»
Topic: It's not that I dislike Brownell
Replies: 50   Last Post: Jan 28, 2019 7:03 PM by: BloodbeOrange®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 50  

It's not that I dislike Brownell

[3]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 1:04 PM
 

He's a nice buy but so was Tommy Bowden. Look, I get that you can't realistically out-recruit Dook and UNCheat on a consistent basis but at the end of the day much of College BB comes down to recruiting and man we whiff on that. We can't live off of the transfer market. . . at some point you have to recruit better. I'm not even approaching the Zion situation. Look at Josiah James from Charleston. . . there's no way we should miss out on that kid. Again, Brownell is a nice guy, but he just seems out of touch with recruits.


gotta be able to out recruit, NCSU, GT, FSU, VT, PITT, WAKE,


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 1:16 PM
 

BC, UM, etc...Thats why not getting Zion was a big deal for BB. It would have at least marketed Clemson for this year and possibly get us more looks from recruits around the nation. Zion did what was best for him but i was just hoping we get lucky.


Zion did what was best for his family*

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 1:18 PM
 

Got a real nice house up there. Can't blame him at all. Completely agree we should try to out-recruit the rest of the ACC. Wouldn't even mind us going the FSU route and trying to just get big athletes.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 1:48 PM
 

Nice guys finish last....


u5c


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 1:52 PM
 

.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[3]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:24 PM
 

Some guy named Dabo might disagree with you


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 6:49 PM
 

I am a nice guy WHO always finishes first......Go Tigers!!!!!


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:01 PM
 

But here is the difference... Brownell has the best winning percentage in conference than any other coach. He has also won the most ACC games... and is 3rd for OOC games. Sure he is behind OP and RB for OOC wins but OP was notorious for a weak OOC schedule. At most, compare him to Cutcliff....

Here is out issue: Reed.

Reed is a great player, but isn't 100% plus last year could lean on DeVoe and Grantham for points. Shut down Reed, and you can limit us offensively. Plus last year we had 5 players over 10ppg, shot over 36% from three and this year, Mitchell and Thomas are contributing but not as much as DeVoe and Grantham and team 3pt is 31%. Defense is lacking too but I see it as a sign that we are tiring (depth issue) late in games.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:04 PM
 

The ACC is a lot easier now than it was. The ACC used to be brutal when players would stay 3 or 4 years.

2019 white level member

Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[4]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:12 PM
 

Once again you are completely ignoring the fact that Purnell’s last 3 years we had a winning record in conference.

The majority of his conference losses came while he was cleaning up the mess the previous coach made.

Purnell built a program that was CONSISTENTLY becoming one of the best programs in the ACC. Brownell hasn’t come close to doing that.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[3]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:23 PM
 

Also, when Rick Barnes was around he had to go up against guys like Tim Duncan at Wake Forest for 4 years. Those guys are one and done now. It was way tougher back then. A team like Wake could catch lightening in a bottle with a Tim Duncan and then they were brutally tough for 4 years. Also, teams like Maryland were awesome back then.

2019 white level member

Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[2]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:52 PM
 

I remember those Wake Forest teams when they had Tim Duncan.

Those Maryland teams under Gary Williams were fun to watch. Steve Blake vs. Shane Battier and Jason Williams in the early 2000’s...

Those Clemson teams with T Booker, James Mays, Ogelsby, etc. were fun to watch also.

College basketball ain’t what it used to be.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:31 PM
 

Talk about getting tired. Ask the lads that played for OP. It was obvious that he ran 'the juice" out of them by season-end.
And how did that DePaul gig work out for all parties? My guess is OP would have preferred taking his wife shopping in Anderson, Greenville or Atlanta by the final year. Brad has got to recruit better and get 1 or 2 scorer on board every season. We do NOT have a consistent backup for Mitchell right now and Reed is having to do too much ball handling. We definitely will miss ET, DS along with the two guards next year. If no heavy lifting transfers are found it, will be a very lean season.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:00 PM
 

Players loved playing in OP’s system. That’s why he was able to recruit better. By the end of his tenure he was pulling in high rated 4 stars and left Bronwell a McDonald’s All American.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:10 PM
 

Ahhh, yes Milton Jennings. Never really developed, outplayed by Devon. Nice enough kid I assume but that was a paper all american. He was a Freshman when OP departed, he could have transfer if there was a real opportunity.

