In your mind, what are acceptable results for basketball

6,782 Views | 125 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by Yell Practice
GrayMatter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tribe2013 said:

RThorp said:

Y'all have high standards for acceptable results! NCAA tournament once every 3 or 4 years should be the expectation. We're never going to be Kentucky.


It's not hard to make the tournament. This is a terribly low bar. Like low-major expectation level bad
--A&M basketball has been in the NCAA tournament 17% (13 out of 78) of the time in its history with 7 of those appearances coming in the last 10 years or so.

For some schools no it isn't hard, but for some reason it's hard for A&M to make the NCAAT.

I think you may have us confused with Kentucky (56 out of 78), Arkansas (30 out of 78~~3 out of 8), Missouri (26 out of 78~~1 out of 3) , Florida (19 out of 78~~1 out of 4), Alabama (20 out of 78~~1 out of 4), LSU (21 out of 78~~1 out of 4) or Tennessee (20 out of 78 ~~1 out of 4) when it comes to NCAAT expectations.

Then there are these teams: Ole Miss (8 out of 78), Miss St (10 out of 78), Georgia (12 out of 78), Vandy (14 out of 78), Auburn (8 out of 78), South Carolina (8 out of 78)

Where do you think we fall?

Before we can compete with Kentucky-like expectations, we must achieve Tennessee, LSU, Alabama, or Florida expectations first.

For most non-basketball first schools, the most we can expect to achieve is reaching the tournament 1 out of every 4 years.

That's not to say that I'm okay with that, but it takes more than coaching and recruiting in order to achieve anything more.
Ulrich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Your stats are terrible as a measuring stick for success in 2017.

78 years ago in 1939 the NCAA tournament only had 8 teams. It gradually increased over the decades and now has 68.
Method Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let's go from when we started actually caring about bball again.
mhayden
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Texas hasn't missed consecutive tournaments since the late 1980s.

Baylor hasn't missed consecutive tournaments since '05-'06 -- not far removed from a terrible basketball scandal.

Florida hasn't missed 3 years in a row since the late '90s.

Oklahoma has missed only 8 times in the last 35 years..



None of those are "basketball first" schools. If you take basketball seriously, it's not hard to make the tournament once every few years.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years
mhayden
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PatAg said:

The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years

Exactly. It's like some people took the stance of "well two coaches left us, lets hold onto this one even though he is bad because we might do worse!"
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hop said:

TXAggie2011 said:

It's not about Kennedy, you blithering dolt. In fact, the post that started this wasn't actually about Billy Kennedy either even though it mentioned his name.

It's about whoever the coach is having the tools to succeed. Every coach who coaches at A&M has the tools to succeed. That applies to all coaches and has nothing to do with any singular coach.

You can stop lecturing me on the difficulty of getting hires right consecutively. If you'd take a breath and read my very first post, you'll see I said just as much. And then I repeated myself.

And you'll see I didn't say anything about Billy Kennedy.

You're half as insightful and twice as insulting as you think yourself to be.


Childish comments aside, I responded to your 1:58 PM post from yesterday when you said I was diverting blame from Kennedy and you said you were specifically pushing back on that point....so yes, you accused me of defending Kennedy which was both irrelevant to the discussion and inaccurate.

You posted this...

"You responded to someone who said a good coach can succeed here by diverting blame away from Kennedy for Kennedy's failure to succeed. That's what I'm pushing back against."

Are you OK?
Kennedy is relevant and has his name mentioned only in so far as he happens to be the coach now. It's not a difficult concept.

You said it's not solely on the coach (you said "Kennedy", by the way) if they don't make the tournament at a good clip.

I disagree, and it seems most of the thread disagrees. It is solely on the coach. The tools are here for a coach to make the tournament at a good rate.

Yes, it might be hard to find a coach each time that doesn't fail, but that excuses nothing about the coach and shouldn't change anything about the expectations for the program for any period of time.

You're mixing two different things to try to divert the discussion away from expectations for coaches and turn it into another attendance thread.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
free_mhayden said:

PatAg said:

The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years

Exactly. It's like some people took the stance of "well two coaches left us, lets hold onto this one even though he is bad because we might do worse!"
Well, you know, it's not a bad coaches fault he's here so, well, we need to lower our expectations for that coach,
Method Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PatAg said:

The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years


TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The only thing keeping any program with A&M's resources from the tournament is poor leadership at the top.

