Brad Brownell has

Not including this season(still in progress but not looking good for advancing to the NCAA's)he is 72-80 in ACC play and has finished in the top tier only twice while finishing in the middle, or bottom of the pack or 6 times. If that is being consistent in playing in the top half of the league, I would hate to see your definition of inconsistency.
Like you say forget Duke, UNC, or even Virginia, he has made the tournament only twice, and his best year was last when he made the Sweet sixteen with a senior-laden team.
I will admit he runs a clean program and avoiding the weeds, but "recruiting" leaves a lot to be desired.
But the problems I am seeing this season, and in the past is this; Clemson can't seem to keep from tripping over their own two feet in the closing minutes of a ball game.
At 5-7 we have lost 6 games on the road, and I know of three where we let leads get away in the final minute.
Whether or not the next two seasons get better is yet to be determined.
Next year is not the issue. This year is. And the main issue is how to turn consistent buzzer-beating losses into wins.
But unless the coach, the assistants, the players, or even the cheerleaders figure out a way to close out a game, this season will not go down as being consistent, unless of course you look at close losses as being consistent.

TigersAndCubs

All-TigerNet [13035]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 22353

Joined: 4/24/04

FWIW i was working on a big post the other day about

Feb 17, 2019, 11:51 AM

Brownell vs what we should actually expect from Clemson basketball from looking at 40+ years of our history (Foster era through to today). I decided not to post it because it was too long and involved a lot of numbers - things that aren't typically received well here, but i will post a synopsis and my conclusions (which is still going to be pretty long, sorry).

I looked at how Brad stacked up with our previous 5 coaches in 4 areas - overall winning %, ACC winning %, NCAA appearances, and talent acquisition.

Brad was fairly average in overall winning % but lagged behind our more successful coaches (Purnell, Barnes, and Ellis) by several % points. I did find it interesting that all 3 of those guys were right around 61% during their Clemson tenures and no Clemson coach has ever won a higher %. That does kind of suggest a theoretical ceiling for what we can expect at Clemson.

Brad was pretty significantly ahead of everyone in ACC winning %. I think a pretty strong argument can be made that expansion has watered down the ACC a bit and made it easier to win conference games in 2019 than 1992, but he was still substantially ahead of most of our coaches and even outpaced Purnell who coaches in a similar are of ACC basketball. In fact, Purnell coached during some of the weakest years for ACC basketball that i can remember.

Brad was maybe slightly below average in NCAA appearances, but he did trail Barnes and Purnell by a substantial margin. Barnes made the tournament in 3/4 years including his final 3 and likely would've made it 4 in a row if he had stayed. Ditto for Purnell who made the tourney 3/7 years including his final 3 and likely would've made it 4 in a row. The success of Barnes and Purnell proves that more is possible at Clemson in terms of making the tournament.

Talent acquisition was really the most difficult thing to assess and it was difficult to draw conclusions. Recruiting rankings only date back to around 2002ish and looking at NBA draft picks only gives an idea of how many star players coaches were recruiting and doesn't accurate gauge the talent level of the entire roster. I did find that Foster and Ellis produced far more draft picks than our more reason coaches and also numerous high draft picks (top 20ish), the likes of which we haven't seen since. When compared to Barnes, Shyatt, and Purnell, Brad was fairly average at producing draft picks, but just from watching the teams during those eras i think Brad's overall talent level has been closer to Shyatt's than Purnell or Barnes.

Overall conclusions:

1) Brad has really cost himself NCAA tournament bids by struggling early in the year in non-conference games. That shouldn't come as any surprise to people that follow Clemson basketball, but Brad has two teams in particular, 2014 and 2016 that both finished 10-8 in the ACC and both really shouldve made the tournament but those teams lost 5 and 6 non-conference games, respectively, and many of those losses were to bad teams. With his success in the conference it is a little puzzling as to why his teams struggle to consistently beat bad competition in the first two months of the season. How much differently would we think of Brad right now if he had made 4/8 NCAA tournaments. Quite a lot i think.

2) I think it is fair to expect more out of recruiting. Bad facilities or not, Brad is the 2nd worst recruiter we've had out of the last 6 coaches and his talent level, while higher than Shyatt's, trails the other 4 coaches pretty significantly IMO. The poor facilities excuse has some merit, but most of these other coaches dealt with similar issues while at Clemson and had more success.

3) While it is fair to expect a little more out of Clemson basketball, Brad really hasn't been bad in an historical context. He's consistently competitive in the ACC and runs a very clean program. As long as he's at Clemson we aren't likely to be an ACC doormat. If we fire Brad it's probably going to be a 50/50 proposition as to whether the next coach will be better or worse. And if that coach is better will he stay? Like it or not, Clemson basketball isn't a destination program for coaches. If we bring in a young up-and-comer and he does well, it's fairly likely he does something like leave after 4 years to take the Texas job. While the Purnell situations was admittedly bizarre, we do have to acknowledge that 2 of the most successful coaches in Clemson history left the school at the height of their success to take other jobs. If we find another successful coach can we keep him?

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Good points.

We need more than 1 blue chip recruit

Re: Good points.

We are so close it's maddening.

Re: Brad Brownell has

We can be better.

I agree on all points.

Re: Brad Brownell has

Re: Brad Brownell has

Re: Brad Brownell has

Re: Brad Brownell has

"Mediocre is the standard!"

Re: "Mediocre is the standard!"

Tell em, coot!***

FWIW i was working on a big post the other day about

Re: FWIW i was working on a big post the other day about

I'm not saying that. What i am saying is that 12-15 more

TigerBoard POTD