Skinner Defenders Defend This

[eepstein0]

The Sanders excuse is awful. Didn't know Al Skinner posted on this board. IT'S HARVARD. We shouldn't be losing to Harvard in basketball, ever.

And I'd like to go on record and say if Skinner doesn't get in the way of this team, we're still going to make the Tourney despite the shitty coaching.

Top 15 UConn only beat Harvard by 5 with a healthy team. Discuss.







Didn't think so.

The difference: UConn beat Harvard. We lost. If we had won by 5, I would have said fine we won let's move forward.

[twballgame9]

The Sanders excuse is awful. Didn't know Al Skinner posted on this board. IT'S HARVARD. We shouldn't be losing to Harvard in basketball, ever.

And I'd like to go on record and say if Skinner doesn't get in the way of this team, we're still going to make the Tourney despite the shitty coaching.

Top 15 UConn only beat Harvard by 5 with a healthy team. Discuss.







Didn't think so.

The difference: UConn beat Harvard. We lost. If we had won by 5, I would have said fine we won let's move forward.

I find that difficult to believe, but fine. I would have been just as annoyed winning by 1 as losing. It's a bad sign. It is not, however, the end of the world nor a reason to drag out the annual "I know Al will surprise and win 20+ games, but let's fire him anyway because he had a WTF loss"

One more time, WTF loss in hoop = acceptable because of 30 game schedule and depth of competition.

WTF loss in football = never acceptable.

[eepstein0]

The Sanders excuse is awful. Didn't know Al Skinner posted on this board. IT'S HARVARD. We shouldn't be losing to Harvard in basketball, ever.

And I'd like to go on record and say if Skinner doesn't get in the way of this team, we're still going to make the Tourney despite the shitty coaching.

Top 15 UConn only beat Harvard by 5 with a healthy team. Discuss.

Didn't think so.

The difference: UConn beat Harvard. We lost. If we had won by 5, I would have said fine we won let's move forward.

I find that difficult to believe, but fine. I would have been just as annoyed winning by 1 as losing. It's a bad sign. It is not, however, the end of the world nor a reason to drag out the annual "I know Al will surprise and win 20+ games, but let's fire him anyway because he had a WTF loss"

One more time, WTF loss in hoop = acceptable because of 30 game schedule and depth of competition.

WTF loss in football = never acceptable.

Fair. WE can agree to disagree.

[15Radnor]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

[twballgame9]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

It wasn't my hyperbole. I was asked if I would take a first round exit every year if BC won the ACC every year. The answer is an obvious yes.

[15Radnor]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

It wasn't my hyperbole. I was asked if I would take a first round exit every year if BC won the ACC every year. The answer is an obvious yes.

The quote to which you responded and mentioned a WTF did not involve the first round exit question. Look immediately above.

Are you not of the opinion that losing your third game out of a possible 6 is a WTF when you have won your conference and the conference is the best or second best in the country? I think it is on equal footing of a WTF football loss.

[twballgame9]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

It wasn't my hyperbole. I was asked if I would take a first round exit every year if BC won the ACC every year. The answer is an obvious yes.

The quote to which you responded and mentioned a WTF did not involve the first round exit question. Look immediately above.

Are you not of the opinion that losing your third game out of a possible 6 is a WTF when you have won your conference and the conference is the best or second best in the country? I think it is on equal footing of a WTF football loss.

In your third game of the tourney, you are playing one of the 16 best teams in the country. There is no such thing as a WTF to one of the 16 best teams in the country. In any sport. Period.

There is no comparison of football to basketball. It's dumb.

[15Radnor]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

It wasn't my hyperbole. I was asked if I would take a first round exit every year if BC won the ACC every year. The answer is an obvious yes.

The quote to which you responded and mentioned a WTF did not involve the first round exit question. Look immediately above.

Are you not of the opinion that losing your third game out of a possible 6 is a WTF when you have won your conference and the conference is the best or second best in the country? I think it is on equal footing of a WTF football loss.

In your third game of the tourney, you are playing one of the 16 best teams in the country. There is no such thing as a WTF to one of the 16 best teams in the country. In any sport. Period.

There is no comparison of football to basketball. It's dumb.

