(02-26-2020 12:39 PM)Gary Miller Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 12:35 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 12:13 PM)Gary Miller Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 11:31 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 08:53 AM)Gary Miller Wrote:  It needs to be taken into account that he took over a program that had 3 straight NCAA appearances. Purnell overall had more success in 6 years than Brownell has had in 10. The fact is that if Brownell was at pretty much any other P5 school he would have lost the job after year 5 or 6. The Sweet 16 run bought him a few more years and he'd probably be on the hot seat right now if it wasn't for the win in Chapel Hill. Yes, I know his contract... This is Clemson, money doesn't matter.

Uuuuuuuuhhhhhhh. Come again???

Purnell went 0-3 in the NCAA tournament while at Clemson. That's zeros in the win column. Like it's already been stated, Brownell is the winningest coach in program history now and made a Sweet 16 run.

I'm sure you have reasons for thinking Purnell was more successful, because you're a logical guy. I'd love to hear them.

Brownell has made the NCAA Tournament 20 percent of the time, Purnell made it nearly 50 percent of the time with a higher winning percentage. That's what I'm basing it off of. Brownell has the most wins because he's been there for 10 years. Brownell is a good coach, but he hasn't built anything substantial yet. Maybe this class he has coming in will do it, but he's got one more year to get it done. The fact that Clemson is a football school has played into his favor not against him.

And LOST. He lost every one of those games.

Are you reading your posts today?

I get that. I'm sorry if you can't see my point but there's no need to keep going on this. I'll be wrong, I'm fine with that.

I understand your point in terms of regular season wins/efficiency. However, we all know that the ultimate success meter is measured in tournament success, of which Brownell has a Sweet 16 and Purnell doesn't even have a win.