UT's next basketball coach - discussion/debate

[Hernandez 11]

1 hour ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Yes - He's been to the sweet sixteen 3/9 years at Tennessee and won at least one conference game in 5/9 years.  It's pretty similar to what he was doing at Texas - and definitely worse than he did in his first 9 years at Texas.

you said he hasn’t exactly been tearing it up, and i’m just pointing out that over the last five tourneys he’s done better than all but a handful of coaches. and that’s not to mention that’s he’s done so with multiple injuries to key, all conference level players throughout that time. he’s done quite well.

[tx 3 putt 78511]

7 hours ago, idigTexas said:

I don't understand why we moved on from all those coaches who were underachieving or getting arrested here.  

 

 

[tx 3 putt 78511]

56 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

First rep on me. Why Hernandez though 

[Hernandez 11]

also fwiw i think that tourney success is both wildly overrated and yet under appreciated by fans. only 32 teams win at least one (real) tourney game in any given year; the number of programs that win at least one game 2, 3, 4+ years in a row is small; and basically nobody makes the E8 or FF with regularity. 

take this stretch of our upcoming schedule:

after the opening round of the tourney you’re basically facing a schedule like this the rest of the way, in a tourney setting, in cavernous arenas at neutral sites, with very little time to prepare for half of your opponents. shooting, guard play, experience, and depth rule the day, and the number of teams that have even 3/4 of those in any given year can be counted on one hand.

it’s an incredibly difficult task, and yet fans are ruthlessly unforgiving about any perceived underachievement and yet at the same time wholly underwhelmed by anything less than making the S16 on a regular basis. its a nearly no-win situation for a good coach and/or team. fans are generally only happy with a mediocre team that surprisingly makes the S16 (meaning a shitty november - february) or with a good team that makes the E8 (meaning a great november - february that nobody remember fondly) or further. they don’t appreciate just how difficult it is to win in the tourney, nor do they properly appreciate the regular season ride. that’s my opinion anyway.

[Hernandez 11]

in fact i kinda hate how much the average fan cares about tourney results. a fan base that has a totally underwhelming regular season but then makes the S16 as a 9 seed is happier than a fan base of a 27-5 team that got a 2 seed and made the S16. i really don’t like that dynamic. the tourney is a crapshoot, a lottery ticket. i find that i value regular season consistency far more than the average fan does. 

[tx 3 putt 78511]

tourney wins are the only measuring stick 

 

[Rickylovesweed 15320]

It's unfortunate, but tourney wins are what define you in college sports like basketball. Same for baseball. 

Nobody remembers Augie as a great regular season coach. He's remembered as a coach that had his teams peaking at the right time and won when it mattered. 

[Hernandez 11]

i think a lot of fans have a tough time wrapping their heads around what constitutes tourney success. there are so few actual “good” tourney coaches out there. you can count them on one hand. 95% of coaches count on good shooting and good matchups, and after round one the games are all against real deal competition. it leaves a lot out of the HC’s hands. if a coach regularly flames out well below his seed (tony bennett, early career jay wright, matt painter, etc) or regularly blows big leads then that’s one thing- that’s a bad tourney coach. but for the most part there’s like 3-5 guys that are actually good tourney coaches, while the other 60+ guys are just good coaches with their fingers crossed.

Edited 2 hours ago by Hernandez

[Slacks 7034]

Winning the conference or conference tourney should matter, but I guess they don't.

But winning in the big tourney doesn't either, right?

[jimmyjazz 46998]

[Hernandez 11]

look back at the the best coach in college basketball, a mount rushmore level coach (bill self)- 

2005- 11th in final kenpom, 3 seed, one-and-done

2006- 8th, 4 seed, one and done 

2010- 2nd, 1 seed, 33-2 record, lost to northern iowa in R2

2013- 8th, 1 seed, lost in S16

2014- 7th, 2 seed, lost in R2

2015- 12th, 2 seed, got their asses kicked by wichita state in R2

2019- 17th, 4 seed, got killed in R2

2023- 9th, 1 seed, lost in R2

bill self would make that short list of good tourney coaches, and even he underperforms on a regular basis, often wildly underperforming expectations. the rest of his tourney resume is pretty much outstanding, but even one of the all time great coaches/“good” tourney coaches finds himself clearly underperforming on a pretty regular basis. in this light i think that coaches like rick barnes, mark few, kelvin sampson, etc have been harshly judged for their “lack” of tourney success.

Edited 2 hours ago by Hernandez

[closetohumping 17786]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

tourney wins are the only measuring stick 

 

Yes.  Otherwise teams would schedule like Rodney and Beard every year

[perfectchaos007 6766]

Shaka had relative success at Texas if you omit the NCAA tournament results. Under Shaka, Texas won a Big12 championship, NIT championship, and a pretty big in-season tournament or two. If he had won a couple of NCAA tournament games, I think his tenure would have lasted longer, but that big ZERO under NCAA tournament wins was baffling and unforgivable. I get that NCAA games are a crapshoot and sometimes require luck to make a run, but the dude was snakebit and cursed at Texas when it came to NCAA tournament games so both sides had to move on.

Edited 45 minutes ago by perfectchaos007