In another thread, we had a discussion about why some people seem eternally critical of our team, regardless of performance, from game to game, win or lose.

I'm not referring to the majority of fans who say both good and bad things about us, only referring to those who are constantly negative.

I recognize their right to complain, within the AUP. Contrary to some people's impressions, I actually have no issue with the rules, or with the moderation here, and I do not expect those posters to be banned.

My only issue is that it is impossible to have any sort of reasonable discussion about anything basketball related, b/c folks with those opinions bombard everyone else with the same old diatribe, and use any bad game, or even a series of play, to support their contentions.

Okay, fair enough. But I decided that two can play this game, so I started pushing back on a few of them. They don't like that.

It's okay for them to bombard the rest of us daily, in almost every thread, but it's not okay if we give some of it back. But after awhile, I got tired of it, b/c it leads nowhere. Nobody on a message board ever changes his/her mind. They just want to espouse their views.

Then I started thinking about their motivation. I have been convinced for a long time that it is a result of holding Pastner to the standard of Calipari's last 4 years here. Not to Calipari's first 5 years here, or Cal's first 4 1/2 years in coaching, or anything else in Memphis' history. Only that one-time spectacular 4-year run in the NCAAs.

On the other thread, one comment in particular caught my attention, "A lot of ppl think Pastner has had underachieving teams and so some of us are going to be critical (even when they blow out Houston). If he starts going balls out in the tournament and they make a few deep runs, most will lay off and enjoy."

I asked him what constituted a "deep run." He said "S16/E8."

To be clear, I am not singling him out. He has the right to feel that way. I just would like to understand it.

So, that got me thinking. How many "deep runs" have we had in history by the same coach, with the assumption that "a few" means more than 2?

So, here's the research:

NCAA School Appearances = 25
Record = 33-25

F2
1973, 2008

F4
1985

E8
92 06 07

S16
84 95 09

One win
76 82 83 86 88 04 13

Lost first game
55 56 62 89 93 96 03 11 12

Coaches
Frederick Grantham 1920-21
W.H. DePriest 21-22
Lester Barhard 22-24
Zach Curlin 24-48
McCoy Tarry 48-51
Eugene Lambert 51-56: 2 appearances = 0 wins
Bob Vanatta 56-62: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dean Ehlers 62-66
Moe Iba 66-70
Gene Bartow 70-74: 1 appearance = 3 wins (1 F2 in '73)
Wayne Yates 74-79: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dana Kirk 79-86: 5 appearances = 9 wins (S16 in '84*, F4 in '85*)
Larry Finch 86-97: 6 appearances = 6 wins (E8 in '92, S16 in '95)
Tic Price 97-99
Johnny Jones 99-00
John Calipari 00-09: 6 appearances = 14 wins ('06-09 = E8, E8, F2*, S16)
Josh Pastner 09-present: 3 appearances = 1 win

* = Vacated

References:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/memphis/

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...team1/6587

Facts:

1. Memphis has had 17 BB head coaches since our first season in 1920.

1. Eight coaches have taken us to the NCAA, in 94 years.

2. Three coaches have more appearances than Josh Pastner (Kirk, Calipari, Finch).

3. Four coaches have more tourney wins than Pastner (Bartow + the above 3 coaches).

4. In 94 years, we have 9 runs to the S16, or deeper.

5. Bartow has 1, Kirk has 2 (both vacated), Finch has 2, and Calipari has 4 (1 vacated).

Observations:

1. "A few" usually means not a great amount, but more than 2.

2. By the above definition, in 94 years and 17 coaches, only ONE COACH. John Calipari, has had "a few deep runs" in the NCAAs (4 back to back, with 1 vacated, so he barely meets the definition).

3. Kirk had 2 deep runs (not "a few"), but both were vacated.

Conclusions:

I'm not saying this one poster represents everybody who is CONSTANTLY negative about our team and current coach, but I bet he isn't the only one who feels that way, based on almost 5 years of comments, from a number of posters.

