|
Replies: 43
| visibility 1
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 7:38 AM
|
|
Said this in response to the jk scock mic drop post but it warrants saying again: the spending argument is dumb. The difference in spending between clemson and the teams immediately above them in the acc is negligible. The problem is those schools get a higher return on their dollar, because they have better coaches. Mike Bray at Notre Dame is case in point. Go look at those schools’ wins and tournament wins during the brad era. It’s “reasonable” to expect to be as good as notre dame or virginia tech or miami. We haven’t been. And we spend the same as they do.
Guess you better pick that mic up and go on home
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Oh i forgot to mention pitt
Dec 19, 2022, 7:40 AM
|
|
Who spends way more than we do and has been horrible. Just a great example of how spending doesn’t necessarily drive results. Not about how much you spend. It’s about what you spend on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Your argument is flawed.
Dec 19, 2022, 1:39 PM
|
|
Pointing out programs that spend more than us and aren't successful doesn't invalidate the argument that we should spend more on men's basketball at Clemson.
You can certainly find examples of programs that spend a lot and don't have the kind of success you'd expect them to have. But typically, and with only a few exceptions, the schools that invest more in their programs have the most success.
It's like health and longevity. If someone wants to live to 100, can they do it eating a poor diet, being fat, drinking to excess, and smoking a pack of cigarettes? Sure, they could. But is it likely? Not at all. The people most likely to live to be centenarians eat a healthy diet, exercise, maintain a healthy body weight, and control their stress.
Yes, you can find examples of people who do all of those healthy things and don't live that long, because those habits don't guarantee a long, healthy life. But they absolutely increase the chances, substantially.
It feels like you're looking for reasons to spend less on men's basketball at Clemson. That's backwards thinking, and is a large reason why we have one of the worst basketball traditions in the ACC. Rather than looking at how we can spend less but somehow be more successful, why not spend more and give ourselves the best chance to win?
If we aren't willing to do that, then we don't really care - despite saying that we do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1998]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2867
Joined: 2/10/02
|
Dabo got budget after success, not before
Dec 19, 2022, 6:01 PM
|
|
Geez
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Ugh, no . . . it isn’t
Dec 19, 2022, 8:05 PM
[ in reply to Your argument is flawed. ] |
|
Sure maybe what you’re saying is my argument might be flawed, but the actual argument I’m making isn’t: the poor return clemson gets on investment in mbb is a way bigger problem than the dollar amount invested. I’d rather be miami, ND or VT than pitt. Don’t wanna just pee down a rat hole
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
But we aren’t getting a poor return on investment.
Dec 19, 2022, 8:27 PM
|
|
We are near the bottom of the 15 team ACC in terms of what we spend on our basketball program each year, but we finish 8th on average under Brownell.
The last 5 years, our average finish is 7th.
That’s getting an outstanding return on our investment.
The only way we would get a poor return on our investment is by finishing 15th in the ACC while being 14th in spending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Nah
Dec 19, 2022, 9:20 PM
|
|
That’s like saying if everyone spent the same amount but clemson spent a penny less, then anything better than last would be a good return. You’re ignoring the $8 million everyone spends and only considering the much smaller amount of dollars beyond that. It’s a little ridiculous. Like if you spend $8 million, then 13th in the acc is overperforming. No, it isn’t. It’s losing. You’re saying “hey the market is down 50% and we’re down 49%, so we did good.” No, you lost a pile. The point is to make money, or if you’re a basketball coach, it’s to win basketball games. Also, clemson has the 9th best winning percentage in the acc during brad’s tenure. The university is getting a poor return on its investment in brad. Sorry
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
You’re making it sound like we spend about the same as many others.
Dec 20, 2022, 12:08 AM
|
|
That simply isn’t true.
Even a million dollars goes a long way, and we are spending $2-$3 million per year less than a lot of schools that often finish below us in the conference.
We most certainly are getting a good return on our investment. That’s why Brad keeps getting raises and extensions. If he were underachieving as much as some of you say, and such a bad coach, he wouldn’t have a job.
