Brian Wardle and his new 5-year contract

[vufan75]

I hadn't seen this topic mentioned so thought I would bring it up. I know many Valpo and HL fans have strong opinions about Wardle and his "coaching" style based on all the accusations made and transfers out of the program last off season. Somebody at Green Bay obviously must feel he has done a good job to reward him with a new contract.

[tweet]456812636189896704[/tweet]

http://www.greenbayphoenix.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=22500&ATCLID=209467836

[FWalum]

I guess winning all those individual award has some perks.  Any idea what they are worth?

[a3uge]

I think this is great news for Valpo fans. The guy can't seem to coach his players to play through adversity, and he's made some horrible coaching gaffes like the end of the semi-final game in Valpo where they never challenged the rebound and Cougill was the one playing on the ball defense against Broekhoff. Maybe I'll get a big fat "I told you so" but I doubt UWGB makes the tourney in his tenure.

[historyman]

I think this is great news for Valpo fans. The guy can't seem to coach his players to play through adversity, and he's made some horrible coaching gaffes like the end of the semi-final game in Valpo where they never challenged the rebound and Cougill was the one playing on the ball defense against Broekhoff. Maybe I'll get a big fat "I told you so" but I doubt UWGB makes the tourney in his tenure.

That is a good way to look at it. If Green Bay chooses to hitch their wagon to a coach that has had disciplinary issues and hasn't proven he can win it all when it really counts so be it. That just leaves more opportunity for Valpo and the other HL schools for future championships.

[wh]

I think this is great news for Valpo fans. The guy can't seem to coach his players to play through adversity, and he's made some horrible coaching gaffes like the end of the semi-final game in Valpo where they never challenged the rebound and Cougill was the one playing on the ball defense against Broekhoff. Maybe I'll get a big fat "I told you so" but I doubt UWGB makes the tourney in his tenure.

That is a good way to look at it. If Green Bay chooses to hitch their wagon to a coach that has had disciplinary issues and hasn't proven he can win it all when it really counts so be it. That just leaves more opportunity for Valpo and the other HL schools for future championships.

For the same reason I think adding more than 1 team (as some HL fans have suggested) is a bad idea.  Why make it harder on ourselves to win championships and go to the NCAA tournament than it already is?  I'm thinking primarily of men's basketball, but the same logic applies to every sport in which we participate (men and women). 

As to men's basketball, people dream of becoming a 2-bid league.   They somehow think that bringing in better programs than we have now will help us make that leap.  What they don't seem to understand is that no one can make for you what you are not willing to do for yourself.  Every HL team should be working to raise its profile toward potentially becoming an at-large team, but that simply is not happening. Instead, we have coaching, recruiting, scheduling and academic performance failures everywhere.

Let me offer a few examples.  In just the past 3 years both McCallum and Wardle have had teams talented enough to receive at-large bids, but they have squandered their opportunities because their coaching wasn't good enough to maximize their team's full potential. I think a case could also be made for the Water's Norris Cole-led CSU team.  Bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses isn't going to suddenly make these guys better coaches.

Need I remind anyone of the gawd-awful OOC scheduling by certain teams in this league.  Do we look like a league trying to raise its profile when a self-promoter like Donlon puts together one of the worst OOC schedules in the country in conjunction with the best team (on paper) they've had in years?  Or, how about Moore's "trying to save my job"-motivated terrible OOC schedule?  Does that look progressive?  Or, how about the fact that the league itself doesn't even show enough leadership to have minimum scheduling standards in place?  Does that have the appearance of a league trying to raise its profile?

Add to that the recruiting deficiencies at different places and the lack of academic accountability at Milwaukee (and soon to be UIC), and it's impossible to make the case that this league is working and pulling together toward becoming a 2-bid league anytime in the foreseeable future. Nothing about bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses is going to change that. So, if the ultimate goal is to get an invite to the Big Dance, and the league and its members aren't doing what it takes to get more invites, our odds are much better in a league with 9 or 10 than in an expanded league of 12.  It's really not much more complicated than that.   

