|
Replies: 36
| visibility 506
|
Heisman Winner [79045]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 120425
Joined: 1998
|
No agenda just numbers
4
Mar 6, 2023, 8:26 AM
|
|
This year we won 70% of our conference games versus 38.6% lifetime in ACC and 50.8% of all games in ur hoops history. I threw out our one tie from over 100 years ago. Not sure why or how you would have a tie
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [10404]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
2
Mar 6, 2023, 8:34 AM
|
|
I don't have an agenda either but here's some more numbers.
Since the NCAA tournament expanded to 64 our Tigers have only made 12 of 38 tournaments. If you take out the Shyatt/Brown-L years our Tigers have made 9 of 21.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [79045]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 120425
Joined: 1998
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
5
5
Mar 6, 2023, 8:41 AM
|
|
If you had to get in like the old days we would still be waiting. Our hoops history is not good. It has been better recently.
I get annoyed when people here act like CBB wrecked our Lamborghini. He has done pretty well with the used 20 year old Jeep we gave him and manages to get some occasional good results with it. We have been a lower tier ACC program. This is probably our first 2 game bye. Lets enjoy what good we get when we get it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
Mar 6, 2023, 8:44 AM
|
|
I’d like to get back to making the tourney (a proper field of 64 invite) 1/2 the time rather than less than 20% of the time. If he inherited a Jeep he’s rolled it more than a few times and you’re congratulating him for getting it to start again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [12938]
TigerPulse: 98%
47
Posts: 12762
Joined: 2003
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
2
Mar 6, 2023, 9:32 AM
|
|
Was great during the OP years where we made the tournament several times but failed to win a single game even against lower seeded teams. Those were the glory days!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 10:05 AM
|
|
I don’t understand why you think this is pertinent. How about a coach who can go consistently AND win games. Holy #### what a concept. So ####### tedious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [12938]
TigerPulse: 98%
47
Posts: 12762
Joined: 2003
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
1
Mar 6, 2023, 10:25 AM
|
|
I don’t understand why you think this is pertinent. How about a coach who can go consistently AND win games. Holy #### what a concept. So ####### tedious.
You brought up making the dance but as usual failed to paint the full picture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
3
Mar 6, 2023, 11:08 AM
|
|
Any defense of Brownell is devoid of context. What Purnell didn’t do is irrelevant. The point is that Clemson can, with a decent coach, be consistent. Barnes proved it. Purnell proved it. Brownell in 13 seasons hasn’t. Winning no games in the tourney isn’t the goal. Winning 2 games isn’t the goal. Winning ACC championships and NCAA championships should be the goal. Purnell appeared to hit a ceiling. Instead of finding a coach with a higher ceiling we found one that has a lower ceiling. If you want to give some outsized credit to winning two games in the tourney - once - then go ahead. Purnell made a ACC tourney final. Now we’re even. The defense of Brownell is a defense of Clemson being perpetually satisfied with just okay. Any improvement in the second half of his tenure has to be controlled for changes in the schedule rotation. Statistically, the last two seasons are the easiest strength of schedule (this year dramatically the worst) Brownell has faced in the last decade. Net result - fails to even make the the NIT and relying on the ACC tourney to try and snag a “First Four”. Such profound progress.
Further, we constantly hear that we shouldn’t dare make a change because good coaches always leave us. But Brownell has never strung anything good enough together to be any threat to leave. We have no idea if he’d actually be loyal if he was in any kind of demand. Since it appears to be the new t-net word of the month: stop being a “cuck” for Brownell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3334]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
I'm confused by this post considering Clemson has only
2
Mar 6, 2023, 9:40 AM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
made the NCAA tournament 13 times over the program's history. Our record is 11-13 in those thirteen appearances.
When have we ever made the tournament 50% of the time? Or even 20% of the time?
Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a good basketball program. If NCAA tournament invitations is the indicator of a good basketball program, we've not been very good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [79045]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 120425
Joined: 1998
|
Re: I'm confused by this post considering Clemson has only
1
Mar 6, 2023, 10:01 AM
|
|
50% is our all time hoops history. Did not look at NCAA T history
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: I'm confused by this post considering Clemson has only
3
Mar 6, 2023, 10:15 AM
[ in reply to I'm confused by this post considering Clemson has only ] |
|
Excluding Larry Shyatt’s tenure, Clemson is 9-21 in making the NCAA tournament (43%). If you exclude Purnell’s first three seasons, which were all a clear upward trajectory from the crap show he inherited, that would make us 9-18 (50%). Even 43% is a marked improvement from Brownell. If you don’t like manipulating the numbers then look at facts as they are. Purnell pulled us out of a tail spin and had us in the NIT in one season. The “he didn’t win a game in the NCAA” is a giant red herring. He took a broken team to three straight NITs and three straight NCAAs. Built a team that would win 20+ 5 straight years and make 4 straight tourneys. This is Brownell’s 5th 20 win team in 13 years and he’s never strung more than two together. And, based on his results at DePaul, we know Purnell isn’t some otherworldly great coach. We should have moved up the coaching ladder and we moved way down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16128]
TigerPulse: 97%
51
Posts: 24632
Joined: 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1560]
TigerPulse: 82%
30
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
Mar 6, 2023, 2:04 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
In the history of Clemson basketball, when has Clemson made the tournament every other year?
People think OP was awesome and had Clemson really playing great. No.
He gamed the systems well. He played weak out of conference preseason games, then basically played .500 ball in ACC conference games.
He had one good year in ACC tournament and never one an NCAA game. Ever. Sure he made it 3x in a row. Wahoo. But we were a one trick pony (pressure full court D and could not shoot FTs). When it worked it could work well, but it did not work when your team was above average.
The Tigers have reached the NCAA tournament 13 times in the modern era (1980, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2018, 2021) since the tournament expansion in 1980, advancing to the NCAA Sweet 16 four times (1980, 1990, 1997, 2018), with their best performance reaching the Elite Eight once.
Clemson Basketball Coaches of that modern era
1980 - Foster
1987, 1989, 1990 - Ellis
1996, 1997, 1998 - Barnes
2008, 2009, 2010 - Purnell
2011, 2018, 2021 - Brownell
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8226]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 3:34 PM
|
|
I seriously don't know what's wrong with some of you people. Purnell was a great coach, and his last three seasons we were one of the four best teams in the ACC, and he made the ACC tournament final. Just because you didn't like him, doesn't mean he wasn't a great coach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8040]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 12:48 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
Your reply to Bowhunter suggests you indeed had an agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5510]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 1:08 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
A more or less apt analogy. I'm happy to give him credit for mostly keeping it between the rails.
But the time when he drives it off the side of a cliff have added so many dents that won't buff out. I'd rather not let him keep driving it if there's a decent chance that we could get someone who will keep it on the road and moving uphill to the summit instead of just circling around and around and around and barely getting any higher. Or maybe going partway up the hill one year only to slide back down the next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16128]
TigerPulse: 97%
51
Posts: 24632
Joined: 2002
|
Brownell inherited a program fresh off 3 straight Tourney
Mar 6, 2023, 3:02 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
appearances. It isn't like he was handed the keys to a Pinto either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
7
7
Mar 6, 2023, 8:42 AM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
Give Purnell credit for having to rebuild after Shyatt and what you have - between Ellis, Barnes, and Purnell - is that good coaches can get us to the tourney 50% of the time and without sweating on Selection Sunday. Let’s remember that Brownell has only been selected to the field of 64 twice. His predecessors did not have the privilege of an “First Four”. We will likely be in the play-in game once again if we make it at all this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5510]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 1:13 PM
|
|
Purnell never did win an NCAAT game, but he got to the postseason regularly. He faded into obscurity pretty quickly after leaving Clemson, but he did rebuild quickly after Shyatt. And in 2008 he had Clemson playing in the ACCT Championship game.
OP's record
2003–04 Clemson 10–18 3–13 9th
2004–05 Clemson 16–16 5–11 9th NIT First Round
2005–06 Clemson 19–15 7–9 9th NIT Second Round
2006–07 Clemson 25–11 7–9 T–8th NIT Runner-Up
2007–08 Clemson 24–10 10–6 3rd NCAA Division I First Round
2008–09 Clemson 23–9 9–7 T–5th NCAA Division I First Round
2009–10 Clemson 21–11 9–7 T–5th NCAA Division I First Round
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1560]
TigerPulse: 82%
30
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 2:46 PM
|
|
So for Purnell it is the Post Season.
