Which is Worse ???

[phil77]

4-41 in Q1 games going back to our last tournament appearance in 2021 is pretty impressive as well.

Let me do some quick math .....


No matter how I math it that is not good LOL

 

[cuseincincy]

Option 1. Basically no chance to win a game against a better team.

I'd say we have little chance against comparable teams.

 

[RF2044]

I'd say we have little chance against comparable teams.

Agreed.

If there's one thing that has been consistent throughout Red's tenure as the head coach, is that we generally perform well against teams we're supposed to beat [Hofstra / BC were outliers this year]. We tend to beat who we should.

But when we play peer-caliber programs, our performance slips.

And we never punch above our weight. Most of the games we play against "better" opponents, we get trounced.

 

[721Comstock]

Agreed.

If there's one thing that has been consistent throughout Red's tenure as the head coach, is that we generally perform well against teams we're supposed to beat [Hofstra / BC were outliers this year]. We tend to beat who we should.

But when we play peer-caliber programs, our performance slips.

And we never punch above our weight. Most of the games we play against "better" opponents, we get trounced.

And THIS is *the* sign of poor coaching.

We're not even in the "spunky mid-major" level where we can play up and beat a better team now and again.
Which 144% falls on coaching, or lack thereof.

You know who else was a continuity hire that also never, EVER was able to beat better teams?
FHCSMFS.

At least Dino nabbed a few prized scalps. Clemson being the most notable.
Shafer had NONE.

 

[MSOrange]

Agreed.

If there's one thing that has been consistent throughout Red's tenure as the head coach, is that we generally perform well against teams we're supposed to beat [Hofstra / BC were outliers this year]. We tend to beat who we should.

But when we play peer-caliber programs, our performance slips.

And we never punch above our weight. Most of the games we play against "better" opponents, we get trounced.

Exactly, and I'd say it really stretches back to the latter part of JB's tenure, but especially with Red. I can't tell you how many games I've gone into the last several seasons thinking "We don't have a chance."

I still watch and force myself into thinking we might win when the game starts, but we haven't pulled many huge upsets.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Can someone do the math on second halves lost so I can see if that should be option C?

 

[dollarbill44]

just remember that your HOFJB is the coach who led us from 2 seed , to a bubble team in , to a bubble team out , to no chance whatsoever .. that was all on jim boeheim's watch . not red autry. he wasn't handed a final 4 program.

Is this supposed to be an excuse for Red Autry in his 3rd season?
Balderdash!

 

[Blanko97]

just remember that your HOFJB is the coach who led us from 2 seed , to a bubble team in , to a bubble team out , to no chance whatsoever .. that was all on jim boeheim's watch . not red autry. he wasn't handed a final 4 program.

He wasnt handed a 4 win team either... no excuses

 

[NineOneSeven]

Agreed.

If there's one thing that has been consistent throughout Red's tenure as the head coach, is that we generally perform well against teams we're supposed to beat [Hofstra / BC were outliers this year]. We tend to beat who we should.

But when we play peer-caliber programs, our performance slips.

And we never punch above our weight. Most of the games we play against "better" opponents, we get trounced.

As 721 side, that’s a very clear indicator of coaching. When the talent is equal or better, or the program/system is, we just can’t win nearly enough.

In several early games this year we won just because we had better players. We were longer, more athletic. Northeastern comes to mind.

But when you don’t have that… that’s why you have a coach on a team.