|
Replies: 50
| visibility 1
|
Fan [96]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 110
Joined: 11/28/05
|
Bill Wihelm as our coach
Jun 26, 2010, 11:34 PM
|
|
36 years as head coach
(6 College World Series participations)
Jack Leggett
16 years head coach
(6 College World Series participations)
This is the Elite 8 of College Baseball.
Would anyone want to fire a Basketball coach who accomplished this record?
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1636]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 3163
Joined: 8/21/01
|
No, but I guarantee you this
Jun 26, 2010, 11:53 PM
|
|
If UNC or Duke had not ever won a national title in basketball, and then Roy Williams and Coach K make it to the final four at the same in an eight year span, and played each other twice, and Duke won both of them, then I would be willing to bet some UNC fans would be calling for Roy's head. UNC fans would not accept losing to Duke twice in eight years in the final four. Right or wrong, that's just the way it goes. No team wants to lose to their rival, ever. And losing to them on a national stage is 100 times worse than losing to them in an average game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15230]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 18252
Joined: 6/10/09
|
No. But I'll never forget his 2-0 starts in the CWS.***
Jun 27, 2010, 12:14 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
LOL! Wilhelm built the CU program and left Jack a great
Jun 27, 2010, 1:27 AM
|
|
program. The first half of Jack's career at CU is far far better than the 2nd half. We have dropped off over the years and are not as good, nor as consistent.
You can not compare Jack to Wilhelm, not even close. CU baseball was nothing before Wilhelm. Jack inherited one of the best programs in the country.
The NCAA tourney in baseball is like football and basketball. A lot more teams participate now than they did before the 90s and expansion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3910]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7987
Joined: 11/30/98
|
You also can't compare rules then and now.
Jun 27, 2010, 1:33 AM
|
|
Much tougher to maintain a top level program now with the # of schools and scholarships being offered.
We have a top 10 program in baseball that has a chance to win the NC about every year.....idiotic to suggest changing gives us a better chance to win it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
omg the rules are about the same now as then and more
Jun 27, 2010, 3:53 AM
|
|
teams get into post season play now thus its easier to make it to the post season. and our ball park is a good bit smaller than in the 80s. they have brought the outfield fence in 2x since the 80s making it a lot easier to hit home runs in clemson.
you think halfway thru jack's career the rules suddenly changed? he took over a great program that wilhelm built from nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3910]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7987
Joined: 11/30/98
|
# of schools offering 'ships and # offered...
Jun 27, 2010, 8:35 AM
|
|
....are not about the same.
"omg"...what are you, 12?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
Again, you're wrong. You post incorrect statements and
Jun 27, 2010, 9:19 AM
[ in reply to omg the rules are about the same now as then and more ] |
|
hide behind them as if they were truth. I don't know if it's sad, delusional, or just misguided.
Per NCAA rules, baseball only has 11.7 scholarships to give out to the entire team. Coaches used to be able to carve that up and award it as they saw fit. But in 2007, that rule changed significantly (effective for the 2008 season, but it had an impact on 2007 recruiting). Coaches are now more restricted on the number of players that can receive partial scholarships, as well as MINIMUM scholarships that players must receive.
This is a rules change that is having a real impact on college baseball. And if you aren't aware of that, then you just don't follow the sport closely enough.
It amazes me how often you are wrong, and adamant in support of your own ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9048
Joined: 2/22/00
|
Coach Wilhelm had 13 ships to work with
Jun 27, 2010, 9:53 AM
|
|
during most of his career. There was a 10% across the board gender equity cut some years ago and that is how we arrived at the princely sum of 11.7. Football BTW went from 95 to 85 at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
That is indeed a truth fact.
Jun 27, 2010, 9:54 AM
|
|
I was responding to Blue Caddy's misguided and incorrect statement that the rules around scholarships had not changed during Coach Leggett's tenure, when they indeed did. Significantly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Again, you are incorrect. I did not say the rules had not
Jun 28, 2010, 3:07 AM
|
|
changed, I said they haven't changed a lot, and they haven't!
I love how people talk about rules changes and other BS like it matters. Those are excuses! Everybody plays by the same rules. Yet other established programs aren't struggling! Somehow they overcome all the BS excuses y'all make for CU.
