Here is my novel on the situation:
Coaches can be ineffective in lots of situations for a multitude of reasons that extend beyond their instructional impact. I've coached, and been a head coach, in baseball and softball for much of the past 20 years or so at the high school level. I'm not saying that to throw my weight around that I know more, but rather to provide perspective. There are things that defy logic. Just watch the 2023 St. Louis Cardinals in late April and early May. Sometimes you just lose because you lose not because of coaching, because baseball and softball to a large degree are outlier outcome sports. What you do sometimes more than puts you on the wrong end of the result more than not...
Here is where I see it the calculation at this point and why we are at where we are at:
1. Recruiting: One of the questions that was brought up when the program was started, is how the program is going to compete in a sport that the state that produces 1 or maybe 2 players per year that are at replacement D1 players. Pinkerton leveraged his connections to bring in recruits and transfers, but the issue was always the same: Montana just doesn't produce enough HS players on a yearly basis to be inherently competitive in softball. Montana talent wise is at a deficit to Idaho, Utah, Washington, Oregon, Colorado and Arizona. Saw it as a coach first hand, how much better softball is in parts of Idaho and Utah as compared to Montana.
They have failed in recruiting pitchers who can be above replacement pitchers even at the lower D1 level and that shows. Brock is barely replacement level and our last in-state Achenbach (while being one of the better the state has produced recently) and the two freshman this year simply weren't capable of filling the innings left by injuries. Maybe O'Brien and Haegele get there, but at first blush both have a bit to go to refine their craft to be average to above average BSC pitchers.
The roster was hurt, in part, by a forced recalculation during the pandemic. I've mentioned this before, and I have heard it from people I trust. Lack of revenue, lack of access to ASA tournaments, and a few other factors tilted the deck in who they could recruit, when and where. This goes a bit back to the first part of the conversation, where most of players in Montana aren't power 5 kids at the HS level, let alone BSC level (tier 3) which for the conversation conference would be. When you are regionally limited, in a sport that can't hand out full-rides to every player on the roster, it hurts A LOT. Montana had two girls on its roster this year from Montana, might have four or five, and those scholarship equivalents carry more weight when they are local. You recruit Montana-Idaho-Oregon in part trying to find players that WUE eligible, so that you can spend those full scholarship to lure girls to Montana with full scholarship rather than 1/2's.
Montana can't field a roster of 20 California HS kids even if they wanted to, and that number dropped significantly since the pandemic because of recruiting limitations.
2. Facilities Montana AD has been working on the indoor facility for close to a decade. Tons of road blocks including lack of capital, downturn in University funds, Covid, etc, conversations about use and space. Heard this again from people I trust, that the development of an indoor facility was identified as one of the essential elements of any long term plan for the softball program. I don't know how late the development was, in comparison to the original plan, but 2023-24 season is almost 10 years after the program was first established. There is no other ready-made facility that provided the necessary elements to house a D1 softball program. Much of the space used over the past ten years or so has been cobbled out of multi-purpose parts of the existing UM athletic physical plant. Almost none of it capable of allowing for live action softball play either in a partial or complete form during the off-season (Nov-Dec) or pre-season (January) as the team spools up for the upcoming season. This is an issue that other programs in cold weather states have managed to navigate, in recent years, but it wasn't like the athletic department wasn't aware of the drawbacks when they put forth the plan to start the program. Moving forward, the use of the indoor facility, even though it is multi-purpose is going to be a huge boost to the overall success of the program and it'll help improve recruiting as well.
Montana won't host games in January ever and the indoor wouldn't resolve nor is it meant to either. In fact they generally won't host games in February either. I have made mention of this before, but it bears repeating again, no playing at home until the second week of March every year is taxing on any and all D1 softball program. Less practice time, more travel time, and so forth. They played five tournaments, almost all of them 5 games in 3 day tournaments, and that isn't necessarily conducive for success, when there is little to no chance that you can see live anything and on a scale that reflective of game experience.
I heard it enough from people not connected to Montana but other programs both in Softball and in Baseball over the years to know that spending the first two months on the road, Thursday-Sunday or Monday is a bear because of how much instructional and coaching time you lose.
3. Coaching I look at this in a bit different lens, because while it is easy for internet fans to just levy accusations left or right, half-cocked, there are things the staff has struggled with but they aren't incompetent. You and I might disagree about how or why they doing thing, but these are all professionals using the best data inform decision. Sometimes all that time and effort just doesn't bring results. Their pitching just hasn't improved, and in a way that provides a fighting chance to win games. That has been a systemic problem in the program dating back to least the pandemic shortened year. Some of that is recruiting/talent but it is tough to win when you aren't getting your pitchers to get the most out of their ability. It isn't easy, but it has been a clear shortfall.
The hitting, which while losing some punch from 2022, expected to be deep with contact ability, never got on a roll. They struck out more, had tons of weak contact. A team constructed to put pressure on the opposition through contact and OBP, never had players on let alone in scoring position for most of the year to score.
Part of that stemmed from the early struggles and players chasing contact. But the improvement throughout the season was too slow. Only Ontiveros performed at last years levels consistently this year, the rest including a couple of seniors just never got going. Klucewhich hit nearly .300 and couldn't get to .200 this year. Phelps who accounted for 22 RBI's and hit .313 last year hit .250 and had 7 RBI's. Whatever the philosophy was or the focus was this year it led to negative results.
In the best circumstances it was or performed at times as one of the better defensive units in the conference, but the inability of the pitching staff capable of playing into those skills undermined the defensive side as well.
In the end, the combinations the decision making didn't produce results. Wasn't without trying. Moving players around, attempting different pitching rotations, the results just weren't there and the coaches will likely bear the brunt of those failures this year.
_________________
I'm not absolving the staff of anything to be honest, but there is a weird narrative here that I think is a bit detached from reality. We shouldn't expect below average play, and we should expect the team to be in the upper half of the conference. If we look at the trend for the program and it isn't good. I think the staff saw this year, before the season started as a legitimate opportunity to finish 1 or 2 in the conference. I don't think that was a pipe dream and it sort of snowballed when Butterfield snapped her ankle. Joseph never returned to full health that caused her to miss all of last year which compounded the problem.
I don't think the staff is going to outrun it, but it is hardly something that was completely undone by their own incompetence. They made do with what they had, and were playing a lot better softball at the end than the beginning. The girls were bought in and competed hard. There just wasn't results. Results matter and I think the staff and admin recognize that. This was a no good, really bad year.
I don't know what the calculus is for the long term of the program, but I wouldn't be surprised that today might very well be the last game Mel and her staff coaches at the UM. While I personally feel they were dealt a pretty shitty hand in some ways, with the opening of the indoor it might provide Haslam a natural break to re-set the program. I know more than some and less than others, but while I have the confidence they'd finally turn the corner next year (better health, more depth, indoor) I doubt seriously that they are going to call me in San Diego to proffer my opinion on the situation.