0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
I think it’s totally fair to put an asterisk on that season, but the fact is Frank never got his players to that point and Weber did.
Quote from: MakeItRain on March 24, 2018, 08:55:04 PMThere's a higher value placed on tournament success than what needs to be, absolutely. The entire sport is structured around winning in March though, it's literally the point of all of this. If you want to play it your way, it definitely seems you're not placing the proper weight on the conference championship season.clearly, he gets no credit for that because he didn't recruit a single contributor to that team.
There's a higher value placed on tournament success than what needs to be, absolutely. The entire sport is structured around winning in March though, it's literally the point of all of this. If you want to play it your way, it definitely seems you're not placing the proper weight on the conference championship season.
Quote from: michigancat on March 24, 2018, 09:00:14 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on March 24, 2018, 08:55:04 PMThere's a higher value placed on tournament success than what needs to be, absolutely. The entire sport is structured around winning in March though, it's literally the point of all of this. If you want to play it your way, it definitely seems you're not placing the proper weight on the conference championship season.clearly, he gets no credit for that because he didn't recruit a single contributor to that team.Frank wasn't going to get what was needed from any of the key pieces, outside of perhaps Angel and JO, to win a conference championship. He recruited that team but it wasn't his team.
Thus the asterisk. My point is that if you put yourself in mean Gene’s shoes today, where exactly is the evidence that you could get a coach who would give you better results than Weber has the last 5 years?
My point is that if you put yourself in mean Gene’s shoes today, where exactly is the evidence that you could get a coach who would give you better results than Weber has the last 5 years?
Quote from: catastrophe on March 24, 2018, 09:07:55 PMMy point is that if you put yourself in mean Gene’s shoes today, where exactly is the evidence that you could get a coach who would give you better results than Weber has the last 5 years?Found it.https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/defiant-and-wounded-rick-pitino-insists-he-did-nothing-wrong--and-wants-back-in/2018/03/21/681d3616-2c6d-11e8-8688-e053ba58f1e4_story.html
It took a lot of courage and compassion to keep Wade on the bench.
Didn't look ready to play. Conditioning and mental toughness always an issue with oscar. No energy outside of one run in the second half. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: michigancat on March 24, 2018, 07:41:29 PMFrank also earned a 2 seed and didn't luck into a joke of a runFrank didn't realize he wasn't running an offense until Bobby Knight called him out on national tv. Luckily, Brad Underwood had one and installed it mid season. I thought Frank was great at some things and suffered elsewhere. Coach W is a stronger tactician, weaker recruiter. Hopefully, the exposure will open some recruiting doors. Not many coaches would trust the word of a player regarding an injury vs a final 4. Says a lot about Webers integrity.
Frank also earned a 2 seed and didn't luck into a joke of a run
Quote from: catastrophe on March 24, 2018, 09:07:55 PMThus the asterisk. My point is that if you put yourself in mean Gene’s shoes today, where exactly is the evidence that you could get a coach who would give you better results than Weber has the last 5 years?It's easy to think Frank's five years were better than oscar's six overall. Like, not hard at all.
Quote from: sys on March 24, 2018, 08:46:16 PMQuote from: 'taterblast on March 24, 2018, 08:39:57 PM25-12 (10-8) with an Elite 8 appearance is better than all but one of Frank's seasons.the only way you can say that is if you value tournament success over all other variables. which is fine if you do, but you may as well just say it.I have long been on record that tournament runs are poor ways to evaluate a coach's performance. How you performance in conference shows how well you're doing.That isn't to say tourney runs aren't fun, but consistent high conference finishes ultimately lead to more fun tourney runs.
Quote from: 'taterblast on March 24, 2018, 08:39:57 PM25-12 (10-8) with an Elite 8 appearance is better than all but one of Frank's seasons.the only way you can say that is if you value tournament success over all other variables. which is fine if you do, but you may as well just say it.
25-12 (10-8) with an Elite 8 appearance is better than all but one of Frank's seasons.
25-12 (10-8) with adn Elite 8 appearance is better than all but one of Frank's seasons. what are we even doing if we can't say this was a good season
The 2011 Big12 conference was shitty as a whole compared to this season. Don't judge it solely on a 5 seed we were given. Only 4 of our 16 games in Big 12 were vs Tourney teams. We were not a top 20 team. We lost to 5th place CU all 3 times.
Quote from: Powercat Posse on March 24, 2018, 10:11:08 PMThe 2011 Big12 conference was shitty as a whole compared to this season. Don't judge it solely on a 5 seed we were given. Only 4 of our 16 games in Big 12 were vs Tourney teams. We were not a top 20 team. We lost to 5th place CU all 3 times. that team finished #32 in KenPom, this team finished #42. FWIWalso check your stats
FSD how come the 71-72 cats elite eight team won 13% more games than the 17-18 cats and still fell 2 short of the elusive 25 win mark?