And if rules changes make it harder, then why doesn't an established program like CU have an even bigger advantage over historically pathetic programs? These rules changes should make it even harder for a bad program to carch the big boys!
Yet suddenly out of the blue there are better programs than us, like UVa & UNC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3292]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6515
Joined: 1/13/04
|
Re: Again, you are incorrect. I did not say the rules had not
Jun 28, 2010, 6:17 AM
|
|
So a Final Four finish this year is struggling? wow just wow
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Not what I said. We've played below expectation and our
Jun 28, 2010, 2:12 PM
|
|
standard since 2002. the program has trended down since 2002. We haven't had the consistency we once had.
And the rules the big rules change tomera keeps ranting about was only 2 years ago. It has nothing to do with the 7 years before that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
That wasn't the point OF THIS DISCUSSION.
Jun 28, 2010, 3:19 PM
|
|
The point of this discussion is that the rules around scholarships had changed between Coach Wilhelm's time and now.
That's it. It's not about anyone's coaching ability. It's about the rules.
You veered it off course when you realized you were WRONG about saying that they had not.
Part of me wants to ignore every message you post and part of me is afraid that someone will read your lunacies, think they are facts, and find themselves misinformed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
YOU said it was about JUST the rules, I was clearly taking a
Jun 29, 2010, 12:35 AM
|
|
more global view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
look at the OP and my 1st response. It was purely about
Jun 29, 2010, 12:39 AM
|
|
the success of the program under Jack vs Wilhelm. you morons started bring rules into it to make excuses for Jack, and I said the rules have barely changed, which is true, until 2008, but that was only 2 years ago whereas my critique started in 2002, 8 years ago. And while I WAS wrong about the 2008 rule change, it has NOTHING to do with CU baseball and Jack from 2002 till 2008 which is a low spell and trended down relative to CU baseball for almost 20+ years before that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
i agree, but that was only 2 yrs ago. has nothing to do with
Jun 28, 2010, 2:19 PM
|
|
our play 2002-2008 nor does it have anything to do with Jack's career vs Wilhelm's until 2008. Ergo, comparing Jack & Wilhelm is stupid in terms of "the rules" because they both coached under pretty much the same rules, but Wilhelm built a giant out of nothing and it was harder to make the tournament back in Wilhelm's day!
Trying to argue otherwise based on a rules change only 2 years old shows how desperate you are to defend Jack, or prove you are somehow right, or deflect from the true point of my original response.
Actually it's YOU I'm feeling sorry for!! Jack's been HC 17 yrs, the rules change you're ranting about was only 2 yrs ago. What are YOU not capable of comprehending?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
I'll try to use very, very small words for you.
Jun 28, 2010, 3:17 PM
|
|
Let me try to break this down to its component parts, so that you might be able to understand.
This is not about Coach Wilhelm. This is about reading comprehension and the ability to have a logical, thought-based discussion.
TigerTown said, and I quote:
“You also can't compare rules then and now. Much tougher to maintain a top level program now with the # of schools and scholarships being offered.”
And you responded:
“omg the rules are about the same now as then …you think halfway thru jack's career the rules suddenly changed?”
Your response is wholly incorrect when considered, in a discussion, against the original poster’s comments. He said the rules have changed. You said they are “about the same” (which they are not) and then asked whether the rules changed – which they did.
So I called you out on it and posted actual facts about the rule changes around allocations of scholarships.
The question at hand was not whether everyone was playing under the same rules (they are, of course) or even whether these rule changes made it harder to compete (they have, I think, made it harder to sustain a program’s success, much like the 85-scholarship limit in football brought greater parity to the game). The question was whether the rules had changed significantly.
Now you say:
“I did not say the rules had not changed, I said they haven't changed a lot, and they haven't!”
That’s a flat-out incorrect statement that isn’t even open for debate. For you to say that this is not a significant rule change shows your ignorance at best, or your obstinence at worst. Do some research for once before you spew misinformed opinions that you try to cast as facts. Heck, even a quick Google search will bring you many articles discussing the significance of this rule change and its impact on college baseball.