Yes, OP's style was fun for defensive, speed oriented players often lacking offensive capacity. The Vernon Hamilton problem. However, OP found Booker and that MADE his system work but Booker was NBA starting talent that only got an offer from Wofford or maybe one other place... and Clemson.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:17 PM
 

Sounds like Purnell could develop players but Brownell can't.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:24 PM
 

In my mind-what I can think of off the top of my head), Brownell has two NBA players (KJ and Blossomgame), Purnell had one (Booker). Might be skewed for newness and that is why Blossomgame sticks out....

OP had issues developing offensive talent... and free throws (lol right). He struck gold with Booker but that was about it.


LOL at Purnell recruiting better.


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:14 PM
 

On paper, Purnell had one good class, and that was due to 5-star Milton Jennings and 4-star Noel Johnson. Both were huge busts. Thankfully, Brownell at least got something out of Jennings (which Purnell couldn't).

2019 white level member

Re: LOL at Purnell recruiting better.


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:22 PM
 

Purnell coached him his freshman year.

It’s hilairous how you blame him for his devolpment as a player when Brownell had him for 75% of his career.


Are you saying that Jennings was a legit 5 star?

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:59 PM
 

Honestly.

2019 white level member

People still try to claim that was our best class ever***


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 6:12 PM
 




Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[3]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:02 PM
 

Yeah OP was riding Booker like a horse in a weak league.

OP's last three years were also some of the ACC's weakest years (outside the Duke/UNC teams). There were 2-4 ranked opponents in ACC play. Less than 3 a year but Brad has average 5 in the past three years. The middle of the ACC was weak... that is why the B10 won in 2009 and 2010 in the challenge.

2008: ACC 3rd - 2 ranked opponents (1-3 to Carolina and Duke, upset Duke in ACCT (only ranked win) but lost to Charlotte).
2009: ACC 5th -4 ranked opp teams including us (lost to Carolina by 30 some points, beat duke)
2010: ACC 6th -2 ranked opp teams (lost to Duke twice by 20+ points)

Sure OP could make it exciting against Duke/Carolina SOMETIMES but he would make it exciting against mid-majors and lose them. I know, I was there.

Now, BB did get a better starting position that OP but it was still a big remake.

Now, the road that BB has to face is harder because we added to the top, not the bottom of conference play.

Brad has finished 4th, 7th, 11th, 6th, 8th, 8th(5 ranked opponents), 11th(6 ranked opponents), 4th (4 ranked opponents).... about the same as OP.... but played on average TWICE as many ranked in conference opponents. Really, Brad should have been ranked 3rd last year but weird ACC tie-breaks hurt Clemson since they face more of the "tied" teams than Miami but beat Miami head-to-head.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:15 PM
 

You're still unfairly comparing Purnell's entire tenure to Brownell's. Look at Purnell's last four years compared to Brownell's entire tenure (he doesn't get the rebuild excuse) and get back to me.

The ACC was not weak then either. I know he beat two top 10 Duke teams and lost to North Carolina who went on to win it all that year by 5 points in the ACC championship.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:32 PM
 

Brad's 2/3 year was the rebuild. It was a complete re-tooling. Brad gets a lot of credit his firstyear winning with OP kids but after that year, it was not a great cupboard. Devon Booker was out best player that year and it showed OP left us with a reputation of not winning in the NCAA. Then BB had to play when we were in Greenville. Off-site is tough and recruiting is tough.

Yes, OP could give you a close games at time, pull them off too ... but he would also get run out of the building as much if not more even in his last three years.

Brad has beaten ranked UNC, Duke. Remember when he beat ranked: #16 Louisville, #9 Duke, and #8 Miami in consecutive weeks? When did OP do that?


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:39 PM
 

Brownell was left a loaded team and several good recruits, a couple of whom he lost which is on him. It's also his fault that he couldn't sell a program that was now on the map thanks to Purnell. Our recruiting has taken a HUGE step back. Purnell's last class ranked 15th in the nation....Brownell hasn't signed one higher than 40th.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:51 PM
 

Loaded? No. What team were you watching?

Much of that 15th ranking was based on Milton Jennings, Devon Booker, and Noel Johnson. Recruiting only PF and non-point guards/SF. The two best played the same position. Noel transferred to Auburn and maybe saw some off the bench time but all were sub 10ppg save Devon (barely higher). Even Donte Hill transferred pre BB.

Sure, it was "ranked" 15th but it was very much a paper ranking.


