- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: Obsession with Will Wade
Posted on 3/14/25 at 2:57 am to WhySoSerious
Posted on 3/14/25 at 2:57 am to WhySoSerious
He’s 8th or 9th in wins right now and might hit the top 5 next year. The only reason you’re making the argument you are is to snipe at Wade because you don’t have a single data point that supports your position.
This post was edited on 3/14/25 at 3:07 am
1
Posted on 3/14/25 at 5:38 am to Chalkywhite84
quote:
12th among all active D-1 HC's in winning % (minimum of 5 seasons). Two spots behind a guy named Izzo
Sooo....his resume is basically the same as Tom Izzo's?
fricking hilarious.
Posted on 3/14/25 at 6:11 am to MikeTheTiger71
You think going from a projected 9 seed to an 8 seed to a 6 is bad for the LSU basketball program?
Posted on 3/14/25 at 9:12 am to Madking
quote:
He’s 8th or 9th in wins right now and might hit the top 5 next year.
What in the frick are you talking about? I can name 9 coaches with more wins off the top of my head. He has about 870 wins. He won 19 games this year. Boeheim, K, Huggins & Calhoun all have over 920. That’s off the top of my head but I know there are a few coaches from unheralded schools that have over 900.
quote:
The only reason you’re making the argument you are is to snipe at Wade because you don’t have a single data point that supports your position.
I don’t have a reason to snipe at Wade. He’s the best coach LSU’s had in some time. That doesn’t make him an exceptional head coach by any standard other than LSU. No data point that supports my position? Which position is that? Neither Wade nor Calipari are great coaches. They recruit well. Cal is not a top 20 all time coach & I explained why, using data in my last post. He has 1 title (data point) and a big chunk of wins against far inferior talent (data point). The only reason I’m making the argument is because obsessed Will Wade fans are responding to me as if I’m wrong. He coaches at McNeese for Christs fricking sake. If Kansas fired Bill Self do you think he would be coaching at God damn McNeese? What exactly do you think my position is? Are you one of those Will Wade freaks that think he’s LSU’s savior & the only coach that can win here?
Posted on 3/14/25 at 9:15 am to Pnels08
quote:
You think going from a projected 9 seed to an 8 seed to a 6 is bad for the LSU basketball program?
No, but going from 12-6 to 11-6 to 9-9 in conference play (with a drop in overall WPct each year as well) shows he wasn’t keeping pace with the rest of the conference, contrary to those saying LSU would have won conference championships or even national championships over the last 3 seasons had Wade not been let go. Maybe he would have turned it around, but he was not trending in the right direction.
Posted on 3/14/25 at 9:17 am to Chalkywhite84
Should WW leave McNeese it would likely be to a school that supports men’s basketball more than LSU.
Posted on 3/14/25 at 9:50 am to paulb52
Dude is killing it in the Southland conference. He likely is getting players the same way he did at LSU. He will show up at a place that is ok with bending rules for the purpose of winning. But there is more to the game than recruiting and he is'nt great at that.
Posted on 3/14/25 at 10:04 am to Circumlocution
Smh
Posted on 3/14/25 at 11:57 am to WhySoSerious
He has 875 wins, 1 behind Rupp who’s 8th alltime. You say a lot of things out of ignorance such as Cal being 23rd in alltime wins which you obviously found on Wikipedia because they count D2 and D3 wins. So you bash Cal for “beating lesser opponents” while simultaneously using NAIA coaches to rank ahead of him because you don’t know any better. You also don’t know that there are only 16 multi time Title winning coaches ever and Cal is the 2nd winningest coach alltime to not have multiple titles only behind Boeheim, who you have ranked ahead of him but don’t penalize for only winning once the way you do Cal. This is another metric that lands Cal in the top 20 alltime. Just to be clear imo Cal is an underachiever but once was a great coach, will go down as a top 20 alltime coach and is already in the HOF because of what he’s achieved. You can be great and still underachieve, happens all the time in sports. And BTW your uninformed and hypocritical opinions aren’t data points. The only data you’ve given has been incorrect or has been a double standard.
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 3/14/25 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 3/14/25 at 2:04 pm to Madking
quote:
You can be great and still underachieve
Matter of perspective. And my perspective is, you can win a lot of regular season games and still not be a great coach. Why? Because it takes more than coaching. It takes talent, which he’s been able to recruit on a far higher level than the majority of the teams he plays (conference) yearly. So much so that it could mask any coaching deficiencies he had until he got to comparable talent & better coaching (NCAA tournament) where he usually loses. Once the parity is even close he looks average. I guess that’s why I count those lower level coaches that you overlook. They won those games based on coaching. Not having future NBA players playing against HS referees, PE teachers & personal trainers.
quote:
there are only 16 multi time Title winning coaches ever
All who have an argument to be greater than Cal.
quote:
Cal is the 2nd winningest coach alltime to not have multiple titles only behind Boeheim,
I’ve explained what I think about his wins. If you disagree, fine. But Boeheim? Are we comparing prime Big East to Conference USA? If you do then I understand who I’m conversing with, & I digress. But in MY opinion, the only conference that Calipari has been apart of that was as competitive as what Boeheim dealt with for the majority of his career is the SEC THIS YEAR. Cal, who had a top 5 class & multiple transfers from his previous top 2 class, won 19 games & lost in the 1st(?) rd of the conference tournament to a team with far less talent, but somewhat comparable. That’s who he is. He needs NBA talent in a 2nd or 3rd tier conference to succeed. Same thing can be said about 500 coaches. It’s not impressive. I literally named over 20 coaches. You picked one who had a much more impressive career than Calipari. It’s not even close between he & Boeheim. Cal wouldn’t have gone to the sweet 16 with the Carmelo team Boeheim won a title with. Are you familiar with Boeheim? He’s the greatest zone defense coach ever. Other great coaches modeled their zones after him including coach K. I’m not even sure Calipari can spell defense. Im done conversing w you. We just have two different ideas of what a great coach is & will never agree.
Posted on 3/14/25 at 2:11 pm to WhySoSerious
-That’s not perspective that’s trying to separate from the whole so you can isolate something to aim your bias towards. It’s actually a fact, Dan Marino and Aaron Rogers are both great and both underachieved, case closed.
- your second statement is again a biased opinion. It’s fine for Boheim to only have won once which makes no sense because the separation and time span of wins is greater for him than for Cal.
- your 3rd point is again pure bias. You dismiss facts using a double standard then use another uniformed option to waive away more objective data. You’re correct about the last 8-9 years of his career even though he’s top 3-5 during that span but that doesn’t cancel out the previous 20-25, that would be insane.
To summarize, your argument consists of double standards, conflicting statements by and incorrect data points.
- your second statement is again a biased opinion. It’s fine for Boheim to only have won once which makes no sense because the separation and time span of wins is greater for him than for Cal.
- your 3rd point is again pure bias. You dismiss facts using a double standard then use another uniformed option to waive away more objective data. You’re correct about the last 8-9 years of his career even though he’s top 3-5 during that span but that doesn’t cancel out the previous 20-25, that would be insane.
To summarize, your argument consists of double standards, conflicting statements by and incorrect data points.
This post was edited on 3/14/25 at 2:30 pm
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News