|
Replies: 105
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches
Mar 18, 2017, 3:40 PM
|
|
Cliff Ellis: .58 winning %-- 80% postseason appearance rate (8/10), including 3 NCAATs (30%)
Rick Barnes: .607 winning %-- 100% postseason appearance rate (4/4), including 3 NCAATs (75%)
Larry Shyatt: .455 winning % -- 20% postseason rate (1/5), no NCAATs
Oliver Purnell: .605 winning % -- 86% postseason rate (6/7), including 3 NCAATs (43%)
Brad Brownell: .546 winning % -- 43% postseason rate (3/7), including 1 NCAAT (14%)
The idea that BB has done as well, or better, than other "modern" Clemson coaches is a myth. If you remove Shyatt, BB is the worst we have had, and it's not even close.
I really wish that Brad would have won here, b/c I think he's a good guy and I think he has represented Clemson well. But the numbers don't lie. I think you also have to account for what he took over, which was a program coming off 3 straight NCAAT appearances. Compare that to what Purnell took over from Shyatt, and BBs numbers look even worse.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [58411]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46321
Joined: 4/23/00
|
It blows my mind that there is even any discussion or
Mar 18, 2017, 4:00 PM
|
|
pondering over this decision. The thought that he may actually be brought back defies all reason or anything that resembles common sense. It's like we are in a cartoonish bizarro world. It's like a bad acid trip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
The consideration that he return is based on several things:
Mar 18, 2017, 4:04 PM
|
|
-We have been extremely competitive under Brownell
-Outstanding team GPA and graduation rate
-No cheating
-Players are involved in the community
-Brownell fixed a lot of behind-the-scenes issues, including a pathetic donor base for basketball, and was the main reason why the new facilities became a reality
The final one is perhaps the most important at this stage, as Radakovich is surely struggling with whether or not to keep a coach who has not won enough, but has advanced the program considerably with the new facilities and off-the-court successes.
It's obviously about winning, and if we can get a coach like Will Wade now we should absolutely do it. But if there are no guarantees with a new coach, it isn't unreasonable to keep Brownell another year or two to see what he can do.
I don't understand why these same things keep getting posted. Everyone who reads TigerNet, even on an occasional basis, has read all of these arguments for and against.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
he has the worst winning % other than Shyatt
Mar 18, 2017, 4:08 PM
|
|
and 3 postseason appearances in 7 years.... How do you consider that "competitive"?
You also continually say he has advanced the program significantly... but nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is that we have taken SIGNIFICANT steps backwards from where this program was under Purnell. You also point to "clean" program... Other than Ellis- who has this been a problem with recently?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
He has been competitive when you look at individual games.
Mar 18, 2017, 4:15 PM
|
|
I cannot remember an era of basketball at Clemson with more narrow losses. In years past, we would routinely get blown out or never have a chance in games, especially against top teams. That is not the case under Brownell, as we had chances to win about a dozen games this year with under a minute left. I consider that competitive. Obviously he has not WON enough of those games, which is the ultimate goal, but there is no denying that he has us competitive.
Program improvement under Brownell can be more than NCAA berths. I feel like you only look at it in terms of wins and tournament appearances. Of course that is one metric - the major one, clearly. But that is not all that is considered, nor should it be.
It is not as simple as stating "Brownell took over a team that had made three NCAAs in a row, and ran it into the ground." There was a lot more to it than that, and you know it. Purnell did not leave the program in nearly as good of a shape as it appeared to the casual observer - or even to Brownell himself.
That isn't an excuse for Brownell not making an NCAA Tournament since year one, but it is important to point out. The fact that he has improved a lot of areas of our program is not insignificant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
what does individual games have to do with anything?
Mar 18, 2017, 4:27 PM
|
|
it's a win or a loss... and yes, program improvement is more than NCAAT appearances, but other things are a SMALL part, very small on the whole.
Tnet needs to stop furthering the myth that he took over a disaster. He did not. He even said so in his opening presser. That is a huge myth.
I would say he took over a better situation than anyone other than Larry Shyatt, and I don't think that can really be disputed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Has it occurred to you that he didn't know
Mar 18, 2017, 6:15 PM
|
|
all of the details about our program's health when he did his first press conference? Why is that hard to understand?
