Is this BU's second worst decade ever?

[SFP]

How is it bashing the current regime? It's a commentary on the decade, and Coach Mo was responsible for 2 of those years.

Ironically Mo has the best and worst conference finishes of the decade.

I stand by my comment 2nd worst decade??? What else is there to take from this post. Do you think that we are a bunch of morons? I give you more credit then that BB.

I can say economically this is the 2nd worst decade in my life. I'd have to say the stagflation years during the Carter years were worse.

[BradleyBrave]

I stand by my comment 2nd worst decade??? What else is there to take from this post. Do you think that we are a bunch of morons? I give you more credit then that BB.

I can say economically this is the 2nd worst decade in my life. I'd have to say the stagflation years during the Carter years were worse.

If you don't like the topic SFP you don't have to contribute. The facts are the facts. Should we just ignore them? Someone brought it up, and people are commenting on it. If you don't like it you don't have to participate. Da Coach didn't have a problem with the thread and contributed to the discussion twice, going as far as to say -

"This program has not reached the levels we expect".

Are you going to call him a 'hater' too?

[bigdaddystuck]

Not sure what that means. If it means that you think 5 more years of this will somehow yield desired results, I would respectfully disagree and say there's little evidence to support that. But I guess it depends what your standards of success are.

I am guessing that Chico meant to compare JL to Stowell would take 5 more years, because that is the difference between the 2 and probably that JL would do better over the next 5

[BradleyBrave]

I am guessing that Chico meant to compare JL to Stowell would take 5 more years, because that is the difference between the 2 and probably that JL would do better over the next 5

Hmm...well here's Stowell's last 5 years -

'74 - 20-8 - .714
'75 - 15-11 - .577
'76 - 13-13 - .500
'77 - 9-18 - .333
'78 - 14-14 - .500

71-64 (.526) over his last 5, and that was with no 3rd tier tournaments to pad the record at the end of the season. So it's debateable. But man do I hope we're better than a .526 winning percentage over the next 5 years, or those are going to be some real long seasons.

[AZ BU Fan]

Disappointing perhaps a better description for this decade. More ups and downs than a soap opera.

DC is correct BU's program has not fallen to the depths of hell this decade after a rough start. But BU has been stuck in the middle for most of this decade, not particularly bad or good, other than the magic run at the end of one season.

Hard to compare this decade to other decades cause BU's reputation this decade has benefitted from NIT participation due to its ability to draw first round fans, and, the fact two new tournaments were put in place with BU's appearance benefitting due to its ability to draw fans.

Take away the NIT invitation, and the two post season 'Exhibitions" aka
'Tournaments', to level the playing field with other decades, and several of the BU accomplishments cited for this decade aren't there.

[BradleyBrave]

Disappointing perhaps a better description for this decade. More ups and downs than a soap opera.

I agree with this statement too. I personally think we've had 4 teams this decade ('06, '07, '08, '10) that were talented enough to compete for our league's title and go to the NCAA's, but have only gotten there once. Yes, we still have a chance for this '10 team to get there, but the point remains the same. It bothers me that we've had so many good players come through recently and don't have more to show for it.

[SFP]

If you don't like the topic SFP you don't have to contribute. The facts are the facts. Should we just ignore them? Someone brought it up, and people are commenting on it. If you don't like it you don't have to participate. Da Coach didn't have a problem with the thread and contributed to the discussion twice, going as far as to say -

"This program has not reached the levels we expect".

Are you going to call him a 'hater' too?

I'm just giving you my opinion on the thread. Why take the offense BB and even take up for the originator of the post? The same old garbage. Boring as the garbage before. Maybe if the thread was worded a bit differently I'd have another attitude towards it but it is still a dig. You know it, I know it and the rest of the guys on this board know it. I never called you a hater but if you want to go there well that's your problem. As I said in the "unsuccessful vs successful" thread I vote UN and I'd bet the team would say the same thing. This thread on the other hand is taking a slap at our program the past 10 years as one of the worst ever! If it smells like trash, it must be garbage no matter how you slice it. If you do not like the way I see things then IGNORE me because I'm not going anywhere.

[Da Coach]

Hmm...well here's Stowell's last 5 years -

'74 - 20-8 - .714
'75 - 15-11 - .577
'76 - 13-13 - .500
'77 - 9-18 - .333
'78 - 14-14 - .500

71-64 (.526) over his last 5, and that was with no 3rd tier tournaments to pad the record at the end of the season. So it's debateable. But man do I hope we're better than a .526 winning percentage over the next 5 years, or those are going to be some real long seasons.

If we are going to try to parse Stowell's record to try to make it look better, and criticize Jim Les' teams for playing in the CBI and CIT, then it's only fair to point out some other things, too that "padded the record" of Joe Stowell.
At least the wins in the CBI and CIT were against quality Division I teams.
Stowell's teams played some abysmally weak competetion early in their seasons that guaranteed several extra easy wins.
They did not play "exhibition games" back then, so these were actual scheduled games that counted-
St. Ambrose, Samford, and Tennessee-Martin (in '73-'74)
Illinois Wesleyan, Steubenville, and Wheaton ('74-'75)
Fort Lewis and Samford ('75-'76)
Quincy and Illinois Tech ('76-'77)
Illinois Wesleyan, Quincy, and Cal-Hayward ('77-'78 ).
Those are just the most obvious ones. There were also games most years against Westren Illinois, Loyola, and other very low level teams on the schedule.

