»
Topic: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team
Replies: 45   Last Post: Mar 7, 2021, 11:06 PM by: Tiger TV
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 45  

I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 8:46 PM
 

than this year's basketball team. One game they look like they can beat anybody in the country, the next game they look like they can't beat a high school team. Normally that's a sign of poor coaching. You have the talent to beat anybody, but don't perform on a consistent basis (see Tommy Bowden). I'm willing to give Brownell a pass though this year given the Covid craziness and all, but it's still puzzling.

link

I am NOT willing to give BB a Covid pass. EVERYBODY is

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 8:48 PM
 

dealing with Covid. Clemson has actually done a better job than some at least in that regard.

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[2]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 8:54 PM
 

Duke and NC have had consistency issues at times. I dont know what our deal was today but it was aa weak effort w the double bye on the line. And 10 pts in the loss is misleading. They could and should have beaten us by 20 plus

badge-donor-05yr.jpgringofhonor-74tiger.jpg link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[4]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 8:59 PM
 

13 teams played there. 12 lost. but it is all brownells fault. got it. the amount of idiots on this board truly boggles the mind.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:13 PM
 

So what? That means nothing. How many ranked teams has Syracuse played at home this year? Wait for it, wait for it.....none.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[2]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:45 PM
 

User Logo
BlueHose
Scout Team [168]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 405
Joined: 8/22/01
Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:13 PM
Reply

So what? That means nothing. How many ranked teams has Syracuse played at home this year? Wait for it, wait for it.....none.

and wait for it. wait for it. after tonight it is still none. we have a good team, certainly not great

badge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 9:45 AM
 

Blue - it was a road game in the ACC. All ACC teams are Jekyll at home, Hyde away - or is that the reverse.

If you win more road games in the ACC than you lose - you win the conference. Virginia is the best at 5-3 in that metric and most are not above .500 (*including FSU and VT and UofL - all 3-3)

I wish we played better on the road (2-5) but our road game losses have come from VT, FSU, GT, Duke and now Cuse). We are 10-1 at Littlejohn and 2-5 traveling. However, we held serve against BAD team on the road. That works for me... it is just a shame that all of our away losses were to teams above .500 in conference play (strong scheduling that) and the worse was DUKE ###?

Cuse is 13-1 in the Dome. including a win over Virginia Tech - yup ranked.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team


Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:23 PM
 

never said that. said they played poorly. I know you cant be bothered to keep up you being chief idiot nd overreactor and all.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgringofhonor-74tiger.jpg link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:06 PM
 

that is what is tough about tonight's play in that they knew what was at stake by winning the last 2 games but they come out looking unprepared many times and the shot selection oh my it was rough

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team


Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 9:24 AM
 

This seems to be phrased as if Clemson was the only team playing for something in the game against Syracuse. Sure...a double bye in the conference tournament was still a possibility, and sure, it would be nice to have that. Most here wouldn't have batted an eye at the start of the season if someone said 4th, 5th, or 6th this year in the league.

On the other hand, it's also fair to ask what motivation Syracuse was playing with. They're playing where many fans claim we always are...they HAVE to win to have a bubble conversation. They also had revenge on their minds, as we had beaten them earlier in the season. Oh...and it was their senior day and last home game for several months. That can motivate as well.

link

Jekyll and Hyde is as good a description as any...

[4]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:14 PM
 

...you truly don't know what you're going to get from this team from one tip-off to the next. But, we're trending in the right direction and hopefully can make a little run in the tourneys and build off of it for next year. This team is really a head-scratcher to me.

2021 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Some commenters use italics to indicate sarcasm, while others prefer the traditional ending of /s. Others eschew any indication of sarcasm as a dilution of wit. Before down voting somebody, ask yourself, "Could this be sarcasm?"


There are plenty more Jekyll and Hyde teams.

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:34 PM
 

Just look around. You can start with the ACC, where at least 12 or 13 teams this year have struggled to be consistent.