Clemson's basketball program was not in great shape when he took over, regardless of how it appeared on the surface.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
you continuing to use "how OP left us" 7 years later is
Mar 18, 2017, 6:16 PM
|
|
quite laughable
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Again, it isn't an excuse for the situation we are in now.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:29 PM
|
|
Brownell owns the program since he has been here 7 years. But you and others keep emphasizing what a great situation he inherited, yet you know very little about the true situation he inherited.
Because we can both agree that what happened seven years ago is irrelevant now, please stop bringing up what OP left Brad with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4341]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4968
Joined: 8/6/02
|
Re: you continuing to use "how OP left us" 7 years later is
Mar 19, 2017, 7:06 AM
[ in reply to you continuing to use "how OP left us" 7 years later is ] |
|
Didn't Brownell take "his" first team here to the NCAA tournament? I'd say he was left in good shape. If there were problems, (as you are imagining) he had a year plus to figure it out. I guess it takes 7 years to figure out things nowadays?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [563]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 103
Joined: 11/18/06
|
Re: Has it occurred to you that he didn't know
Mar 19, 2017, 2:42 AM
[ in reply to Has it occurred to you that he didn't know ] |
|
Please tell us the details... 7 years later and still nothing. If anything Clemson Basketball has a smaller following than it did before he took over. I used to pay attention to basketball, but now I'm just thankful it's over. Nobody is going to shift their focus to basketball until it becomes exciting again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16240]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12779
Joined: 11/14/09
|
I doubt there are many fans who discount Brownell's
Mar 18, 2017, 4:39 PM
[ in reply to He has been competitive when you look at individual games. ] |
|
many accomplishments that you mention, and with good reason. He hasn't been a bad guy at all in so many areas, but there's just something missing - hard to put a finger on it - but you know it also.
Stats and instances and comparisons etc. etc. is just as much a catharsis for the many long-suffering Clemson basketball fan, considering we all know a good guy is on his way out, whether it's this week, next year, what have you. It's painful to lose one of your own, and posting stats that help serve as a bit of a balm through the process, there's really nothing wrong or group freak about that.
Go Tigers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [315]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 478
Joined: 11/16/15
|
Re: He has been competitive when you look at individual games.
Mar 18, 2017, 5:18 PM
[ in reply to He has been competitive when you look at individual games. ] |
|
But he hasn't WON those close games. Saw they're 9-25 in games decided by six points or less in the past three seasons.
PLUS, they were 0-12 against the top nine teams in the ACC this season.
That's not competitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
"competitive"... haha***
Mar 18, 2017, 5:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
No need to state that we didn't win those games.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:18 PM
[ in reply to Re: He has been competitive when you look at individual games. ] |
|
I said that in my original post. As I have said many times, it is ultimately about wins and losses, and he hasn't won enough.
However, the post was about being competitive. My point is that being competitive doesn't require winning. Being competitive requires...being competitive. We narrowly lost a BUNCH of games this year. We had chances with under a minute left in a dozen games this year. That is being competitive, despite the fact that we didn't win enough of those games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [563]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 103
Joined: 11/18/06
|
Re: No need to state that we didn't win those games.
Mar 19, 2017, 2:44 AM
|
|
Tommy Bowden was competitive in the ACC if those are the standards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
and you accuse others of "cherrypicking"?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:22 PM
|
|
haha
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
I gave you a stat that is given by the natural break
Mar 18, 2017, 6:25 PM
|
|
in records...
I had a whole post with the complete record previously.
We're 0-8 against ACC teams seeded 1-5. The OP noted that here....
Then we're 4-4 against ACC teams seeded 7-12. That was my stat to show
exactly what Judge Keller contends:
we didn't win "enough" but we won "some".
That suit you pumpkin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
you can't have it both ways... you continually pump "ACC"
Mar 18, 2017, 6:28 PM
|
|
record---
Well, going by ACC STANDINGS, we were 0-12 vs. the top 9.
You never want to acknowledge the NCAAT as a benchmark for Brownell--- until you want to point out wins/losses...
Which is it? Are we going to be old school and look at the ACC standings as it pertains to records for success (as you have repeatedly done)--- or are we going to use the NCAAT as a measuring stick (which you do not, until now)
which is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
can you show me the column in the final stats for a season
Mar 18, 2017, 5:25 PM
|
|
that accounts for close losses?
