"Average Al" Skinner

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:36 pm

I just wanted to take a look at Al Skinner's record this decade:

If you compare all the Big East teams in Al Skinner's last five seasons in the Big East, take the average # of conference wins per team and list them from best to worst, you get this:

Pittsburgh 11.6
Syracuse 11.2
Connecticut 11.2
Boston College 11
Notre Dame 9.8
Villanova 8.2
Providence 8
Georgetown 7.4
Seton Hall 7.2
Miami 6.25
West Virginia 5.8
St. John's 5.6
Rutgers 4.8
Virginia Tech 4

Then, if you compare all the ACC teams in Al Skinner's first four seasons in the ACC, take the average # of conference wins per team and list them from best to worst, you get this:

North Carolina 12.5
Duke 11.5
Boston College 8.5
Clemson 8.25
Florida State 8.25
Maryland 8.25
Virginia Tech 7.5
Virginia 6.75
Miami 6.5
Wake Forest 6.5
NC State 6.25
Georgia Tech 5.25

Fourth best team in the Big East over a period of five years and the third best team in the ACC over a period of four years. That's "average?"

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:42 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:I just wanted to take a look at Al Skinner's record this decade:

If you compare all the Big East teams in Al Skinner's last five seasons in the Big East, take the average # of conference wins per team and list them from best to worst, you get this:

Pittsburgh 11.6
Syracuse 11.2
Connecticut 11.2
Boston College 11
Notre Dame 9.8
Villanova 8.2
Providence 8
Georgetown 7.4
Seton Hall 7.2
Miami 6.25
West Virginia 5.8
St. John's 5.6
Rutgers 4.8
Virginia Tech 4

Then, if you compare all the ACC teams in Al Skinner's first four seasons in the ACC, take the average # of conference wins per team and list them from best to worst, you get this:

North Carolina 12.5
Duke 11.5
Boston College 8.5
Clemson 8.25
Florida State 8.25
Maryland 8.25
Virginia Tech 7.5
Virginia 6.75
Miami 6.5
Wake Forest 6.5
NC State 6.25
Georgia Tech 5.25

Fourth best team in the Big East over a period of five years and the third best team in the ACC over a period of four years. That's "average?"

now list the number of sweet 16 appearances of all of those teams over the last 15 years.

Interesting that you used only the last 5 years in the big east instead of 4 or 6, or 7. Is it because perhaps it would have changed the results? Didn't want to include an 11-19 season in there, did 'ya. Pretty easy to make stats tell whatever story you want, isn't it?

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:54 pm

And that would show that Al Skinner is a good coach whose teams have underachieved in the tournament.

But an "average" coach wouldn't be in the top third of both the big east and the ACC (unless he had some unbelievable talent and should clearly have had more wins than anybody in either conference over those time frames).

You want to say that Al Skinner chokes in the NCAAs? No argument from me. But if you think he's a mediocre or average coach, the numbers most certainly do NOT support that.

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:10 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:And that would show that Al Skinner is a good coach whose teams have underachieved in the tournament.

But an "average" coach wouldn't be in the top third of both the big east and the ACC (unless he had some unbelievable talent and should clearly have had more wins than anybody in either conference over those time frames).

You want to say that Al Skinner chokes in the NCAAs? No argument from me. But if you think he's a mediocre or average coach, the numbers most certainly do NOT support that.

In my mind you can't be any more than an average coach if you consistently choke in the post-season.

by **BCMcG** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:15 pm

Since when did Sweet 16s become the standard of success?

If BC rarely made the tourney, people would be bitching about they've only been there X times in 10 years. If they made the Sweet 16 every year people would be bitching that the team has only made it to the Final Four X times. It's like saying that Jerry York sucks because BC is in the Frozen Four every year and he's only won 2 championships. You can set the standards to whatever you want to fit your argument.