So you got called out on that, and now you’re trying to spin this back into your anti-all-Clemson-coaches-and-leaders manifesto, but it’s not about that. You continue to fail at reading comprehension. You are unable to discuss the points of debate that are actually being addressed.
And now in your latest, you’re no longer denying that the rules changed significantly; now, you’re crying that they happened only a couple years ago. So perhaps you’ve abandoned your misguided presence that they weren’t significant, but now you are content to only try to argue about the timing.
GUESS WHAT? The original post from TigerTown said, and I again quote, “You also can't compare rules then and now.” And they are indeed different between then and now.
Please go back to whatever village is being deprived at the moment. You’re a waste of time, and a discredit to my University.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
OK, let me try simple words. You are splitting hairs, ok,
Jun 29, 2010, 12:16 AM
|
|
I'll agree the rules change in 2008 was huge, but that is totally immaterial to the discussion. My point was during Jack's career as HC the rules were very similar to those Wilhelm competed under, and until 2 years ago that was 100% correct. There, happy now!!!???
But it doesn't matter, its like a typo, you're missing the whole gist of the discussion because you are so obsessed with being right about a simple error, NEW rules change. YOU are MISSING the POINT!
I'll concede your rules technicality error in regard to my discussion. Let me reword for morons like you that become obsessed with any tiny detail regardless of how immaterial to the actual POINT of the conversation.
If YOU could comprehend you'd of said I was correct except for the 2008 change, but that's splitting hairs because it's recent and not really material to the point I'm making!!
Here we go .... See if you can follow this ...
Wilhelm built a program out of nothing and made CU a national power in baseball. Jack inherited that 17 years ago and for the 1st half of his career he maintained that level of success. After our monumental meltdown in 2002 our baseball program has not been the same, and it hasn't, and over the years many others on TNET have pointed this out as well. During the second half of Jack's career, 2003 forward, we have NOT lived up to CU standards.
Yes, we made the CWS in 2006 and this year, but before 2003 40+ regular season wins was a given, coming close or winning a regular season and/or ACC tourney title was a given, going to the NCAA baseball tourney was a given.
Since 2002 every one of those things have been struggles to achieve! We missed the NCAA tourney a few years ago for the first time in almost 30 years. We've struggled to win 40 regular season games and actually haven't numerous times since 2002. We haven't won an ACC regular season or tourney title in years, not even close.
During this time, and before your precious 2008 rules change, programs we have dominated passed us, such as USC, UVa, and UNC.
Since 2002, the trend has been DOWN! Yet, until 2008, just 2 years ago, not 17 when Jack took over, the rules have barely changed. I'll say that again, Jack has been here 17 years, things started trending down in 2003, which was 8 years ago, yet there were NO "significant" rules changes until 2 years ago.
UNC, which isn't even in a baseball state, which SC is, went to 4 straight CWS until this year. We've never come close to that. USC has pretty much owned us since 2002 and DO own us when it counts!
So rant and rave all you want about the rules change in 2008, it has nothing to do with the decline of CU baseball under Jack 8 years ago, while other teams that we dominated for years, that have NO history of baseball success, passed us by! And their coaches were passing us playing by the same rules!
I'm not happy playing well below the CU gold standard 3 out of 4 years and getting hot and going to the CWS only to then struggle for another 3 years until we get hot and go to Omaha again.
Just like TB's mediocre and limited success by CU standards was not good enough!
Jack has served CU well, but he's lost his edge and clearly isn't able to win on the biggest stage. Clearly Ray Tanner is showing he can. There are a lot of great young ex-CU guys out there coaching other teams being very successful, and turning programs around where the competition is tough! I'd like to see Jack move on gracefully and we get Sully or Corbin to come home and bring some youthful excitement and true hunger to CU!
Jack has made a lot of coaching decisions that can seriously make you scratch your head and he's running our program with antiquated rules that I guarantee you inhibit to some degree his recruiting. Again, nothing new, plenty on TNET have said the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
Thank you for admitting you were wrong.
Jun 29, 2010, 7:55 AM
|
|
Now I'm done with you. You are disposable like the diaper that my neighbor's kid poops into.