Maybe, at some point, you guys will understand that “inconsistency” isn’t a Clemson problem. It’s a basketball problem.

This isn’t football.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Re: There are plenty more Jekyll and Hyde teams.


Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:51 PM
 

Gonzaga would beg to differ with that, but yes this has arguably been the worst season in ACC basketball history.

link

It’s not just the ACC. It’s college basketball.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:11 AM
 

If using arguably the best team in college basketball as a counter-point makes you feel better, go ahead. But they are absolutely the exception rather than the rule.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


I think that describes 95% of all college teams right now.

[2]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 10:26 PM
 

Go back 30 years and you had say, 10-12 teams that had clearly superior talent and coaching, and could go out there night after night and with few exceptions, wear other teams out. Then you had a second tier of about 10-15 teams that were still very talented and very well coached, that played with tremendous consistency (relative to today) and didn't have very many "bad" games. After that you had steady, significant drop-off. Over time, that has gradually changed to what we have today where there are about 5 or 6 super talented teams, then maybe 5 or 6 others that could possibly challenge those teams, then a glut of 30-40 others who could literally beat each other on any given night. I think it's a combination of factors, among them being one-and-dones, increased reliance on 3-pt shot, different (more sophisticated?) defenses, transfers, changes in officiating and the way games are called and rules are interpreted and enforced, etc.

2021 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg link

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: There are plenty more Jekyll and Hyde teams.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 6:28 AM
 

But Judge, bless your heart, but at what point do you say enough is enough with the very same thing, with the same HC year after year for more of the same for the past 10/11 years?

I understand your loyalty with BB, I had the very same loyalty for him as our HC for 10 solid years. But my loyalty has finally worn so thin that, I just can't support BB as our HC any longer, especially with the talent that he has, with only winning a couple more games, with basically the same results that is barely over .500 in his time at Clemson, that is now feeling like forever with the very same mediocrity!!!!

I believe that it is finally time for a change for our basketball program. Clemson, and her fan base, needs something better for our basketball program going forward!!!!

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg link


So you’re calling for a change right now?

[2]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:09 AM
 

A year where we are challenging for a top 4 ACC finish and will be in the NCAA Tournament with a good seed?

THIS is the year you conclude that we are not good enough and need a coaching change?!?

You have to be joking.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Snapshot argument


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 9:31 AM
 

If you take a simple snapshot of this season - then your post makes sense. Why would Clemson try something new when we have a potential tourney (be in top 68) team? Less after autos, but still a large number. Ok, got it. Should we evaluate progress by game, week, month, season, or full tenure? Do all the other seasons get washed away?

But now look at the entire 10 ish seasons and evaluate. Are we in a better spot than the prior coach had us? Down in wins, down in tourneys per year.

Do I see some progress? Depends on my benchmark.
Progress from BB baseline, yes, it appears to be going in the right direction - after 10 seasons. But if you measure against the prior 5 ish years of OP - then no. It is not like we have broken thru this year and truly contend for the conf championship. Maybe we can pull off a great tourney and do so. That would change some minds for sure.

My issues are more basic. Why can we not get an inside game to balance?
Why can we not have expectation of going to dance 2/3 out of 4 years?
Why can we not be chosen as a dark horse to win the ACC?

I don’t like measuring the Covid year. For or against, I think nobody should be measured this year. Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc. IMO - two things causing ripples. 1. Reliance on freshmen, (all 3 I just listed). They did not have enough time to acclimate as a team. 2. Not all Covid pauses are equal. Teams that actually got Covid had to stop and are affected even after they test negative. And teams that got hit with Covid tracing and could still practice. To me that is why there are some programs who looked horrible coming out of break and others did not.
This does not mean I don’t appreciate the wins we have this year, I do think we need to have perspective though.

Change or no change - the support does not waiver for Clemson. You have a contingent that has dug in and “all in” for BB and think that what he has accomplished is good enough. Another contingent who looks at the entire body of work and think it is time for a change.