But are they surely one of the best 16 teams in the country? You said before that it is 3 parts luck, 2 parts draw, and 1 part gravy.

[twballgame9]

Isn't not winning 4-6 Tournament games when you have won your conference championship (when the conference is the best or second best in the country), a WTF?

It wasn't my hyperbole. I was asked if I would take a first round exit every year if BC won the ACC every year. The answer is an obvious yes.

The quote to which you responded and mentioned a WTF did not involve the first round exit question. Look immediately above.

Are you not of the opinion that losing your third game out of a possible 6 is a WTF when you have won your conference and the conference is the best or second best in the country? I think it is on equal footing of a WTF football loss.

In your third game of the tourney, you are playing one of the 16 best teams in the country. There is no such thing as a WTF to one of the 16 best teams in the country. In any sport. Period.

There is no comparison of football to basketball. It's dumb.

But are they surely one of the best 16 teams in the country? You said before that it is 3 parts luck, 2 parts draw, and 1 part gravy.

Depends on what happens. For BC, they have been, for the most part. GT (national runners up), #1 seed Nova (Elite Eight) and #2 seed G'Town (Final Four) in the three seasons where I think BC actually had a team that was good enough to even contend for the Sweet 16 or Elite 8.

[commavegarage]

Depends on what happens. For BC, they have been, for the most part. GT (national runners up), #1 seed Nova (Elite Eight) and #2 seed G'Town (Final Four) in the three seasons where I think BC actually had a team that was good enough to even contend for the Sweet 16 or Elite 8.

So please justify how having three teams in 13 years in the ACC that are good enough to make the Sweet 16 is acceptable?

I really want Al to do great; it's nights like this that make him incredibly hard to root for him.

[twballgame9]

Depends on what happens. For BC, they have been, for the most part. GT (national runners up), #1 seed Nova (Elite Eight) and #2 seed G'Town (Final Four) in the three seasons where I think BC actually had a team that was good enough to even contend for the Sweet 16 or Elite 8.

So please justify how having three teams in 13 years in the ACC that are good enough to make the Sweet 16 is acceptable?

I really want Al to do great; it's nights like this that make him incredibly hard to root for him.

Well the first two years he had no players thanks to Jim O'Brien (Dwayne Pina anyone?). So it is really 11 seasons. In those 11 seasons, he has been to the tourney 8 or 9 times. That means, ignoring the auto bids from small conferences, his teams have been in the top 35 teams in the country in all but 2 season once he got his recruits on campus.

It is acceptable because even in years when he doesn't have tourney talent, he makes the tourney. Think about the Bell teams with Harley, Agbai, Singletary, Beerbohm. Terrible. Last year's team fought to a tourney bid.

Now count what has actually happened - who they have actually played in their good years. Don't just set an amorphous goal like "they should make the Elite Eight"; is that true if they have to go through the #1 team in the country to get there? The hottest team? Should we presume that they will automatically knock off a 1 or 2 seed? That Al is required to make BC a 1 or 2 seed while playing an ACC schedule?

He won 2 regular season BE titles, and one BE tourney with relatively weak teams in a watered down league. In his first year in the ACC, he brought his best team to the final game of the ACC tourney, knocked off UNC twice on the way, and lost a title in one of the most epic title games the ACC has seen, and then went to the Sweet Sixteen. Every year teams look at his players and pick him to finish 10-15, every year he finishes in the top 5-6 teams.

Now look around Conte forum. No one shows. UNC and Kentucky recruits aren't coming here. Fans that don't go to games scream bloody murder. Yet Al brings in Bell, Smith, Dudley, Williams, Sanders, Jackson. Al chases Brandon Roy and Andre Iguodola when no one wants them.

Guy is a great coach overall. He is not great at Xs and Os, but neither are most head coaches. That stuff is usually left to assistants.

[RyanBC]

Fuck losing to Harvard. It sucks but once the sting wears off, who Cares. Let's go win some more ACC games.

Skinner is a very good coach, maybe a great one. I matriculated through the JOB era OMFG & make a living in sports.

Let's go, BC.

