Butler Boise State: Can Culture Be Duplicated?

Good stuff, Scip.

Is part of the implication that these coaching wizards were not so Gandalfian? I think they and their agents chose some shitty next gigs. Nebraska Basketball? Colorado Football?

Been interesting to see what would have happened to some of these guys had they landed at a real program.

Nebraska doesn’t have more resources than Butler? Iowa?
 
Colorado doesn’t have more resources than Boise? Arizona State?
 
You have to get the job at Texas to be successful?
 
Why couldn’t they duplicate at least an equivalent program to what they had at Butler?
 
Those coaches left the schools they were coaching at because they and every single one of their peers believed it to be a substantial step-up at every level: facilities, resources, recruiting, money, exposure.

They have more resources but much stronger competition. Hence the relative disadvantage is greater.

If Boise State played in the Big 12, SEC, et al. what would their record be over the same span?

Plenny O Fiber is god damned excellence. Great stuff from you recently.

Some of the failure to transport the culture with which these coaches had previously enjoyed so much success can probably be linked to the different talent tier that their new jobs allowed them to recruit to and the accompanying difference in mindset right? It’s easier to convice Clovis from Caldwell than Blake from St. Bonaventure of the necessaties of gymrat-hood. -dom. -icity. Whatever.

Are we talking about the same Colorado that had seasons with 10, 9, 8, and 7 wins just before Dan came in (with one 5 win season)? The same team that that played in 4 of 5 Big 12 championships and had fairly recently punked us in the B12 title game? That wasn’t a step up?

-ness. You were looking for -ness.

raoul:
 
They have more resources but much stronger competition. Hence the relative disadvantage is greater.
 
Bowl games, OOC scheduling, and the NCAA tournament suggest otherwise when Butler and Boise meet the big boys.
 
If Boise State played in the Big 12, SEC, et al. what would their record be over the same span?
 
They wouldn’t be 16-33, would they?
 
Put Butler in the Big 12 North for basketball and they’re still a NCAA tournament team.
 
Put Boise in the Big 12 North and they probably win it a couple of years. And they certainly go bowling every year.
 
The proof is simple enough: if these coaches are that outstanding, they should be able to build programs at least equal (or better) to the resourceless ones they left.

Senzible Annuity

Pure. Greatness.

Minnesota –
 
Yes, that’s a big part of it.
 
It’s also much easier to act on a template that’s already been handed to you rather than to write your own from scratch.
 
Most coaches – and people – can be very good mimics. There are very few people that are fundamentally creative, in all senses of the word.

“…the fourth most famous basketball school in Indiana…”

If you consider that Larry Bird attended Indiana State, then they are arguably the fifth-most famous.

Evansville fans might argue that Butler is sixth.

Sorry, just picking nits.

Great piece.

Great read, Scip. Thanks.

How in hell do you accumulate and recount such a wealth of encyclopedic info?

Hat’s off to you as I know you have a day job that keeps you thoroughly engaged and occupied.

jones –
 
I had it:
 
1. Indiana
2. Purdue
3. Indiana St.
4. Butler

“They have more resources but much stronger competition. Hence the relative disadvantage is greater.

If Boise State played in the Big 12, SEC, et al. what would their record be over the same span?"

Comparing success for a program in WAC to a program in the SEC or Big 12 is apples to oranges. Too many differences to list, but an interesting write up.

Hawkins’s success at Boise arguably depended on Petersen. Did CU merely hire the wrong Boise guy? Or would the result have been the same?

It strikes me that the best of these coaches from such programs might be Rick Barnes clones.
 
Barnes obviously can recruit at the big-time level, and he had a reputation for taking just the kind of player you are talking about (Royal Ivey, P.J. Tucker, Brandon Mouton, Jason Klotz, Connor Atchley, etc) and getting maximum effort and pretty much maximum production as well.

Defense, effort, rebounding, chip on-your-shoulder attitude — the picture often painted of Barnes’ first decade at Texas.

But actually handling elite talent? Getting said elite talent to “bend” to his principles? Not so much.

