Method Man said:

---

I've had half a bottle of whiskey and I'd drive to BCS in reverse if we could replace BK with Frank.

---

.629 > .553

JJxvi said:

---

There is no "issue." Nobody seriously thinks Kennedy is a better coach than Martin, it's a laughable position and you look like a basketball novice for even hinting that it might still be in question with that post.

---

I've watched bball since Phi Slamma Jamma. I'm not always right but don't mistake me
For a novice.

Method Man said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

There is no "issue." Nobody seriously thinks Kennedy is a better coach than Martin, it's a laughable position and you look like a basketball novice for even hinting that it might still be in question with that post.

---

I've watched bball since Phi Slamma Jamma. I'm not always right but don't mistake me
For a novice.

---

He's talking to Hop, not you. Have another drink.

_lefraud_ said:

---

Method Man said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

There is no "issue." Nobody seriously thinks Kennedy is a better coach than Martin, it's a laughable position and you look like a basketball novice for even hinting that it might still be in question with that post.

---

I've watched bball since Phi Slamma Jamma. I'm not always right but don't mistake me
For a novice.

---

He's talking to Hop, not you. Have another drink.

---

i did

Coached USCe to the Final Four. If that doesn't make you a good coach I don't know what does.

He is winning because of one player, lets see how good they are once he leaves. #KennedySupporters

You're very wrong. You watch how the guard and rebound the ball? It's nothing like the passive way Kennedy desires defense to be played. SC denies passes and dictates what they want you to do on offense.

I've always liked Frank Martin. He's hard-nosed and preaches great defense. Reminds me of BG.

Double Diamond said:

---

You're very wrong. You watch how the guard and rebound the ball? It's nothing like the passive way Kennedy desires defense to be played. SC denies passes and dictates what they want you to do on offense.

---

Check you sarcasm meter.

PaRappa said:

---

La Bamba said:

---

Did Hop seriously argue for Kennedy in a Kennedy-Martin argument?

Does Hop also think Lavar Ball could beat MJ one-on-one?

---

Sandhop is basically a troll/contrarian on all threads

---

Fixed

Thanks, mazag!

Do y'all see South Carolina getting past Gonzaga? I'm thinking probably not. The Zags have only lost one game all season and they play defense just has ruthless. And offensively they just don't seem to have any weaknesses. They can bludgeon you inside or shoot threes all game.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Do y'all see South Carolina getting past Gonzaga? I'm thinking probably not. The Zags have only lost one game all season and they play defense just has ruthless. And offensively they just don't seem to have any weaknesses. They can bludgeon you inside or shoot threes all game.

---

It could happen. The West Virginia defense gave Gonzaga a lot of problems (41% shooting, 16 TOs), so I imagine South Carolina will bother them too. USC is going to have to do a lot better on offense than WVU did, though, because I don't see Gonzaga getting crushed on the boards again (Gonzaga is generally a great rebounding team).

Gonzaga will probably be something like a 5-8 point favorite. They played a lot of great teams during non-con this year and beat all of them.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Do y'all see South Carolina getting past Gonzaga? I'm thinking probably not. The Zags have only lost one game all season and they play defense just has ruthless. And offensively they just don't seem to have any weaknesses. They can bludgeon you inside or shoot threes all game.

---

Tend to agree but didn't see USC getting past a lot of teams they got past. They have to get the giant in foul trouble.

Quote:

---

but really arguing about that seems ridiculous because a Final Four run is more than worth a rebuilding job for awhile after.

---

Yeah, I mean we can get back to arguing later, but right now still popping in during the Elite Eight to tell us about Frank Martin's recruiting just kind of seems really silly.

mazzag said:

---

I've always thought frank was a good coach. He's been at South Carolina since 2012. Kennedy came here in 2011. His percentage is .565 and BK's is .581. Frank has an e8. Kennedy has a s16. Frank was given a **** sandwich and bk was given a coaches pick to win the b12. It's about sustainability. And FWIW, Scott drew is a dumb ass coach.

---

Scott Drew has improved dramatically at coaching and player development over the years. He also identified a defensive system that works for him and has stuck to it.

I was one loudest laughers at Drew's coaching ineptitude, but he's not the guy he was a decade ago and deserves a lot of credit for what he's built.

Ugh. I'm gonna go throw up now.

one thing for sure about South Carolina and Frank Martin...they earned their trip to the Final Four. Had to beat the #2 seed, #3 seed, and #4 seed to get there.

has Baylor under Scott Drew ever beaten a 1, 2, 3, or 4 seed in the NCAA tournament?

SELL

Did you see the game against USCe? Baylor had no discipline and Scott couldn't come up with any strategy to produce points. USCe was playing good defense but Baylor had the talent to overcome it if they really worked at it.

Scott is a good recruiter but that's about it.

Bryce might be a better coach than Scott.

Scott Drew took over a program in crisis. It's now been 10 years since his first NCAA appearance at Baylor.

Over that decade, they've been to the tournament seven times, making the Elite Eight twice and the Sweet 16 two more times.

The results have been good. And when the results have been good long enough, calling someone a terrible coach just starts to ring hollow.

This is the same board that has renewed strong criticism of Bill Self's and Roy Williams' abilities in recent days, so it's not surprising criticism of Scott Drew persists, but it is just starting to seem kind of silly at this point.

I think Drew is Roy Williams-lite, and thats not an insult.

_lefraud_ said:

---

My favorite part is the argument that "yea, well Kennedy was coaching at small one bid dumpsters", as if Kennedy had a choice in the matter, and was coaching at those schools out of some sort of charity. No credit is due to Martin and other guys for getting "better" jobs than Kennedy.

That's what's so hard about Kennedy and comparing him to others. I've really tried to think of guys that have had similar paths as him, and they're just aren't any. Kudos for him for getting his "dream job", but he's proven, after 6 years now, that he's not a good coach, and that maybe THATS why he was at THREE different one bid schools.

---