My take on what AK has done to (and for) our program .....
Now that I am probably being viewed as a Boone apologist (which of course I am not), now I am going to expand this label to being an AK apologist as well
When AK took over our program we were the worst basketball program in the SEC. Something weird happened approximately around the same time AK became our coach. NCAA basketball expanded the size of D1 programs meaning about 8 additional programs now received automatic NCAA tourney bids with their conference tourney wins. This made AK’s job much harder because in essence the goal posts were moved back as compared to past SEC years. With the D1 expansion in the NCAA two things consequently happened. The bubble became smaller (there used to be about 16-20 bubble teams but now there are only 8-10). As a result the once magic number of 20 wins equates to a likely NCAA tourney birth now became 22-23. Furthermore, this reality created a double whammy for the SEC (and other major conferences besides the ACC for that matter). The indirect effect of this move over time lowered the RPI of the conference, now meaning the 20-22 wins we may get throughout the year now have less weight in the eyes of the NCAA selection committee. Despite this, I contend the level of play and athleticism within the SEC has not gone down. We all know if AK had duplicated the exact same numbers 10-15 years ago, Ole Miss would have gone dancing in at least 3-4 of the seven years AK has been here.
Now, that I have provided evidence that the playing field has changed since AK arrived, I want to discuss what AK has actually done at Ole Miss. Yes, I do realize outside of Florida, Kentucky, & MSU every historic SEC bubble team has to deal with the same dilemma. I just find it frustrating that the AK critics refuse to acknowledge this change in the tourney field. It was such a problem that the field of 64 was expanded to 68, which alleviates the concerns slightly (increases the bubble a few teams) but does nothing for our conference RPI. But this change only took place the year before last and any long term effect of it has yet to be seen.
When AK arrived, we were dead last in the SEC in terms of money, facilities, etc. Despite this reality, AK has taken our program from the laughing stock (and it truly was a joke) to being consistently anywhere from 5-7 in the SEC. Also, talent is no longer an issue at Ole Miss. Compare the recruiting classes before AK arrived to what we do consistently now. We no longer hold our breath when recruiting players, because we have also become accustomed to replacing top level SEC athletes with other top level SEC athletes. AK never gets credit for this, and quite frankly this is all AK doings despite being the coach of Ole Miss. In other words, Ole Miss does not draw these athletes just because of our *great* facilities, and *historic* tradition. AK has to overcome these barriers when he recruits these players even today.
Although the ceiling for our program became higher when AK arrived, and he has yet to reach it, over time AK established a new bottom for our program. We are no longer living in the cellar of the conference but rather have climbed up to the 2nd floor and have remained there, even though, the ultimate goal is to get to the third floor. This is important because the days of living in the cellar are long gone. To me this is a major accomplishment because EVERY SINGLE TEAM which we have leaped while AK has been here (Aub, LSU, Ark, SC, GA), we can look to date and honestly say without equivocation we have a superior basketball program to vis a vis the SEC. Furthermore (now I am moving to all caps for dramatic effect), ALL THE TEAMS WE HAVE SURPASSED HAVE SUPERIOR ATHLETIC BUDGETS, FACILITIES, and MORE BASKETBALL TRADITION THAN WHAT WE DO/HAVE. And, AK has done all of this within only seven years.
Let us now turn to instate recruiting and overall quality of program. MSU is the pride of Mississippi in terms of basketball. Whereas MSU used to have their pick of basketball players now is no longer the case. They get 2 out of 3. Yes, we are still behind but we are now within reach of MSU. After 40 years of being 2nd class citizens in the state of Mississippi we are now within reach (not quite there yet) of being on par with MSU. And AK has accomplished all of this just within seven years. Please allow me once again to emphasize the job AK has done vis a vis with MSU with a smaller budget, and a complete joke of facilities, and an armpit worth of tradition compared to our redneck brothers and sisters down south.
Allow me to make an analysis comparison. The SEC only gets 4-5 teams in the tourney now (opposed to 5-6 teams consistently 10 years ago). If this was football, this means the Cotton Bowl is the last tourney spot if you will. Now let’s say Kentucky hires a new coach. And in the 7 years this coach has been at Kentucky, he has averaged 8 wins a year and has gone to the Peach bowl three times and the Music City bowl 3 times of his seven years being UK’s coach. Furthermore, 2 of those years they should have gone to the Cotton Bowl but for whatever reason they had to settle on the Peach Bowl. Now the mere discussion of firing this coach for these accomplishments is downright laughable. Ladies and Gents, this is what AK has done for our basketball program.
Now I am not saying that NIT should always save AK’s job. What I am saying is that when the discussion of making a change comes up we have to look at numerous factors. And for yours truly these following factors are relevant: it is now harder to get to the NCAA than it was 10 years ago; where AK has moved our program relative to the rest of the conference since he’s been here; what AK has accomplished despite the historic, financial, and institutional hurdles that come with being the perennial bottom dweller of the conference; and the consistent level of talent that we have become accustomed to since AK has arrived. For me this is all a part of the equation when evaluating a coach (any coach). So I challenge everyone on here to ask themselves not just what AK has not accomplished (NCAA tourney) but what he has accomplished in the seven years of being our coach? And in these accomplishments, is the time frame in which he has received these achievements not been impressive? And finally, the context in which these accomplishments were achieved (a smaller bubble, lower conference RPI, but no change in quality of basketball within the conference; and the historic and financial hurdles of the program) have made these achievements more or less impressive?
If you ask me, it is a no brainer to extend the man’s contract and give him a small (not huge but small) raise. OK pals and gals, it is now time to blast the AK apologist.
hope), but comparing football and basketball by counting the number of teams that make it to some arbitrary result is useless considering that there are 119 FBS (div 1A) football teams and 345 div 1 basketball teams. 53% of the football teams make it to a bowl game while only 19% of the basketball teams make it to the dance.