I don’t like the demeaning posts (by whomever). People are entitled to their opinion/perspective. The world we live in today is so polarized- if you are on one side - you are deemed as right and the other side is wrong. It is not that simple.
Support for Clemson goes on, the question is, after taking a step back - remove emotion - and removing yourself from prior posts, would you look at the last 10 and bet that the next 5 will achieve the goals we expect - to not only return to OP results, but pass them by. If so, then stay the coarse, if not, - then why not change? Sure, we could do worse. But the flip side is we could also do better.

link

Re: Snapshot argument

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 10:24 AM
 

How often has Clemson been above .500 in conference across a 4 year period? Lets just take the last 4 years.

38-33 in ACC play. Let be optimistic and say we win vs Pitt, that would be 39-33 in ACC play. 0.54
OP's best? 35-29 (then cuts for depaul) 0.54
Barnes: 26-28
Ellis: 31-25 (with an asterisk) .55
Foster: 21-27

Actually, no matter how you cut it, while BB has those 5-13 third season or the 6-12 season in '17 he has been consistently better than "Clemson's historical mark". Actually, he is now at that point that a Clemson coach cuts and runs (or runs us into trouble).

5 seasons above .500 in conference play. 2 at.500 and 4 below. Our last four years have been highwater marks.

If you measure against OP's last 4 years, BB has equaled him in conference, out paced OP out of conference, and actually won a NCAA game.

My question: why invest in an inside game when small-ball arc shooting has made it as outdated as a landline phone.
We would go to the dance in the last 2 of 4 years based on the last 4 years. We were robbed in 18/19 IMO.
Why can't we be a darkhorse to win the ACC - because the media will never consider us enough of a clickbate team to pick us... the "darkhorse" picks are the .55 bluebloods. ugggg

link

You lost me when you mentioned Oliver Purnell.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 2:50 PM
 

Then you mentioned him again toward the end of your post.

I think Purnell is a good coach, and really appreciate him as a program builder. He brought an excitement to our program that we needed, and did some good things for us. Bolting in the middle of the night (without telling his players or even his boss) notwithstanding, I think we need to be more objective about his tenure.

Did he help us recover from the Shyatt years? Yes.
Did he bring excitement to the program with his full court press? Yes.
Did he get us to three NCAA Tournaments in a row? Yes.

But it's not just about making NCAA Tournaments, it's winning when you get there. And Purnell never won an NCAA Tournament game at Clemson (or anywhere else). If he's such a great coach - one to emulate as you suggest - why couldn't he win even one NCAA Tournament game?

It was set up so well for Purnell in each of those three NCAA berths. In 2008, we were a #5 seed and lost to #12 seed Villanova. In 2009, we were a #7 seed and lost to #10 Michigan. In 2010, we were a #7 seed and lost to #10 Missouri.

In completely opposite fashion, Brad has never lost a first round NCAA Tournament game at Clemson. We won our first round game in 2011, and won both our first and second round game in 2018. We will likely be the higher seed again this year in the NCAA Tournament, and I am confident we will win. Why? Because Brad has his teams ready for NCAA Tournament play. Purnell didn't.

So please spare me the rose-colored glasses through which you are viewing Purnell's tenure. He got us to a certain point and left because it was clear to him that he couldn't progress beyond that. In fact, it was clear to some of us that he wasn't going to be able to maintain the yearly NCAA Tournament appearances.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Cherry picking

[1]
Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 9:02 AM
 

I agree with some of what you wrote.
I did not like the way OP left.
Nor would I wish for him to come back or to emulate him.