If Clemson has clearly communicated one thing about men’s basketball over the decades, it’s that they won’t spend too much on it. If the athletic department believed that we could get another coach to do as well or better, they would’ve moved on from Brad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Losing isn’t winning
Dec 20, 2022, 9:04 AM
|
|
2 tournament wins in 12 years is not winning. It’s not that we’re not getting a good return; we’re basically getting no return. You act like $8 million is nothing. Now i get why people are always teasing that we should scrap mbb. You’re looking at the couple of worse programs in the conference and saying “see we’re better than them, cuz we spend more. We’re getting a good return.” It doesn’t make a lot of sense. It’s like saying “hey we lost 50% of our money but they lost 60%. That’s a good return!” Again, no it isn’t. Losing money is not a good return, just like losing in basketball isn’t winning. Again 2 tourney wins in 12 years, losing conference record, 9th out of 15 over 12-year span. Point to history and money all you want. That’s losing!!! And $8 million isn’t nothing!!!
Pay brad the same as larannaga. You say Bray makes more. Pay him the same as Bray. Then what separates the annual spend between clemson and those programs? Half a mil? What’s the difference? If we get someone else who’s good you say they’ll leave. You say brad’s poor record is good. It’s totally defeatist. How bout this? Try to pick a winner instead of dumping more money into what’s been failing. I just can’t believe these were the expectations when brad first came to clemson, that this 12-year performance would’ve been considered a success if you’d presented it at the signing of that first contract.
Look when brad finishes top 3 in the acc and takes this year’s team to the final 4, ok. To do that once in 13 years is reasonable. Then, I’ll get on board with giving him more money, but he’s given no indication he’s capable of ever reaching those heights. You can call finishing below .500 in the acc and missing the tournament “reasonable” if you want; i’d call it “realistic,” but to call it successful i’d say is irrational. The point is to win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [453]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 465
Joined: 6/5/10
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 7:48 AM
|
|
Isn’t this team 9-3 ? What kinda record do you think they should have ? Sounds pretty good to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4035]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3527
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 7:55 AM
|
|
While the 9-3 sounds good - the level of competition has been horrible. (Combined records are below .500 ). 2 of our losses are to really poor teams. We have not played a team that is currently ranked.
Time will tell - although our schedule is weak for the rest of the season as well. The ACC is historically poor, so no better time than this year to win the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Just responding to attacks against fans
Dec 19, 2022, 7:58 AM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
Hopefully this team continues to play well and the season ends up better than it usually has with brad leading the way
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31303]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9123
Joined: 8/31/15
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 7:59 AM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
At least 9-2. Never should have lost to SC. They are horrible!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16732]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16761
Joined: 8/19/04
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 8:05 AM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
LOL. We most always open up the schedule playing YMCA teams with a few average teams mixed in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3047]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1746
Joined: 10/14/05
|
Don't knock YMCA basketball until you've played it!***
Dec 19, 2022, 8:24 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64589]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88994
Joined: 3/27/01
|
Back in the day...
Dec 19, 2022, 9:02 AM
|
|
I got asked to play in the old Southern Textile Tournament a couple of times. Sports (largely baseball and basketball) were a big part of the mill village life/culture. Local cotton mills would organize their own teams to compete against other mills (players had to work at the mills to be eligible to play on the teams). The Textile Tournament was created to determine the best mill basketball team in the state. It grew to include mill teams from Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia. Over time, the organizers set-up an "open division" and that's when the level of competition really increased. The two years I played, the event was held at the old Greenville Memorial Auditorium. I was a decent basketball player but I was in WAY OVER my head in this tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1620]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 1616
Joined: 11/23/10
|
Re: Back in the day...
Dec 19, 2022, 7:26 PM
|
|
Grown man from Graniteville company . Might not win the game but hopefully would win the fights
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12208]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 20772
Joined: 2/13/05
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 1:41 PM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
Just wait till the end of the year before you crown the 9-3 BB legend.
He is in year 100 and has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The program is in worse shape than when it was handed off. The lack of support from the fans is showing.
9-3 is cool. We will end up with a very average record in a trash conference. Yea!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4596]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3360
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 7:58 AM
|
|
Why are we talking about spending? I thought it was the pep band that won games?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Just taking it one at a time
Dec 19, 2022, 7:59 AM
|
|
Apparently we’re excusing away a lot of excuses. And that fact is a “mic drop” argument to end all arguments
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7987]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 10449
Joined: 11/28/03
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 8:00 AM
|
|
We should note that for whatever reason(s) Clemson is a difficult place to win in basketball. It has been that way for a hundred years. One of the ways to overcome the negative history is to pour money into the program. Facilities and/or hiring a top tier coach. Comparing the spending at Clemson to a school who does not have the same obstacles to overcome is not a valid comparison. Using a football example, one would expect to spend much less at FSU to create a top 10 program than would be needed at Syracuse given the natural advantages at FSU put a much better history to sell recruits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Uh . . .
