And we need a Coach dance!

Definitely played better these last 3 games, but still too many TOs on offense, as you said. Gilder has been a major reason why we are playing better, he is balling out of his mind right now. But I'm pretty sure he has played all 40 minutes in each of the last 3 games, and that can't happen much longer.

This is what I thought we would look like all year - streaky, with large spurts of real good play, lock down defense and rebounding and running out and scoring on the other end, and then spurts where we totally look lost. It's how we looked to start the year, then something happened with that Tennessee game.

austinaggie2008 said:

---

Definitely played better these last 3 games, but still too many TOs on offense, as you said. Gilder has been a major reason why we are playing better, he is balling out of his mind right now. But I'm pretty sure he has played all 40 minutes in each of the last 3 games, and that can't happen much longer.

This is what I thought we would look like all year - streaky, with large spurts of real good play, lock down defense and rebounding and running out and scoring on the other end, and then spurts where we totally look lost. It's how we looked to start the year, then something happened with that Tennessee game.

---

Gilder playing all 40 the last three games anc 39 the game before that might have a lot to do with this team looking much better recently. Unless we are blowing someone out need to keep riding him until he starts to show real fatigue. He's been playing well at the end of games so it doesnt seem to be getting to him that badly.

So depressing this season. Nothing like having your team at least in bubble mode

We were at best a bubble team to start the year......in retrospect. Even if this team is playing it's best, it is marginally top 30. Too many weaknesses that can't or won't be over-come this year.

Any realist knew we were at best a bubble team and probably NIT team before the year started. Lost a ton of starters, had only one guard with any major d 1 experience, and lost top assistants to head coaching gigs...
Oh wait that is exactly what I put in preseason expectations thread.

Billy, I thought we were a bubble team, too, but a big part of that is Kennedy as the HC and losing Stansbury.

Method I agree
Any realist would also see the short comings of Coach Kennedy. I am no Kennedy blind supporter.

bobinator said:

---

I'm disappointed the OP didn't rhyme

---

Well, maybe next time.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

Method Man said:

---

Billy, I thought we were a bubble team, too, but a big part of that is Kennedy as the HC and losing Stansbury.

---

So losing three pro caliber players didn't figure in? Losing a senior who'd led the team for four years didn't figure in?

Criticizing Kennedy is fair game, but there are very few, if any, coaches that wouldn't struggle with that.

I'm with Jorts here - I'm unsure how I feel about the coaching. I really liked what we did with the talent last year. I like that we seem to be getting better this year. I don't like that we leave players in when they're making poor decisions. I don't like that the offense stagnates for long stretches. I don't like that our defensive intensity isn't consistent.

---

Any shortcomings this year are all on Kennedy. Period.

For once I see someone say 2 pt guards. Could not agree more. Seeing everyone say all we needed was caldwell but he is not enough. Even if he made it in this is a huge mistake by Kennedy. Thought coaching in WV game was ok. Didnt really get heartburn over anything and the fact that we are playing better with Hogg hurt tells me coaches are not using him properly for his skill set and development. Love BK as a human being and the culture hes created with his players but his game day coaching and ability to build a complete roster is just not good enough in my opinion.

Really? There are many reasons for coaches leaving a program in less than 6 years. How many coaches DO stay at the same school 6 years, NCAA tourney or not?

txag72 said:

---

Really? There are many reasons for coaches leaving a program in less than 6 years. How many coaches DO stay at the same school 6 years, NCAA tourney or not?

---

They don't stay at the school 6 years because either they get hired by a better school or they get fired/let-go for under-performing.

It's really baffling to me how many basketball "fans" simply don't realize that making the tournament 1 time in 6 years is grossly underachieving and a fire-able offense at nearly every major conference school.

And something pretty fitting? The lone school on the above list -- Penn State? The coach they currently employ was hired after Ed DeChellis left for a lower-paying job because quote -- "Penn State did not care about the basketball program".

One coach from the 6 major conferences has done worse than 1 for 6 on tournament appearances and that was at a school that admittedly didn't care about the program.

Another amazing stat.

austinaggie2008 said:

---

Andy Kennedy. Didn't make the tournament in his first six years at Ole Miss, and only made it once in his first 8 years.

---

And don't you think Ole Miss is run by a bunch of people that don't care about bball?

austinaggie2008 said:

---

Andy Kennedy. Didn't make the tournament in his first six years at Ole Miss, and only made it once in his first 8 years.

