|
Replies: 35
| visibility 304
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105932]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44238
Joined: 2008
|
Clemson basketball history
Mar 26, 2019, 4:07 PM
|
|
I see a lot of posts talking about Clemson's poor basketball history and how Brad has performed well relative to our history. In an effort to put real data to that, I looked all the way back to Cliff Ellis, starting with the 1984-1985 season:
Cliff Ellis - 10 seasons
-Made the NIT Tournament 5/10 seasons (50%)
-Made the NCAA Tournament 3/10 seasons (30%)
-Total post-season play 8/10 seasons (80%)
Rick Barnes - 4 seasons
-Made the NIT Tournament 1/4 seasons (25%)
-Made the NCAA Tournament 3/4 seasons (75%)
-Total post-season play 4/4 seasons (100%)
Larry Shyatt - 5 seasons
-Made the NIT Tournament 1/5 seasons (20%)
-Made the NCAA Tournament 0/5 seasons (0%)
-Total post-season play 1/5 seasons (20%)
Oliver Purnell - 7 seasons
-Made the NIT Tournament 3/7 seasons (43%)
-Made the NCAA Tournament 3/7 seasons (43%)
-Total post-season play 6/7 seasons (86%)
Brad Brownell - 9 seasons
-Made the NIT Tournament 3/9 seasons (33%)
-Made the NCAA Tournament 2/9 seasons (22%)
-Total post-season play 5/9 seasons (56%)
We can use history as a crutch, but including the dreadful Larry Shyatt years, the previous 4 coaches and 26 seasons Clemson made post-season play 73% of the time. Brad has made it 56% of the time. BTW I'm not going back and double checking my math, so if there is an error in there feel free to let us know.
People claim the NIT was easier to get into before Brownell and a .500 record could get you in. Fair point, but I only see 1 time when that happened: '87-'88 we went 14-15, which I assume includes our first round NIT loss that year.
So I guess you can aggregate the entire history of Clemson basketball and claim Brad has performed at or better than that history (I don't know, I don't care to look back that far), but looking back over the last 35 years Brad has comparatively under-performed. Take out the Larry Shyatt years and Brad's performance is far below the others (Brad - 56% post-season, Cliff/Rick/OP - 86% post-season).
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Clemson Legend [100846]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 48614
Joined: 2009
|
Problem seems to be we have a truly nice coach & very loyal players..
Mar 26, 2019, 4:17 PM
|
|
and our AD & Powers to be just don’t want to rock the boat, yet...
but thank goodness that our AD during Coach Bowden’s tenure (another nice coach with loyal players) wasn’t afraid to change things up (in mid season at that!) for a young guy named Dabo!
Know that I liked & respected Coach Bowden very much as I do Coach Brownell now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [11079]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
Re: Problem seems to be we have a truly nice coach & very loyal players..
Mar 26, 2019, 4:27 PM
|
|
If I am not mistaken, that was a different AD then. Pretty sure TDP made that move. Hope DRad shows he can make a decision that leads to similar results.
Message was edited by: cutigergrad93®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22310]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 18026
Joined: 2005
|
But Cliff cheated, and Barnes and OP left
Mar 26, 2019, 4:24 PM
|
|
so they don't count. Compared to the only coach that matters then, Shyatt, Brad is Bobby Knight, only nicer
#amidefendinghimright?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105932]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44238
Joined: 2008
|
Yep, I'd say you nailed it!***
Mar 26, 2019, 4:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [86015]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 17929
Joined: 2017
|
Who exactly is this "us"?
Mar 26, 2019, 4:46 PM
|
|
TIA
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
Look, if you only want to only use 26 seasons to assess
Mar 26, 2019, 4:54 PM
|
|
Clemson basketball, and on top of that, only use postseason appearances to assess how well we did... be my guest.
It doesn't change the fact that Brownell can consistently beat the bottom 3-4 teams in the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9521]
TigerPulse: 95%
44
Posts: 13976
Joined: 2002
|
We've never won the ACC basketball tournament......
