Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="billsin01, post: 1718324, member: 837"] This post is absurd. He's had good talent, there's no question. He's also had some disappointing losses that are hard to explain -- particularly early as you point out. Navy/Minny/Rhode Island/Richmond wasn't a pretty stretch in there. But pointing to the stretch from 84-94 is cherry picking. I can't really speak to 84-86 (bad Navy loss), but 87 is a title game run, 89 is an elite 8 loss to a really good Illinois team, 94 is a really solid run to the sweet 16. Those are three really solid runs. But if you took 84-96, you'd also have the near miss vs. Arkansas (national runner up) and then a title game run in 96. So if you just shift the time frame up two years to 86-96, you have two title game runs, an elite 8, a sweet 16 and a near=miss vs. Arkansas. And as for the all-NBA team -- I'm not sure if you're arguing that JB was just simply a bad coach but the seeding and records don't necessarily bare that out for that entire period. 94 -- 4 seed 93 -- banned, 9 losses, maybe a 4/5 seed if they were eligible? 92 -- 6 seed 85 -- 7 seed 84 -- not sure on seed but 18th in the final poll with 9 losses. So, I don't know. The reality to me seems like there are some coaches who really just seem to thrive on the tournament set-up by either finding a way to win almost every march despite their seed (Izzo, Pitino, K, Calhoun, Brad Stevens in the short time we saw him) or have had enough elite teams to compile a bunch of wins by largely overwhelming teams with talent (K again, Roy Williams, Dean Smith). There may be some guys who end up on those lists (Shaka Smart, etc.) but to me JB is in that next rung down. He's gotten the cuse there enough that the numbers have worked out in his favor a fair percentage of the time. Could his numbers or should his numbers be better? Perhaps, but it's pretty tough to argue that he's really been that much of an underachiever in March. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?