Interesting
He also made the ncaa tournamentInteresting to say the least Especially coming off his stellar coaching performance at Vandy. Yes, that same Vandy that our board intelligentsia declared Drew was going to out coach and recruit former coach and slug Stallings.
He also made the ncaa tournament
Stallings has a show cause and out of work
He wa historically inept
Damn, they fired Thunder Dan Majerle
Didn’t go over my headStalling's last Vandy team also went to the NCAAs. Drew held serve with Stallings players his first year and then systematically drove the program into the ground. Winless in year three. So much ineptitude.
But my post was not meant to to be a Stallings/Bryce comparison. No, it was meant to poke fun at the high IQ guys ( I kid) who 1) dismiss that that is harder to win at Vandy than the other SEC schools and 2) seem to think they know good coaching until the results come in.
For a supposedly smart guy, it completely went over your head.
Didn’t go over my head
It’s not that hard -as proven by a couple of bad cod he’s making it
Even failed coaches can win in what has been a weak conference historically
Bryce Drew is ****ing trash, but GCU have more money than God and they won't stifle his cheating.
More popcorn please. Lots of butter.Stalling's last Vandy team also went to the NCAAs. Drew held serve with Stallings players his first year and then systematically drove the program into the ground. Winless in year three. So much ineptitude.
But my post was not meant to to be a Stallings/Bryce comparison. No, it was meant to poke fun at the high IQ guys ( I kid) who 1) dismiss that that is harder to win at Vandy than the other SEC schools and 2) seem to think they know good coaching until the results come in.
For a supposedly smart guy, it completely went over your head.
Then they should have hired Rick Pitino.
But my post was not meant to to be a Stallings/Bryce comparison. No, it was meant to poke fun at the high IQ guys ( I kid) who 1) dismiss that that is harder to win at Vandy than the other SEC schools and 2) seem to think they know good coaching until the results come in.
It's hilarious that Kevin Stallings second biggest defender is talking about other people not knowing good coaching.
Leonard Hamilton went 0-18 in the Big East in his THIRD season at Miami.
Is Leonard Hamilton a good coach?
This guy went 0-18 in conference his last year at Vandy. Impressive.
Please don’t take my next statement to be defending Drew.
To be fair, he didn’t have Darius Garland for any conference games. Can’t predict losing a top 5 pick to injury. He had least has an excuse, our buddy Stallings certainly doesn’t.
Not particularly, no.
Great recruiter, mediocre at best in terms of actual coaching.
He's better than mediocre. He did post losing records at his first two gigs, but settled in quite nicely at FSU. Wins at a good clip plus a lot of post season = good. But what do I know; better to wait on Joe the stat fan and let him weigh in. Cause one thing you can bank on is that he knows good coaching.
But what do I know; better to wait on Joe the stat fan and let him weigh in. Cause one thing you can bank on is that he knows good coaching.
I disagree that he's better than mediocre as a coach. He had the #11 class in 2015, the #4 class in 2016 and the #12 class in 2017. What does he have to show for it? An Elite 8 and a Sweet 16. Not bad by any means, but relative to his recruiting it's not good enough.
He brings in talent, but he's incapable of maximizing its impact. His teams almost always have more talent than their opponents yet he needed two postseasons worth of favorable matchups to get past the round of 32. He always has ++ depth, but utilizes it poorly. He's awful at making in-game adjustments.
The only way that I can possibly agree with calling him a "good coach" is if you're looking at the totality of his impact, including recruiting. He is not, nor will he ever be, more than mediocre in terms of X's and O's.
I disagree that he's better than mediocre as a coach. He had the #11 class in 2015, the #4 class in 2016 and the #12 class in 2017. What does he have to show for it? An Elite 8 and a Sweet 16. Not bad by any means, but relative to his recruiting it's not good enough.
He brings in talent, but he's incapable of maximizing its impact. His teams almost always have more talent than their opponents yet he needed two postseasons worth of favorable matchups to get past the round of 32. He always has ++ depth, but utilizes it poorly. He's awful at making in-game adjustments.
The only way that I can possibly agree with calling him a "good coach" is if you're looking at the totality of his impact, including recruiting. He is not, nor will he ever be, more than mediocre in terms of X's and O's.
Well we all know that you think that Kevin Stallings is good coaching. So the average middle school kid probably knows coaching better than you.
I disagree that he's better than mediocre as a coach. He had the #11 class in 2015, the #4 class in 2016 and the #12 class in 2017. What does he have to show for it? An Elite 8 and a Sweet 16. Not bad by any means, but relative to his recruiting it's not good enough.
He brings in talent, but he's incapable of maximizing its impact. His teams almost always have more talent than their opponents yet he needed two postseasons worth of favorable matchups to get past the round of 32. He always has ++ depth, but utilizes it poorly. He's awful at making in-game adjustments.
The only way that I can possibly agree with calling him a "good coach" is if you're looking at the totality of his impact, including recruiting. He is not, nor will he ever be, more than mediocre in terms of X's and O's.
I guess your definition of mediocre is different than mine. And good does not necessarily mean great. But is certainly good enough to keep a job in the ACC for eighteen years. Apparently FSU's athleic director(s) are easily fooled, unlike message board posters.
A middle age school kid might know more than me, but I still know more than you.
Spare me the snark until you can formulate a coherent argument that doesn't consist entirely of semantics and a logical fallacy.
It's obvious that my argument is going over your head. Leonard Hamilton recruits extremely well, nobody is denying this. He also underachieves relative to his teams' talent levels because he's poor at coaching them up to their potential. Overall, he's been a net positive for FSU and has elevated their program since he took over, but he's done it on the strength of his recruiting. As you should know, recruiting is generally more important than X's and O's unless we're talking about a savant like Brad Stevens.
FSU's administration are probably happy with him for any number of reasons, ranging from the program's status now relative to before he took over to the fact that they don't emphasize basketball as much as the blue bloods do and therefore are risk averse enough to keep the guy running a successful program in spite of his ultimate limitations. None of this changes the fact that, in terms of X's and O's, Leonard Hamilton is mediocre.