Got it.
I thought all of Clemson expects NCAA Tournament every other year like orginal poster.
OP made it to the NCAAs his last 3 seasons at Clemson. Then he bolted. He did not leave much for a team. The players he left did make the NCAAs with BB in year one. Play in game. BUt did make it.
Remember that team loaded with elite players of:
Number Name Position Height Weight Year Hometown
2 Demontez Stitt Guard 6–2 180 Senior Matthews, North Carolina
3 Zavier Anderson Guard 5–9 170 Senior Greenville, South Carolina
4 Jonah Baize Forward 6–6 195 Senior Evansville, Indiana
5 Tanner Smith Guard 6–5 210 Junior Alpharetta, Georgia
10 Catalin Baciu Center 7–2 255 Junior Cluj-Napoca, Romania
11 Andre Young Guard 5–9 175 Junior Albany, Georgia
12 Cory Stanton Guard 5–10 175 Freshman Springfield, Tennessee
21 Bryan Narcisse Forward 6–6 220 Junior North Augusta, South Carolina
24 Milton Jennings Forward 6–9 225 Sophomore Summerville, South Carolina
31 Devin Booker Forward/Center 6–8 245 Sophomore Whitmire, South Carolina
44 DeAndre Hopkins Guard 6–2 205 Freshman Central, South Carolina
45 Jerai Grant Forward/Center 6–8 230 Senior Bowie, Maryland
Where were the elite players? One poster a few days ago said the BB had Purnell's players, a team of elite players.
Nope. Not true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5510]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 7, 2023, 3:10 PM
|
|
Don't read too much into my comment. I was only making a point that OP did MAKE it to the NCAAT but never won any games; OTOH for the people who lament that OP is not still the coach, his career went steadily downhill after bolting. Plus, he bolted. I'm not saying I wanted OP to come back or anything.
However, when looking for positives, OP made the postseason 6 out of 7 years and NCAAT 3 years running. And year 1 was dealing with Shyatt's players. CBB has made NCAAT 3 times in 13 years, nonconsecutive (and year 1 with OPs players), and NIT 3 times in 13 years (nonconsecutive), so postseason 6 out of 13 years.
I don't expect a Clemson head basketball coach to make NCAAT every year, but I do expect more than 3 times in 13 years (50% would be nice though), and I do expect that in the off years that we make the NIT and do not choke in the first game to Oakland, et al.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3696]
TigerPulse: 85%
35
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 2:56 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
Yeah Purnell had to rebuild, but brownell did not, eh? I keep seeing this thrown around and it is silly, and a dumb comparison.
1. People act like Purnell left this basketball in great shape....we still had the worst facilities and history in the ACC. We went to the tourney 3 times in a row and lost to a lower seed. Wow, what a selling point to recruits. He left with no notice to players at the end of the recruiting cycle. He only had one mediocre commitment and they went to UGA. We didn't end up having a freshman class because of this.
2. In our second year, Brian narcisse started and our back up big man was catelin baciu. The talent dropoff was huge..... if you compare Purnell and brownell talent in year 2, it was very similar. I always like narcisse, but he would not sniff the court on this team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 3:36 PM
|
|
This constant argument from you is insincere. You’re pretending Brownell had no control over his team until sometime years down the road. He came in off-season of 2010. He had months to recruit for the fall early signing date. That’s what you’re crying about with the cupboard bare. It’s literally what every new coach deals with any year in basketball. The freshman class he inherited was - on paper - the best recruiting class in Clemson basketball history. That’s a fact. Trashing our former players doesnt change it a reveals how cynical and insincere your calls to support Brownell are. You don’t give a crap about anything other than being right about Brownell and are willing to see this go on forever to feel right. Once again a regular season is over and it’s pretty safe to say we aren’t in the tourney. We could still play our game way in but it’s pretty embarrassing that we’re in this position as you bros proudly contend this is the bestest season Eva! It’s sad you throw those former players under the bus to aggrandize Brownell. To whatever degree they were “busts” is inextricably tied to Brownell’s failure to motivate, coach, adjust his style of play, utilize their athleticism or basically do anything. His second year recruiting class is more his problem the Purnell’s but you actually excuse him for just floundering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3696]
TigerPulse: 85%
35
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 5:11 PM
|
|
Wow. Where to even begin. You can trash brownell's teams, and that's all good. If I say that there wasn't a lot of talent leftover from Purnell in year 2 of brownell, it's bashing players. Sorry to hurt your widdle feelings by saying Brian narcisse wasn't an acc caliber starter. I thought that was common sense.