Good day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Exactly. 1.3 schollies means very little and tomera & bball
Jun 28, 2010, 2:59 AM
[ in reply to Coach Wilhelm had 13 ships to work with ] |
|
fan love to forget that while the rules always change, the changes are usually minor and EVERYONE plays by the same rules! Not just CU.
Oh and tomera, Jack's been here 17 yrs as HC, the chg you mentioned was only 3 yrs ago. We haven't been the same since 2002. We've often struggled since 2002 and missed 40 regular season wins numerous times and even missed the tourney a few yrs ago. Things that were givens under Wilhelm and the 1st half of Hack's career here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
You continue to show your ignorance.
Jun 28, 2010, 1:05 PM
|
|
We're not talking about the reduction in scholarships from 13 to 11.7 ("1.3 schollies means very little").
We're talking about the 2008 rule changes on how those scholarships must be divvied up.
I didn't say anyone else played by different rules. I supported the earlier argument that there was a major rule change around scholarships during Coach Leggett's tenure.
You continue to fail at reading comprehension at a basic level.
I will never respond to you again, on any thread. You are a waste of time and your lack of intelligence is an insult to the alma mater that I hold so dear. You can't even acknolwedge basic facts as Truth, and that makes any discussion with you pointless.
I pity your neighbors.
Good day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
LOL! Dude, this program started having issues after 2002
Jun 28, 2010, 2:08 PM
|
|
not 2008. Please stop acting like I'm ignorant when you keep trying to defend things Jack when everyone plays by the same rules and those rules changes have nothing to do with our issues going back as far as 2002. You're trying to act all high and mighty and deflect attention from the true issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virtuoso [621]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1777
Joined: 1/18/06
|
this program started having issues after 2002???
Jun 28, 2010, 2:28 PM
|
|
seemingly a lot of programs would love to have the same issues as CU Baseball. how many teams have maintained the consistent success as our Tigers? not many.
this year was frustrating. began with a bang, deep funk in the middle, great run in CWS, then a flame out to finish... but overall it was a good year by any reasonable measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
you don't know the history of CU baseball if you think we
Jun 29, 2010, 12:26 AM
|
|
have maintained consistency since 2002.
Failed to win 40 regular season games several times
Missed the NCAA tourney completely one year with the 3rd longest active streak @ 27 behind I think Miami & FSU.
How many ACC regular season or tourney crowns have we won since 2002? 1 or 2? This year we were 0-2. Yea, got a meaningless win in our 3rd game after being eliminated.
Those things were all givens at CU for practically 30 years, but not since 2002.
YES, compared to MOST other programs we are successful, compared to what was the norm at CU for almost 30 years we have NOT been.
I don't care what other schools do, I care what CU does, and I use our history and the standard we set and the expectations that others built here as my bar for success!
To be great you have to compare yourself to greatness. Great teams don't compare themselves to the mediocre!
This kind of loser mentality, mediocre mentality, this is why our football, soccer, and other sports are down with no accountability from the AD or admin, because fans, alumni, and IPTAY members aren't demanding better like we did in the past!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
That wasn't the point. You don't get to just wave your arms
Jun 28, 2010, 3:20 PM
[ in reply to LOL! Dude, this program started having issues after 2002 ] |
|
in misdirection and jump topic when you're wrong.
You're wrong often, which is why you threadjack. You make ridiculous statements and, when called out on it, you jump off topic.
Sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wrong. When you and others can't win and use your orange
Jun 29, 2010, 12:34 AM
|
|
kool aid logic you find some minor error that is totally irrelevant to the spirit and point of my discussion and become obsessed with that point rather than address the bigger idea, the big picture. The 2008 rules change has no impact on the thesis of my discussion! None! And oddly enough, despite that major adjustment in schollies, Jack has been turning things around seemingly the past two years. But my point is, if he was the coach some of you think we wouldn't of had some of those down years after so many years of success. Sure, everyone has a down year sometimes, but we've fallen from our once lofty accomplishments ... 40 win regular seasons, ACC championships, be it regular season or tourney, consecutive NCAA trips, etc. .... All that happened BEFORE 2008. But has continued since.