However,
You failed to discuss the facts. To review the data. Compare the prior 7 years to the full BB seasons.
Prior years:
2004 16-16
2005 19-13
2006 25-11
2007 24-9
2008 23-8
2009 21-10
2010 22-12
Average wins 21.4. Losses 11.3. Win percentage 65.5%
5 of 7 - 21 win seasons. 71%

Now CBB tenure.
2011 16-15
2012 13-18
2013 23-13
2014 16-15
2015 17-14
2016 17-16
2017 25-10
2018 20-14
2019 16-15
Average wins 18.1. Losses 14.4. Win Percentage 55.6%. (Adding current year does not move the percentages much).
3 of 9 -20 win seasons. 33%

3 less wins per year. Less tourneys per year.

Your post implies that it is better to go from 3 tourneys in a row to 1 every 4/5 - as long as you win a game. One game you mention was a play In game. You are too smart of a basketball guy to not know that matchups are important. Sometimes, you hit a hot team or you don’t shoot well. UVA lost in first round to a 16, did that make TB a bad coach? Of course following year, he won it all. I would say that this does not have to be mutually exclusive.

Why can we not strive to have both?
You really did not answer the entire body of work discussion that my post was really about. It was about moving forward. Brad measuring against himself, yes, moving a bit forward. But not against the prior 7 years.

I don’t want to go back and forth with you cherry picking. I support the program and wish to see us competitive for ACC championships and a high rate of ncaa berths. You speak to being a high seed in dance this year. I am not sure I agree with a 7 being a high seed, but ok. It appears we will be around a 7 seed. Since you brought up OPs seeding. 4,7,7.
You gave credit to CBB for winning a “play in game” as a 12 seed against another 12 seed. I appreciate the win in playin games, but I personally do not think they should be counted the same as winning in the real first round.
Clemson was a 5 seed in 2018 and defeated the 12 seed,. Good. And then Clemson won Impressively against Auburn (4 seed). And then played well against Kansas and lost. A very good year.
Unfortunately, this great season was followed up by a 16-15 record. And 9th in the conference.

You be you, I will be me. I am more of a data, big picture guy and you are a little more micro. It is all good. We can both have our opinions / fact and be friends.

link

Re: Cherry picking

[1]
Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 9:36 AM
 

The Sweet 16 season (2017-18) was followed up with a 20-14 (2018-19) record, not a 16-15 (2019-20) record.

Here's a question for you, since you seem to be so data driven.

At what point does Brad Brownell get afforded the "what have you done for me lately?" question over the question (and data averages) of his entire tenure? If you use the re-opening of Littlejohn Coliseum as the reference point (2016-17), he has taken Clemson to the postseason in every season (that there has been one...and would have in 2019-20 as well). Our talent level has risen by any recruiting metric you'd like to use.

After this season, you're going to have (since the 2016-17 reference point):

- A postseason tournament birth in every season (sans 2019-20)
- Two NCAA Tournament births that stretch (four postseasons)
- Three seasons at .500 or better in ACC play
- The best in-conference winning percentage over a four year period in Clemson basketball history (2017-18 through 2020-21)

At what point does he get more credit for that (having done it lately) than what performance indicators showed from 2011-12 through 2015-16?

link

Re: Cherry picking


Posted: Mar 6, 2021, 9:26 AM
 

Good question.
IMO, a 5 year moving window. As long as we baseline the targets on something solid.

link

Re: Cherry picking


Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 2:44 PM
 

Respectfully, I discussed facts and only facts regarding Purnell. Of course I didn't discuss all possible facts, because that would take days. I included facts germane to the discussion, not every little detail from Purnell's coaching career, family life, personal beliefs, and hobbies.

You mentioned his tenure as some sort of standard Brownell should try to meet, and my response is that in some ways he has already exceeded that standard. If postseason success is your standard, Brad has already far exceeded anything Purnell did here.

As mentioned, Purnell is an excellent program builder. With the exception of his time at DePaul, he showed throughout his career that he can take a struggling program and make them a competitive team as evidenced by NCAA Tournament appearances. He was great at using a scheme (full court press) that neutralized talent deficiencies. He was good at recruiting players who fit his system. It worked - to a point.