It seems to me that the real standard that most of Pastner's detractors hold him to is Calipari's last 4 years (not his first 5), and not to any other coach in Memphis history. That 4 year run is not only Memphis' best, it is the best in NCAA history in # of wins (before vacated ones), and one of the best NCAA runs in history (behind UCLA and not many, if any, more).

So, by saying we'll be happy after Pastner makes a few deep runs in the tourney, people who feel that way are going to be unhappy for a LONG TIME more, several years, at least.

And THAT is why I say it is impossible to have a rational discussion with anyone who feels that way, b/c that is an impossible standard, and certainly not the norm for Memphis basketball. EVER. Not even close.

Not the end of the world. Just want to call it for what it is.

Nice work.

Not directed at you but vacated means nothing to me.

Sports media and internet nerds are the only folks who care about that.

Fab 5 went to two Final Fours. I watched both.

Nice try. Won't help. Appreciate your research, though. This is rational well thought out reasoning. Which is what is wrong with it.

(01-25-2014 03:28 PM)TripleA Wrote:  In another thread, we had a discussion about why some people seem eternally critical of our team, regardless of performance, from game to game, win or lose.

I'm not referring to the majority of fans who say both good and bad things about us, only referring to those who are constantly negative.

I recognize their right to complain, within the AUP. Contrary to some people's impressions, I actually have no issue with the rules, or with the moderation here, and I do not expect those posters to be banned.

My only issue is that it is impossible to have any sort of reasonable discussion about anything basketball related, b/c folks with those opinions bombard everyone else with the same old diatribe, and use any bad game, or even a series of play, to support their contentions.

Okay, fair enough. But I decided that two can play this game, so I started pushing back on a few of them. They don't like that.

It's okay for them to bombard the rest of us daily, in almost every thread, but it's not okay if we give some of it back. But after awhile, I got tired of it, b/c it leads nowhere. Nobody on a message board ever changes his/her mind. They just want to espouse their views.

Then I started thinking about their motivation. I have been convinced for a long time that it is a result of holding Pastner to the standard of Calipari's last 4 years here. Not to Calipari's first 5 years here, or Cal's first 4 1/2 years in coaching, or anything else in Memphis' history. Only that one-time spectacular 4-year run in the NCAAs.

On the other thread, one comment in particular caught my attention, "A lot of ppl think Pastner has had underachieving teams and so some of us are going to be critical (even when they blow out Houston). If he starts going balls out in the tournament and they make a few deep runs, most will lay off and enjoy."

I asked him what constituted a "deep run." He said "S16/E8."

To be clear, I am not singling him out. He has the right to feel that way. I just would like to understand it.

So, that got me thinking. How many "deep runs" have we had in history by the same coach, with the assumption that "a few" means more than 2?

So, here's the research:

NCAA School Appearances = 25
Record = 33-25

F2
1973, 2008

F4
1985

E8
92 06 07

S16
84 95 09

One win
76 82 83 86 88 04 13

Lost first game
55 56 62 89 93 96 03 11 12

Coaches
Frederick Grantham 1920-21
W.H. DePriest 21-22
Lester Barhard 22-24
Zach Curlin 24-48
McCoy Tarry 48-51
Eugene Lambert 51-56: 2 appearances = 0 wins
Bob Vanatta 56-62: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dean Ehlers 62-66
Moe Iba 66-70
Gene Bartow 70-74: 1 appearance = 3 wins (1 F2 in '73)
Wayne Yates 74-79: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dana Kirk 79-86: 5 appearances = 9 wins (S16 in '84*, F4 in '85*)
Larry Finch 86-97: 6 appearances = 6 wins (E8 in '92, S16 in '95)
Tic Price 97-99
Johnny Jones 99-00
John Calipari 00-09: 6 appearances = 14 wins ('06-09 = E8, E8, F2*, S16)
Josh Pastner 09-present: 3 appearances = 1 win

* = Vacated

References:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/memphis/

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...team1/6587

Facts:

1. Memphis has had 17 BB head coaches since our first season in 1920.

1. Eight coaches have taken us to the NCAA, in 94 years.

2. Three coaches have more appearances than Josh Pastner (Kirk, Calipari, Finch).

3. Four coaches have more tourney wins than Pastner (Bartow + the above 3 coaches).

4. In 94 years, we have 9 runs to the S16, or deeper.

5. Bartow has 1, Kirk has 2 (both vacated), Finch has 2, and Calipari has 4 (1 vacated).

Observations:

1. "A few" usually means not a great amount, but more than 2.

