Posted by cubcub113 on 5/26/2021 10:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cal_bears on 5/26/2021 9:03:00 PM (view original):
UUhmm, good discussion people, surprised no one has asked about the criteria and the rather suspect tier placement of some universities. To begin with no way Texas and Oregon have less expectation for success than Pitt and Purdue. Absolutely no way Illinois should be a tier higher than Ohio State, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Maryland should also not be in the top tier. There are several other questionable choices, but those stand out at me right away. What was the criteria?

the criteria is completely based upon the baseline prestige of the school

10.1.1

Yeah, when was that done? I think my points about the schools still apply. They can update baseline prestige. Gonzaga should probably be top tier now and Villanova, evaluate it based on the last 8 seasons or something.

Posted by cal_bears on 5/26/2021 10:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 5/26/2021 10:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cal_bears on 5/26/2021 9:03:00 PM (view original):
UUhmm, good discussion people, surprised no one has asked about the criteria and the rather suspect tier placement of some universities. To begin with no way Texas and Oregon have less expectation for success than Pitt and Purdue. Absolutely no way Illinois should be a tier higher than Ohio State, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Maryland should also not be in the top tier. There are several other questionable choices, but those stand out at me right away. What was the criteria?

the criteria is completely based upon the baseline prestige of the school

10.1.1

Yeah, when was that done? I think my points about the schools still apply. They can update baseline prestige. Gonzaga should probably be top tier now and Villanova, evaluate it based on the last 8 seasons or something.

Counterargument is typically competitive integrity.

Say you and I started in D3 together and climbed the ranks. You dominated the competition, I was middle of the pack. In early D1, you win a NT and I made the NT. Job openings come around and both Duke + Gonzaga are open. You apply to Duke because it’s the better baseline. I apply to Gonzaga because I can’t do better.. Then we wake up and we suddenly have the SAME baseline.

Now imagine you picked Indiana and I picked Gonzaga… then we wake up and I suddenly have the BETTER job. How is that fair? Indiana was picked with the presumption of being better.

And even with the “You can change it, just give everyone fair warning”… what if I was at Indiana for 30 seasons? I’m just suddenly at SOL despite the time and money?

I don’t side one way or another as I see both advantages/disadvantages but food for thought.

Posted by fd343ny on 5/26/2021 9:41:00 PM (view original):
In the opposite direction, I suggest that the four year window to achieve the specified level of success also expands

NCAA champ - four more years - so you get eight seasons to hit the required accomplishment

Final Four - two more years - six seasons to hit the level after a Final Four

combined with above rebuild proposal, this extends the window for the downside case and the upside case, but in narrow ways

I also like something like this.

In addition, something to let the coach know their job security throughout the window, not just at the end with a "You've been fired! email.

Well that's a funny point upsetcity because it applies directly to me. I have played this game since its start. When it started, for some reason Stanford was explicitly listed as one of the top 7 teams. They had a FF run back in 04. I left Cal for the Furd because of this supposed built-in baseline prestige. They changed this forum fact later on.

Your point upset speaks to the fact that you have to pick baselines. They should be based on reality as much as possible. If you are making changes, you should make all appropriate relevant changes accordingly.

Posted by gillispie on 5/26/2021 8:05:00 PM (view original):
i read it as, these things have to be achieved in the previous 4 seasons to avoid getting fired - a condition that will be checked every season - but i could be totally off base there

This is how I interpreted it as well. I do like the idea of success above and beyond the minimum requirement granting a little extra leeway on the four year timeframe though.

I think the addition of actual firings with some teeth is great and should have been implemented years ago.

One last thing, I agree with Gil that certain schools may have to be looked at and adjusted. His Utah/BYU scenario is a perfect example.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/26/2021 10:20:00 PM (view original):
I’d like to suggest that for every team in scope of firings that they get an email in their inbox at the beginning of each season reminding the coach of the expectations for their team, and where they currently stand with respect to those expectations, i.e. “you’ve fallen short the last two seasons, and you need to make the S16 in one of the next two seasons or you’ll be looking for a new job”.

Agreed.

Posted by adlorenz on 5/26/2021 3:03:00 PM (view original):
So with the D1 jobs process opening up, we would like to create some accountability for the top jobs and baseline prestige schools to ensure these jobs aren’t just camped. The goal of this change is to start with what might seem like easy requirements, but we used average data of the tiers to generate these initial requirements, so while these should be attainable there will inevitably be folks that don’t hit the objective. If this doesn’t create the desired result we then can ramp the requirements up or down based on how it goes. Because there is no smooth way to integrate this, teams will have the full 4 seasons from today to attain these goals and the patch will go live which may result in some firings in either the November or December patch.

Teams in 2 games a day worlds will get a little bit of a longer leash since the code cannot be versioned between worlds which means the coaches in these worlds will have to ensure the goals are hit in their last 4 seasons, until the November/December timeline to attain the goal as well.

The requirements will be postseason tournament based, RPI & rank will have no impact on this, (meaning yes you could be at Syracuse be ranked #1 and lose in the 2nd round, 4 straight years and get fired. At the end of the day the ranking systems can be manipulated so we would rather focus on postseason performance and this will create some additional pressure in the tournament.

The tiers are based on baseline prestige and even in some of the dire rebuild projects are attainable.We my eventually add some smarter logic and adjust some school's baseline prestige, but I wanted these to be as black and white as possible so there is no confusion or debate, and so we can continue to gather more information.

