Criteria for Satisfaction with Wake Basketball program

As I mentioned in the "expectations" thread, I'm curious what level of success Wake Forest basketball needs to have in order for you to be satisfied with where the program is. For those who are always keeping tabs on LOWF syndrome, this should be a good indication of what the level of those thoughts are.

Here are my criteria:
- Making the NCAA Tournament approximately 3 out of every 4 years ("approximately" in that I think I'd still be satisfied by 4 out of 6, for example)
- Of those three NCAA Tournament appearances, at least one should include a Sweet 16 or better run.
- Consistently in the top half of the ACC standings (minimum 4 out of 5 years maybe?)
- Legitimate contender for ACC Title at least 1 in every 4 years, preferably 2.

So, does this make me LOWF? I think there will be a variety of opinions. I didn't really become a true Wake basketball fan until I came to Wake in 2006, so in the 5 seasons I've been a fan Wake hasn't been up to snuff. They've done alright in the ACC department, but only 2 NCAA Tourney appearances and zero Sweet 16's makes me an unsatisfied fan.

Also, I looked at Wake's Tourney history for the past 30 years (since 80-81). Wake has 17 tournament appearances in that time. There was the 7-straight tournament appearances in the 90's and then 5 straight to start the last decade, but there have been some pretty long droughts and 17 out of 30 is not quite 3 out of 4 or even 4 of 6. Based on the semi-recent history, Wake has never really met my satisfaction threshold.

What about the rest of you?

Just for some context, there are 9 programs that have made the tournament 75% of the time or better since 1980 (in fairness, the first 5 of those years were 48-53 team tournaments).

Make the ACC Tournament.

We should be a top 30 program nationally.

tiltdeac said:

Just for some context, there are 9 programs that have made the tournament 75% of the time or better since 1980 (in fairness, the first 5 of those years were 48-53 team tournaments).

Click to expand...

Good point. What about 2/3? That's probably more realistic.

If anything, though, that stat may be an indication that the program isn't as far off as people like to think it is.

I expect us to make the NCAA tourney three out of every five years, and make the Sweet 16 two of those times in the stated three. We're capable of that, under the right leadership, even with the built-in limitations of our institution that everyone here is familiar with. (The reason I'm so BuzzOut is because I feel he's trying to minimize expectations/redefine success at modern Wake, which is the exact opposite of what Skip did.)

I expect us to recruit, develop, and cultivate young men of character, charisma, intelligence, and talent that are proud of going to Wake and are part of the Wake community. Even when it means attending class regularly.

I expect those same young men to enjoy college in all its awesomesauceness. Even when it involves the sauce.

For what it's worth, I was at Wake from 2001-2005. J-Ho, Taron, CP3, The Jungle, Tie Dye Nation, fucking with JJ Redick, upsetting Wake's wine and cheese old people crowd, all in all good times. Frankly, I think when we attended Wake and/or became dedicated fans greatly impacts our expectations level as fans. Maybe Ph can do a sociological study on this this summer? Or perhaps over his next sabbatical? The correlation of that thread with this one would be fascinating, IMO.

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be a top 25 program annually. That's my expectation.

siff said:

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be a top 25 program annually. That's my expectation.

Click to expand...

I know a reason, there are only 25 teams allowed in the top 25. There are AT LEAST 50 programs whose fan bases believe they shoudl be a Top 25 program. When schools like Butler, VCU, San Diego State, Washington, and Utah State are in, that only adds to the number who are disappointed in their team's results.

I think a nice goal would be to see the top 25 every season, even if we don't end up or stay there. Moreover, I think it would be super to end the large majority of seasons ranked higher than we started.

tiltdeac said:

Just for some context, there are 9 programs that have made the tournament 75% of the time or better since 1980 (in fairness, the first 5 of those years were 48-53 team tournaments).

Click to expand...

30 years is forever though.

More realistic: programs that have achieved that 2/3 or 3/4 threshold in recent years or under their current coaches.

ACC
UNC, Duke

Clemson has the 2nd longest streak of NCAA bids in the conference, and Brownell made the tournament in his only attempt so far.
FSU has 3 straight under Hamilton, though less than half in total under him.