We experienced the pinnacle of Purnell's abilities at Clemson. He clearly made us competitive, and got us to the NCAA Tournament three years in a row. It was exciting. It was fun. But it was also incredibly frustrating because we lost every time we got there. Not only that, but we lost all three of those games to teams we were supposed to beat. You can say all you want about bad matchups, but losing in the NCAA Tournament three years in a row as the favored team is more than just bad matchups. It's coaching. Purnell's history prior to coming to Clemson confirms that, as he was 0-6 in NCAA Tournament games. In 4 of those 6 games, he was the higher seed but couldn't even win one. He was a #4 seed his last year at Dayton, and got blown out by #13 seed Tulsa.

Being a data/big picture guy, surely you can appreciate Purnell's dismal NCAA Tournament record and how that is almost solely a result of his coaching.

His tenure was also notable for struggling on the recruiting trail the last couple of years. Although his 2009 class was a top 20 class, it was littered with failures. Whether it be due to poor scouting or poor player attitudes/commitment, we can agree that the 2009 class was perhaps the most overrated in Clemson history. The 2010 class featured just one player, Marcus Thornton. Purnell knew that the cupboard was bare starting in 2011 and he got out while he could. Again, being a data/big picture guy, you can certainly agree with this reality regarding Purnell's recruiting.

As for Brownell, we have certainly had some struggles at times during his tenure, but surely you can agree that the program is on an upward trajectory. I'm not sure why you and others keep saying "he's been here 11 years" as some sort of reason to be discouraged by his performance, when we are having a good year this year. People say they want Clemson to compete in the upper third to upper fourth of the ACC and make the NCAA Tournament. Well, that's exactly what we are doing this year. To minimize our success this year, and point to some frustration you can't get over from years earlier in his tenure, makes no sense to me.

Obviously, we want to see our success this year continue. None of us want it to be one good year in a sea of disappointing years. But what's wrong with enjoying this year for what it is - a great year by Clemson basketball standards, one in which we are meeting or exceeding the season goals laid out by 99.9% of Clemson basketball fans? This is supposed to be fun.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Re: Cherry picking

[1]
Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 2:58 PM
 

And the one major benefit that Purnell stumbled upon was Booker. Without Booker, Purnell at Clemson would have looked a lot like an NCAA dancin' team

A high-powered NBA big who only other offer was Wofford. He wasn't even considered the top 25 of his position out of HS. He hit another level with us.

I agree, OP was a recruiting mystery. His good classes were questionable at best, hit successes were real hidden gems, and at worse, failures were bad too.

I fell that BB is better at building a overall team, better at assessing talent, and better coach than OP. OP would run his system and it ran well when it was clicking. But if teams had time or a coach that would adapt, it was a loss within minutes of tip-off. Bad teams could beat Purnell.... bad teams don't beat BB.

link

Re: Cherry picking

[1]
Posted: Mar 5, 2021, 2:58 PM
 

would' look like a dancing team

link

Re: Cherry picking


Posted: Mar 6, 2021, 9:35 AM
 

I think some of you are fixated on me simply bringing in OPs name.
Had flaws for sure. He just happened to be the coach during the 7 years prior to CBB for reference. And those numbers don’t change.
I clearly see that CBB is a better technician and control coach than OP. But - they played a totally different style. God, I remember the turnovers and the poor free throw shooting. But also, I remember the athletic abilities, dunks, blocks, fun. More like a VT, maybe FSU, or GT this year.
Frustrating for sure that OPs squads did not win in tourney. But, in order to be disappointed, you actually have to get there.

link

Re: There are plenty more Jekyll and Hyde teams.

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:20 PM
 

If anyone thinks Brad can coach offense they don’t know basketball or they are satisfied with mediocrity

link

He can coach offense just fine.

[1]
Posted: Mar 7, 2021, 10:06 PM
 

It’s called a motion offense, and it’s used by many teams.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Re: He can coach offense just fine.