Dec 19, 2022, 8:03 AM
|
|
Virginia tech? Notre dame? Miami? Pitt? These comps seem pretty valid to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16732]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16761
Joined: 8/19/04
|
Re: Uh . . .
Dec 19, 2022, 8:07 AM
|
|
Add Tenn to the football schools that are now good at basketball. IF we were to pour more money in basketball the only area increases are needed is at Head Coach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1868]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 965
Joined: 9/9/18
|
Last i checked mike bray makes less than brad
Dec 19, 2022, 8:11 AM
|
|
Not sure if that’s still the case, but I’d say ND has gotten way more for the same or less money with him. Probably the only added expense we need is whatever the cost of the coaching search is
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Notre Dame also said that Brian Kelly made $3 million
Dec 19, 2022, 1:53 PM
|
|
in compensation last year.
Do you believe that's all he got? Because I don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13481]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8920
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Uh . . .
Dec 19, 2022, 11:48 AM
[ in reply to Re: Uh . . . ] |
|
Had we held on to the Tennessee coach, none of this would even matter...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Tennessee spends a lot more on their program than we do.
Dec 19, 2022, 1:51 PM
[ in reply to Re: Uh . . . ] |
|
They spend $10.5 million a year on men's basketball, and we spend $7.9 million.
That's roughly 25% more than we spend.
Don't you think the additional $2.6 million each year could be spent on things to enhance our program?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [231]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 344
Joined: 3/11/13
|
Re: Tennessee spends a lot more on their program than we do.
Dec 19, 2022, 7:22 PM
|
|
If your numbers are correct for this year, that means other than head coach salary we actually spend more on basketball than Tennessee. Best I can tell, Barnes is making $5.45M and Brownell $3.75M, a $2.7M difference. And obviously no, paying Brownell an additional $2.6M salary is not gonna improve anything. But yes, spending that on a better coach would probably help, but I don't think that's what you meant to suggest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Brownell is compensated fairly.
Dec 19, 2022, 8:29 PM
|
|
I’d like to see us spend more on assistants and support staff.
We also must continue to upgrade our facilities and not let them get too far behind again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [140468]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33865
Joined: 12/5/10
|
How often should we budget $63,500,000.00
Dec 20, 2022, 11:25 AM
|
|
for Littlejohn upgrades? Men's basketball only makes $1,000,000.00 per year, I'm worried we may be upside down on this deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21848]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15708
Joined: 10/23/12
|
I'm sure JK is going to tell you that you gotta spend more
Dec 20, 2022, 11:44 AM
|
|
to make more or something along those lines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82042]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17306
Joined: 1/14/17
|
We're going make it up in volume.
Dec 20, 2022, 12:47 PM
|
|
jk probably
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9716]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 9410
Joined: 1/18/17
|
Guess I just imagined those times
1
Dec 19, 2022, 8:43 AM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
in the past where it was a lot of fun, we were good, and it was tough to get a ticket.
Musta been some good drugs I was on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4035]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3527
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Guess I just imagined those times
Dec 19, 2022, 5:37 PM
|
|
100%. We had a blast. Now, there is no oxygen, Brad sucked it out of the room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16252]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12783
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Re: Guess I just imagined those times
Dec 19, 2022, 5:56 PM
|
|
Apparently the dying enthusiasm, dwindling attendance, and overall program malaise has nothing to do with the head coach. The fans and students are to blame for not appreciating losing conference records, an overabundance of close losses, and inconsistency enough. Let that be a lesson to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8537]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 11511
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 8:32 AM
|
|
You are correct. Basketball is about history and opportunity not money. We do not have a history of winning that attracts big time players because they do not see Clemson players in the NBA. The 35 year gap in our football championships largely ended because CJ Spiller took a chance and signed with us. The doors opened then, the wins started coming and other players followed. Until a super big time recruit comes to Clemson, we will be a decent program but not one that is a championship team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2850]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3021
Joined: 9/10/04
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 10:40 AM
|
|
Sometimes no reasonable amount of extra money is going to move the needle. If they built a brand arena and a basketball training facility equivalent to what football has do you think Clemson would get a long term return on that investment? I believe Clemson admin concluded long ago that was not going to work and would only cause the rest of the athletics to suffer. No way will they make that tradeoff. They invested in upgrades sufficient to potentially hire a basketball staff with more money available to pay them. We will see if Neff decides to go that route after this year. The Clemson brand is strong nationally thanks to football, so the right coach and assistants could potentially improve recruiting results to a certain degree. Winning enough to put the Tigers into the top third of the conference would land that coach at another program with a really nice raise. Then the cycle starts over. That’s Clemson’s basketball DNA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4035]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3527
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Basketball spending
Dec 19, 2022, 5:39 PM
[ in reply to Re: Basketball spending ] |
|
And now ask the big question.