[Logitano]

Not to rain on your apology parade but most GREAT head coaches would have had at least one upset win in the NCAA tournament by now. The most telling thing about Al is that his teams get upset but never pull off the upset. A GREAT head coach does not need completely superior talent just to squeak by the 1st round.
And for teddyballgame who I have always respected the opinion of you do not see the irony of the fact that you say the exact same bullshit that tobias merrymen say but say it for Al? After 12 season we should all be in agreement that the lack of Sanders was not why BC lost to Harvard tonight. To say otherwise is total crap and shows a very low college basketball IQ. It is just a knee jerk defense of Al without any real analysis. Just sayin is all. [/quote]

Yeah, Al's teams never pull off an upset. Shit, I can't remember one last season.

Football is not basketball. I refuse to explain it again. Just read what ATL said.[/quote]

Wow you have gone full merryman retard in defense of Al. I mentioned not having one upset in the NCAA tournament and you mention some wins in the REGULA SEASON You have told me all I need to know about your basketball knowledge, you and homojs are the eaglewings and sayso of bc hoops. USC has now twice beaten us as the lower seed. Al is a good coach who has taken us far as he can go and anything else is just total apologist bullshit. You honestly know dick about college basketball if you think there is a ceiling on BC hoops that is not self-imposed.

[Eagledom]

He's looking at me. Skinner is a good coach with faults, like I have always said. Comparing football to basketball is a fucking retarded move that only Radnor and his failed blog would make. You knee jerk fucking losers amuse me. BC is playing without their best player, what did you expect? I am surprised that your boy Raji didn't take over tonight, he is such a hustler after all.

UNC lost to Santa Clara the year they won the national title. It is hoop not football. Get a fucking grip.

First of all, you can use the santa clara example all you want, but Al has now lost 1/3 of his games this year to 3 teams we shouldn't have lost to...this isn't just one loss we're talking about. Not to mention that we lost to Harvard LAST YEAR too, so there is no fucking way he shouldn't have had the team prepared for this game. Yet, he made NO FUCKING ADJUSTMENTS. You just don't get it. It's not just the loss. It's how we lost, the fact that it is two years in a row, the fact that this loss is coupled with the loss to St. Joes, and the fact that this happens every fucking year.

And as far as not comparing football with hoops - no, you can't compare the two. But even without comparing the two, you can say that Al has never taken his team above mediocrity when it really matters...and that is a problem. You can make all the excuses you want about sanders and whatever, but you are nothing but a hoops merryman.

p.s. Josh Southern really showed that "great post defense" tonight didn't he? Josh Southern is not an ACC player. He sucks and is a major liability on this team.

[Whitechapel]

I was reading through this thread and though I'm not a BC fan, I thought maybe I could add my two cents.

I see the UNC loss to Santa Clara in 04-05 being referenced and I think it should be pointed out that Raymond Felton was suspended for that game, so UNC (like BC last night) was without a very important player that night. Of course he returned for the next game and they didn't lose too many games after that and eventually won it all. It might also be worth noting that the game was played AT Santa Clara, as UNC was making their way westward to play in the Maui tournament. I don't know how this affects the discussion, but I thought it would be helpful to have all the facts. Of course, any UNC fan would tell you that they should NEVER lose to Santa Clara anywhere, under any circumstance, but that's another topic for another time.

Oh and I agree that the 2006 ACC tournament final was one of the greats. I've been a Wolfpack fan for many years and have seen some of the most amazing basketball ever in the ACC tournament. For championship games alone you have Mike Gminski and Duke over Lefty and Maryland in 1980; Jimmy V and State over Ralph Sampson and Virginia in 1983; Mark Price vs. Kenny Smith in 1985; Vinny Del Negro carrying State to the title in 1987; Randolph Childress' one-man demolition of the Heels in 1995; Maryland's incredible comeback against Duke in 2004 -- these were all college basketball epics of Shakespearean quality.

The 2006 championship was a heartstopper that sits right up there with them.

[twballgame9]

Calling me a Merryman because I don't want to fire a coach for losing a meaningless game in December is laughably stupid. Like I said, if TOB had lost to Kent and not Syracuse, UNC or NCSU and had one BE championship and two ACCCG appearances, I never would have called for his head either.