Maybe Boise and Butler (and Barnes) are living examples of the “Peter Principle.”

parlin –
 
Everyone has theories. What’s clear is that Koetter started something, it elevated under Hawkins, and soared under Petersen. And there was direct continuity between all 3 at every level.
 
That’s why bringing in a school like Butler to compare is enlightening. Different sport, different part of the world, but almost an exact replication of culture, continuity and a magnification of success from Collier (good), Matta (real good), Lickliter (real good), to Stevens (great).
 
The question is, why is the trend up across the board, despite heavy coaching turnover? (Which we’re told is uniformly bad) The program is bigger than all of these guys, is one theory.
 
If I’m looking to promote from a successful overachiever program, I probably want the most tireless recruiter who is also the most creative and adapatable, not the implementer.

The AD that thinks one of these guys can come in and implement Butler 4.0 but with New And Improved Extra Resources! using the same playbook is in for a very rude awakening.

Scip — I figured you had Indiana, Purdue, Notre Dame…then the rest.

But back to brass tacks:

What is different between Butler and Gonzaga?

I think it is probably the Zags that I might more closely compare to Boise State, not the Bulldogs. Of course, Gonzaga may have already reached its apex.

Aw, shit. Notre Dame. Digger Phelps and Peter Bean are laughing at me right now.
 
Our own Notre Dame blogger is probably seething.

I think it’s hard to compare across sports when looking at mid-majors. In football you have to have athletes to win, there’s no way around it. Teams like TCU and BSU are good at finding great athletes that are tweeners, played a different position in HS, etc. They aren’t as highly recruited because they have more risk or their value isn’t readily recognizable. However, they are athletes, as you can’t win football games by only having “coach on the field type kids.”

I think in basketball you have more flexibility with what you want to do with your team. Butler is a very unathletic team. However, they have great shooters, hard workers, and have a very high basketball IQ. You can win with guys like that if they are in the right system. It seems like the major programs would rather take a kid with great athleticism but with a lower basketball IQ. Very, very rarely will a prospect have it all.

One thing that also introduces error in these types of discussions is assistants. How good of a recruiter would Barnes be without Springmann or the guy who runs his conditioning program?

I do agree with your point that in order to succeed in the big leagues you need to recruit, and you also need flexibility. A system guy whose acting as a caretaker will be useless at his next position.

Scipio Tex,
 I have been sitting here at home for two hours with random thoughts flowing through my Patron shrunk brain, setting aside, on the back burner , a big money deal due to this article. This is excellent fodder for the masses to discuss. Well done.

“Continuity. Culture. Collaboration.”
A 10-12 year run will tell the Admin, fans, players what a program will do with all the resources at any institution. Some will vary but most will be consistant with your template if you will.
The questions that come up are, do we recruite to that system in place if you are lucky enough to have a system or maybe does it have high spikes and low valley’s in recruiting.

Then the other maybe the most important concept is the Admin / fans base and what is the level of institutional mediocrity that is acceptable (barely satisfactory or adequate). Texas has a culture of being an excellent top shelf football program. The mindset is excellent as it should be.

Most coaches usually work their collective asses off during the off season and through the season, some relate to their kids very well others not so much. They understand recruiting to a culture and the type of players that work well in that system. Unable to change to adapt the system for the high level talent is ridged and self serving, you are better off recruiting in the # 75- # 100 kids the tough nosed kids and the developing player eager to learn and not question on any level but wanting to please (AB) then recruiting the top 10.
I still have many questions that have not formed as yet but I have to finish this deal today.
I look forward to more articles ,great stuff.

I had the opportunity to hear the Boise State special teams coordinator, Jeff Choate, speak at a business dinner event recently. He spoke about their culture and values at length. To paraphrase he mentioned trust, hard work, max effort, toughness (not just tough, but BRONCO tough) and a number of other somewhat cliche team values. He was a good speaker, and I am convinced he believed in what he was saying. He sold me on it. (I imagine Greg Davis would struggle to sell me water in a desert ).