Requirements:

Highest Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the Sweet Sixteen once every four seasons.

Arizona
UCLA
UConn
Duke
Illinois
Kansas
Kentucky
Michigan State
UNC
Syracuse
Maryland

Next Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the Round of 32 once every four seasons.

NC State
Oklahoma
Stanford
Indiana
Florida
Georgetown
Georgia Tech
Cincinnati
Boston College
Wake Forest
Wisconsin
Villanova
Virginia
Arkansas
Tennessee
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Ohio State University

Last Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the National Tournament once every four seasons

Oregon
Oregon State
Oklahoma State
Notre Dame
UNLV
Marquette
Memphis
Miami
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Providence
Seton Hall
South Carolina
University of Southern California (USC)
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Texas
Temple
St. John’s
St. Joseph’s
Arizona State University
Auburn
Alabama
Dayton
Depaul
Cal
Clemson
Gonzaga
Georgia
Florida State
Iowa
Iowa State
LSU
Utah
Washington
Washington State
Vanderbilt
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Xavier

Under this criteria Jim Boeheim would have been fired by Syracuse in '08 despite winning the title in '03.

**Bill Self would need to make the sweet 16 this season or be fired.

Im going to assume Louisville is in tier 2.

I am not completely against job firing; However, this has several flaws people have pointed out already - the most glaring is taking on a rebuild of one of these schools. I've always welcomed a challenge of building a program and I am a huge Razorback fan so I took over Arkansas in Naismith, Wooden, and Iba all as major rebuilds with stacked competition and it took me 10 and 7 seasons respectively to meet this criteria in Naismith and Wooden. I am in season 6 in Iba and have not met the criteria yet...who will want to take on a major rebuild in the major conferences without some longer grace period? As someone pointed out, you are asking for your own death sentence. So you can count me out under these rules!!

Posted by gillispie on 5/26/2021 10:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by fd343ny on 5/26/2021 9:39:00 PM (view original):
I suggest that the criteria add definitions of major rebuild and minor rebuild.

Major rebuild is a school that is 2 or more grades below its base prestige before the coach arrives - A baseline at C.

Minor rebuild is a school that is 1 or more grades below its baseline prestige - A baseline at B

Then define extra window for major and minor rebuilds. Four more seasons for major and two more seasons for minor rebuild?

my understanding is your major rebuild definition should be impossible or very near it, that A baseline bottoms out at C+. i like the idea though! i do think the admins are looking to keep it simple, and just giving all new coaches a couple extra seasons would be perfectly acceptable in my opinion. i think it gets the job done.

IMO its better to give coaches a bit longer up front than too little, i'd be happy anywhere 6-8 probably... i'd obviously be good with a more nuanced scheme to measure magnitude of rebuild but given the intentional simplicity of the proposal, i just feel like its not the place to get fancy.

point well taken - the triggers need adjustment - but the concept would be to give new coach who takes on a rebuild a break - need some simple and non subjective definition of when this would apply. Would help make the plan avoid unforeseen effects (like discouraging rebuilds)

Posted by snewell12 on 5/27/2021 8:51:00 AM (view original):
I am not completely against job firing; However, this has several flaws people have pointed out already - the most glaring is taking on a rebuild of one of these schools. I've always welcomed a challenge of building a program and I am a huge Razorback fan so I took over Arkansas in Naismith, Wooden, and Iba all as major rebuilds with stacked competition and it took me 10 and 7 seasons respectively to meet this criteria in Naismith and Wooden. I am in season 6 in Iba and have not met the criteria yet...who will want to take on a major rebuild in the major conferences without some longer grace period? As someone pointed out, you are asking for your own death sentence. So you can count me out under these rules!!

Yeah my *** is about to be fired from Cuse

A lot of good discussion here. I think the common sense (and majority approved) updates would be:
1. Some sort of grace period for taking over a team.
2. Exceeding the minimum requirements grants you some extra seasons beyond the 4.

Posted by Benis on 5/27/2021 9:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by snewell12 on 5/27/2021 8:51:00 AM (view original):
I am not completely against job firing; However, this has several flaws people have pointed out already - the most glaring is taking on a rebuild of one of these schools. I've always welcomed a challenge of building a program and I am a huge Razorback fan so I took over Arkansas in Naismith, Wooden, and Iba all as major rebuilds with stacked competition and it took me 10 and 7 seasons respectively to meet this criteria in Naismith and Wooden. I am in season 6 in Iba and have not met the criteria yet...who will want to take on a major rebuild in the major conferences without some longer grace period? As someone pointed out, you are asking for your own death sentence. So you can count me out under these rules!!

Yeah my *** is about to be fired from Cuse

Don't worry Benis. When you get canned, I'll take up the mantle and gently guide your players to the promised land.

I like the try here but this seems slightly too harsh. I would have been fired after 4 seasons at UofL if they fall into teir 2. If i were in charge i think this is how it should start if the regular season means nothing.

Tier 1- Top programs- Rd of 32 in 4 seasons
Tier 2 - Make NT in 4 seasons
Tier 3- Make PI in 4 seasons.

This seems more obtainable to do in a rebuild situation.
With the way prefs take 8 seasons to get Long time coach to VG meeting these goals should be enough.