Posted: Mar 7, 2021, 11:06 PM
 

To provide more context to this, I'd encourage folks to look at how efficient Brad typically is coming out of a timeout (when we've got the ball). He has LOTS of good sets that we run. We have several different concepts that are common in set situations, including (but not limited to) double elbow screens with a wrapping shooter, a lane clearout to a high-low action, standard floppy action (that we'll run for guys like Hemenway, Devoe, occasionally Reed, etc.), amongst others. However, as you stated Judge, our main offensive concept is motion. The pluses of motion is that it allows for a free-flow offensive concept...basketball players are allowed to make basketball plays. There's no designated place where the ball HAS to go for the next action to take place. The downside is that if you're not offensively talented, especially in having one or two guys who can be go-to guys at the end of a shot clock, it can be challenging to score. Motion offenses without good guard play is a recipe for failure. This is generally why our offenses, under Brad, have been as good as our guards. Early on in his tenure, we had Stitt, Young, Smith, etc. who all were better offensively than the middle tenure guys (Hall, Harrison, Roper, etc.). And now, we're seeing more success with teams that include Mitchell, Reed, Devoe, Dawes, Honor, etc. Throw in a stretch PF/C type who can also handle the ball some (Simms to a degree, but DEFINITELY Grantham in his senior year) and the motion capabilities become especially lethal.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[3]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 9:44 PM
 



2021 purple level member link

"It is not part of a true culture to tame tigers any more than it is to make sheep ferocious."
--Henry David Thoreau


Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team


Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 10:37 PM
 

Exactly. Where have yall been last 40-50 years? Nothing new to see with CU Basketball. Move along.

link

Given up trying to understand. Just have another drink ...

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 10:06 PM
 

Inconsistent shooting,
Strange substitution patterns.
Player and team confidence comes and goes like the tide.

Effort and defense were solid ... a few bad rebounding sequences.

IDK the answers.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg link

In true "road" games.....

[3]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 10:13 PM
 

This team has had trouble on the road...not unusual, but they are not exactly road warriors.
They have been excellent at home (aside from one really bad night against UVA).
They had some really good neutral court wins early in the season (those are not road games though).

On the road they won on a buzzer beater at Miami and they won at Wake.
But they lost to any good team they played on the road (VT, FSU, Duke, GT, Syracuse). 3 ACC road games were canceled...which honestly worked in our favor.

My hope is that the neutral court version of the Tigers in the tourney is more like the home version, or perhaps the early season neutral court version.....than the road game version.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 3, 2021, 11:33 PM
 

Every time I want to believe in this team, get excited about it, Brownell opens his mouth. Sorry, I just don't like him. That's my opinion and no matter what happens or how far we go, whether we win or lose, I just can't stand to hear him speak.

I'll support the tigers and root for every team to win but that doesn't mean I think the coach is worth a crap. His game management is the worst in the biz.

It's one thing to get beat by UVA who clearly has more talent than us. It's another thing to have a coach that can't coach or motivate the talent he has.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 7, 2021, 8:52 PM
 


Every time I want to believe in this team, get excited about it, Brownell opens his mouth. Sorry, I just don't like him. That's my opinion and no matter what happens or how far we go, whether we win or lose, I just can't stand to hear him speak.

I'll support the tigers and root for every team to win but that doesn't mean I think the coach is worth a crap. His game management is the worst in the biz.

It's one thing to get beat by UVA who clearly has more talent than us. It's another thing to have a coach that can't coach or motivate the talent he has.




Wow, this sounds like a you problem and nothing else but.

link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 6:54 AM
 

I would have been somewhat surprised if we would have won this game. They were out for "revenge" Cuse was so cold last game and we got a little lucky. It's a good match up though.