2. By the above definition, in 94 years and 17 coaches, only ONE COACH. John Calipari, has had "a few deep runs" in the NCAAs (4 back to back, with 1 vacated, so he barely meets the definition).

3. Kirk had 2 deep runs (not "a few"), but both were vacated.

Conclusions:

I'm not saying this one poster represents everybody who is CONSTANTLY negative about our team and current coach, but I bet he isn't the only one who feels that way, based on almost 5 years of comments, from a number of posters.

It seems to me that the real standard that most of Pastner's detractors hold him to is Calipari's last 4 years (not his first 5), and not to any other coach in Memphis history. That 4 year run is not only Memphis' best, it is the best in NCAA history in # of wins (before vacated ones), and one of the best NCAA runs in history (behind UCLA and not many, if any, more).

So, by saying we'll be happy after Pastner makes a few deep runs in the tourney, people who feel that way are going to be unhappy for a LONG TIME more, several years, at least.

And THAT is why I say it is impossible to have a rational discussion with anyone who feels that way, b/c that is an impossible standard, and certainly not the norm for Memphis basketball. EVER. Not even close.

Not the end of the world. Just want to call it for what it is.

While I think you have a rationale theory, the problem is not all 94 Tiger teams were equal in talent.

Doubt you will find many over the course of history with as many top 100 players as Cal and Partner have had.

Sure, there have been some individual teams that were loaded, but few coaches have had as much talent that ranked favorably with the top teams in the country as Kirk, some Finch, Cal and Pastner.

Some fans think we should reach the Sweet 16 every season.

wouldn't you necessarily agree that the standard begins with how well a coach does with so called non talent?

It appears that you have a lot of time on your hands.

(01-25-2014 03:28 PM)TripleA Wrote:  In another thread, we had a discussion about why some people seem eternally critical of our team, regardless of performance, from game to game, win or lose.

I'm not referring to the majority of fans who say both good and bad things about us, only referring to those who are constantly negative.

I recognize their right to complain, within the AUP. Contrary to some people's impressions, I actually have no issue with the rules, or with the moderation here, and I do not expect those posters to be banned.

My only issue is that it is impossible to have any sort of reasonable discussion about anything basketball related, b/c folks with those opinions bombard everyone else with the same old diatribe, and use any bad game, or even a series of play, to support their contentions.

Okay, fair enough. But I decided that two can play this game, so I started pushing back on a few of them. They don't like that.

It's okay for them to bombard the rest of us daily, in almost every thread, but it's not okay if we give some of it back. But after awhile, I got tired of it, b/c it leads nowhere. Nobody on a message board ever changes his/her mind. They just want to espouse their views.

Then I started thinking about their motivation. I have been convinced for a long time that it is a result of holding Pastner to the standard of Calipari's last 4 years here. Not to Calipari's first 5 years here, or Cal's first 4 1/2 years in coaching, or anything else in Memphis' history. Only that one-time spectacular 4-year run in the NCAAs.

On the other thread, one comment in particular caught my attention, "A lot of ppl think Pastner has had underachieving teams and so some of us are going to be critical (even when they blow out Houston). If he starts going balls out in the tournament and they make a few deep runs, most will lay off and enjoy."

I asked him what constituted a "deep run." He said "S16/E8."

To be clear, I am not singling him out. He has the right to feel that way. I just would like to understand it.

So, that got me thinking. How many "deep runs" have we had in history by the same coach, with the assumption that "a few" means more than 2?