I'd love to see where that is, and what it means exactly
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
Judge Keller's point was that we were competitive
Mar 18, 2017, 6:27 PM
|
|
1 point losses on last second shots is pretty competitive.
Of course, Bama didn't win the NCAA Football Championship either....
you see pumpkin, unlike you I don't cherry-pick,
over state my case,
or ignore real FACTS.
that's why you're you,
and I have credibility....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
you really are delusional, aren't you***
Mar 18, 2017, 6:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: He has been competitive when you look at individual games.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:01 PM
[ in reply to He has been competitive when you look at individual games. ] |
|
It's about wins and losses. Tommy Bowden graduated his players. They were fine citizens. He lost a lot of close games and was competitive. How many ACC titles did he win? How many Atlantic Division Titles did he win? Winning trumps all other factors in a program. It's no different for Brownell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Did you even read my post?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:19 PM
|
|
I said:
"Obviously he has not WON enough of those games, which is the ultimate goal, but there is no denying that he has us competitive."
You can do better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22965]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 25005
Joined: 6/24/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
haha.. fixed... +1***
Mar 18, 2017, 4:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58411]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46321
Joined: 4/23/00
|
All of those things are very important, but at some point,
Mar 18, 2017, 4:36 PM
[ in reply to The consideration that he return is based on several things: ] |
|
we must be more than "competitive". It's not good enough. It's not easy, but it's absurd to think we can't do all of those things reasonably well and be more competitive. It's also absurd to think that we just can't get a coach that could get us there. It's a loser mentality. Moving on at this point wouldn't be a rash decision driven by delusional, lunatic fans; it would be a very reasonable thing to do. I agree that we shouldn't just hire just anybody in an act of desperation, but it shouldn't be like that. Surely DRad and the powers that be have anticipated this and have some kind of plan in place. There should be plenty of worthy candidates. Besides, there are no guarantees with any coach we hire, it's always a gamble; that's not an excuse for doing nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
I don't disagree that we need to win more.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:20 PM
|
|
I said that in my post above:
"Obviously he has not WON enough of those games, which is the ultimate goal, but there is no denying that he has us competitive."
My point in mentioning that we were so competitive is that it is probably one of the things in his favor when being evaluated. Of course it isn't enough to be competitive, but if DRad is looking for reasons to keep him, there is no denying that he has made a group of less talented players competitive in a league filled with a lot of outstanding talent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1898]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2345
Joined: 11/6/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: The consideration that he return is based on several things:
Mar 18, 2017, 5:52 PM
[ in reply to The consideration that he return is based on several things: ] |
|
The question is about the confidence that Drad has in Brownell to advance the program to NCAA tournament levels. Were several games very close this past season? Yes! Did Brownell coach stupidly toward the end in some ? Yes! His record of graduating players is fantastic. He inherited a pretty good OP team but never really raised the level of the program. His seven year record does not show a reason to have faith that he can get over the hump. Drad if you keep Brownell and he fails, you will be forever linked with his failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4754]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5125
Joined: 9/14/02
|
"Competitive" is the CBB supporters talking point...
Mar 19, 2017, 7:15 AM
[ in reply to The consideration that he return is based on several things: ] |
|
Yet it's still a LOSS. All these close losses also point to poor game management. I don't even need to get into the HUGE blown leads we experienced in the NIT and last years ACC tournament.
CBB has had 7 years. It is just not happening under CBB and Clemson expects to win in everything and so should you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16732]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16761
Joined: 8/19/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111526]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73740
Joined: 9/10/03
|
modern?
Mar 18, 2017, 4:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
haha +1... which makes his numbers even
Mar 18, 2017, 4:10 PM
|
|
worse now
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [725]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 1165
Joined: 11/29/06
|
Re: Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches
Mar 18, 2017, 4:14 PM
|
|
Not to argue whether he should be retained or fired, but you conveniently left off the conference win percentages.
Ellis - .384
Barnes - .438
Shyatt - .250
Purnell - .464
Brownell - .459 (believe this is accurate for this year)
I can't remember when Louisville, Syracuse, and ND came into the ACC, but those are 3 pretty tough additional teams to contend with on an annual basis. Pitt hasn't really been as tough, but still another addition. Just keeping it fair and balanced.