You can say that it was the best class in history on paper, but we all know that is insincere. You are intentionally leaving out context.
Milton Jennings was our highest rated recruit ever. We all know and saw that he was a bust. Sorry Milton. Noel johnson was our second highest rated recruit. He transferred to auburn and only started 5 games for the remainder of his career. He avg 4 ppg in his best year. Devin booker was solid, but not a star like his brother. It's ok to admit that.
I'm simply debunking the silly argument that OP had to rebuild, and brownell didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 6:50 PM
|
|
As usual virtually everything false.
You don’t hurt my feelings.
I don’t bash players
You don’t say “there wasn’t much talent leftover” you have trashed virtually every player on Brownell’s initial roster by name.
Whatever Milton was, Brownell was his coach. As our highest rated player ever you should concede that he had a much higher ceiling than what was achieved. How does the man that coached him and put him on the floor bare absolutely zero credit for that lack of development. It is a ridiculous notion that has set up Brownell to only earn accolades and have no fault whatsoever when things go wrong.
Why did our second highest recruit transfer? Also, no fault of Brownell’s. Weird that our two best recruits flamed out but the head coach has literally zero culpability in your eyes.
It is absurd to argue that the job before Brownell was comparable to the one in front of Purnell. It’s especially stupid since Brownell himself said it was not a rebuilding job. And even if you were crazy enough to want to say they started from the same baseline it would take Brownell seasons to build a team that would get back to the tourney. It took Purnell 5 - whereupon he went 3 straight times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1109]
TigerPulse: 100%
26
|
Have selections been the same since expansion?
Mar 6, 2023, 12:38 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
At one point, not every conference was an automatic qualifier. When NCAA decided to award automatic qualifiers to all conferences, the number of spots for power 6 teams went down. Also at some point, NCAA decided to get more mid-major, runner up’s in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1560]
TigerPulse: 82%
30
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 2:22 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
The reality
The Tigers have reached the NCAA tournament 13 times in the modern era (1980, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2018, 2021) since the tournament expansion in 1980, advancing to the NCAA Sweet 16 four times (1980, 1990, 1997, 2018), with their best performance reaching the Elite Eight once.
Clemson Basketball Coaches of that modern era
1980 - Foster coached from 1975-84
1987, 1989, 1990 - Ellis coached from 1984-94 so did not reach the NCAA Tournament in 84,85,86, 91,92,93, 94
1996, 1997, 1998 - Barnes coached from 1994-98 - Did not reach NCCA Tournament in his first year.
2008, 2009, 2010 - Purnell coached from 2003-10 - Did not reach NCAA Tournament 03,04,05, 06, 07
2011, 2018, 2021 - Brownell coached from 2010 - present and did not reach NCAA Tournament 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 with 20 cancelled.
You want a great coach that Clemson should have gotten behind, it was Rick Barnes. That is turning point where the program could have become a much more consistent program. But he left. And Clemson has been searching for someone to take it up to another level .
No one should dismiss what Coach BB has done for Clemson basketball. The teams are more fundamentally sound than under Shyatt or Purnell. They play better defense. He has developed players. They have achieved things that no other coach at Clemson has been able to accomplish. Winning in Chapel Hill vs a team coached by Roy Williams was a big deal. Going to Sweet 16 is a big deal in Clemson history.
To me the knock that I give to Coach Brownell:
- he has had too many players leave the program, aka transfer
- he has not really improved basketball recruiting's success
- he does not seem to have a warm, approachable personality to win over the Clemson fanbase
- I think he is slow to see the reality during some games where certain players are not going to be what he wants/thinks that they are
So I do not know if there is another level that he could take Clemson basketball too. I think he has hit is ceiling. So I am OK if AD Neff makes a change. But if a change is made. He better make the right one. Otherwise, Clemson basketball will slide backwards.
