Lottich's Contract

[NativeCheesehead]

So regardless of any of our feelings on the matter, it's safe to assume Lottich will return next year. Which means we have to deal with his contract. Now we still don't know how long his initial contract was (someone correct me if I'm wrong but I couldn't find anything.) I actually hope it was a five year deal, as it would be easy to tack on a year with (hopefully) a low buy out, and announce an extension via press release for stability purposes, leaving out details.

One thing that, to me, would be unacceptable is leaving yourself without a way to move on after next season if need be. That Dorow extension still gives me nightmares. By this time next year, we should know what we have. Do we have a guy who needed a couple of years in the Valley to find his footing and grow as a coach? Or one who recruits pretty well but just can't get out of the bottom half of the league? ISUr, SIU, MoST, and EVille have already turned over coaches just since we've been here, with ISUb likely to follow. This isn't a league that lets a Gary Waters spend a decade running a program into the ground. We're going to be on pace for another year of declining attendance and lagging local interest. Next year has to be the year we get out of the cellar.

[crusadermoe]

I think you are way too cynical about Lottich.  I know we are tired of injuries.  But the Fazekas absence was real. 

How hard do the pop players play for him. Erasing a 17 point halftime road deficit in two games in a row speaks volumes dir player effort and half time adjustments. 

Later years team would have melted away in apathy.  So give him credit for molding this team fast without those losers

[oklahomamick]

agreed that those losers would have made this year worse.

disagree with your stance on Lottich.  It's about results, and those aren't there. 

We have had a lot of Valpo teams in the past 10 years that would steam role this team and would be top 3 in MVC.  Let's get back to that. 

[NativeCheesehead]

Didn't want this thread to become a 'Is he the right guy?' thread, as we break that down in most of the game threads. I'm made my opinion known, as has most of the board.  Point being he will be back next year, so how do we adjust / extend his contract in a way that doesn't hurt us this offseason in recruiting, but also doesn't trap us into an underperforming coach for 3 more years.

[4throwfan]

In the last three years, the team has finished 6-12, 7-11, and this year will be at least as good as last year since they already have 7 wins.  Before making a judgement on Lottich, I think we should wait to see what the final record will be.  It will be flatline from last year, or incrementally better.  If VU finishes 9-9, then there is accelerating improvement yoy.  I don't think that reality supports a change.  Improvement is better than the other two alternatives of (1) flat, or (2) worsening.  If, on the other hand, VU finishes 7-11, it's a little more debatable.

My only point is, I think we should wait until the end of the year to have the discussion. 

[oklahomamick]

Why will he be back next year?

[GoldenCrusader87]

Declining attendance and now having to do buy one one free on a Saturday night game with no snow in the forecast or holidays or breaks?

And again on Tuesday. All that chatter last year about improving the game day experience and garnering more student interest.

Did you all see Erik Bugg's recent social media post from when he played???!!!???

The student section was packed! The stands were packed! We were onto March Madness.

My oh my how we've fallen into a state of mediocrity. We celebrate moral victories and gauge the "improvement" of our team on .... dogging out of routine deficits we never should be in on such a constant basis? All with a pathetic attendance ... dwindling pep band .... and hardly existent student section.

[GoldenCrusader87]

We should for sure lock ourselves into more of the same.

I'm not saying it's Matt's fault but I am saying that's the nature of the business. Yes, it's a business. As we see from the cancellation of other programs (men's tennis and golf) it's a business.

Money does matter. Support does matter. People can complain about those of us who wave the red flags but we're still financially and emotionally supporting the program.

What about all the others who've seemingly lost interest ... and are nowhere to be found? Instead ... people want to attack when those of us who wave the red flags do so ... but at least we're not waving the white flags implying we quit.

We're just not waving the banners celebrating something that's not worth celebrating as we aren't winning anything worthy of celebration.

[Valpo2013]

Declining attendance and now having to do buy one one free on a Saturday night game with no snow in the forecast or holidays or breaks?

And again on Tuesday. All that chatter last year about improving the game day experience and garnering more student interest.

Did you all see Erik Bugg's recent social media post from when he played???!!!???

The student section was packed! The stands were packed! We were onto March Madness.

My oh my how we've fallen into a state of mediocrity. We celebrate moral victories and gauge the "improvement" of our team on .... dogging out of routine deficits we never should be in on such a constant basis? All with a pathetic attendance ... dwindling pep band .... and hardly existent student section.

There's no interest
Not just Valparaiso
Everywhere
Young people would rather be "doing " not watching
Especially at middle of the road places
Heck -power 5 conferences have attendance issues

[Valpower]

If a coach performs in the middle of the pack for middle-of-the-pack incentives with middle-of-the-pack facilities and resources, you gotta figure you're getting what you pay for, right?  If not, and your answer is to replace the coach, while keeping all other things the same, what is your expectation? And if the new coach somehow turns out to exceed expectations do you respond with better wages and improvements to facilities and resources right away, as part of a strategy to capitalize on that good fortune or do you stand pat and congratulate yourself for your great choice and see how long it will continue?  If the latter, how easy will it be to find someone to exceed expectations again? 

