- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Matt McMahon coaching record in SEC is 14-40 ( 45-53 overall)
Posted on 10/15/25 at 2:43 pm to Madking
Posted on 10/15/25 at 2:43 pm to Madking
quote:
Again you’re just saying things that are false then doubling down with absurdity
More bullshite without actually telling me where I lied and what I was wrong about. I've asked a few questions, you've tried to answer 1, was inaccurate(unless you're willing to defend McMahons similar season as a success) and have yet to answer the other 2.
2
Posted on 10/15/25 at 2:48 pm to JWill409
You were answered, all your attempted points were addressed and comically disproven.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 2:57 pm to JWill409
Ok here’s one “18-14 record is the exact same as 17-16”
It’s not, it’s a 3 game difference
It’s not, it’s a 3 game difference
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:01 pm to Alt26
quote:
I'm pretty sure even you don't actually believe this position has any merit. It's just a contrarian argument posed solely to go against the majority position. But even if we set aside the fact that the means of roster building in Pearl's first 3-4 seasons were massively different than they have been in McMahon's LSU tenure (i.e. Pearl had no access to 1,000+ immediately eligible experienced transfers) this position still does' hold any weight. Why? Beginning with the year McMahon was hired (22-23 season) through last season, TEN (10) other HC's were hired by SEC schools. EVERY.SINGLE.ONE of those TEN coaches made at least 1 NCAA Tournament appearance within their first 3 seasons. Every One....except McMahon. Who hasn't even been close. LSU is so blessed that they were able to land the ONLY coach in the SEC who needs 4, 5, 6,...15 years to field a moderately good team. Unfortunately, whether they like it or not, LSU fans are stuck with him for at least one more year. But to pretend he's been anything other than the worst HC in the SEC over the last three seasons is absurd.
I think there is merit to what I said. I do not agree up to this point McMahon should be fired. I could see why he would be, because of piss poor results. I wouldn’t have been mad had we fired him at the end of last season. My argument is, if it took Pearl a good bit of time to build a program, why can’t we at least have some perspective about McMahon? We have been pretty much dead last in the money game every year, but this one. He had a decent second season, I don’t think anyone would argue that. Last year, we lost Ward and Reed early on in literally the best SEC top to bottom in years. This year, we have gone out and spent the money, why not be slightly optimistic? If we suck, he’s gone. This may have been too much for him this early in his career, but we hired him to grow into the position, we knew of the risk vs reward when we hired him. Florida just happened to strike “gold”. McMahon was as highly regarded as he was.
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:03 pm to JWill409
None of that is accurate. Try another example
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:04 pm to Madking
quote:
Ok here’s one “18-14 record is the exact same as 17-16” It’s not, it’s a 3 game difference
So now we’ve moved the argument to technicalities like this instead of the original question. So here it is again for you. They finished 6-14 that year not 18-14. They cheated and got caught. They also finished 7-11 in the SEC which is worse than McMahons 9-9. So if we’re gonna shift the narrative instead of answering the questions, at least make some good points instead of widening the goal posts to fit your argument.
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:06 pm to Madking
quote:
None of that is accurate. Try another example
None of what is accurate? Tell me so I can provide links to back up what I’m saying. This is what you do, you play this little game to try to discredit people, seen it countless times.
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:12 pm to JWill409
-The two coaches resume prior to taking over
- the state of each program when taken over
- the time it took for each coach to have success
- the false claim about money (recruiting)
- your description of success
None of your alleged parallels are actually parallels
- the state of each program when taken over
- the time it took for each coach to have success
- the false claim about money (recruiting)
- your description of success
None of your alleged parallels are actually parallels
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:14 pm to JWill409
quote:
Which is my point....you still haven't answered me. Why did it take Pearl 4 years?
It's already been answered. The reason is because the means of roster building at that time were FAR different than they are now. At that point in Pearl's tenure the only ways to turnover a roster was through HS/JUCO signees. No coach could immediately go out and get 4, 5, 6, 7 experienced D-1 players. That means it often took time to build. Not just for Pearl. Rick Barnes, who had success at both Clemson and Texas before going to Tennessee took three years to get Tenn winning at a consistent level.
The transfer rules now have greatly expedited the timeline for a "rebuild". Ignoring that reality is being intentionally disingenuous. It's how Rick Pitino could take over a struggling St. John's program, complete filp the roster and improve, then flip it again and win the Big East/get a #2 seed in the NCAA Tournament. It's how Grant McCasland could come into a Texas Tech program fresh off a mutiny and within two season have TTU near the top of the Big 12 and in the Elite 8.
The counter question is why EVERY OTHER SEC coach hired along with and after MM can within a 1-3 years (most within 1-2 years) have success, yet LSU fans should be patient with a guy who (1) has lost ~70% of his games vs power conf. opponents and (2) still yet to have even the moderate level of success of his peers?
In this day and age good coaches win quickly. Bad coaches talk about "patience"
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 3:14 pm to JWill409
Again false, they didn’t cheat in a competitive manner, it was outside of basketball and the players who were ruled ineligible for that season were allowed to play later and contributed to major success at Auburn. It’s like saying Derrick Rose didn’t exist in college basketball which we all know isn’t true.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 4:41 pm to Madking
quote:
-The two coaches resume prior to taking over
- the state of each program when taken over
- the time it took for each coach to have success
- the false claim about money (recruiting)
- your description of success
-Coaches resume when taking over is irrelevant unless you were trying to argue the opposite of what your stance is
- Took Pearl 4 years to have "success" due to a combined 32-54 (16-38 SEC)
- The state of the program? The year before Pearl took over Auburn was 14-16(6-12) and his first season he actually was worse than the year prior.