Go Tigers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Someone will try to discount Brownell's ACC record
Mar 18, 2017, 4:17 PM
|
|
They will say that the 80s and 90s ACC was so much tougher, how you had to play each ACC team twice, etc.
The ACC is as tough now as it has ever been. Those who can't acknowledge that just don't want to give Brownell credit for any successes. They dislike him, they are tired of him, and they will go to any lengths to criticize him. It's sad really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
The ACC was tough this year
Mar 18, 2017, 4:43 PM
|
|
for the bulk of the Brownell era; FSU, Wake, GT, BC and Pitt have been down. State the last two years. While their are and have been sone obviously great teams, the bottom of the league has been mediocre at best. One sixth of all his ACC wins have basically come against Tech
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
Can you tell me what that has to do with ANYTHING?
Mar 18, 2017, 4:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches ] |
|
what has that record translated to? That is the most insignificant stat you can throw out, period. Did it lead us to NCAAT berths? Did it get us high seeds in the ACCT?
I don't get that stat... Why throw it out? Those numbers mean absolutely NOTHING.
As a matter of fact, you could argue, and SOS backs it up, that Purnell and Barnes had a tougher road, and that's why they got in with less than stellar ACC records.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [725]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 1165
Joined: 11/29/06
|
Re: Can you tell me what that has to do with ANYTHING?
Mar 18, 2017, 5:38 PM
|
|
Umm, you posted their overall winning stats, and when you consider that the ACC is generally one of the two toughest conferences each year, just thought it was relevant on how BB compared against other Clemson coaches within the conference. If you're going to compare him to past coaches, let's compare all stats, not just the ones that make your point.
I was at Clemson during the Bill Foster era, horrible, horrible basketball. What a frustrating time, but I went to the games. Go back and look at the coaches throughout the history of Clemson basketball and what will you see? Very little success. Does that mean we can't have success? Of course not. But here's what has to happen. We have to convince yet another young up and coming coach that it is worth it for him to come to a school where basketball will likely be the #3 sport on campus behind football (obviously) and likely baseball. Then, this coach has to convince those kids going to schools where basketball is the #1 sport on campus (your Duke's, UNC's, Villanova's, etc) that it also is the place to be. It's a tough sale that, for whatever reason you want to come up with, that NO previous basketball coach at Clemson has been able to make to these youngsters. Can the sale be made by someone? I guess so, but what I see is we will hire that young up and coming coach, and one of two things will happen: 1) After 4 or 5 years he will have some success and go to a more prestigious basketball school, or 2) We fire yet another coach and the process starts over again. It's the history of Clemson basketball.....the facts on that don't lie.
Clemson football has had tradition, especially in the ACC (of course, now it is Nationally), but Clemson basketball....unlikely to change. Just being real and just trying to tell you not to get too excited about Clemson basketball....concentrate on football or baseball....even that will often cause you to lose some sleep! LOL Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
but you still didn't answer what his ACC numbers have to
Mar 18, 2017, 5:56 PM
|
|
do with anything... I would give you that if we had made the NCAAT a few times over the years and were having this discussion...
but we have not, and b/c we only have 1 NCAAT and 2 NITs in his 7 years, that makes his ACC numbers irrelevant.
We are 9-25 in games decided by six points or less in the past three seasons... AND THIS SEASON we were 0-12 against the top nine teams in the ACC
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
I wish when we talk post season that it would only be..
Mar 18, 2017, 4:16 PM
|
|
the tournament. I don't think the others should even be mentioned. It makes it sound like a success when we go to those lesser novelties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2205]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3134
Joined: 1/8/13
|
Re: Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches
Mar 18, 2017, 4:29 PM
|
|
Glad you're looking at records that are mostly OOC wins, aka inferior opponents. How about when things get tough?
ACC Record
BB:.459
OP:.446
RB:.438
CE:.384 vacated wins
LS:.250
Interesting that the worst coach in the world is actually being pretty competitive against the best league in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
What does that mean for BB? Those #'s mean absolutely
Mar 18, 2017, 4:33 PM
|
|
NOTHING.