[FieldGoodie05]

If a coach performs in the middle of the pack for middle-of-the-pack incentives with middle-of-the-pack facilities and resources, you gotta figure you're getting what you pay for, right?  If not, and you're answer is to replace the coach, while keeping all other things the same, what is your expectation? And if the new coach somehow turns out to exceed expectations do you respond with better wages and improvements to facilities and resources right away, as part of a strategy to capitalize on that good fortune or do you stand pat and congratulate yourself for your great choice and see how long it will continue?  If the latter, how easy will it be to find someone to exceed expectations again?

Bingo!  We must take a look at ourselves as a University and determine what made us excel before, then consider that adding a new HC into the same limited resource environment may not be a sound change.  I believe some were making arguments in the last year that "change for the sake of change" would improve things.  That type of approach is what politicians have been promising with their campaign slogans for a century+ and to extraordinarily mixed results.

If we are making no resource changes then it makes little sense to axe a head coach with good recruiting classes and making progress (as it stands today).  I'm not saying he is our coach of the future but I think it makes more sense for our new President (Valpo) to be established and then together with the board and the athletics department to create a master plan.  For if there are no resources coming from the academics and alumni side, what is the point in throwing _____ against the wall to see if it sticks?  I think this has become a "timing" thing and it's unlikely we axe a coach amidst planned change from the higher ups.

[GoldenCrusader87]

Touché. Great points ... middle of the pac is true in all of those categories. Just a bit spoiled I suppose with our relatively recent success.

Idk if it's a total cop out on the attendance thing though ... I'm sure it's true attendance is down overall ..I. but still a lot of happening, well attended games out there

Look at the Loyola game last year at home or the drake game last year at home - those were great environments

[oklahomamick]

We may have middle of the pac funding but that doesn't mean we have to be middle of the pac results.  Those shouldn't be correlated.  After all, they never have been for us. 

Look at our recent success.  Minus 3 years... 

[Valpower]

Touché. Great points ... middle of the pac is true in all of those categories. Just a bit spoiled I suppose with our relatively recent success.

Idk if it's a total cop out on the attendance thing though ... I'm sure it's true attendance is down overall ..I. but still a lot of happening, well attended games out there

Look at the Loyola game last year at home or the drake game last year at home - those were great environments

I'm not even sure we're as high as the middle in some of those areas, which is why they were all phrased as questions. The main point was that those looking at coaching as the problem are doing so in a vacuum.

[FieldGoodie05]

We may have middle of the pac funding but that doesn't mean we have to be middle of the pac results.  Those shouldn't be correlated.  After all, they never have been for us. 

Look at our recent success.  Minus 3 years...

Then compare our results in the HL -vs- the other budgets in the HL Okie . . . come on meow.

[oklahomamick]

dont know if valpo had the largest HL budget identical to our constant finish in the standings. 

regardless, we had teams that would beat up on programs that had much larger budgets. 

[Valpower]

We may have middle of the pac funding but that doesn't mean we have to be middle of the pac results.  Those shouldn't be correlated.  After all, they never have been for us. 

Look at our recent success.  Minus 3 years... 

I'm not sure how resources, which require funding, have no correlation to sustained success.  If you're referring to the success under the Drew's, you're describing the scenario where someone exceeds expectations in spite of the resources. Homer struggled for many years and eventually succeeded because of Scott and Bryce. The entire Drew period of overachievement was possible only through their familial synergy.  But it was not sustainable (nor improvable) because investment did not keep pace and because luck like that doesn't repeat itself often.

[oklahomamick]

I agree they overachieved.  All 3 Drews got results despite the resources.  Why can't that happen again? 

Bryce was sought out by many.  Scott is now coaching a #1 ranked team.  Lottich if he is able to have 1/2 the success of the previous two coaches will be able to get a pay raise at another school.

[oklahomamick]

Don't mean to offend Tex, but Texas has big pockets in football and hoops.  Neither perform well.

[NativeCheesehead]

Lol. I wish we had middle of the pack facilities.

[Just Sayin]

Touché. Great points ... middle of the pac is true in all of those categories. Just a bit spoiled I suppose with our relatively recent success. Idk if it's a total cop out on the attendance thing though ... I'm sure it's true attendance is down overall ..I. but still a lot of happening, well attended games out there Look at the Loyola game last year at home or the drake game last year at home - those were great environments

Division 1 attendance in 1976 was 15.06 milllion
Division 1 attendance peaked in 2008 at 28.14 million
From 2008-2019 attendance has decreased to 27 million


Source:


http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2020/Attendance.pdf

[oklahomamick]

Green Bay didn't have the largest basketball budget but they were always top 3 or winning the HL.  Wardle overachieved slipped on some ice and got a pay increase in Bradley

[Valpower]

Don't mean to offend Tex, but Texas has big pockets in football and hoops.  Neither perform well.

C'mon, Mick. Don't think about money, think about resources, especially effective ones. None of us is so simple-minded as to think that money can't be misspent but few of us think you can get something for nothing.

As for why the Drew's can't happen again? It's not that it can't; it's that you can't easily select for it. They were the perfect storm in terms of the people, the state of college hoops at the time, and the state of the program (low expectations and a high level of patience).

[Valpower]

Lol. I wish we had middle of the pack facilities.

I wish we had middle of the PAC facilities. 

[valpotx]

Don't mean to offend Tex, but Texas has big pockets in football and hoops.  Neither perform well.

It's ok, we all know that Oklahoma is Texas' red-headed step-child .  Besides, if you look at the yearly rosters tied to successful Oklahoma sports, most folks are from TX...