Mar 26, 2019, 5:16 PM
|
|
and have never beaten North Carolina in Chapel Hill. And we continue to lose close games and not have much real success in the NCAA tournament.
It depends on your perspective. In this day and age making post-season play should be something we're doing ever year - NCAA and not settling for NIT.
We're always pretty much an under-achiever. Is that what you're satisfied with????
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
you have to be fair here... keep in mind that the
Mar 26, 2019, 5:18 PM
|
|
NIT is much, much harder to get into now. You have to consider that when looking at the 4 years under Brownell that Clemson didn't qualified for ANY postseason.
All things considered, we should just go ahead and give him those, b/c he would have made it if the rules hadn't changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [27753]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 32032
Joined: 2003
|
Re: you have to be fair here... keep in mind that the
Mar 26, 2019, 6:02 PM
|
|
How many times did Shyatt or Purnell or Ellis or Barnes play Louisville and Syracuse and Miami and Pitt. Or VPI and FSU that matter. You can’t make comparisons such as this because the league has changed. On the flip side of this, in the “ole” days we played UNC and DUKE twice! Personally I believe the league is more difficult now. Agree or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
disagree... ACC SOS of Clemson shows that it was not
Mar 26, 2019, 6:04 PM
|
|
any easier when Barnes and OP were here. An expanded league means there are more teams at the bottom to beat, especially with unequal scheduling... which BB has benefited from in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50664]
TigerPulse: 79%
58
Posts: 36972
Joined: 2003
|
Again, you are changing the criteria
Mar 26, 2019, 8:18 PM
|
|
to benefit your argument.
You don't want to acknowledge that the NIT is harder to get into now, because that would make Brad's tenure look better.
But any discussion of ACC records, and how Brad has done better against ACC competition compared to those coaches, you immediately talk about how much harder the ACC schedule was in the past.
It's easy to make every kick when you move the goalposts like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
False... you fail to admit that your touting of Brad's ACC
Mar 27, 2019, 12:34 PM
|
|
record is against the bottom half of the league... That is what makes his record. Why will you not acknowledge that?
If he had done better against the top half, we would be in more NCAAT's... correct?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105932]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44238
Joined: 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [170]
TigerPulse: 56%
12
|
Re: Clemson basketball history
Mar 26, 2019, 6:41 PM
|
|
I DON'T KNOW WHY ELLIS LEFT.WAS HE FIRED?
BARNES LEFT BECAUSE OF HIS VIEW OF OUR SCHOOLS IN SC.I THINK IT HAD MORE TO DO WITH A RUN IN WITH DEAN SMITH,AND A MEETING IN GREENSBORO.
WHO KNOWS WHY OP LEFT.HE LEFT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.SOUNDS LIKE HE HAD TO GET OUT IN A HURRY.
SHYATT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN HIRED.
IF THEY ARE GOOD,THEY ARE NOT LOYAL.IF THEY ARE BAD, WE KEEP THEM TO LONG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22310]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 18026
Joined: 2005
|
Cliff signed a 1 year put up or shut up contract
Mar 26, 2019, 6:43 PM
|
|
his last year banking on getting to the dance with Wright, Whitney and Gray. Didnt work out and he immediately landed at Allbarn
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
that's interesting... I didn't know that***
Mar 26, 2019, 6:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50664]
TigerPulse: 79%
58
Posts: 36972
Joined: 2003
|
Barnes and Purnell left for three main reasons:
Mar 26, 2019, 8:19 PM
[ in reply to Re: Clemson basketball history ] |
|
1. They saw how poorly Clemson supported basketball.
2. They weren't able to recruit well.
3. They had opportunities to get a raise and a better situation, and bolted due to #1 and #2 before they saw a drop-off in performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27366]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 26231
Joined: 2011
|
Barnes left for three different reasons:
Mar 26, 2019, 9:49 PM
|
|
36-25-37
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22310]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 18026
Joined: 2005
|
Does this have something to do with skoolz?***
Mar 26, 2019, 9:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9788]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
You guys have clearly made the case for the hiring of
Mar 26, 2019, 6:43 PM
|
|
TigerTraz14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22310]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 18026
Joined: 2005
|
But then our basketball spending will go down***
Mar 26, 2019, 6:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1280]
TigerPulse: 97%
27
|
Re: Clemson basketball history
Mar 26, 2019, 7:03 PM
|
|
Can we stop calling the NIT post season? The only tournament that matters is the NCAA and BB isn’t getting us there consistently.
All I keep reading are excuses. Posts about the past, money, blah blah blah.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50664]
TigerPulse: 79%
58
Posts: 36972
Joined: 2003
|
They aren't excuses at all. They are reality.
Mar 26, 2019, 8:23 PM
|
|
Continuing to expect our basketball coaches to succeed despite poor support from the administration and fans has become the Clemson way when it comes to basketball.
Hire a new "up and comer" but continuing providing lukewarm support for basketball, and either fire him for not winning enough or lose him when he leaves to take a better job elsewhere, and keep consoling ourselves for being a football school playing in a tough basketball conference. Rinse and repeat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105932]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44238
Joined: 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10404]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
There’s also more gimme games now.
Mar 26, 2019, 9:17 PM
|
|
When the conference had 8 teams then 9 when FSU joined there was few gimme games. Now that there’s 15 teams in the conference there’s much more opportunities at conference wins. We only had to play UVA, Duke, and UNC one time this year as opposed to the traditional 2.
Message was edited by: bowlhunter®
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3666]
TigerPulse: 96%
35
|
Re: There’s also more gimme games now.
Mar 27, 2019, 8:36 AM
|
|
Ok, I'll be the snob.
THERE ARE NO GIMMES IN ACC BASKETBALL.
You're not holing out on the 18th. This green fights back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: There’s also more gimme games now.
Mar 27, 2019, 8:49 AM
[ in reply to There’s also more gimme games now. ] |
|
Yeah, but we had to play Louisville and Syracuse (x2), so we are still playing 6-8 games against elite, win at all costs programs that out-spend us 3:1. Keep in mind that Pitt is a wounded elite program too.
Next, you can't do what Barnes and OP did... be the unofficial Big South Champion and/or get into the Tournament with sub .500 seasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: There’s also more gimme games now.
Mar 27, 2019, 8:57 AM
|
|
*elite spender...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [80]
TigerPulse: 100%
9
|
Re: There’s also more gimme games now.
Mar 27, 2019, 9:24 AM
[ in reply to Re: There’s also more gimme games now. ] |
|
Against the "old" ACC this year's team would not have fared very well. I'm using the actual results and guessing at the games that were not played (like NCSU at home, at UVA, and the two MD games).
UNC 0-2
Duke 0-2
UVA 0-2
FSU 0-2
Maryland 1-1 or 0-2
NCSU 1-1
GT 2-0
Wake 2-0
So that means probably 6-10 or 5-11, which sounds a lot worse than 9-9.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50664]
TigerPulse: 79%
58
Posts: 36972
Joined: 2003
|
Rick Barnes made two of his three NCAA Tournament
Mar 27, 2019, 12:32 PM
|
|
appearances at Clemson with 7-9 ACC records. So based on your post, we still would've been a bubble team. Going 7-9 against that schedule would've been very possible.
Plus, if we're scheduling non-conference games like we did when Barnes was our coach, there would've been a ton of easy non-conference games to make our overall record look better than it should've.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3666]
TigerPulse: 96%
35
|
Re: Clemson basketball history
Mar 27, 2019, 9:08 AM
|
|
Since you guys like to use postseason play as the new benchmark for postseason success (congrats to Snowtown for browbeating everyone into agreement), you should be finding new love for Tommy Bowden.