I hope Al Skinner leads BC to the Sweet 16 and no further every year for the next 10 years so OJ can eat cake and be satisfied that the mark of success has been consistently achieved. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there'd be something new to bitch about.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:17 pm

So, if we're going to use the postseason for the be all end all of judging a coach's success, is Mike Krzyzewski on the hot seat?

In the past ten years, Krzyzewski has advanced past the Sweet 16 only twice.

In the past five years:
In 2009, second seeded Duke beat a terrible Binghampton and barely eeked out a victory over 7 seed Texas before losing in the Sweet Sixteen.
In 2008, second seeded Duke barely beat a terrible Belmont team before getting knocked out in the first weekend by WVU.
In 2007, seventh seeded Duke lost in the first round to VCU.
In 2006, top seeded Duke beat Southern and George Washington in the first two rounds before losing in the Sweet Sixteen to LSU
In 2005, top seeded Duke beat Delaware State, struggled to beat Mississippi State before losing in the Sweet Sixteen to Michigan State.

Five years, two wins over major programs (7 seeded Texas, 9 seeded Mississippi St). That's a pretty average tournament record, and considering that in four of the last five years, Duke had a 1 or 2 seed in their region and every year the school routinely gets their pick of McDonald's All Americans, that average tournament record starts to look abysmal.

Fire Mike?

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:25 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:So, if we're going to use the postseason for the be all end all of judging a coach's success, is Mike Krzyzewski on the hot seat?

In the past ten years, Krzyzewski has advanced past the Sweet 16 only twice.

In the past five years:
In 2009, second seeded Duke beat a terrible Binghampton and barely eeked out a victory over 7 seed Texas before losing in the Sweet Sixteen.
In 2008, second seeded Duke barely beat a terrible Belmont team before getting knocked out in the first weekend by WVU.
In 2007, seventh seeded Duke lost in the first round to VCU.
In 2006, top seeded Duke beat Southern and George Washington in the first two rounds before losing in the Sweet Sixteen to LSU
In 2005, top seeded Duke beat Delaware State, struggled to beat Mississippi State before losing in the Sweet Sixteen to Michigan State.

Five years, two wins over major programs (7 seeded Texas, 9 seeded Mississippi St). That's a pretty average tournament record, and considering that in four of the last five years, Duke had a 1 or 2 seed in their region and every year the school routinely gets their pick of McDonald's All Americans, that average tournament record starts to look abysmal.

Fire Mike?

5 years does not equal 13 years.
Advancing PAST the sweet 16 TWICE does equal NEVER advancing past the sweet 16, and advancing TO IT only once.
How many national championships does Al have? How many final 4s? When he gets one of those, you can start making these comparisons.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:26 pm

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:30 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

And why do you keep saying "past the sweet 16". Why don't you say "to the sweet 16".

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:31 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:38 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:40 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:45 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:47 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

If Al Skinner could have his pick of recruits like Coach K, he would have. I think the better coach is the one that achieves the same with lesser known talent. Likewise, I think it is more embarrassing for the coach of multiple NBA players to bow out in the Sweet 16 than the guy who gets under rated players one game away.

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:49 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

If Al Skinner could have his pick of recruits like Coach K, he would have. I think the better coach is the one that achieves the same with lesser known talent. Likewise, I think it is more embarrassing for the coach of multiple NBA players to bow out in the Sweet 16 than the guy who gets under rated players one game away.

so al is a better coach than coach K now?

and FYI, getting the recruits he wants happened BECAUSE he is a good coach.

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:50 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

If Al Skinner could have his pick of recruits like Coach K, he would have. I think the better coach is the one that achieves the same with lesser known talent. Likewise, I think it is more embarrassing for the coach of multiple NBA players to bow out in the Sweet 16 than the guy who gets under rated players one game away.

so al is a better coach than coach K now? He has achieved as much as Coach K? You are a moron.

and FYI, getting the recruits he wants happened BECAUSE he is a good coach.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:50 pm