Stitt (2 star) and Young (Maybe a 4, but more of a 3) were under-recruited and plugged into BB scheme well. Really, BB found underused talent in OP roster.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:18 PM
 

By Clemson standards it was loaded and it was a better roster than Brownell has ever had.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 5:38 PM
 

I still get a little sad thinking about Demontez.


A lot of the times we were 3rd and the 4th place team VT was


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:36 PM
 

not getting a bid, the league was weak then, that's how Louisville got the nod


Re: A lot of the times we were 3rd and the 4th place team VT was


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:47 PM
 

The ACC has never been weak. It won 3 out of the 7 national titles during the Purnell years. Since the ACC has only won 2 out of 8.

Yea Brownell has had to deal with Louisville and Syracuse but they have both dropped off since joining, especially Syracuse.


Re: A lot of the times we were 3rd and the 4th place team VT was

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:58 PM
 

Syracuse... the team that got caught in a pay for play issue and still has a Final Four and Sweet Sixteen appearance in 2 of the last 3 years.

Clemson is 27-27 in the last three years.
Syracuse is 27-27 in the last three years.

They were added to tourney when there were 8-10 in 2016, we were left out in 2016 when 10-8


The ACC has been weak, 2008-2010 saw NC State shrivel up after Sendek, the twilight of Williams at Maryland, and no competition from GT or UVA. Just like current ACC football, top-heavy and middle weak.


It was top heavy***


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:01 PM
 




Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:08 PM
 

Jhop83® said:

Once again you are completely ignoring the fact that Purnell’s last 3 years we had a winning record in conference.

The majority of his conference losses came while he was cleaning up the mess the previous coach made.

Purnell built a program that was CONSISTENTLY becoming one of the best programs in the ACC. Brownell hasn’t come close to doing that.


Yeah.. But.. How many NCAA tournament wins does OP have?...

I'll hang up and listen....


Brownell has finished .500 or better in ACC play

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:12 PM
 

5 of his 8 seasons at Clemson.

2019 white level member

I don't know if Brownell can coach or not. What I know for

[2]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:34 PM
 

a FACT is that he can't recruit here. Ellis, Barnes and Purnell had styles that suited Clemson. They recognized the difficulties of recruiting b-ball players to Clemson, and they worked around it. Ellis went the JUCO route and had some success (more than Brownell), Barnes went bully-ball and won, and Purnell went run-and-press and won.
Brownell seems to think you can win here by doing what everyone else does, and that won't ever work. We won't EVER out-recruit the better schools. But if we had a coach who had a system--as we've had in the past--that gave us a chance, we could recruit specifically to that system...players who might not be the best traditional basketball players but could utilize different skills here that make them effective.

Brownell, like Shyatt before him, makes Clemson basketball boring.


Re: I don't know if Brownell can coach or not. What I know for


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:14 PM
 

clemson32 said:

a FACT is that he can't recruit here. Ellis, Barnes and Purnell had styles that suited Clemson. They recognized the difficulties of recruiting b-ball players to Clemson, and they worked around it. Ellis went the JUCO route and had some success (more than Brownell), Barnes went bully-ball and won, and Purnell went run-and-press and won.
Brownell seems to think you can win here by doing what everyone else does, and that won't ever work. We won't EVER out-recruit the better schools. But if we had a coach who had a system--as we've had in the past--that gave us a chance, we could recruit specifically to that system...players who might not be the best traditional basketball players but could utilize different skills here that make them effective.

Brownell, like Shyatt before him, makes Clemson basketball boring.

For anybody who thinks CBB is the answer for Clemson basketball....you do not know the question. We have to have a style of play or be strong in some facet to have a puncher’s chance.

RIck Barnes - slab five was ready to throw down.

OP - we would run you out the gym or run ourselves out of gas.

Cliff Barnes - big men rule.

Brad - I got nothing. What ya got?