---

Which means he still falls under the category of a coach that was given 6 or more years and made the tournament more than zero times (he's made it twice). Doesn't mean Ole Miss should have given him that many, but at least when he was given it he made the tournament.

Also helps that he took over a perennial 14-win Ole Miss team and averaged 21 wins in those first 6 years. A far cry from taking over a perennial 24-win team and averaging 20.

austinaggie2008 said:

---

Also, if you don't count his first year (because none of the players were his), Ricardo Patton made 1 NCAA tournament in 11 years at Colorado in the early 2000s.

I'm not saying keep Kennedy, but you stat is just factually inaccurate. And it only took me about 2 minutes to come up with those two names.

---

Except you came up with a coach that has been there 6+ years and has made the tournament two times and a coach that hasn't coached in Boulder since 2007 -- meaning he is no longer with Colorado.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

Method Man said:

---

Billy, I thought we were a bubble team, too, but a big part of that is Kennedy as the HC and losing Stansbury.

---

So losing three pro caliber players didn't figure in? Losing a senior who'd led the team for four years didn't figure in?

Criticizing Kennedy is fair game, but there are very few, if any, coaches that wouldn't struggle with that.

I'm with Jorts here - I'm unsure how I feel about the coaching. I really liked what we did with the talent last year. I like that we seem to be getting better this year. I don't like that we leave players in when they're making poor decisions. I don't like that the offense stagnates for long stretches. I don't like that our defensive intensity isn't consistent.

---

We didn't lose 3 pro caliber players.

You easily pointed out a coach that doesn't actually fit the stat I was describing.

"Teams with coaches that were given 6 or more years and made the tournament less than [one time]".

Andy Kennedy has been at Ole Miss 10 years. He has made the tournament twice (which is not zero times).

Had I posted this statistic back in 2012, then yes you would have been correct in debunking it.

In the Power 6 conferences listed, other than Penn State there is not a current head coach that has been at the school 6 or more years with less than 1 tournament appearance in that time -- meaning that of currently employed P6 head coaches, only one has put up a worse tournament hit-rate at their school with a minimum of 6 years than Billy Kennedy at Texas A&M.

You may not think it's a relevant stat, but it shows that coaches who do not have more success than that typically aren't tolerated.

It is a relevant stat, but Andy Kennedy should obviously be included. How do you not get that? The fact that he's now made the tournament a couple of times doesn't change the fact that he had been there six years and not made it.

So he obviously fits the category.

And uncertainty about Kennedy has absolutely zero with why we don't have extended success. Both BCG and MT (and hell, Shelby to me personally) complained about the lack of support from Aggie fans and administrators. We don't show up to games and we don't pay up. That's why we lost both those two coaches, one very late in a hiring cycle. Both could've created consistency (regardless of my ability to AD). People crap about BK's salary but he's one of the longest tenured and lowest paid coaches in the league.

I'm all for making the investment but to think we will ever be other than a stepping stone program with the apathy we have from the bulk of the university is naive. So, yes, I'm uncertain.

bobinator said:

---

It is a relevant stat, but Andy Kennedy should obviously be included. How do you not get that? The fact that he's now made the tournament a couple of times doesn't change the fact that he had been there six years and not made it.

So he obviously fits the category.

---

Is Andy Kennedy a current coach that has been at his school 6+ years and not made the tournament?

No.

Unless we're taking a time machine back to 2012, he does not fit the category. We're looking at the current state of major conference college hoops, not what it was 5 years ago. (And as mentioned, even then you could make a much better case for Andy Kennedy deserving the time due to taking a ~14 win program to a ~21 win program)

Kennedy is making like 2.3 million this season. I'm pretty sure that's more than everyone in the league except Avery and Calipari.

bobinator said:

---

Your stat loses relevance if you're not including coaches who at one point would have fit the category and are still employed at their current school. You're building your own bias into the question by removing any examples of schools that stood by their coaches and had it actually work out.

---

It's relevant to the current state of major conference college basketball.

If you want to back-fit it to previous time periods and produce a list of coaches that were given 6 or more seasons and what they did with them then feel free -- Andy Kennedy is one example and I'm sure there are others, though I'd guess it's a very short list over the last decade or so. Would be interesting to see if the few that are out there "blossomed" and were worth waiting for, but I suspect not as if that were the case they'd still be in major conference coaching.