|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1,273
|
110%er [5962]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3939
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Serious coaching question
Mar 20, 2017, 11:16 PM
|
|
Why do so many on here think that paying big money to a big name coach is going to bring instant success? I've seen so many arguments that we have no history, no recruiting power, why would anyone want to play here, why would anyone want to coach here; but yet we should fork out $2+ mil to get a brand name coach?
We're all complaining about the buyout, the mistake to extend BB's contract, etc. What kind of contract and buyout would be expected to hire one of these coaches? And, what if, they aren't successful either? Then what?
It's funny, all this coaching talk, yet we just won a championship in football, with a coach nobody wanted to be hired bc we needed a brand name coach, Mike Leach was one of those I think. This cheerleader coach then went and hired an OC two years removed from high school, when we needed a brand name coach, Ralph Friedgen was Tnets's choice at the time. Not saying a no name, up-and-coming coach is the answer, but how many schools have been burned by going after the big fish.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [13879]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8801
Joined: 11/26/99
|
The one thing our no name coach always brought to the
Mar 20, 2017, 11:23 PM
|
|
table was the ability to recruit at a high level. Brownell couldn't catch a cold running around nekid in a Chicago blizzard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111340]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73660
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Serious coaching question
Mar 20, 2017, 11:29 PM
|
|
Barnes brought immediate success with a team that had some talent and absolutely no depth. I thought what he did in 94-95 was the best coaching job I have seen here. There was an excitement surrounding the program, and kids were camping out to see us play Duke and UNC. We have not had anything like this since. I think that an elite coach would immediately raise expectations and most importantly, bring a winning culture back to the program. What I saw against Oakland was a team that expected to lose and found a way to accomplish that. For me, that should have been the final nail in the coffin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7191]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 20374
Joined: 8/18/06
|
Re: Serious coaching question
Mar 21, 2017, 4:52 AM
|
|
Serious question,and you gave a serious answer which I like.
Just an observation,but I don't think that Brad is a bad coach,but from looking
at the NCAA Tournament so far,there are several teams out there without much history,but what they do have is physical player,big men who can take to the hoop,or block a shot.
I haven't seen that in a while at Clemson.
If these guys can play for other schools without much history,why could they not play for Clemson.And I'm certain there is a lot of good local,and regional talent that could be scouted,and recruited.
Look ,Brad likes defense,and that's ok,but you have got to score,and you can't have these 4 and 5 minute droughts like Clemson seems to have game in and game out.
So here is a serious question for you?
Why can't Clemson recruit players like the Gamecocks have,who have very little history other than back to back NIT Tiles a few years back?
Maybe the answer lies in the "type" of coach we get,not necessarily the "name".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5013
Joined: 7/15/13
|
Re: Serious coaching question
Mar 21, 2017, 5:04 AM
|
|
I agree about a physical inside player. They are out there playing on teams everywhere. I have told my son's that I feel like we need a Tom Wideman or Matt Geiger type of player. Efficient and bruising instead of a lanky, minimal talented center.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
A big name coach isn't a guarantee.
Mar 21, 2017, 8:15 AM
|
|
But what is a guarantee is that if we keep approaching basketball like we have for the past 100+ years, we will continue getting the same results.
I don't think we have to go get a big name, but we do need to do everything we can to signal that we are passionate about basketball at Clemson. Currently, other coaches as well as top recruits believe that we aren't serious about basketball. We must change that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16222]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12771
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Agreed. Whether a "name" pans out or not in the W
Mar 21, 2017, 1:02 PM
|
|
column I believe is less important than the signal such a move would send to the collegiate community at large that Clemson basketball is more than just an afterthought - something to occupy our time between bowl season and baseball. It seems as if we've just doubled down though on the "afterthought" approach, which is disappointing.
Go Tigers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [505]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 888
Joined: 3/26/13
|
Re: Serious coaching question
Mar 21, 2017, 12:50 PM
|
|
There is not one ACC coach that I would offer a $3.5 or 3.0 million dollar buyout clause to let alone Brad Brownell. That's how far off base DRad was on this one!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: Serious coaching question
Mar 21, 2017, 1:03 PM
|
|
A big name coach isnt a guarantee but more than likely a big name coach has a history of success.
That greatly increases your odds of success when you hire them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1,273
|
|
|
50