So, here's the research:

NCAA School Appearances = 25
Record = 33-25

F2
1973, 2008

F4
1985

E8
92 06 07

S16
84 95 09

One win
76 82 83 86 88 04 13

Lost first game
55 56 62 89 93 96 03 11 12

Coaches
Frederick Grantham 1920-21
W.H. DePriest 21-22
Lester Barhard 22-24
Zach Curlin 24-48
McCoy Tarry 48-51
Eugene Lambert 51-56: 2 appearances = 0 wins
Bob Vanatta 56-62: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dean Ehlers 62-66
Moe Iba 66-70
Gene Bartow 70-74: 1 appearance = 3 wins (1 F2 in '73)
Wayne Yates 74-79: 1 appearance = 0 wins
Dana Kirk 79-86: 5 appearances = 9 wins (S16 in '84*, F4 in '85*)
Larry Finch 86-97: 6 appearances = 6 wins (E8 in '92, S16 in '95)
Tic Price 97-99
Johnny Jones 99-00
John Calipari 00-09: 6 appearances = 14 wins ('06-09 = E8, E8, F2*, S16)
Josh Pastner 09-present: 3 appearances = 1 win

* = Vacated

References:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/memphis/

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...team1/6587

Facts:

1. Memphis has had 17 BB head coaches since our first season in 1920.

1. Eight coaches have taken us to the NCAA, in 94 years.

2. Three coaches have more appearances than Josh Pastner (Kirk, Calipari, Finch).

3. Four coaches have more tourney wins than Pastner (Bartow + the above 3 coaches).

4. In 94 years, we have 9 runs to the S16, or deeper.

5. Bartow has 1, Kirk has 2 (both vacated), Finch has 2, and Calipari has 4 (1 vacated).

Observations:

1. "A few" usually means not a great amount, but more than 2.

2. By the above definition, in 94 years and 17 coaches, only ONE COACH. John Calipari, has had "a few deep runs" in the NCAAs (4 back to back, with 1 vacated, so he barely meets the definition).

3. Kirk had 2 deep runs (not "a few"), but both were vacated.

Conclusions:

I'm not saying this one poster represents everybody who is CONSTANTLY negative about our team and current coach, but I bet he isn't the only one who feels that way, based on almost 5 years of comments, from a number of posters.

It seems to me that the real standard that most of Pastner's detractors hold him to is Calipari's last 4 years (not his first 5), and not to any other coach in Memphis history. That 4 year run is not only Memphis' best, it is the best in NCAA history in # of wins (before vacated ones), and one of the best NCAA runs in history (behind UCLA and not many, if any, more).

So, by saying we'll be happy after Pastner makes a few deep runs in the tourney, people who feel that way are going to be unhappy for a LONG TIME more, several years, at least.

And THAT is why I say it is impossible to have a rational discussion with anyone who feels that way, b/c that is an impossible standard, and certainly not the norm for Memphis basketball. EVER. Not even close.

Not the end of the world. Just want to call it for what it is.

We were in the Sweet 16 in 1982 and 1983 as well. I think I remember that 1985 was the first year for the 64 team bracket, but in 1984 we must have not gotten a bye and had to play two games, whereas in 1982 and 83 we got a bye into the 2nd round.

Now that I think about it, a little strange considering that we got home court advantage in 1984. I think thats the year we beat the crap out of Purdue in the 2nd round

(01-25-2014 04:14 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  Nice work.

Not directed at you but vacated means nothing to me.

Sports media and internet nerds are the only folks who care about that.

Fab 5 went to two Final Fours. I watched both.

I understand. I agree with the thing about vacated, as a fan. And I went to San Antonio. But when listing NCAA records, you have to acknowledge that stuff, to be objective.

Also, it doesn't change ANY of the points I made. Kirk had 2 runs, not "a few." Only Cal had more than 2, with or without the penalties.

(01-25-2014 04:19 PM)Raleigh_Tiger Wrote:  Nice try. Won't help. Appreciate your research, though. This is rational well thought out reasoning. Which is what is wrong with it.

I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. Just putting research behind my points. I can probably predict each reaction by first reading the user name.

