Sandvol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2010
- Messages
- 12,785
- Likes
- 3,721
I believe his point is Martin hasn't made the NCAA tournament EVER as a head coach so that counts as a losing season. The standard is make the tournament. Or, go coach somewhere else.
Yeah Pearl was a mastermind at dictating a game. Indy, Oakland, College of Charleston, Charlotte, USC (twice)...you just have to except the fact that Pearl was declining as a coach and was reeling in Swiperboy's and Hall's.
Yes ignore the others he listed, or didn't list such as final four bound Wichita State.
I like you Vols30, but don't act as if Martin has never win a "big" game, that's absolutely ridiculous.
Read the thread "Martin isn't so bad" and get back to me when you see how the current great coaches did in their first 5 years as a head coach. He's right on par, with more wins.
When I see this argument, I know the coach has no other qualities in which someone can point towards as a defense. You know who else has a mediocre record and performance their first couple of years? A bunch of crap coaches.
It is possible, people should know, to use one's eyes and discern whether or not a coach is good by his game plan, game management and other readily apparent details.
But here's the point. If all these coaches were in the same year (year three) of their coaching careers, would you really be saying that Martin is terrible?