By the way, I started doing the annoying math on tourney and Sweet 16 appearances by the ACC and Big East teams. With the exception of last season, it is generally a rarity when any of those teams 24 other than Pitt, UConn, WVU, Nova, UNC or Duke make the Sweet 16, and usually only 2 or 3 of those teams a season.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:55 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I didn't say that you said that. I was asking a question. I just find it interesting that if Coach K were to go ten straight years of never taking a team full of McDonald's all americans past the sweet sixteen, final four appearances from before that ten year drought would absolve him of the drought. But if Al Skinner went to the final four 8 years ago, you'd still have a problem with him today.

by **buconvict** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:56 pm

So if BC had been rightfully awarded the ball after **** ******** rejected Randy Foye's shot off of Foye's foot instead of awarding Villanova the ball under the basket with 2 seconds left in the game, and BC had won that game and advanced to the Elite 8, you wouldn't have any problems with Skinner?

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:00 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

Read the last sentence of my last post again.

If Duke does not advance past the sweet 16 over the next five years, would you fire Krzyzewski if you were Duke's AD?

I guess you were too stupid to read the last sentence of the post. When Al wins a few national titles and gets to multiple final 4s, then you can start making these comparisons. Until then, they are stupid. Not to mention you are using a different measuring stick for Al than you are for Coach K, because you know there's know way in hell Coach K goes anywhere NEAR as long as Al without reaching a sweet 16....next argument please.

So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I didn't say that you said that. I was asking a question. I just find it interesting that if Coach K were to go ten straight years of never taking a team full of McDonald's all americans past the sweet sixteen, final four appearances from before that ten year drought would absolve him of the drought. But if Al Skinner went to the final four 8 years ago, you'd still have a problem with him today.

Multiple championships and final 4 appearances are not equal to 1 hypothetical final 8 appearance. You really are reaching. You might want to try a new argument soon.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:05 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I would like to point out the upsurdity of this little exchange.

paraphrasing:
me: would one extra game 8 years ago change your opinion of Al Skinner? clearly in the form of a question
OJ: how dare you put words in my mouth! no, one extra game 8 years ago would not change my opinion of Al Skinner!

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:12 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I would like to point out the upsurdity of this little exchange.

paraphrasing:
me: would one extra game 8 years ago change your opinion of Al Skinner? clearly in the form of a question
OJ: how dare you put words in my mouth! no, one extra game 8 years ago would not change my opinion of Al Skinner!

You are such a moron. But I'm glad you have moved on from your ridiculous Al=Coach K comparison and realized how stupid I made you look in this thread.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:17 pm

From 2001 to 2009 (9 years)

ELITE:

DUKE: 9 appearances, 7 Sweet 16
PITT: 8 appearances, 5 Sweet 16
UCONN: 7 appearances, 5 Sweet 16
UNC: 7 appearances, 4 Sweet 16
CUSE: 6 appearances, 3 Sweet 16
NOVA: 5 appearances, 4 Sweet 16
UMD: 6 appearances, 3 Sweet 16 (none since 2003)

NEXT GROUP:

GTOWN: 4 appearances, 3 Sweet 16
WVU: 4 appearances, 3 Sweet 16
BC: 7 appearances, 1 Sweet 16
WAKE: 6 appearances, 1 Sweet 16
NCSU: 5 appearances, 1 Sweet 16
GT: 4 appearances, 1 Sweet 16

NEXT GROUP:

ND: 5 appearances

HAPLESS:

PROV: 2 appearances
SHU: 2 appearances
CLEM: 2 appearances
MIA: 2 appearances
VT: 1 appearance
UVA: 1 appearance
SJU: 1 appearance
FSU: 1 appearance
Rutgers: 0 appearances

I may be off by one or two appearances, but this is close to right.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:18 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I would like to point out the upsurdity of this little exchange.

paraphrasing:
me: would one extra game 8 years ago change your opinion of Al Skinner? clearly in the form of a question
OJ: how dare you put words in my mouth! no, one extra game 8 years ago would not change my opinion of Al Skinner!

You are such a moron. But I'm glad you have moved on from your ridiculous Al=Coach K comparison and realized how stupid I made you look in this thread.