(01-25-2014 05:04 PM)alcalde Wrote:  We were in the Sweet 16 in 1982 and 1983 as well.

yep. Kirk went to 4 straight sweet 16s

and I'm with Hoop Deams -- "vacated" means nothing to me

(01-25-2014 04:20 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  While I think you have a rationale theory, the problem is not all 94 Tiger teams were equal in talent.

Doubt you will find many over the course of history with as many top 100 players as Cal and Partner have had.

Sure, there have been some individual teams that were loaded, but few coaches have had as much talent that ranked favorably with the top teams in the country as Kirk, some Finch, Cal and Pastner.

Again, I generally agree, but IMO, that doesn't change anything. Those more successful coaches still had to go out and get the players, which is part of recruiting. But that's also why they are the most successful coaches in Memphis history.

And I would concede that Pastner is, to some extent, taking advantage of what was built before him, but even that goes way back before Calipari. We became nationally relevant in the mid-'50s, and have remained so for the great majority of the time since, so you could say Kirk and Cal benefited from that, too.

(01-25-2014 04:54 PM)BealeStreetTiger Wrote:  Some fans think we should reach the Sweet 16 every season.

That was essentially my point. Not trying to pick on the one guy, just using him as typical, in that he's not going to be happy until we make a few runs. A run to him is S16 or E8.

Well, that disqualifies every coach in Memphis history except Calipari, and I don't think anybody believes Pastner is Calipari right now.

I just think a lot of the negative outpouring is a result of taking the last 4 Calipari years as the performance standard for every team and coach, going forward.

(01-25-2014 05:10 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 04:19 PM)Raleigh_Tiger Wrote:  Nice try. Won't help. Appreciate your research, though. This is rational well thought out reasoning. Which is what is wrong with it.

I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. Just putting research behind my points. I can probably predict each reaction by first reading the user name.

I know, right. The frustrating part is the unwillingness to reason.

(01-25-2014 04:55 PM)tigeriron Wrote:  wouldn't you necessarily agree that the standard begins with how well a coach does with so called non talent?

I don't think so. Any observer can set any standard he wants, I suppose, but in the end, coaches are always judged on results. It is certainly how they are paid, hired and fired, voted into the HOF, etc.

Any judging talent is subjective, to some degree. Plus, recruiting the talent is as import as coaching it up. More important, IMO. Tubby Smith is a great bench coach, but not so great at recruiting, for example. UK fans still point out that his one NC was won with Pitino's recruits.

(01-25-2014 05:15 PM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 05:04 PM)alcalde Wrote:  We were in the Sweet 16 in 1982 and 1983 as well.

yep. Kirk went to 4 straight sweet 16s

and I'm with Hoop Deams -- "vacated" means nothing to me

Then you've apparently never knowingly shown your asterisk though others clearly can see it. If "vacated" (scandal, cheat, deception, fraud, opportunistic, selfish ambition to a dishonest end) means nothing to you, I'm quite content to never have known nor met you.

Thanks again, Andy, for the research. I cannot ignore the asterisks.

As a fan, I take every season and every game as an entity by themselves. This season the talent and experience is there combined with quality young guys to make a nice run. For me, I judge the coaching the same way season by season and game by game. That's why some of us praise Josh when he does well and criticize bad game decisions. To me, that's just fair.

(01-25-2014 04:56 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  It appears that you have a lot of time on your hands.

Let's see. I found the 2 reference sites through Google. Took seconds. Then I copied and pasted the records into here, and edited. Then I added my commentary. Took about an hour, b/c I can type quite fast.

Oh, and I'm good at multi-tasking. I was watching basketball on TV while I was doing it.

Not to mention, it's Saturday. And I'm retired. And I have lots of time. Annoying, isn't it?

I understand everything you are pointing out, but so far Josh MIGHT be a better coach than Finch, stressing the MIGHT, but he is not a better coach than Bartow, Kirk, or Calipari. So if we are going off the numbers and thought process here, that means we wont make any S16 runs or deeper.
He is a better person than some of the aforementioned people, but great person doesn't make you a great coach.

(01-25-2014 04:56 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  It appears that you have a lot of time on your hands.

It appears your butt-hurt level is cranked to 11.......