They contributed nothing to our program.... did we get more NCAAT bids b/c of that? No. Did we get better ACCT seeding? No
I don't understand why ACC winning % is important when it meant nothing. The NCAAT looks at your overall numbers, not ACC wins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
So ACC wins mean nothing to you but NCAA invites do?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:27 PM
|
|
You discount Brownell's ACC wins because he hasn't gotten us to many NCAA Tournaments, yet you praise Purnell for the same amount of ACC wins simply because he got us to the NCAA Tournament?
If Purnell had WON any NCAA Tournament games, I could understand your argument, but just making the NCAAs only to lose (twice to a lower seed) is ridiculous.
At least Brownell won a first round game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
what means something to Snowjob, aka York,
Mar 18, 2017, 6:29 PM
|
|
is his overbloated opinion.
Otherwise he's accept your point has validity
even as we didn't win "enough" to get an invite this year....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
who praised OP for ACC wins? Where did I do that?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:36 PM
[ in reply to So ACC wins mean nothing to you but NCAA invites do? ] |
|
I praised OP for getting us to the NCAAT. He did have quite a few ACC wins his final 3 years, and that translated into NCAAT invites.
In what universe do BBs ACC wins mean anything if we are not in either the NCAA or NIT? I ask, b/c that describes more than half of his 7 seasons here.
You have yet to say why his ACC wins over the last 6 years mean anything, if all we have to show for it is 2 NIT appearances. How does that work?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Why do NCAA appearances matter if we don't win?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:41 PM
|
|
OP got us there, and we lost. All three times.
Is our goal to make the NCAA Tournament or to actually win games there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
wait a sec--I thought you were a fan of being "competitive"
Mar 18, 2017, 6:48 PM
|
|
Why fault OP for losing if we were competitive? Isn't that your mantra with Brownell? This thread is full of that.
As far as winning-- yes, you want to win.. but you have to get there first. It's kind of silly to defend BBs career numbers by pointing to a guy that took us to 3 straight NCAATs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
We weren't competitive in those NCAA games.
Mar 19, 2017, 4:11 PM
|
|
My point was that you have a double standard: criticize Brownell for not winning more games, but praise OP for making three NCAA Tournament even though he never even came close to winning a game there.
Since you repeatedly stress the importance of Brownell not winning enough games, it is laughable that you brush OP's lack of NCAA wins under the rug. Just making it matters none if you don't win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
maybe you should re-read your post to see how stupid it is
Mar 19, 2017, 4:15 PM
|
|
How are you equating BB not winning enough games to a guy that was solidly in the NCAAT three years in a row? I have never seen anyone argue that OP was "fine" b/c he couldn't win in the NCAAT....
but to suggest it's a double standard when you compare what OP did to Brownell, who, in 7 years has taken us to 1 NCAA and 2 NIT--- is just ignorant...
and that's being polite
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
I'm not equating the two coaches or their performances.
Mar 19, 2017, 4:23 PM
|
|
OP > Brownell. No question.
I just don't understand why you stress NCAA Tournament appearances so much with Purnell when he didn't do squat when he got there. We don't get participation trophies, you know.
The fine line between making the NCAAs and not, as we have seen the last several years under Brownell, is less significant to me if we are comparing him to the prior coach who made it to the big dance but could never win (even as a higher seed all three times).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Thanks, I had clearly forgotten that.***
Mar 18, 2017, 6:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
I am haunted by those upsets...Each worse than the next...
Mar 18, 2017, 7:21 PM
|
|
First we blew a 19 point lead in the 2nd half(with arguably the best team in school history), then we lost a tough one to Michigan with an embarrassing ejection to boot and then Mizzu beat us at our own game and ran us out of the gym going away...I am envious that you COULD forget any of them
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
The Nova game was horrible.... I thought we had a chance
Mar 18, 2017, 7:25 PM
|
|
to make a run, and we looked like it the 1st half-- terrible, terrible loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58411]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46321
Joined: 4/23/00
|
The fact is, we need to be better. The competition may be
Mar 18, 2017, 4:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches ] |
|
better, but we have to step up and be that much better ourselves. Relative improvement should not be the goal; that's a preposterous position. If the competition is 50% better and we are 20% better, we are still falling behind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Great point. This is my concern with our improved recruiting
Mar 18, 2017, 6:33 PM
|
|
We have a really nice 2017 class coming in. It is Brownell's best. But is it enough improvement relative to the rest of the conference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1463]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 977
Joined: 9/5/99
|
Very misleading
Mar 18, 2017, 4:48 PM
[ in reply to Re: Brad Brownell vs. other "modern" Clemson coaches ] |
|
Coaches like Ellis and Barnes had to play teams like UNC and Duke twice a year. Brownell didn't. In the expanded ACC, Clemson has played bottom and mid-level programs far more than teams in the top tier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58411]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46321
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Great point***
Mar 18, 2017, 5:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
BS, BS,BS- I have already posted how Brownell played 8 games
Mar 18, 2017, 6:12 PM
|
|
this year against other ACC teams with Top-5 NCAAT seeding.