I'm sorry, not meeting past expectations but a CWS trip every 4 yrs is not good enough for me. I don't compare CU to other schools and what THEY define success as, I look at CU over the past 30 years as what we can achieve and how we should set the bar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1177]
TigerPulse: 67%
Posts: 514
Joined: 7/18/00
|
Leggett has two 3rd place finishes in CWS..........
Jun 27, 2010, 9:24 AM
[ in reply to LOL! Wilhelm built the CU program and left Jack a great ] |
|
Leggett has two 3rd place finishes in CWS in the 2nd part of his carreer at Clemson. What was the best finish for the Tigers during the 1st part of his carreer and during Wilhelm's tenor............... 5th!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1147]
TigerPulse: 73%
Posts: 1671
Joined: 12/8/04
|
Wilhelm had a tenor?? who knew?***
Jun 27, 2010, 9:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9048
Joined: 2/22/00
|
Leggett has three 3rd place finishes in CWS..........
Jun 27, 2010, 9:35 AM
[ in reply to Leggett has two 3rd place finishes in CWS.......... ] |
|
In 1996 we went 2-2.
Bill Wilhelm never won more than one game in the CWS in his legendary career and finished 5th 4 times
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1280]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 1021
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Leggett has three 3rd place finishes in CWS..........
Jun 27, 2010, 9:42 AM
|
|
obviously the CWS was tougher back then lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Jack also took the #1 team in the country to the CWS
Jun 28, 2010, 3:13 AM
[ in reply to Leggett has two 3rd place finishes in CWS.......... ] |
|
with one of college baseball's all time best pitching staffs and went 0-2.
Jack also went 2-0 in the CWS twice and only needed 1 win in 2 to go to the championship and both times it was against a coot team we were clearly better than during the season and he promptly went 0-4 !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virtuoso [621]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1777
Joined: 1/18/06
|
Re: Jack also took the #1 team in the country to the CWS
Jun 28, 2010, 2:30 PM
|
|
Are you STUCK in 2002, or perhaps you were the fan tossed earlier this season for being a jack-arse? or both?
Clemson was nothing close to the #1 team in the country. We were not even #1 in our regional this year, and the team (and coach) deserve some credit for getting to the spot the earned... even if they pissed it away in the end.
They feel worse than you, but hopefully they are able to get on with life in a way you seemingly can't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
Some people can't grasp that (gasp!) this isn't 2002.
Jun 28, 2010, 3:26 PM
|
|
Sucks that it happened again, but the circumstances are completely different.
But Blue Caddy has an agenda against pretty much every coach and leader at Clemson, and so this loss, while heartbreaking for Clemson fans, fuels his manifesto.
Hey, I have no problems with people that don't like the coach. But at least be factual in your analysis. Or just admit that you don't like the guy without trying to spin it up into mistruths and misdirection.
Like I said in another thread, I've been very critical of Coach Leggett often, including the middle of this season. But I can at least understand facts, and see other viewpoints, and actually have a rational opinion.
And the rational opinion is that coaching had very, very, very, very little to do with our two losses in Omaha. Just because you don't like the guy and just because you question past decisions doesn't set up a bogeyman for this time around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
lol, wow, talk about spin and misdirection. i use plenty of
Jun 29, 2010, 12:52 AM
|
|
facts and support all my opnions. you just don't like them so you find ways to get off point and attack me and what you think my motives are rather than staying on point.
and i'm not the only one questioning some of Jack's coaching moves, others on TNET are as well, as did Robin Ventura a few times and i'm certain he knows more about baseball than both of us combined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Im comparing a series of years not any 1 year and you Jack
Jun 29, 2010, 12:47 AM
[ in reply to Re: Jack also took the #1 team in the country to the CWS ] |
|
lovers try to point to our mid-season slump as "we didn't belong" or "no one expected this" which is 100% FALSE!!
It was generally regarded that anything less than Omaha going into this season would be a disappointment based on how we played last year and the team we had coming back this year.
Look at the 1st third and the 3rd third of our season. They were identical. For two thirds of the year we were in fact one of the best and hottest teams in the country. The fluke, the aberration was the slump in the middle of the season! Yet you Jack lovers and Orange Kool Aid sunshine pumpers try to say that 1/3 of the season was the real 2010 CU baseball. I guarantee you the team doesn't think that!