Big East
Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, West Virginia

Marquette (8 of 10, 6 straight, 3 in a row under Williams)
Georgetown (Thompson is 5 for 7, so more than 2/3 but less than 3/4)
Connecticut (Calhoun is actually only 18 for 25)
Villanova (Wright is 7 of 10, but those 7 are a current consecutive streak)

Big 12
Kansas, Texas, Texas A&M (6 of 7 and 6 straight; 4-for-4 under Turgeon)

Kansas State (3 of 4 under Martin)

Big 10
Wisconsin, Michigan State, Purdue (6 of 7 under Painter), Illinois (6 of 8 under Weber, though only 2 of the last 4)

Ohio State (5 of 7 under Matta)

Pac 10
UCLA, Arizona (Miller's only 1 of 2 but they made it pretty much every year under Olson)

Washington (Romar's 6 of 9)

SEC
Kentucky, Tennessee (new coach, but 6 straight tournaments under the old one)

Florida (Donovan's only 11 of 15), Vanderbilt (similar to FSU, Stallings made the NCAA in 1 of his first 7 years, but 4 of the last 5)

There's 17 in the top group, and a dozen more listed as "close" or something of that ilk. It's easy to see from looking at the accomplishments of some of the second group that you can't go on NCAA tournament frequency alone; missing the tournament is OK once in a while if you're doing what Calhoun or Donovan do or Matta looks to be on the way to doing.

Still, this should give a better idea for when you're making that 75% or 2/3 comparison...just who that's taking in.

siff said:

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be a top 25 program annually. That's my expectation.

Click to expand...

This. Obviously there will be some rebuilding years, but overall, we should find ourselves int he top 25.

ZDeac said:

As I mentioned in the "expectations" thread, I'm curious what level of success Wake Forest basketball needs to have in order for you to be satisfied with where the program is. For those who are always keeping tabs on LOWF syndrome, this should be a good indication of what the level of those thoughts are.

Here are my criteria:
- Making the NCAA Tournament approximately 3 out of every 4 years ("approximately" in that I think I'd still be satisfied by 4 out of 6, for example)
- Of those three NCAA Tournament appearances, at least one should include a Sweet 16 or better run.
- Consistently in the top half of the ACC standings (minimum 4 out of 5 years maybe?)
- Legitimate contender for ACC Title at least 1 in every 4 years, preferably 2.

So, does this make me LOWF? I think there will be a variety of opinions. I didn't really become a true Wake basketball fan until I came to Wake in 2006, so in the 5 seasons I've been a fan Wake hasn't been up to snuff. They've done alright in the ACC department, but only 2 NCAA Tourney appearances and zero Sweet 16's makes me an unsatisfied fan.

Also, I looked at Wake's Tourney history for the past 30 years (since 80-81). Wake has 17 tournament appearances in that time. There was the 7-straight tournament appearances in the 90's and then 5 straight to start the last decade, but there have been some pretty long droughts and 17 out of 30 is not quite 3 out of 4 or even 4 of 6. Based on the semi-recent history, Wake has never really met my satisfaction threshold.

What about the rest of you?

Click to expand...

I think this is reasonable based upon past success. And I'm an old guy(I assume) :thumbsup:

We should be the clear cut #3 program in the ACC behind Duke and UNC.

OP is pretty reasonable, though probably 2 out of 3 years make it to the tournament.

win games

I want to be nationally recognized for being competitive.

Otherwise, I think my expectations are probably in line with what most of you have laid out.

Pretty much what Irish said, except that I was at Wake in the mid-80s. If you look at the past 20 years or so, MD, Wake & GT were usually solid, and that's largely why the ACC has been so strong until the last 2-3 years. Now we're completely in the tank, so is GT except to a slightly lesser extent, and GDub's recruiting has fallen off precipitously over the past decade to where MD is ordinary at best.

If you want to look nationally, the top tier programs over the last decade or 2 are: UNC, Dick, Cuse, SueConn, Lville, tOSU, MichSt, Ky, Kansas, Texas, UCLA and Zona. We should be in that next tier with schools like MD, GT, Pitt, Nova, Gtown, Fla, Indiana, Purdue, Sconsin, Memphis.... So yes, we should spend 70-75% of our years being a tourney team and hanging around the top-25. And if our coach doesn't have us in that realm, then he needs replacing.

I will add in < 3 home losses

Not getting embarrassed at home by Stetson, Presbyterian, et al
Winning more than 1 ACC game
Being competitive in the majority of our conference games...

Not asking too much is it?

For real though - I think we should be finishing in the top half of the conference on a regular basis. I'd like to see us establish ourselves as #3 behind Duke and UNC down the road. We should be making the tournament at least 2 out of every 4 years. And even in a rebuilding year where we aren't playing under the best of circumstances, I damn sure expect us to win more than 8 games.

My criteria for satisfaction have more to do with playing hard, winning close games (and important games), and improving over the course of the season than they do with achieving a specific number of wins or percentage of tournament appearances. This is why I was largely unsatisfied with the Dino years, and why I still have some hope for [Redacted].

I generally find that I am satisfied when we win a game, and dissatisfied when we lose a game. I don't care about how we wear our socks, and I don't care if our shirts are tucked in right. I want consistent, unmistakeable effort on both ends of the floor, every possession of every game.