That's 8 of 18 for just Top 5 only.
Then there's another 8 games against lower seeded NCAAT teams.
That's 16 of 18 ACC games against NCAAT teams.
Please, please tell me that's not the hardest schedule we've ever played....
Do you people really simply ignore FACTS so you can act like turds?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
What was our record this year against the top 9 ACC schools?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:15 PM
|
|
We had a tough schedule this year-- but if you look at BB's entire tenure, we have a WEAKER ACC SOS than both Purnell and Barnes.
We have played the lower half of the ACC, since it expanded, more than ever before.
and by the way-- 0-12 vs. top 9 ACC teams
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
16 of 18 ACC games against NCAAT teams
Mar 18, 2017, 6:31 PM
|
|
and you say Brownell's SOS is weaker?
you are a fool....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
the word "tenure" doesn't mean what you think it means***
Mar 18, 2017, 6:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [231]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 344
Joined: 3/11/13
|
what???
Mar 18, 2017, 8:55 PM
[ in reply to 16 of 18 ACC games against NCAAT teams ] |
|
what world do you live in where 16 of our 18 ACC games were against tourney teams?
And you are apparently unaware that Brownell has been here more than this year, and the previous years have not had the same SOS toughness as this year. Yeah this year was tough, we get that. That's 1/7 of Brownell's tenure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I'm curious about that stat he threw out there too..
Mar 18, 2017, 9:00 PM
|
|
W- T- H epifunny
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [725]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 1165
Joined: 11/29/06
|
Re: Very misleading
Mar 18, 2017, 5:43 PM
[ in reply to Very misleading ] |
|
Sooooo.....rather than playing UNC or Duke twice, we play them once each and then face Louisville or ND or Syracuse? LOL Thanks for the easier games. By the way, none of the other coaches that were listed in the "modern" era ever won at Chapel Hill. We just aren't a basketball school....like the Gamecocks aren't a football school. Stop trying to put a square in a circle. BB's average finish during his tenure has been 8. Out of 15 schools, I believe that puts him right in the middle of the pack. That is a pretty good run for Tiger basketball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
We took UNC to 3 OT and had a shot to beat Duke at buzzer.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:35 PM
[ in reply to Very misleading ] |
|
Why is it unreasonable to think that we would have been competitive if we had played both of them twice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
what does it matter about being "competitive"?
Mar 18, 2017, 6:41 PM
|
|
you are hung up on this...
we were 0-12 against the top 9 ACC schools, according to the standings-- Sure, we were competitive in a lot of those games, but there's not an * beside them either..
I don't get it why you are so hung on us being competitive
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
I'm not hung up on us being competitive.
Mar 18, 2017, 6:44 PM
|
|
But given Clemson's basketball history, and the other positives Brownell has brought to the program, it might be another reason being used to keep Brownell for another year. There is no denying that we were VERY close to having a much better season.
You do recall that the reasons I originally listed are potential reasons for why DRad might keep Brownell, right? They aren't my reasons.
I'm all for getting rid of Brownell now if Clemson will make a great hire. I'm just not convinced we will. I am hesitant to forget our history of poor support for basketball, which certainly includes bad coaching hires.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I get what you are saying-- but let's say we make a bad
Mar 18, 2017, 6:52 PM
|
|
hire, and its obvious 4 years from now...
how is that different than the past 6 years... and what is there to suggest BB would be better over those next 4?
At some point, you just have to take the chance-- it's all a "risk", no matter who you get
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
There are no guarantees either way.