We don't have good leadership, you remove it and try another group.

You don't keep bad leadership because the next leadership might also be bad.

It's simple.
TangoMike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nothing pre-1985 matters when it comes to non-powers making the NCAA tournament. Now that there are 40-something at large bids divided among ~65 power conference teams, it's not much to ask to make the tournament... especially to make it more often than every 4th year.

Here's some non-emotional information. Since the tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1985, schools from the major conferences have gone to the NCAA tournament an average of:
SEC - 42% of the time (including SCar, Auburn, and A&M's bad histories)
ACC - 53% of the time (including VaTech's bad history)
Pac12 - 46% of the time (including WashSt, Oregon St, and Colorado's bad histories)
Big 12 - 53% of the time (including TCU's bad history)
Big Ten - 49% of the time (including Northwestern's 0-Fer and Rutgers's drought)
BigEast/Atlantic10 - 48% of the time

So, a team from one of the conferences that get multiple bids each year can expect to make the tournament about 50% of the time. That's 1/2, not 1/4
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Longhorns went through coaches like candy until they found Penders and that success made them attractive to an established guy in Barnes. At which point they did everything they could to keep him happy until they didnt want him anymore.

Baylor fired bad coaches over and over and finally found their guy, too.

You don't let up on your expectations because you have bad leadership. You keep bringing in guys until it works.
GrayMatter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
free_mhayden said:

Texas hasn't missed consecutive tournaments since the late 1980s.

Baylor hasn't missed consecutive tournaments since '05-'06 -- not far removed from a terrible basketball scandal.

Florida hasn't missed 3 years in a row since the late '90s.

Oklahoma has missed only 8 times in the last 35 years..



None of those are "basketball first" schools. If you take basketball seriously, it's not hard to make the tournament once every few years.
that's my point, we don't take basketball seriously.
bero88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cover the spread every game.
mhayden
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAggie2011 said:

free_mhayden said:

PatAg said:

The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years

Exactly. It's like some people took the stance of "well two coaches left us, lets hold onto this one even though he is bad because we might do worse!"
Well, you know, it's not a bad coaches fault he's here so, well, we need to lower our expectations for that coach,

Careful TxAggie -- Rangers season is right around the corner so we can't start agreeing with each other now.
TheAngelFlight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A&M does take basketball seriously. It has a fine arena, it has excellent practice and office facilities, it has excellent athlete support facilities, and it provides a top-rate recruiting budget.

If there is a deficiency, it is how A&M and the Texas prep basketball community treats Aggie head coaches from a relationship and contract standpoint. That has cut both ways for A&M over the last 15 years.
TheAngelFlight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCU installs a good head coach. Woah. Might make the tournament.

SMU installs a good head coach. Woah. Making the tournament.

Its about who is in charge and you keep making changes until you have a good one.
mhayden
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yup. If you want to go bargain shopping for coaches that don't have skins on the wall then be prepared to cut bait after 3 years unless there obvious improvement...

A guy with 2 tournament appearances in 13 years comes in and puts up 3 straight 100+ RPI seasons? Show him the door -- he might have a few solid years but he's not going to be a long-term winner. Instead we are likely in a situation where our coach will have to miss the tournament 6 times in 7 years here to get his walking papers -- along with a nice buyout!

Hop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
PatAg said:

The problem with your argument is, when you don't hit on the next coach after the succsssul ones move on, you fire that coach and try again
You dont double down for another 3 years


That wasn't part of my argument.
Yell Practice
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm not attacking you, I appreciate the majority of your contributions, passion, and discussion surrounding our team. We disagree on this subject though, but I kind of feel like you feel you need to defend him when some people go overboard with the Kennedy criticism

You said" And both successful coaches left and now you are experiencing a 14-12 season. You are complaining about the current coach who was hired because the last two quickly bolted Texas A&M...yet, you say I'm wrong. Um, OK. If you are forced to go hire a mid-major coach every time your successful coach leaves, the odds are heavily stacked that eventually you'll be complaining about the current coach and still arguing that A&M is capable of constant success." and in a followup something to the effect of if you keep losing coaches you will eventually hire a dud.

So my comment spoke to those 2 statements. If we had just moved on from Kennedy after it became clear he wasn't working out, this thread doesn't exist.
Yell Practice
How long do you want to ignore this user?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.