2021 white level member link

Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 7:12 AM
 

I totally disagree and have stated so on this site numerous times. It is not a question of Brad's coaching or the talent he recruits, or even Covid.
Brad is as probably as good as a X and O coach as you could want ,and he recruits good talent, but just not good "basketball" talent, the type of talent that can take it to the next level. Sure these guys can play basketball, but are they another Zion Williams type that can elevate their game to the NBA, not that I give a rat$ @$$ about the NBA.
(P.S.I only use him as an example because Brad did recruit him, but couldn't close the deal).
Look, I know we have all heard the story/excuse that we are not a basketball school, but neither is Duke/UNC a football power, but the have had some success in recent years on the gridiron.
You would think at some point Brad could get that 4 or 5 star "basketball" talent to which to build on ,but it hasn't happened yet.
Still this is a good team, but not a great team. And it has taken about 3 to 4 years of these guys playing together to achieve the success they have had.
Time will tell how they do in any post season play, then you can look ahead to 2021-22.

link

First of all, we have four star players on our current roster.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:43 PM
 

Not sure why you say that we don’t. Simms, Dawes, Hunter, and Hall were all four star recruits coming out of high school.

Second, I’m not sure why you are bringing up Duke and UNC football, but since you did, how competitive have they been against Clemson? Other than UNC keeping it close two years ago, neither team has challenged us let among beaten us.

Continuing your comparison, Clemson basketball has BEATEN both UNC and Duke in recent years. We beat Duke last year when they were a top 5 team. We have beaten UNC twice in a row, and 3 of the last 4 games, in basketball. So we’ve had way more success against them in basketball under Brad than they have had against us in football.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


You must be new to Clemson basketball


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 7:32 AM
 

Either you haven't been following clemson basketball for very long, or haven't been paying attention.

This team plays exactly like every other, which is why we rarely make the NCAA tournament.

2021 purple level member link

The thing about the talent does not apply here

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 9:49 AM
 

Relatively speaking, Bowden's teams (particularly his last few) were much more talented than what Brad is working with. Of course Brad is responsible for the talent level on the team so this doesn't absolve him, but i think comparing him to Tommy is apples and oranges. Recruiting has held Brad back more than anything, while Tommy's biggest problem was very clearing coaching and preparation.

2021 white level member link

Clemson basketball plays in a tougher conference as well.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 3:30 PM
 

Bowden should've been able to fairly easily have us as a top 2-3 ACC football program based on our football history and support from the AD and fans relative to the rest of the ACC.

It's a very different reality for Clemson as it relates to ACC basketball, a much tougher conference than ACC football overall. That, plus the fact that Clemson football is at a disadvantage compared to most other ACC basketball programs, makes it a very tough situation.

This isn't to make excuses for our basketball program. We should still strive for significant success. But the path to get there is much more difficult for us in basketball than it was for football.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


it really had to do with their forward Griffin catching fire

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 11:37 AM
 

at the beginning of the second half. He made every 3 he shoot it seemed after being his normal self in the first half. Other than that it was a close game and i think we had a good chance at winning. We didn't play great but we didn't play horrible either. We were pacing each other well until Griffin played out of his mind for 8 minutes.

link

Great point. He made some outstanding shots that


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 3:31 PM
 

were well covered by our defenders.

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Re: I don't think I've ever seen a more Jekyll and Hyde team

[1]
Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:16 PM
 

I wished it was not so but Brad has a ceiling over his head he will never break out of Last nights offense performance was pathetic and it was not the players fault Success in a sport is up to the head coach compare T Bowden with Dabo S

link

You are a basketball troll and everyone knows it.


Posted: Mar 4, 2021, 8:46 PM
 

You show up after losses to whine and complain, yet you are nowhere to be found after wins.

If you’re truly a Clemson basketball fan, why not enjoy the wins, not dwell on the losses, and support the team regardless?

2021 white level member link

Cobbox on Brad Brownell: “His only problem is he has to deal with turd fans questioning every move he makes.”


Replies: 45  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: (2) season tickets UM row D. $2150 total ago Tigers

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
3610 people have read this post