What stood out for me was the example he gave of the “culture” in action. Remember the fake punt against TCU in their BCS game? Earlier in the game a player highlighted to the coaches that if they motioned into (or was it out of) trips in the punt formation, one of the DBs would follow leaving the middle of the field open. So they did that later in the game. The call for the fake punt is made by one of the up backs. If the play is open, the up back turns and points with both hands at the punter to signal the fake. The normal up back was hurt, so the kid making that call was a freshmen. Coach Choate used this to underscore trust between coaches and players, trust in the backup to be prepared. Maybe just a good story, but certainly supports Scipio’s thesis.

He then mentioned that rolling and smoking blue turf gives you a killer buzz and invited everyone down to the field.

Interesting premise, Scip. Addendum to your comment about Thad Matta—don’t forget that he validated his coaching/program building prowess as coach of Xavier. From Ohio State’s perspective, that’s what set him apart from Hawkins, Collier, and Lickliter.

Since the discussion has once again turned to Barnes, I’ll add this. I’ve read many hypotheses regarding our own hoops program and drawn my own conclusions from watching other successful teams (i.e. teams still playing basketball). One note that irks me is when I read a comment saying, for instance, " doesn’t have the capability to " when it’s quite clear to me that there are an abundance of “slow, unathletic” guys who can: take their man off the dribble, shoot consistently, pass the ball into the post, play excellent defense, etc. against the best of college basketball.

The key differences are that those players are buying into what the coach is selling, playing 4-5 years since they have no NBA draft prospects, and are in a system that doesn’t require a full NBA lineup to break 60 points. The players rely on their intelligence, rather than athleticism, out of necessity. Our players are just as smart as the other guys, but they’re so accustomed to “out-athleting” the opposition that they don’t make the extra pass and instead shoot a guarded 3-pointer ten seconds into the shot clock.

To bring it back to this article, organizations like Butler basketball and Boise football have found ways to teach a simple philosophy that can be implemented enough ways for the appearance of complexity. Calipari’s dribble-drive motion offense falls into this category and it’s why he can take a bunch of freshman deep into the tournament year-in and year-out.

I think the cat is out of the bag on the Boise St. offense. It was well deserved reputation for gadgetry in the past, but man Petersen’s offense is just awesome now. I think that if Tub’s is smart in Lubbock, he tries to emulate it, as the parts are there.

It also helped that other than USC, and occasionally Cal, football that way has been horrid for a while. He’s not getting blue chips by any stretch, but he’s reeling in some decent talent that fits what he wants to do.

As good as he is, I think Petersen is still being sold short, probably because of Hawkins and Koetter.

Oh yeah, while I’m mentioning underrated coaches, is anybody ever going to notice the genius that is Mike Riley?

You’re on to something, Scip.

As opposed to being ON something.

UT has a football and baseball culture. Despite Barnes’ best efforts (or whatever the hell you call what he did this year), we are not a basketball school. We just have bad wiring in our brains or something.

The good news is that the culture at a school can change — see Baylor basketball as Example A.

Hook ’em.

Your point on Culture, Continuity, and Colloboration makes me feel great about our football future. Mack has set up an organization that should (hopefully) make an easy transition when he leaves, ensuring the standards hes set.

If the play is open, the up back turns and points with both hands at the punter to signal the fake.

If any coaches read this board, they have to get a new signal.

And all that comes to mind is the song by “Primitive Radio Gods”- “Standing outside a Broken Phone Booth with Money in My Hand”.

Great article…

First off, I’d say in terms of popularity/media attention, it probably goes:
1. Indiana
2. Purdue
3. Notre Dame
4. Butler
Although, Butler is definiely getting more press and more fans than ND when it comes to Basketball these days.

It’s game time… if Butler gets to the final four, we’ll come a little closer to comparing to Boise St.

Thanks Dawgfan.
 
I agree on your rankings.

The guy that has to be a little down today, if not downright glum, is Mark Few.

Here is a guy who has given a decade to Gonzaga, helped raise it from obscurity (as an assistant to Dan Monson) and by and large avoided serious talks with BCS schools to make the "mistake" that coaches such as Koetter, Hawkins, Barry Collier and Todd Lickliter made.