-false claim about money? LSU NIL
- Success is subjective based on circumstances, but I'm not the one arguing he hasn't had success. MM did a great job all things considered in year 2. You disagree? So you tell me what your definition is.
Posted on 10/15/25 at 4:51 pm to JWill409
- Saying the coach’s accomplishments are irrelevant is dishonest and ridiculous. You know that. If I told you Ole Miss was hiring Chris Beard and Miss State was hiring Kermit Davis you know damn well which is the better hire so cut the shite.
- It didn’t take Pearl 4 years, you keep using an irrelevant NCAA punishment for an off court situation 8 years later to retroactively pretend we didn’t see that team play. I know you didn’t but basketball fans did. Year 4 I think he went 26-8 and won the SEC. McMahon will not get close to that this season.
-You’re making my point with the state of the program, Pearl inherited a 14 win team and didn’t have the advantage of the portal. McMahon inherited a 6 seed, had a top 15 class and was picked as a bubble team year 1. He finished with 2 league wins.
-Your link says “reported” which comes from LSUs debunked reporting about spending on NIL and again you had multiple top 16 classes so it’s irrelevant.
- Success isn’t subjective, you don’t get to keep moving the goalpost based on your bias.
BTW just so we’re clear, here’s one of your first responses today…
“In no way shape or form am I comparing Matt McMahon to Bruce Pearl.”
You know it’s bad when you’re not trying to troll but there’s zero difference between your post and a troll.
- It didn’t take Pearl 4 years, you keep using an irrelevant NCAA punishment for an off court situation 8 years later to retroactively pretend we didn’t see that team play. I know you didn’t but basketball fans did. Year 4 I think he went 26-8 and won the SEC. McMahon will not get close to that this season.
-You’re making my point with the state of the program, Pearl inherited a 14 win team and didn’t have the advantage of the portal. McMahon inherited a 6 seed, had a top 15 class and was picked as a bubble team year 1. He finished with 2 league wins.
-Your link says “reported” which comes from LSUs debunked reporting about spending on NIL and again you had multiple top 16 classes so it’s irrelevant.
- Success isn’t subjective, you don’t get to keep moving the goalpost based on your bias.
BTW just so we’re clear, here’s one of your first responses today…
“In no way shape or form am I comparing Matt McMahon to Bruce Pearl.”
You know it’s bad when you’re not trying to troll but there’s zero difference between your post and a troll.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:10 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:18 pm to Madking
quote:
“In no way shape or form am I comparing Matt McMahon to Bruce Pearl.”
I’m not, which is why I’m arguing he deserves more time to build than Pearl did anyway because he’s not as good and I’m not comparing. You are the king of vocabulary, I’m sure you’re familiar with what a logical fallacy is.
You reek of contradictions. You want him fired last year, but make excuses for a coach that has been far more successful that took until year 4 to establish success.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:21 pm to JWill409
That’s exactly what you’re doing. The mental gymnastics you’ve been practicing for so long have severed your grasp on reality. The logic you’re using now is “the more the coach sucks the longer he needs” that’s insanity, you don’t see the fault in that logic?
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:24 pm to Madking
quote:
That’s exactly what you’re doing. The mental gymnastics you’ve been practicing for so long have severed your grasp on reality. The logic you’re using now is “the more the coach sucks the longer he needs” that’s insanity, you don’t see the fault in that logic?
You love to say “mental gymnastics” yet your logic is flawed because you’ve got nowhere to go. Let me rephrase this. Why does McMahon need to be fired if it took one of the most successful coaches in the SEC until year 4 to have success? You can’t give me a logical reason without contradiction so you’re going to resort to your own version of “mental gymnastics”. It’s all good, I’m sure we will go through this again at some point and I will bookmark this conversation as reference.
ETA: I want this on record too. If McMahon makes the tournament this year, do you still want him fired?
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:28 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:29 pm to JWill409
You just keep saying untrue things. It didn’t take him this long, he had a history of winning at a high level. The process was much slower by design then and he actually won. Not a single one of those things can be applied to McMahon who’s lost at a higher rate than any coach in our programs history and no coach who’s lost as much has ever kept his job before. What you’ve done is completely shifted the priority from LSU basketball having success to making excuses for McMahon. The sad part is you can’t even do that.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:35 pm to Madking
quote:
You just keep saying untrue things. It didn’t take him this long, he had a history of winking at a high level. The process was much slower by design then and he actually won. No a single one of those things can be applied to McMahon who’s lost at a higher rate than any coach in our programs history and no coach who’s lost as much has ever kept his job before. What you’ve done is completely shifted the priority from LSU basketball having success to making excuses for McMahon. The sad part is you can’t even do that.
Right, so now there’s qualifiers. You just spent an hour making excuses for Pearl LOL the contradiction is wild. I could argue McMahon had success already as well, and made the tournament, we could do this all day long. I’m adding perspective. My reasoning for saying that would be that we’ve performed based on what we’ve got. Well, we ain’t had shite and we’ve finished like shite lol this year we’ve got some shite, spent some money. I think this is the year people judge him on because there’s no other season we could say we had the talent to make the tournament, not one. Hell the 9-9 season was well above expectations and we were projected to finish last or near last in the conference.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:38 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:38 pm to JWill409
Lmfao
Posted on 10/15/25 at 5:57 pm to JWill409
quote:
This year, we have gone out and spent the money, why not be slightly optimistic?
Because the players he signed were very underwhelming. He gets his chance to prove me wrong. As far as looking at the players he signed and what he spent, I don’t see it producing good results. We will see. My guess is slight improvement. We will likely be arguing over a 6 or 7 win SEC record, lol. The argument will be “he is showing improvement over last year”.
This post was edited on 10/15/25 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 10/15/25 at 6:35 pm to BowDownToLSU
I call him mcwinner. just needed more cash
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News