And the other factor I would argue is that the Missouri Valley simply was not as good a conference top-to-bottom then as it has been the last decade. The MVC always had 2 or 3 very good teams, but they had some bottom dwellers than that guaranteed a couple easy conference wins every year.
Nobody I know has ever suggested Joe Stowell wasn't a very good coach, and I don't see anyone here saying that. He always got his players to play hard, and overachieve. But his teams usually played with talent that might politely be called second tier.
Jim Les has been criticized endlessly here for never winning a conference or tournament title. What did Joe Stowell ever win?

And if Jim Les ever scheduled a home game against Steubenville or Illinois Tech (not just an exhibition) just to pad his win total, the fans would revolt.

[squirrelgotdead]

What did Joe Stowell ever win?

Respect.

[Braveman]

Wow- now people are attacking Joe Stowell... unbelieveable...

[Da Coach]

What did Joe Stowell ever win?

Respect.

Ridiculous. Ask the other coaches in the MVC if they respect Jim Les. To your surprise, they all do. Ask the President of Bradley, the AD, the BSS, and the Braves Club and anyone else who matters at Bradley if they repect Jim Les. I already know the answer.
In fact even the few people I have ever met who want a different coach, still respect Jim Les for his integrity, intelligence, honesty, hard work, and ethical standards.
Just because a tiny minority of disgruntled fans have some personal grudge, doesn't mean everyone shares your irrational hatred for our coach.

[Da Coach]

Wow- now people are attacking Joe Stowell... unbelieveable...

Braveman, nobody is attacking Joe Stowell.
This entire thread is actually just another attempt to attack Jim Les.
Joe's record stands on it's own merit, I was not the one who brought it up.
But those here who are now trying to drag out this argument that Jim Les's record is worse than the last decade of Jow Stowell's regime, are the ones who are delusional, and are showing how desperate they are.

[BU RICK]

If we are going to try to parse Stowell's record to try to make it look better, and criticize Jim Les' teams for playing in the CBI and CIT, then it's only fair to point out some other things, too that "padded the record" of Joe Stowell.
At least the wins in the CBI and CIT were against quality Division I teams.
Stowell's teams played some abysmally weak competetion early in their seasons that guaranteed several extra easy wins.
They did not play "exhibition games" back then, so these were actual scheduled games that counted-
St. Ambrose, Samford, and Tennessee-Martin (in '73-'74)
Illinois Wesleyan, Steubenville, and Wheaton ('74-'75)
Fort Lewis and Samford ('75-'76)
Quincy and Illinois Tech ('76-'77)
Illinois Wesleyan, Quincy, and Cal-Hayward ('77-'78 ).
Those are just the most obvious ones. There were also games most years against Westren Illinois, Loyola, and other very low level teams on the schedule.

And the other factor I would argue is that the Missouri Valley simply was not as good a conference top-to-bottom then as it has been the last decade. The MVC always had 2 or 3 very good teams, but they had some bottom dwellers than that guaranteed a couple easy conference wins every year.
Nobody I know has ever suggested Joe Stowell wasn't a very good coach, and I don't see anyone here saying that. He always got his players to play hard, and overachieve. But his teams usually played with talent that might politely be called second tier. Jim Les has been criticized endlessly here for never winning a conference or tournament title. What did Joe Stowell ever win?

And if Jim Les ever scheduled a home game against Steubenville or Illinois Tech (not just an exhibition) just to pad his win total, the fans would revolt.

You have got to be kidding, right?? Who were the teams in the MVC when Joe coached, you're the expert. The ones I remember, that left, for basically football reasons were Louisville, Tulsa, Memphis, Cincinnati...? Who are the ones that replaced them. So I completely disagree. The competition was much tougher when Joe Stowell coached.

[Da Coach]

We are talking about the 1970's. Not the 1960's. I didn't start this thread or set the parameters.

I conceded that the MVC always had a couple very good teams in the early 70's. Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis were very good. But you are wrong to include Tulsa, they were not a national power back then in the 70's.

You are also are wrong about Cincinnati- they left the MVC after the 1969-1970 season, and were not a factor in Joe Stowell's record in the 70's.
The 2 teams that I conceded, Memphis left after the 1972-1973 season, and Louisville left after the 1974-1975 season, so for the last several years that Joe coached, he did not have to deal with any of those national power teams that won the MVC in the 60's and early 70's.

[tornado]

--different decades...
I think Da Coach would NOT dispute that in the 60's the Valley was tougher than now...but he's specifically pointing to the 1970's when BU's competition became far weaker....an entire decade where Coach Stowell had the benefit of playing those no-name opponents, and by 1969 Cincy was gone from the Valley, by 1973 Memphis was gone, and by 1974 Louisville was gone...
So most of the 1970's the teams we played were either some of the same ones we play now plus, North Texas, New Mexico State, West Texas State, not exactly frightful opponents...