Brownell may be hitting his ceiling. AD Neff will have to decide that. But I do not think a change occurs this year based on what has occurred as of today ( March 6). There is still time.
So since Barnes, Shyatt was abysmal. Then OP comes to start growing interest and getting attention. However, his approach could only go so far and he reached his limit. So Clemson hired Brownell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10902]
TigerPulse: 60%
45
Posts: 13963
Joined: 2006
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
2
2
Mar 6, 2023, 8:53 AM
|
|
An AD would have a hard time looking a prospective new coach in the eye after firing a coach that just bettered the all-time conference record for wins by 3 games. Just settle in and hope there is a way we can somehow beat NC State for a 3rd time Thursday and all will be taken care of. If there is no common sense in the selection process anymore, all we can do is win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [6037]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 9:49 AM
|
|
Sounds like Brad is doing a nice job of doing more with less in a down conference.
No agenda here. He deserves credit for what they've accomplished so far. From here on out his season will be based on post season results.
Personally, I'm not a huge fan and don't think his resume suggests he's Rick Barnes, but as far as this season goes so far so good.
Appreciate the rational post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50790]
TigerPulse: 79%
58
Posts: 37057
Joined: 2003
|
How exactly is he doing less with more?!!
1
1
Mar 6, 2023, 10:16 AM
|
|
He routinely plays teams that have a higher basketball budget than we have and better fan support than we have, not to mention a better basketball history than we do.
To finish in the top half of the conference on average as we have under Brad means he is doing more with less. Sprinkle in seasons like this one, and we are definitely getting our money’s worth.
This year, we finished ahead of teams with higher rated recruiting classes. We have several big contributors who were not highly recruited, but have improved considerably during their time at Clemson due to good coaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22746]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 13378
Joined: 2018
|
Re: How exactly is he doing less with more?!!
3
Mar 6, 2023, 10:29 AM
|
|
From what I gather, I don't think our administration is willing to invest more in the coach we have. I think they will consider investing more to attract a coach they really want. You would argue just spend more with the coach we have and he will deliver more of the results we want. Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of folks believe that. This leads us to continue with what we have until we identify someone we really want to go after, and will pay to get, and then continue to invest to upgrade the program.
I certainly could be wrong but it feels like this is where we are...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [6037]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Stay calm....
Mar 6, 2023, 4:22 PM
|
|
....it was just a typing error.
JK asked the same question and I just responded. Just a little dyslexic typing on my part!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [6037]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: Backwards typing
Mar 6, 2023, 4:14 PM
[ in reply to How exactly is he doing less with more?!! ] |
|
I stand corrected!
That was just my dyslexia kicking in. I meant to type "more with less".
Brad has done a nice job with this year's team, and there's no doubt he's done MORE WITH LESS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4842]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
1
Mar 6, 2023, 10:51 AM
|
|
Basketball conference power rankings:
1 Big 12 0.588 Kansas (25-6) 1
2 SEC 0.567 Alabama (26-5) 2
3 Big Ten 0.559 Purdue (26-5) 3
4 Mountain West 0.557 San Diego St (24-6) 4
5 Big East 0.544 Marquette (25-6) 5
6 ACC 0.542 Duke (23-8) 6
Yes, ACC is behind the Mountain West and Big East...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20806]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 18734
Joined: 2012
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 11:31 AM
|
|
Another reason Smart would not consider leaving Marquette and coming here
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1109]
TigerPulse: 100%
26
|
just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 1:03 PM
[ in reply to Re: No agenda just numbers ] |
|
Adjusting the ratings so that Big 12 is 100%, for comparison
Big 12 100.0
SEC. 96.4
Big 10. 95.1
M West. 94.7
Big East 92.5
ACC. 92.2
Significant difference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [44756]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 11711
Joined: 2015
|
Re: No agenda just numbers
Mar 6, 2023, 5:37 PM
|
|
I have a serious question. If Brownell was to leave would the next coach look at this job as a rebuild?
Tired of hearing about fan support and budgets. Poorer teams will be in the tourney. Barnes had far less and done a lot more.
It’s recruiting and X’s and 0’s. You do those well and the money and recruits will follow. We are and have not been a pipeline for the NBA but we can do a hell of a lot better than always being on the outside looking in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 36
| visibility 506
|
|
|
50