When did I say that Al = Coach K?

This whole thread was about how Al Skinner finished at the top of both the Big East and the ACC over the past decade. I question how an "average" coach could do that.

You then say that the regular season is meaningless when judging the worth of a coach and that he should be judged solely on what happens in the post season. So, if post season success is the only factor in which a coach can be judged upon, then over the past five years, Coach Krzyzewski is an average coach. True or False?

by **twballgame9** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:19 pm

By my math, that makes BC the 10th most successful postseason team of the 23 that were in the two top conferences in the country while BC was in them.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:25 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
So, hypothetically speaking, if BC had advanced to the final four 8 years ago when they were a three seed, you'd have no complaints about Al Skinner today?

When did I say that? And they DIDN"T reach the final 8....so what's the point? Al has a record of 13 years of failure in the post season. One extra game in one year does not suddenly make everything better.

I would like to point out the upsurdity of this little exchange.

paraphrasing:
me: would one extra game 8 years ago change your opinion of Al Skinner? clearly in the form of a question
OJ: how dare you put words in my mouth! no, one extra game 8 years ago would not change my opinion of Al Skinner!

You are such a moron. But I'm glad you have moved on from your ridiculous Al=Coach K comparison and realized how stupid I made you look in this thread.

When did I say that Al = Coach K?

This whole thread was about how Al Skinner finished at the top of both the Big East and the ACC over the past decade. I question how an "average" coach could do that.

You then say that the regular season is meaningless when judging the worth of a coach and that he should be judged solely on what happens in the post season. So, if post season success is the only factor in which a coach can be judged upon, then over the past five years, Coach Krzyzewski is an average coach. True or False?

True. In fact, with the talent he supposedly gets, applying the OJ standard I would say he has been worse than average.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:36 pm

Since the beginning of the 2004/05 season, Coach K has won 139 out of a possible 169 games. But, according to the definition of an average coach above, Coach K is unarguably an average coach over that time period.

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:46 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:Since the beginning of the 2004/05 season, Coach K has won 139 out of a possible 169 games. But, according to the definition of an average coach above, Coach K is unarguably an average coach over that time period.

You are missing the point. In 13 years, Al has one conference championship, 1 sweet 16 appearance, no final 4s, and no national titles. What does coach K have in those 4 categories over that SAME time? Answer that question, and then tell me by the same standards that they are comparable. Then shut up.

And I never said that the regular season is "meaningless", but you have to say that in order to even hope to have an argument. My point was in looking at Al's record, you were ONLY looking at the regular season, and you HAVE to take into account both the regular and the post season performance to evaluate him. When you do that objectively, you see that he is an average coach.

by **EaglesTalon** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:48 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:Since the beginning of the 2004/05 season, Coach K has won 139 out of a possible 169 games. But, according to the definition of an average coach above, Coach K is unarguably an average coach over that time period.

You are missing the point. In 13 years, Al has one conference championship, 1 sweet 16 appearance, no final 4s, and no national titles. What does coach K have in those 4 categories over that SAME time? Answer that question, and then tell me by the same standards that they are comparable. Then shut up.

OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, is Coach K an average coach or not? According to your definition, he is an average coach.

by **Eagledom** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:51 pm

EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
EaglesTalon {l Wrote}:Since the beginning of the 2004/05 season, Coach K has won 139 out of a possible 169 games. But, according to the definition of an average coach above, Coach K is unarguably an average coach over that time period.

You are missing the point. In 13 years, Al has one conference championship, 1 sweet 16 appearance, no final 4s, and no national titles. What does coach K have in those 4 categories over that SAME time? Answer that question, and then tell me by the same standards that they are comparable. Then shut up.

OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, is Coach K an average coach or not? According to your definition, he is an average coach.

your arbitrary selection of "5 years" makes your point idiotic.

"Average Al" Skinner

"Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

"Average Mike" Krzyzewski

Re: "Average Mike" Krzyzewski

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Re: "Average Al" Skinner

Who is online