Mar 19, 2017, 4:15 PM
|
|
I do think there are some encouraging signs re: Brownell possibly turning it around. We were even more competitive this year than normal under Brownell (we are almost always competitive under him, just don't win quite enough). If just a few shots for us go in, or just a few for other teams don't go in, we are easily an NCAA Tournament team this year.
Recruiting seems to be picking up, and we are just one year into the new facility. We have a nice young core of rising juniors in Mitchell, Thomas, and Reed.
Again, if he stays we might not improve at all. But we certainly could.
For me, it all depends on how serious Clemson is regarding basketball. I truly hope the new facilities are evidence that things are different now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10929]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4671
Joined: 10/25/11
|
The fun is in the winning.***
Mar 18, 2017, 5:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
please show the ACC records separately
Mar 18, 2017, 6:05 PM
|
|
and note that you've cherrypicked the overall records because you want to be an ###;
then make note that OP left him bereft of talent for years 2 and 3;
then make note that the NCAA gave NC State a NCAAT bid in 2014
even though Clemson had a better overall record, a better ACC record, AND
beat them head-to-head by 17 points;
and then maybe you'll be showing FACTS as a reasonable person.
Otherwise, you're just another azz-wipe who wants to a little blood....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I used overall winning % for all coaches, and you are saying
Mar 18, 2017, 6:11 PM
|
|
I "cherrypicked" stats? W- T- F??
I used total POSTSEASON appearances for all coaches, and you think I "cherrypicked" stats? W- T- F??
What does BB's ACC record have to do with anything? We could absolutely put those numbers up, but they translate to NOTHING. They may be important if we had more success over the past 7 seasons, but we have not.
That ACC record you are touting has resulted in 2 NITs and 1 NCAA in 7 years, and that's what you want to tout? Are you serious?
You keep using the word "FACTS" over and over in your posts, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
FACTS- Clemson is 9-25 in games decided by six points or less in the past three seasons... AND THIS SEASON we were 0-12 against the top nine teams in the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
yes, show the ACC record, and then you won't be cherry-
Mar 18, 2017, 6:13 PM
|
|
or nose-picking...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
Good grief. 47% of Brad's ACC wins
Mar 18, 2017, 7:17 PM
|
|
24 of them, have come against GT(11-3), BC(6-3), and WF(7-2). The three teams clearly worse than us during his tenure. He's beaten the teams he should have, and sprung a few upsets. We're still a bottom third of the league team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
^^ this...
Mar 18, 2017, 7:22 PM
|
|
47% epifunny against 3 teams... that's a FACT
btw- which 4 ACC wins against NCAAT teams were you referring to earlier in this post?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
Over 20% against Tech alone
Mar 18, 2017, 7:27 PM
|
|
The four programs worse than us during his tenure, if we add in VT(5-4), have all changed coaches as well. Over 50% of Brad's ACC wins are against those four schools
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
and people want to focus on "ACC" record***
Mar 18, 2017, 7:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
yeah, lol.... Snowjob...
Mar 18, 2017, 10:07 PM
|
|
did you know 39% of Dabo Swinney's ACC wins have come against Ga Tech, BC and Wake?
more than against any other 3 ACC teams, even as his record against Ga Tech is only 5-5.
Does that make him a cherry-picker too?
Maybe we should fire Dabo for beating the bad teams every year....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I can't believe you actually just posted this***
Mar 18, 2017, 10:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58411]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46321
Joined: 4/23/00
|
He's desperate.***
Mar 19, 2017, 3:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4378]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 4849
Joined: 5/22/15
|
Re: yeah, lol.... Snowjob...
Mar 19, 2017, 6:36 PM
[ in reply to yeah, lol.... Snowjob... ] |
|
Thank you for posting this. Now it's 100% clear to EVERYONE that you're a complete moron.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
Only ACC team in the tourney we beat
Mar 18, 2017, 7:31 PM
[ in reply to ^^ this... ] |
|
this year was WF twice I believe. As far as NCAA teams we also beat the chickens and UNCW
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
right... but
Mar 18, 2017, 7:34 PM
|
|
epifunny has said 3-4 times in this thread alone that we were 4-4 against ACC teams seeded 7-12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
I have us 4-11 against NCAA teams
Mar 18, 2017, 7:37 PM
|
|
this year. 4-12 if you count the ACC tourney loss to Dook
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
4-12 includes Duke - and again my apologies, 2-4 against ACC
Mar 18, 2017, 8:03 PM
|
|
teams in the NCAA is correct.