[Eagledom]

Calling me a Merryman because I don't want to fire a coach for losing a meaningless game in December is laughably stupid. Like I said, if TOB had lost to Kent and not Syracuse, UNC or NCSU and had one BE championship and two ACCCG appearances, I never would have called for his head either.

???

[twballgame9]

Calling me a Merryman because I don't want to fire a coach for losing a meaningless game in December is laughably stupid. Like I said, if TOB had lost to Kent and not Syracuse, UNC or NCSU and had one BE championship and two ACCCG appearances, I never would have called for his head either.

???

Real simple. Had TOB beaten Syracuse, UNC and NSCU, he would have won the Big East once and gone to the ACCCG twice. Those were the WTF games that made most want to fire him, precisely because A led to B. had he won those cupcake games, no one would have wanted him gone. Period.

Had Al beaten Harvard last year, BC would have ended up exactly like they ended up. 6th in the ACC and a 7 seed and a first round loss. A game cannot be a WTF if it means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme. Maybe if they beat St. Louis too they would have finished 6th in the ACC and received a 6 seed and got a second round loss! Cake and Ice Cream!

TOB should have been fired because you could point to one single conference game against a crappy opponent that was lost in miserable coaching fashion that directly caused the team not to go to a BCS bowl or conference championship game. Same cannot be said for Al. Or Jags. Or, for that matter, Spaz, at this point, though I have fears that next year will prove otherwise.

[angryty]

Okay. I understand what you are saying ballgame. But at a certain point doesn't the lack of NCAA Tournament success start to grate? I'm not for firing Al at this point, but I do think he is the black Herb Sendik and BC will never sniff a Final Four until Al departs.

I am also curious if you think BC has a ceiling as a program or do you think if we had a another young Dr. Tom or Gary Williams and we actually paid top dollar to keep him and make him happy we could be like Villanova or Marquette or Gonzaga.

[EaglesTalon]

Okay. I understand what you are saying ballgame. But at a certain point doesn't the lack of NCAA Tournament success start to grate? I'm not for firing Al at this point, but I do think he is the black Herb Sendik and BC will never sniff a Final Four until Al departs.

I am also curious if you think BC has a ceiling as a program or do you think if we had a another young Dr. Tom or Gary Williams and we actually paid top dollar to keep him and make him happy we could be like Villanova or Marquette or Gonzaga.

I think BC has absolutely not reached its ceiling. But I absolutely think that Gene D will not be the AD that hires that coach.

[branchinator]

Skinner has a lot of strengths but his teams' poor execution in the NCAA tournament is a pretty big black mark on his resume. With the exception of the Texas and 2009 USC game, where we were physically outmatched, our tournament losses this decade have been the result of sloppy play, poor adjustments, terrible execution down the stretch, and blown leads. The reason BC never makes a run in the tournament is because Skinner's teams are never consistent enough come tournament time.

[twballgame9]

angryty, I do not think BC has reached its ceiling. If a coach could keep the good local talent home, hit one or two big recruits, and keep bringing in the guys Al finds, they could be a consistent top 15 program that makes Sweet 16s. The fact that they have not reached this ceiling does not warrant dismissal of a coach that consistently gets them close to that.

I am not entirely happy with everything Al does. I just think the good far outweighs the bad. Many of his faults could be solved with the hiring of an old school assistant for in game coaching strategy. Boeheim, for example, has one of those, and Calhoun has had Blaney for many years.

[Eagledom]

I am not entirely happy with everything Al does. I just think the good far outweighs the bad.

In other words, lets settle for what we have because it could be worse.

That's where we differ.

[twballgame9]

I am not entirely happy with everything Al does. I just think the good far outweighs the bad.

In other words, lets settle for what we have because it could be worse.

That's where we differ.

Hiring a new coach does not fix the bad. In most cases, it just makes the good worse, and the bad not much better. Like always, you have no alternative.

All coaches have faults. Trying to fix the faults of an excellent coach is likely to land you a mediocre coach. And at BC, that means 5-11 in the ACC.

[twballgame9]

And excellent selective quoting you fucking miserable loser douchebag. I gave you an alternative to firing the best coach in BC history, and you give me failed-blog-boy's "Ever to Excel" bullshit argument. Die faster OJ.