2019 purple level member

Re: I don't know if Brownell can coach or not. What I know for


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:16 PM
 

Exactly. It’s like trying to be a power run team in the SEC West. You can’t do that and compete with programs like Alabama and LSU on a consistent basis if you are an Arkansas or Mizzou.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:37 PM
 

I don't dislike Brad either.In fact, I have his bobblehead doll on my bookshelf.
And I totally agree that you can't out recruit Dook, or UNCheat.Heck, I'll even throw in Virginia.
But there is no reason you can't recruit, or even out-recruit the other schools in the ACC.
Yet here we are 5 games into the ACC schedule and all we have is 1 win, at home against Ga.Tech.
O.K.we lost home games against Duke and Virginia, but we have yet to win an ACC road game. Losses against Syracuse, FSU, and now N.C. State doesn't bode well come selection time.
And that is what you are referring to as being out of touch with recruits.
He has got to do a better job in recruiting a level of talent that can at least make us competitive with those teams not called Dook, or UNCheat.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 3:41 PM
 

he's just not the guy, just not, but we should embrace it cause it aint changing


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:42 PM
 

I honestly don't get this mindset. Why can we not expect to beat the FSUs and the Virginia Techs consistently in basketball. I'm no asking to win a championship but I'm asking to be in the dance every other year. I personally don't think Brownell is the man for the job. I like him. But I believe it's time for a new message.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:04 PM
 

I know a lot of people say that we can't hire a better coach, but look at VA basketball for a minute. They are currently racked 1st in the ACC with a coach that has won .731 of all his games and .681 of his ACC games. Keep two things in mind. His first two years were losing seasons. Also he was preceded by coaches with records of .200,.559,.432,.274,.432,.653, .584, .559, and .512. So I would say that better coaches are out there. Brownell is at .466 in the league after nine years averaging 7th or 8th place in the standings. I think we can do better. We should at least try.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 6:08 PM
 

I don't know who we can get, but we need someone else. I would like to see a decent b-ball program. Brad doesn't seem to be able to recruit at a high enough level. I think we can do better. We need to try something else.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[2]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:11 PM
 

To address some points mentioned above.

- The ACC was stronger when Purnell was here: That is complete BS. To start the ACC this year, we have played 4 out of road. 2 of those teams were ranked (Duke #1 and NCSU #21) We should have beaten NCSU and lost because our career 90% free throw shooter missed 2 FTs in a row and they made a very low percentage shot. The other 2 teams we have played on the road were teams that were ranked pretty high preseason and had a ton of talent. We have played 2 home games including one against a top 3 team in the country and we won the other one. Our ACC schedule has been brutal

- Purnell left Clemson LOADED: Uhhhh no he did not. He left a veteran heavy team for 1 year, and after that, everyone sucked. Brownell actually won a tourney game with Purnells players, something that OP couldn't do. OP also left at a terrible time and Brownell was unable to get any players to sign that year. Purnell left Brownell a dumpster fire after year 1.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:16 PM
 

Comparing to OP is a joke. It's like he was a God. Please . .there was a reason he's gone.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:19 PM
 

Yea and it’s because he left. Lol.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:19 PM
 

Money. He took Depaul to the cleaners and went to Chicago and sucked it up while making fat checks.

2019 white level member

Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:20 PM
 

Brownell came in after 3 straight tourney appearances and two of the best recruiting classes in Clemson history. The fact that he couldn’t hold it together is not on Purnell.

It’s really not on Brad either. It’s on the man that hired him.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 4:15 PM
 

There are a lot of nice guys out there, but some just are not qualified or can do the job. Sometimes you just have to make a change.


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell

[1]
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 5:36 PM
 

Here's the thing, and I am sure you would agree if you're old enough.
Barnes didn't recruit 4 and 5 star guys. But he could flat out coach
and develop. As well as motivate players. Brownell struggles with all
the above. Problem is...if you understand what I am trying to say.
Brad's players don't get into trouble, they graduate. And runs a clean
program. Plus, very few ppl in the program- fans and powers that be.
Even care about Basketball; You might, I do. And a few others. But Clemson
has never had a strong following there.
You're right, we're not going out recruit Duke or Nc- I don't expect to.
But we do need a young, energetic coach who has a strong passion for winning
and developing players, Which isn't happening with BB.
Then there's the football team; Most Clemson ppl could care less about bask.
with the FB team having so much success.
Hope I am wrong...


but I doubt it.
#21


Are we forgetting "We are what our record says we are"?


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 6:22 PM
 

Its fine to parse out a particular season, or even 2 or 3. But if a 6 or 7 year record has to be explained, maybe we are what the record says. No explanations. Do we hold on that hand or not?


Re: It's not that I dislike Brownell


Posted: Jan 28, 2019 7:03 PM
 

Tommy was an arrogant snob. The only thing good about him was when his daughter posted those pics back in 2000. Oh yea, those were on point!!

2019 white level member

Replies: 50  
[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
1675 people have read this post