[d4cohn]

The recovery will be long. The glory days of being close to or making the World Series is maybe in the future.  But at least several years away

To echo Bob's point, I think an important point in this discussion is what one's expectations are. In the Pac-12 conference for softball, I argue that a NCAA tournament berth is a baseline goal. In the last five years (though this trend holds going farther back), at least the majority of conference teams have made the NCAA tournament (2012: 8 out 9 teams qualified, 2013: 8 out of 9 teams qualified, 2014: 5 out of 9 teams qualified, 2015: 7 out of 9 teams qualified, 2016: 8 out of 9 teams qualified). As such, mediocre and even bad Pac-12 teams, with reasonable strengths of schedules, have still qualified for the NCAA tournament.

Building off of my previous post, I would argue that on the basis of our soft non-conference schedule alone, that an NCAA tournament berth is going to be an uphill climb; barring a stronger showing in Pac-12 play (i.e. 8-10+ conference wins), we won't be able to pick up enough quality wins to raise our RPI and SOS high enough to build a competitive tournament resume. There is also no conference tournament in Pac-12 softball, so NCAA berths for Pac-12 teams are based on the regular season alone.

Therefore, it is very possible that this staff will miss the tournament for the third straight year to start their tenure, in a conference in which just about every team makes the tournament by default.

Finally, on the point of a timeframe, I would point to Utah as a case study. In 2012, Utah entered the Pac-12 from the Mountain West Conference, which is a much lower conference for softball than the Pac-12. As such, Utah was an overmatched squad needing to significantly upgrade its talent and depth to compete in the Pac-12 (I would argue Coach Hanson has had much more talent than Utah did, but I digress). Nevertheless, in their third year in the conference, Utah made the NCAA tournament, and now is among the upper echelon of teams in the Pac-12.

I don't expect Coach Hanson to make the World Series. However, I do expect, at this point in the program building, the team to at least contend for an NCAA tournament berth. Nevertheless, I think this non-conference schedule is an indication that the team is not close to contending.

Regardless of Bernard's handling of Coach Rittman's situation and Coach Hanson's hiring, the players deserve to have a staff that allows them to develop as players and contend. Echoing fullmetal's question from earlier in the thread, I am just not confident that this staff is that group.

[d4cohn]

The recovery will be long. The glory days of being close to or making the World Series is maybe in the future.  But at least several years away

To echo Bob's point, I think an important point in this discussion is what one's expectations are. In the Pac-12 conference for softball, I argue that a NCAA tournament berth is a baseline goal. In the last five years (though this trend holds going farther back), at least the majority of conference teams have made the NCAA tournament (2012: 8 out 9 teams qualified, 2013: 8 out of 9 teams qualified, 2014: 5 out of 9 teams qualified, 2015: 7 out of 9 teams qualified, 2016: 8 out of 9 teams qualified). As such, mediocre and even bad Pac-12 teams, with reasonable strengths of schedules, have still qualified for the NCAA tournament.

Building off of my previous post, I would argue that on the basis of our soft non-conference schedule alone, that an NCAA tournament berth is going to be an uphill climb; barring a stronger showing in Pac-12 play (i.e. 8-10+ conference wins), we won't be able to pick up enough quality wins to raise our RPI and SOS high enough to build a competitive tournament resume. There is also no conference tournament in Pac-12 softball, so NCAA berths for Pac-12 teams are based on the regular season alone.

Therefore, it is very possible that this staff will miss the tournament for the third straight year to start their tenure, in a conference in which just about every team makes the tournament by default.

Finally, on the point of a timeframe, I would point to Utah as a case study. In 2012, Utah entered the Pac-12 from the Mountain West Conference, which is a much lower conference for softball than the Pac-12. As such, Utah was an overmatched squad needing to significantly upgrade its talent and depth to compete in the Pac-12 (I would argue Coach Hanson has had much more talent than Utah did, but I digress). Nevertheless, in their third year in the conference, Utah made the NCAA tournament, and now is among the upper echelon of teams in the Pac-12.

I don't expect Coach Hanson to make the World Series. However, I do expect, at this point in the program building, the team to at least contend for an NCAA tournament berth. Nevertheless, I think this non-conference schedule is an indication that the team is not close to contending.

Regardless of Bernard's handling of Coach Rittman's situation and Coach Hanson's hiring, the players deserve to have a staff that allows them to develop as players and contend. Echoing fullmetal's question from earlier in the thread, I am just not confident that this staff is that group.