A Reluctant Criticism of Barnes

USAFgolferVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
6,794
Likes
3,417
Making the tournament is a crap goal.

The goal should be to reach potential every year. If the potential is making the tournament, then fine. If the team is a potential Final Four team and it craps the bed in the tournament, then it is a disappointing season.

These arbitrary goals are stupid. The program six years ago is different than the one today. It should reflect this. Saying "Well, historically, we have been such and such" is a foolish guideline. I'm not going to base success today on a failure of a program decades ago. That sort of mentality simply doesn't register for me.
This team didn't have a SEC champion or final four roster
 

bleedingTNorange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
65,234
Likes
19,840
What are the schools? How much is their salary? What is their basketball history? What are their fanbase’s expectations? What are the previous five years? Has Coach A suffered injuries in the tournament? Did Coach B have a star one and done that led them to a tourney one year and they barely got in? How bad were the rosters when they took over? Did they overachieve in the regular season? How’d they do in the conference tourneys?
Lmao, funny all these circumstances and excuses yet those things don’t generally matter at Tennessee. Same power 5 conference, same salary...go ahead and answer?
 

bleedingTNorange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
65,234
Likes
19,840
Or, 22/45, depending how you want to look at it. Hell, take out the really bad coaches in Houston and Peterson, and it's even better. Barnes is 3 out of 6, he wasn't making it last year.

Last year was a down year. This was a disappointing year.
Nobody made the dance last year and we were in bubble talk, he’s 3/5, stop trying to make it something it’s not.
 

bleedingTNorange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
65,234
Likes
19,840
Making the tournament is a crap goal.

The goal should be to reach potential every year. If the potential is making the tournament, then fine. If the team is a potential Final Four team and it craps the bed in the tournament, then it is a disappointing season.

These arbitrary goals are stupid. The program six years ago is different than the one today. It should reflect this. Saying "Well, historically, we have been such and such" is a foolish guideline. I'm not going to base success today on a failure of a program decades ago. That sort of mentality simply doesn't register for me.
So Barnes would be smart to hedge his bets and not have a stacked team? Therefore less likely to “underachieve”? Rather just have expectations at maybe making the dance and when he does each year people are ecstatic???
 

zjcvols

WE’RE GONNA BITE YOUR KNEECAP OFF
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
73,291
Likes
22,442
Probably Coach A but I reserved the right to change my mind once I know the schools because I understand that context actually matters

What about this

Coach A: 4/4 tourneys...64% conference...71.2% overall...1x S16...1x R32...4x 20 win seasons

Coach B: 3/5 tourneys...57% conference...65.3% overall...1x S16...2x 20 win seasons...
 

VolGee4

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
23,622
Likes
24,241
Punter was a Juco All-American scoring machine. He was pretty damn good.
There is a reason why kids go juco these days in basketball. He was a 3 Star who wanted to go to Mizzou with Haith. But his other offers were midmajor. He ended up being good for us because it was all we had to score. He was basically the best player Barnes inherited, so that tells you what he had.
 

Unimane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
2,583
Likes
1,489
So Barnes would be smart to hedge his bets and not have a stacked team? Therefore less likely to “underachieve”? Rather just have expectations at maybe making the dance and when he does each year people are ecstatic???
Is there a possible more obtuse way to answer this question? I would say "hedging his bets" and creating an inferior team would demonstrate he wasn't reaching expectations.
 

bleedingTNorange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
65,234
Likes
19,840
Probably Coach A but I reserved the right to change my mind once I know the schools because I understand that context actually matters

What about this

Coach A: 4/4 tourneys...64% conference...71.2% overall...1x S16...1x R32...4x 20 win seasons

Coach B: 3/5 tourneys...57% conference...65.3% overall...1x S16...2x 20 win seasons...
What was year 5 for A?

What were other 2NCAAT results for each?
 

VolArmy74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
5,283
Likes
7,666
Again, you have to take into account that Buzz Peterson was terrible. There no way in hell he should have gone 14-17 with that roster. None. Calling what he inherited a dumpster fire isn't honest either. You can't just wave away Watson and Lofton.
He inherited two guards, one highly skilled who he made much better (CJ went from 11ppg to near 16 in one season) and one who he really developed into an all-time great in Lofton. Everyone else on that team was considered a bust at that point in their career. Major Wingate was the #1 prospect in the nation at one point, he was ranked ahead of LeBron James. By his senior year of high school he was down to 60th on Rivals and by his junior year at Tennessee even that seemed extremely overranked. The argument that a walk-on who averaged one point a game was part of his loaded roster he inherited and not that he did an amazing job developing him is an all time bad take from some on here. Pearl worked a miracle his first year.
 

VN Store




Top