Just think: 8 postseason appearances in 9 tries, while burning the 9th in a successful public shaming of your rival (who clearly craved that postseason appearance more than we did. Shame on us. I guess we just didn't understand the new "measuring stick" mentality like they did.)
Don't bother trying to escape my inescapable logic.
Sure, the proliferation of bowls makes it look like anybody could have done it--shoot, even Tommy West got us to 4 in 5 years!--but you can't think like that: the changing landscape of college sports is not relevant when I'm making a point, dagummit!!
Never mind the fact that the ACC's football gimme schools are now also going to postseason play. That's irrelevant because i don't want to consider it.
Nope. I'm back to my conclusion that Tommy Bowden is the greatest coach in Clemson history based on 8 postseasons out of 9 full years.
Dabo?? Oh, you can't include the current coach in the conversation. Fans can't be rational if you include the current coach. Most of us will cut him some slack until he misses the postseason once. But i did read where one poster threatened to get upset if we miss the CFP next year.
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105932]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44238
Joined: 2008
|
So...are you suggesting we shouldn't use
Mar 27, 2019, 10:55 AM
|
|
postseason play as a benchmark for postseason success? What are you actually suggesting through the multiple layers of sarcasm here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3666]
TigerPulse: 96%
35
|
Re: So...are you suggesting we shouldn't use
Mar 27, 2019, 1:57 PM
|
|
IF you're going to use postseason play as the benchmark, you are dishonest to deny that the benchmark moves with the landscape.
If your point is that BB is less successful than other coaches, and then you use a moving benchmark to make your case, you have failed to win the argument.
Your and Sniwtown's criticisms are ALL subjective and outcome-based. They reek of a lack of basketball knowledge. You don't offer any critical insight into what could be done better, except disappoint you less.
Ok, you're a frustrated fan, not a knowledgeable one. I get that. So you've expressed your frustration. I am not obligated to agree with you.
And the posters on your side of the argument who want to call people names don't convince me that you're right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3666]
TigerPulse: 96%
35
|
Re: So...are you suggesting we shouldn't use
Mar 27, 2019, 1:58 PM
[ in reply to So...are you suggesting we shouldn't use ] |
|
IF you're going to use postseason play as the benchmark, you are dishonest to deny that the benchmark moves with the landscape.
If your point is that BB is less successful than other coaches, and then you use a moving benchmark to make your case, you have failed to win the argument.
Your and Sniwtown's criticisms are ALL subjective and outcome-based. They reek of a lack of basketball knowledge. You don't offer any critical insight into what could be done better, except disappoint you less.
Ok, you're a frustrated fan, not a knowledgeable one. I get that. So you've expressed your frustration. I am not obligated to agree with you.
And the posters on your side of the argument who want to call people names don't convince me that you're right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: Clemson basketball history
Mar 27, 2019, 12:05 PM
|
|
How about the expansion of the Tournament in 85(?) to 64 teams making an impact. At that time, you had more mid-pack conference teams with sub .500 records (like the Barnes years) able to make the Tournament. While there are roughly the same number of "automatic" bids 30 (46.8% of the field vs 32 (47.1%), the tournament takes more non-power conferences than in previous years. But, major conferences have expanded since Ellis... so rather than 1 in eight getting a spot, it is now 1 in 10, 12, or 15 getting the automatic bids. Why does this matter... well there are more teams in the 2-4 spot in conference taking bids.
So there are 351 D1 basektball programs with more emphasis on the non-power conference schools. In 1985, there were about 279. So about 23% of all basketball programs went dancing and with 8-10 members, a great % got automatic bids. Now, 19% of teams go dancing, a fraction more get automatic bids, and power-5 teams make up fewer spots.
So you can now literally go .500 and be left out in 2019 when in the past you could go .438 and be a decent seed.
And you can't count Ellis' vacated appearances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 35
| visibility 304
|
|
|
50