Why would any great recruit come play for a coach who gets excited when we are picked to finish 11th and we actually finish 10th? BB and his minions think that is success.
Not me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [-79]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 4600
Joined: 12/21/21
|
Her ridiculous attempt at "mic drop" scok was banned.
Dec 19, 2022, 9:12 AM
|
|
How many times does this lady need to get caught using scoks before she's perma-banned?
Great points, BTW. Don't expect Ms. Keller to address them, with any handle. You'll be put on ignore shortly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44044]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32956
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Where did you get your numbers?
Dec 19, 2022, 1:30 PM
|
|
My post from earlier this year breaks it down:
https://www.tigernet.com/clemson-forum/message/in-case-you-are-curious-what-we-spend-on-basketball-at-clemson-30215453
We spend $7.9 million a year on men's basketball. Miami spends $9.2 million (over $1 million a year more than we do) and Virginia Tech spends $10.3 million a year (over $2 million a year more than we do). That's significant in men's basketball.
I couldn't find data for Notre Dame, but I think it's safe to say that they probably spend more (and likely significantly more) than we do. As I'm sure you know, we spend less than everyone but Boston College.
Second, no on here has ever said that spending more money guarantees more success. However, it should be pretty clear that the programs that spend more tend to do better. Why wouldn't we want to increase our chances of success by supporting basketball at Clemson well?!?
As for your comparisons, Notre Dame is a poor comparison. Their basketball history is leaps and bounds better than ours. Mike Brey took over a program with 24 NCAA Tournament appearances in its history, including 14 Sweet Sixteens, 5 Elite Eights, and a Final Four. In contrast, Brad took over a team with just 9 NCAA tournament appearances, 2 Sweet Sixteens, and 1 Elite Eight.
Mike Brey is an outstanding coach, no argument there. However, he has had some ups and downs in his 22 years there. He's been to 13 NCAA Tournaments (more than we've been to in our entire history), including a couple of Elite Eights and a Sweet Sixteen. But interestingly, in his last five years, he has two losing seasons and just one NCAA Tournament appearance.
Virginia Tech has a similar history to us, but we've been better than they've been in Brad's tenure:
Clemson (2010-2022): 218-166 (.568) overall, 103-111 ACC (.481)
Virginia Tech (2010-2022): 214-175 (.550) overall, 90-121 ACC (.426)
Again, no argument from me about Buzz Williams and Mike Young, two excellent coaches.
Miami has been better than us in the Brownell era:
Miami (2010-2022): 247-156 (.613) overall, 112-106 (.514) ACC.
Larranaga has been there since 2011, and has had some wild ups and downs. The ups: 5 NCAA Tournaments, including an Elite Eight, two Sweet Sixteens, and two first round losses. He also won the ACC regular season and ACC Tournament in 2013. The downs: three losing seasons (including 3 of the last 4), with an average ACC finish of just below 11th those three seasons.
Larranaga is a good coach.
So all of these programs we're discussing (including ours) have good coaches, but varying degrees of success. They have all been inconsistent (see, it's not just a Brownell problem!).
It would be great if you (or anyone) could find good examples of programs that spend less than or equal to what we spend, and have the kind of success you want us to have. Again, I think that will be a very short list.
You used examples of programs that spend more than we do, and even still they haven't been clearly more successful than us. That doesn't help your argument that we should be better than we have been for what we invest in the program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4035]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3527
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Where did you get your numbers?
Dec 19, 2022, 5:43 PM
|
|
Varying success is right. The other teams have has success winning conf championships, multiple NCAA invites, and NCAA success. BB, not so much. His success is beating the low expectations the writers have for him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21848]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15708
Joined: 10/23/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1620]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 1616
Joined: 11/23/10
|
Re: Link to where you get your numbers?***
Dec 19, 2022, 8:37 PM
|
|
www.Brownelljocksniff.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1157]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 770
Joined: 2/25/19
|
Re: Where did you get your numbers?
Dec 20, 2022, 12:57 PM
[ in reply to Where did you get your numbers? ] |
|
If the University said we will spend 5 million more per year and we are going to fire Brownell would you be happy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 43
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