       

[justducky]

Need I remind anyone of the gawd-awful OOC scheduling by certain teams in this league.  Do we look like a league trying to raise its profile when a self-promoter like Donlon puts together one of the worst OOC schedules in the country in conjunction with the best team (on paper) they've had in years?  Or, how about Moore's "trying to save my job"-motivated terrible OOC schedule?  Does that look progressive?  Or, how about the fact that the league itself doesn't even show enough leadership to have minimum scheduling standards in place?  Does that have the appearance of a league trying to raise its profile?

The argument for minimum standards along with gradually rising enforcement penalties is compelling. The goals of the HL should always take precedence over the ambition or desires of any one individual.  Other than the level of penalties that should be imposed for noncompliance and the length of the phase in period what else is there to even think about?

So how come the HL fan base is not demanding either immediate action or some heads?

[LaPorteAveApostle]

[tweet]456812636189896704[/tweet]

[EddieCabot]

I think this is great news for Valpo fans. The guy can't seem to coach his players to play through adversity, and he's made some horrible coaching gaffes like the end of the semi-final game in Valpo where they never challenged the rebound and Cougill was the one playing on the ball defense against Broekhoff. Maybe I'll get a big fat "I told you so" but I doubt UWGB makes the tourney in his tenure.

That is a good way to look at it. If Green Bay chooses to hitch their wagon to a coach that has had disciplinary issues and hasn't proven he can win it all when it really counts so be it. That just leaves more opportunity for Valpo and the other HL schools for future championships.

For the same reason I think adding more than 1 team (as some HL fans have suggested) is a bad idea.  Why make it harder on ourselves to win championships and go to the NCAA tournament than it already is?  I'm thinking primarily of men's basketball, but the same logic applies to every sport in which we participate (men and women). 

As to men's basketball, people dream of becoming a 2-bid league.   They somehow think that bringing in better programs than we have now will help us make that leap.  What they don't seem to understand is that no one can make for you what you are not willing to do for yourself.  Every HL team should be working to raise its profile toward potentially becoming an at-large team, but that simply is not happening. Instead, we have coaching, recruiting, scheduling and academic performance failures everywhere.

Let me offer a few examples.  In just the past 3 years both McCallum and Wardle have had teams talented enough to receive at-large bids, but they have squandered their opportunities because their coaching wasn't good enough to maximize their team's full potential. I think a case could also be made for the Water's Norris Cole-led CSU team.  Bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses isn't going to suddenly make these guys better coaches.

Need I remind anyone of the gawd-awful OOC scheduling by certain teams in this league.  Do we look like a league trying to raise its profile when a self-promoter like Donlon puts together one of the worst OOC schedules in the country in conjunction with the best team (on paper) they've had in years?  Or, how about Moore's "trying to save my job"-motivated terrible OOC schedule?  Does that look progressive?  Or, how about the fact that the league itself doesn't even show enough leadership to have minimum scheduling standards in place?  Does that have the appearance of a league trying to raise its profile?

Add to that the recruiting deficiencies at different places and the lack of academic accountability at Milwaukee (and soon to be UIC), and it's impossible to make the case that this league is working and pulling together toward becoming a 2-bid league anytime in the foreseeable future. Nothing about bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses is going to change that. So, if the ultimate goal is to get an invite to the Big Dance, and the league and its members aren't doing what it takes to get more invites, our odds are much better in a league with 9 or 10 than in an expanded league of 12.  It's really not much more complicated than that.   
       

Well thought out post.  If the Horizon doesn't need additional schools to keep automatic bids in some sports, not sure why they'd want to add any schools.  You didn't mention it, but adding another school also means each school's share of the NCAA tourney money is further diluted.

[historyman]

You didn't mention it, but adding another school also means each school's share of the NCAA tourney money is further diluted.

Not necessarily. If you were to bring in a school, like Belmont, and they win the HL tournament and then make it to the Sweet 16 they would be bringing in more money because they progressed farther than the usual one and done in the NCAA tourney that the HL has experienced since Butler left the HL. Then every school gets a smaller percentage of a much larger pot. It's better to bring in quality programs that win.

