Bruce Pearl is a better basketball coach than Kevin O'Neill

#726
#726
HendersonVol said:
This is a terrible analogy. Just awful.

You have no clue what my stance on the NCAA mess is. Nor have you thought to ask.

Fun with numbers for hatvol and his cronies:

Hatvol despises Dooley because he didn't win enough at La Tech. His winning percentage? 46%

O'Neills? 49%

People have tried to make the argument to him that people generally aren't successful at la tech(not me). This is no good for Dooley. What is O'Neills excuse for Northwestern?

In his 3rd year at La Tech, Dooley won 4 games. In his 3rd year at Northwestern, O'Neill won 5.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Hold up! Bad analogy. You forgot to mention why he won't be in the hall of fame, even though his statistics warrant it. Did I miss something?

I don't care what your stand is. What I know is that winning % in a vacuum is how you've argued from the beginning, regardless how nonsensical it might sound.

The awful analogy is about what another poster thinks of the Dooley hire and how that might pertain to this.
 
#727
#727
coaching is more than x's and o's. it's the entire deal, and as the big tuna said, "you are what your record says you are".

career loser kevin.
 
#729
#729
BigPapaVol said:
Hold up! Bad analogy. You forgot to mention why he won't be in the hall of fame, even though his statistics warrant it. Did I miss something?

I don't care what your stand is. What I know is that winning % in a vacuum is how you've argued from the beginning, regardless how nonsensical it might sound.

The awful analogy is about what another poster thinks of the Dooley hire and how that might pertain to this.
Click to expand...

Am I trying to get Bruce into the hall of fame? Is Kevin in the hall of fame?

Here is a more apt baseball analogy. I say Tom Glavine is a better pitcher than Kenshin Kawakami. You disagree because KK has a knowledge of the game factor that Glavine just doesn't have.

Your argument is that a coach shouldn't be measured by wins and losses over the long term. It is the only argument for KO.
 
#730
#730
And clearly steroids and lying about illegal contact with a recruit you didn't sign have the same impact on the outcome of games. Oh, that's right, outcome of games doesn't matter to you.
 
#731
#731
HendersonVol said:
Your argument is that a coach shouldn't be measured by wins and losses over the long term. It is the only argument for KO.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is the argument at all.

You and others have thrown out a lot of numbers about the past, regardless of context, but who do you think will have the more successful future?
 
#732
#732
cotton said:
I don't think that is the argument at all.

You and others have thrown out a lot of numbers about the past, regardless of context, but who do you think will have the more successful future?
Click to expand...

If Bruce coaches, Bruce. No question about it.
 
#735
#735
HendersonVol said:
Am I trying to get Bruce into the hall of fame? Is Kevin in the hall of fame?

Here is a more apt baseball analogy. I say Tom Glavine is a better pitcher than Kenshin Kawakami. You disagree because KK has a knowledge of the game factor that Glavine just doesn't have.

Your argument is that a coach shouldn't be measured by wins and losses over the long term. It is the only argument for KO.
Click to expand...
So Nolan Ryan sucks? Maybe you think Greinke sucks. How about last year's AL Cy winner. Those guys suck because they didnt win like Cy.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#738
#738
BigPapaVol said:
Ryan? Greinke? Hernandez?

Do have any idea what a baseball is? Maybe I should list Japanese players?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Ryan won more games than he lost. Greinke is 26. Baseball pitching wins don't always correlate to pitching the best.

Basketball coaching does.
 
#744
#744
HendersonVol said:
Wrong Big Mac.
Click to expand...

Big Mac was a guy to highlight the silliness of your stats in a vacuum position. You tried to make it better by tossing out pitchers and they were unceremoniously crammed in your earhole. You then told me some gibberish about how wins and performance aren't correlated, except in college basketball, which you knew was senseless when you posted it, just like I did.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#745
#745
HendersonVol said:
It's best for him to get off topic when trying to debate that KO is a better coach than Pearl.
Click to expand...

Not that my opinion matters much but I'd call it a draw. They both have faults in their resumes. To me, one is a good marketer and a good coach. The other is a poor marketer and a good coach. One lied to the governing body making it a draw.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#746
#746
Just to add to the beautiful thing going on here.

Bob knight won more ncaa tourney games at tx tech than kevin o'neill has ever won.

Knight's old school nature did not keep him from having success at a basketball graveyard
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#748
#748
99gator said:
Just to add to the beautiful thing going on here.

Bob knight won more ncaa tourney games at tx tech than kevin o'neill has ever won.

Knight's old school nature did not keep him from having success at a basketball graveyard
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Ding ding ding we have a winner here folks. Case closed, I can't believe some would argue KO was better, pearl took us to the elite 8 and 6 straight NCAA appearances with a #1 ranking at one time. Kevin has done squat
 
#749
#749
Kevin O'Neill is a better coach.

Bruce Pearl is a better recruiter. Except he cheats and lies about it.

/thread
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top