In order to be treated "seriously" by the national media and the NCAA selection committee, Few consistently has put together non-conference schedules, usually ranked in the top 25 nationally by Ken Pomeroy. (By comparison, even by going out every year to take on some highly ranked (or at least highly thought of) teams, Rick Barnes’s best n-c schedules have been ranked somewhere around Few’s worst.)

But now, he’s been upstaged by a school that’s been making the tournament regularly (last four years), with arguably a better cycle (including a complete rebuild last year such that they lose only a handful of points from this year’s team going into next year).

For all his planning and upgraded recruiting, it turns out that Gonzaga isn’t any closer now to making the FF that it was the first year it reached national prominence, losing to UConn in the EE. Gonzaga’s gotten high seeds since then (2 in ’04, 3s in ’05-06) but lost in the second round with the first two and blew a huge lead to UCLA in the S16 in the other – that was the night that Adam Morrison cried before the game was over. And they were stomped by UNC as a four last year, and again by Syracuse as an eight this year.

Butler hasn’t had a high seed yet, but now has surpassed what Few has been aiming for, all this time. It has to sting.

Great points all, Bob. That’s exactly why I used Butler rather than Gonzaga despite the geographic tie-in to Boise.

I looked it up out of curiosity. Petersen arrived at Boise as OC in 2001, upon which they had only an 8-4 season. Subsequently they went 12-1, 13-1, 11-1, and 9-4. Tammy’s father has done less well since leaving Boise:

Hawkins at Boise with Petersen = .828 record

Petersen at Boise without Hawkins = .924 record

Hawkins at CU without Petersen = .326 record

From the outside, Hawkins must have seemed like the rainmaker. But their subsequent records tell us that CU should have looked harder for the talent.

Few will argue that Petersen is not the better coach but as the blog suggests, culture is the culprit at CU. Although the Buffaloes have a hard core group of loyal fans, yours truly included, the overall football curlture in Boulder is hardly what it is in Boise. CU has too many out of state students and too many other diversions to cultivate that intensity that exists in a small community like Boise. And dont listen to ColoradoAg cause it aint any better in Fort Collins, either.
Hawkins was swept along by the culture at Boise and when he got to Boulder he was a fish out of water. He has no motivatonal skills of his own. He is the anti-Muschamp. Speaking of Muschamp…….you better keep him happy.

Batteredbuff has it exactly right—a universities culture and administration plays a huge role in the success of the athletic department. Is the university truly willing to devote the resources to make a sports team successful? Probably more important, is it willing to commit resources to the athletes? CU football is an excellent example particularly comparing the 90’s to the current situation. But sadly exas in the early 90’s is equally revealing. The administration didn’t really value a winning football team—it was obvious in everything from coaching hires to conference affiliation to facilities. Going to a game at UT now is an entirely different experience.

It’s easy to give lip service to a coach and say “we want to building a winning program” It’s much harder to maintain that support when athletes embarrass the school or when academic budgets run up against athletic budgets.

Coaches probably have a hard time evaluating the depth of support at a non-traditional powerhouse before accepting the position . But then again given the upside of a big time coaching position, its probably worth the risk, even if you are coaching girls softball after two years.

a$m has the requisit culture if culture is incredible alum and admin suppport for major college sports. They suck worse than any other similarly sized BCS college. Hence, I contend it requires much more in terms of coaching and player talent than some suggest.

When they finally get it right, we are going to be just as miserable as we were in the 80’s and early 90’s. Our only salve in those dark days was that blowu was worse than we were back then.

The incomparable Kevin Scarbinsky writes 20 small paragraphs about Butler and Boise with argument #2,389 why there should be a playoff in college football.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=maisel_ivan&id=5059612

Shall we accept the possibility that Ivan the Terrible may have legitimately thought of this idea on his own or just proceed with hasty accusations of blatant plagiarism?

I’m inclined towards the latter.

Wow, superb weblog structure! How long have you ever been running a blog for? you make running a blog look easy. The overall look of your website is fantastic, as well as the content!

Hi there, I found your blog by way of Google even as looking for a similar matter, your web site came up, it looks great. I have added to favourites|added to my bookmarks.