[a3uge]

I think this is great news for Valpo fans. The guy can't seem to coach his players to play through adversity, and he's made some horrible coaching gaffes like the end of the semi-final game in Valpo where they never challenged the rebound and Cougill was the one playing on the ball defense against Broekhoff. Maybe I'll get a big fat "I told you so" but I doubt UWGB makes the tourney in his tenure.

That is a good way to look at it. If Green Bay chooses to hitch their wagon to a coach that has had disciplinary issues and hasn't proven he can win it all when it really counts so be it. That just leaves more opportunity for Valpo and the other HL schools for future championships.

For the same reason I think adding more than 1 team (as some HL fans have suggested) is a bad idea.  Why make it harder on ourselves to win championships and go to the NCAA tournament than it already is?  I'm thinking primarily of men's basketball, but the same logic applies to every sport in which we participate (men and women). 

As to men's basketball, people dream of becoming a 2-bid league.   They somehow think that bringing in better programs than we have now will help us make that leap.  What they don't seem to understand is that no one can make for you what you are not willing to do for yourself.  Every HL team should be working to raise its profile toward potentially becoming an at-large team, but that simply is not happening. Instead, we have coaching, recruiting, scheduling and academic performance failures everywhere.

Let me offer a few examples.  In just the past 3 years both McCallum and Wardle have had teams talented enough to receive at-large bids, but they have squandered their opportunities because their coaching wasn't good enough to maximize their team's full potential. I think a case could also be made for the Water's Norris Cole-led CSU team.  Bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses isn't going to suddenly make these guys better coaches.

Need I remind anyone of the gawd-awful OOC scheduling by certain teams in this league.  Do we look like a league trying to raise its profile when a self-promoter like Donlon puts together one of the worst OOC schedules in the country in conjunction with the best team (on paper) they've had in years?  Or, how about Moore's "trying to save my job"-motivated terrible OOC schedule?  Does that look progressive?  Or, how about the fact that the league itself doesn't even show enough leadership to have minimum scheduling standards in place?  Does that have the appearance of a league trying to raise its profile?

Add to that the recruiting deficiencies at different places and the lack of academic accountability at Milwaukee (and soon to be UIC), and it's impossible to make the case that this league is working and pulling together toward becoming a 2-bid league anytime in the foreseeable future. Nothing about bringing in "savior" programs riding on white horses is going to change that. So, if the ultimate goal is to get an invite to the Big Dance, and the league and its members aren't doing what it takes to get more invites, our odds are much better in a league with 9 or 10 than in an expanded league of 12.  It's really not much more complicated than that.   

I think you bring up good points - having too many teams can dilute the field, make it harder to reach the championship in a 1 bid league. I don't think the HL should expand to 12, especially if it means a huge footprint.

But I think there's some merit in bringing decent schools in because it helps SOS, which helps a teams RPI, which ultimately translates into a better tournament seed. When a conference is weak, there's smaller room for error. Say Green Bay had the opportunity to play Belmont twice and either split or won both games - a split probably wouldn't hurt them all that much, but 2 wins over a decent top 75 RPI team like Belmont would've pushed them to an AL bid. Take the Southland as an example of a league with a bunch of crappy teams that are perennially sub 150 RPI. SFA didn't lose a single game in conference, only lost 2 games all year, and were still only a 12 seed. Can you imagine getting through the Horizon undefeated or with only 1-2 losses and winding up as a 12 seed? It must've seemed great for Oral Roberts to join the Southland... they could come into the league and contend for a title each year with little resistance. But playing Lamar twice a year didn't do their programs any favors.

I think there's some bit of merit to having a couple schools with a top 100 RPI, and adding a school that has shown a history of achieving this is good for the entire league. But I agree, having 12 schools fighting for 1 position isn't necessarily a good thing either - you can't get a good seed in the tournament if you don't make it.