Rather than think something stupid counter to the facts like "it was Jack's great coaching that got us to Omaha" the reality is it was Jack's coaching and lack of motivation that allowed such a good team to sink so low during the heart of the season!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1321]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 2316
Joined: 10/5/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [150]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 154
Joined: 9/7/09
|
Re: How have we finished 3rd?
Jun 29, 2010, 8:26 AM
|
|
You didn't see it? I was on ESPN6 at 3am last night. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [150]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 154
Joined: 9/7/09
|
Re: How have we finished 3rd?
Jun 29, 2010, 8:26 AM
|
|
It** was on ESPN6
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9048
Joined: 2/22/00
|
A lot to admire in both men. Coach Wilhelm fought like
Jun 27, 2010, 9:48 AM
[ in reply to LOL! Wilhelm built the CU program and left Jack a great ] |
|
crazy to get the ACC to enter the 20th century. He is one of the fathers of the expanded schedule- The old season would end in late April and then the champ would sometimes have to pick up games til the regional started. Another part of his legacy was hand picking Jack Leggett to be his successor.
How many guys who have followed a legend have done as well as Jack? We have had 2 TWO! baseball coaches in 53 years. 12 CWS trips..numerous regional and conference championships and we have been doing it since 1958. We owe a lot to these 2 men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4741]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 1/29/99
|
Yes indeed.***
Jun 27, 2010, 12:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12823
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Re: LOL! Wilhelm built the CU program and left Jack a great
Jun 28, 2010, 3:26 AM
[ in reply to LOL! Wilhelm built the CU program and left Jack a great ] |
|
So wouldn't the greater number of teams competing in college baseball make Leggett's number of appearances in the CWS all the more impressive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Not really. In the 80s only 32 teams went to the NCAA
Jun 28, 2010, 3:55 AM
|
|
tourney, then 64, then 65. More teams means its easier to get in. Thus, easier competition in the opening rounds. People act like OP is CU's best coach cause we went to the tourney 3 years in a row, but we also went 0-3. And in baseball, we often host so we're playing on our own field, which is a huge advantage for getting to Omaha. More teams just means an extra game or two against weaker competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virtuoso [621]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1777
Joined: 1/18/06
|
didn't realize Auburn's field was a 'home' for us?
Jun 28, 2010, 2:32 PM
|
|
cool. that should help us in a few months when our football team plays there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
we were at home for the Super Regional were we not?***
Jun 28, 2010, 2:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virtuoso [621]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1777
Joined: 1/18/06
|
after winning one of those "easy" regionals at our
Jun 28, 2010, 3:01 PM
|
|
"home away from home".
my point is that your complanining (or whining) is hard to take seriously. this team had a great run in the end after a bumpy mid-season... then fell apart late.
we do not have a failing program. we do not have a terrible coach. we did not have a bad year. we are in fact one of the best teams (and programs) in the country. we finished 3rd among all teams. we got beat by a very good team. enough said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
i agree 100% but there are things to point at as issues. you
Jun 29, 2010, 12:55 AM
|
|
are looking only at this year, i'm looking at cu and jack since 0-2 in 2002. including this year. you don't judge a coach or programs success by 1 year, nor do i judge cu by other programs but the standard cu set for itself from the 80s until 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3974]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8556
Joined: 3/1/05
|
Nope.***
Jun 28, 2010, 8:28 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [762]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 1819
Joined: 11/30/98
|
quit bringing rational thought into an irrational board...
Jun 28, 2010, 8:55 AM
|
|
these guys can not handle the truth...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2563]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4860
Joined: 10/2/08
|
Re: Bill Wihelm as our coach
Jun 28, 2010, 3:25 PM
|
|
All the coach can do is ride the horses he's got.
If JL had made the boneheaded call the Oklahoma coach did (not walking USCjr's hottest hitter, to an empty first base , with a lead, and 2 outs) then he could be criticized for "coaching".
You cant criticize him for our sluggers slumping or the errors. Or pitchers leaving fat ones over the plate.
Players play, coaches coach.
The only thing I saw , was JL should have argued till he got tossed about the batters interference non call. He should have known being that late in the game , it could be a game changing thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 50
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