I included UNCW and USuCk incorrectly when speaking of ACC play alone.
We were 5-2 against teams not in the tourney.
Regardless, the point holds: this year's ACC schedule was the toughest we've ever had.
And we were competitive in the vast majority of games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: 4-12 includes Duke - and again my apologies, 2-4 against ACC
Mar 18, 2017, 8:11 PM
|
|
Competitive is not winning. Imagine telling Dabo that competitive is good enough. Watson would not be throwing that pass to Hunter Renfoe to win a national title. You may get your wish and Drad keeps Brad. It will be the death of Clemson basketball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard...
Mar 18, 2017, 8:13 PM
[ in reply to 4-12 includes Duke - and again my apologies, 2-4 against ACC ] |
|
"this year's ACC was the toughest we've ever had. And we were competitive in the vast majority of the games"...
We were 0-12 against the top 9 teams in the ACC.
We won 6 conference games.
But hey... there's that word "competitive" again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard...
Mar 18, 2017, 8:23 PM
|
|
Close counts in horseshoes only. I was just reading an article on the Clemson Insider. It looks like we are keeping the loser for at least another year. Drad is a fool if he does this. Brownell will not turn this program around next year or make the tournament. Drad blame yourself for this. We put a bad product on the basketball court. It's not worth watching or buying tickets to see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
you buy tickets?***
Mar 18, 2017, 8:24 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: you buy tickets?***
Mar 18, 2017, 8:26 PM
|
|
Been to a few games but no more if we keep Brownell!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
so you're a fair weather fan? Gonna wait till we win again
Mar 18, 2017, 8:35 PM
|
|
and then you're gonna ditch this handle and get back on the Bandwagon with the one you used last month?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [648]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 2764
Joined: 3/6/17
|
Re: so you're a fair weather fan? Gonna wait till we win again
Mar 18, 2017, 8:46 PM
|
|
It's not being a fair weather fan. In Leggetts last year, empty seats made it clear to Drad that a change was needed. Many years ago fans not going to games got rid of Hatfield. Be honest with yourself. What convinces you that Brownell will make this program an NCAA tournament team next year? A finish in the top division of the ACC? Nothing in the last seven years inspires confidence in the coach. The only thing fans can do to express their displeasure is to not go to the games. That NIT crowd was a statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
What about the players? Don't THEY deserve better from
Mar 18, 2017, 10:53 PM
|
|
"fans" like you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
my apologies - this is correct - I misstated
Mar 18, 2017, 7:58 PM
[ in reply to Only ACC team in the tourney we beat ] |
|
the 4 wins against NCAAT teams includes USuCk and UNCW
and would not have been against ACC teams alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
yep.... you mis-stated multiple times on that one
Mar 18, 2017, 8:02 PM
|
|
what's your take on 47% of Brad's ACC wins being against GT, BC, and WF? Throw in VT (4-5), and over 50% of his wins have come against those 4 teams....
how does that square with your insistence that we should examine the "ACC Record"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/24/09
|
I thought you were the one who loved Buzz and Greenberg
Mar 18, 2017, 8:04 PM
|
|
and what they were doing at Va Tech?
I thought you were the one who loved Gotfired at NC State?
I thought you were the one who thought Manning was doing such a good job at WF?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
do you even know what you are talking about?
Mar 18, 2017, 8:10 PM
|
|
VPI invested in Buzz, and it's paying off
Pretty sure Manning had WF in the NCAAT
Gottfried had 4 NCAAT in 6 years, with multiple Sweet 16s--- his last two years did not meet NCSU's expectations, so he's gone
You realize there have been changes made at all those places, including NCST, since BB was here... right?
And where the hell does "Greenberg" come from? Can you cite one time I've ever mentioned him or the job he did?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17282
Joined: 8/18/05
|
Since Brad has been here
Mar 18, 2017, 8:58 PM
|
|
changes at BC, Pitt, UVa, VT, NCS, WF, GT, and UM
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 105
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
