if you have zero tourney appearances to 3 tourney appearances, I choose the 3 every time. So he's not "just as" productive. In the same amount of time, Stansbury has tripled Kennedy's production.
Discussion: How much better would we be if AK was our coach?
- Thread starter FreeDawg
- Start date
but that shouldn't matter. As a NCAA basketball coach, you should be judged by tourney appearances unless you are upper echelon.
Mullen gets applauded and rewarded by making the NIT (music city bowl) meanwhile Stans could lose his job for doing the same.
Our expectations for football are not even in the same stratosphere as basketball.
Our expectations for football are not even in the same stratosphere as basketball.
but i have said that's the way it is. Mullen is judged by bowl games. Stansbury is judged by NCAA appearances. If you can't deliver - time to move on.
unless Kennedy wins the SEC Tournament and assuming we win one game in the SEC tournament - Stansbury has been 3 out of 6 years. Kennedy has been zero.
Your calculator is sucking hind tit today.
Your calculator is sucking hind tit today.
Some of us want more than 3 tournaments in 12 years.
Stans makes ncaa tournaments half the time (3 out of 7) like Tebow makes the playoffs every year (1 out of 1). Come on...that's not representative of his performance as a coach.
Furthermore, Stans getting to tournaments and never making a sweet 16 is like getting to a bowl game and never winning. Don't kid yourself if you think people are going to be happy with Mullen getting to low tier bowls 25% of the time and not ever winning them.
Stans makes ncaa tournaments half the time (3 out of 7) like Tebow makes the playoffs every year (1 out of 1). Come on...that's not representative of his performance as a coach.
Furthermore, Stans getting to tournaments and never making a sweet 16 is like getting to a bowl game and never winning. Don't kid yourself if you think people are going to be happy with Mullen getting to low tier bowls 25% of the time and not ever winning them.
Stansbury has been to the tournament 6 out of his 13 seasons (about to be 7 out of 14). Hell, if you take after the first year he went to the tourney - he has been 6 out of 10.
Might want to grease up that calculator.
Of course, he has been 2 out of the last 6 years which is not acceptable or to put it in Flabloser terms - 0.33 tournament appearances/year.
Until he goes to the tournament, there is no proof that he can get to the tournament. When that happens, then this discussion may have some very small amount of merit.
It is silly to think that AK could do better than Rickwhen he has never done better.
It is silly to think that AK could do better than Rickwhen he has never done better.
year. I think this has actually been one of his better years coaching, however he's also responsible for the knuckleheads currently on the roster.
He dances next year, or hits the bricks.
He dances next year, or hits the bricks.
But who speaks highly of places they're not allowed to go? I would also agree about the best year coaching. Kicking off the leading scoring option in a possible coaching for your job year takes some balls. All things considered, I think he battled pretty well after booting Nelson, which no OM fans talk about or give him any credit for. But for the record, I have no problem with athletes smoking pot in their apartment. Fighting on national tv though...