What grade would you give Coach Brian Gregory on how he is doing as head coach @ UD?

FLYER FANATIC 88 · #1 10-01-2010, 04:55 PM

Brian Gregory has coached the Dayton Flyers 7 seasons. What grade would you give him for the job he is doing as head coach? Why?

UDBrian · #2 10-01-2010, 05:40 PM

I would say A or A-. I would give him a B on his accomplishments so far because of our A10 record. But, overall I would say A because we have a lot of young talent here and more coming in. We lost three starters and still feel good about our chances this year. Can you remember a Pre Gregory time where we lost three starters and expected to have a good season?

Gazoo · #3 10-01-2010, 05:58 PM

I would say a solid B+. He has great support and facilities, plus an acceptable conference. He just has to execute and he has to an acceptable level.

I could not give him an A unless I thought Butler / _avier were just lucky, which is not the case. 1 NCAA win in his time here, and I have to wonder if we win that game if not for a couple of early 3's that scared WV out of their zone. But win we did.

longtimefan · #4 10-01-2010, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

I would say a solid B+. He has great support and facilities, plus an acceptable conference. He just has to execute and he has to an acceptable level.

I could not give him an A unless I thought Butler / _avier were just lucky, which is not the case. 1 NCAA win in his time here, and I have to wonder if we win that game if not for a couple of early 3's that scared WV out of their zone. But win we did.

I'm surprised you gave him a B considering your posts on the other thread listing his many stupid decisions which cost us an NCAA bid last year.

anthonycharles · #5 10-01-2010, 08:24 PM

B+

The only reason he doesn't get an A is due to our A-10 play.

Gazoo · #6 10-02-2010, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

I'm surprised you gave him a B considering your posts on the other thread listing his many stupid decisions which cost us an NCAA bid last year.

Really, you and UD62 thought I would give him an A?

Originally Posted by Gazoo

. . . but I would answer your question that yes, BG had a crappy year (NOTE: DID NOT SAY HE'S A CRAPPY COACH), not reacting well to the pressure of expectations and trying to over-control game situations. Until the NIT.

Originally Posted by Gazoo

There's a difference between "BG his terrible, fire him and burn his house down" and "BG had a bad game, I'm disappointed." Or even a bad season. I recognize that bad decisions compound based on human nature / stubborness / relationships. I can be disappointed and still want him to be my head coach this year.

SeasonTicketFan · #7 10-01-2010, 06:25 PM

BG could be graded in several areas.

Recruiting --> A much higher caliber talent than his two predecessors
Performance against BCS schools --> A+
A10 league performance --> B- some disappointments
Representing the University --> A honors tradition, education and graduation

ClaytonFlyerFan · #8 10-01-2010, 06:31 PM

Would the person who gave BG a C please be man (or woman) enough to explain your reasoning.

ClaytonFlyerFan · #9 10-02-2010, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan

Would the person who gave BG a C please be man (or woman) enough to explain your reasoning.

I hate it when people quote themselves, but this really irritates me.

I would love to see a response from any of the three of you (so far- as of 8 AM Saturday October 2nd) with the reasoning as to why you gave BG a C. Send it to me in a PM if you like. What am I missing? What do you expect?

My hunch is all three live within the I-275 loop?????

Fudd · #10 10-02-2010, 10:46 AM

I said "A". I considered a "B", because we can do better in conference play. But then I considered where we have been, and how long it takes to move the needle of public opinion about a program.

The win percentage by coach chart at the bottom of this page says a lot to me. BG is getting up into Donoher type numbers.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/teams/dayton/coaches

And UD has the type of program where improvement of national perception moves slowly. You have to have a very sustained track record of league and NCAA success to stick in the national public consciousness. To me, it feels like he has us at a point where it feels like we are 50-50 in getting in the NCAA tournament or getting in the NIT and kicking butt there. That is a stage of program development that you can't just bypass. We are going to have to be there for some time and do well in the NCAA opportunities in order to impact the thinking of our program on a national level. IMO, getting to the 2nd round 3 years in a row is better for our rep than the sweet 16 once every 3 years. People look for consistancy in the NCAA tournament. But even getting to that point takes a little luck, IMO. It's like playing poker. If I play the percentages well all the time, the success will come. But I cannot predict exactly when I will win 3 hands in a row. I feel like BG runs a very sound program, and now that he has built it to a certain point, we are playing the percentages well.

I think getting to the NCAA tournament 4-5 times every decade is very acheivable for UD. If you look at the history of the best teams in the A10, that is what they typically have done during periods of domination. Being better than that can obviously be done (X is example), but that can only be done by moving through stages of program development and having some good long-term fortune. X is like the poker player who is the table tall-stacks now. They have the clout working for them.

Honestly, I am skeptical that you can sustain 2 elite teams like that in the A10. If we want to acheive that tip-top success, you have to knock X off the peak. Every year, one of us is going to steal some of the national perception mojo from the other. That extra mojo is what gets you a terrific seed in the NCAA tournament and allows you to have a dominating long-term presence in the NCAA tournament. There have been periods where the A10 had two very successful teams simultaneously, but that tends to lock-out most other teams from much post season participation. There has only been so much mojo to go around. League perceptions change even slower than team pereceptions.

San Diego Flyer · #11 10-02-2010, 11:07 AM

B+ with substandard League record and our inability to recruit, or develop, multiple shooters as the biggest deficiency. Has he solved that issue this year? I think so but how much can you expect from true freshmen?

But I think his grade has increased every two years, and that trend continues. Gregory is on a nice steady upward curve.

Atlantic 10 · #12 10-02-2010, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by Fudd

I said "A". I considered a "B", because we can do better in conference play. But then I considered where we have been, and how long it takes to move the needle of public opinion about a program.

The win percentage by coach chart at the bottom of this page says a lot to me. BG is getting up into Donoher type numbers.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/teams/dayton/coaches

And UD has the type of program where improvement of national perception moves slowly. You have to have a very sustained track record of league and NCAA success to stick in the national public consciousness. To me, it feels like he has us at a point where it feels like we are 50-50 in getting in the NCAA tournament or getting in the NIT and kicking butt there. That is a stage of program development that you can't just bypass. We are going to have to be there for some time and do well in the NCAA opportunities in order to impact the thinking of our program on a national level. IMO, getting to the 2nd round 3 years in a row is better for our rep than the sweet 16 once every 3 years. People look for consistancy in the NCAA tournament. But even getting to that point takes a little luck, IMO. It's like playing poker. If I play the percentages well all the time, the success will come. But I cannot predict exactly when I will win 3 hands in a row. I feel like BG runs a very sound program, and now that he has built it to a certain point, we are playing the percentages well.

I think getting to the NCAA tournament 4-5 times every decade is very acheivable for UD. If you look at the history of the best teams in the A10, that is what they typically have done during periods of domination. Being better than that can obviously be done (X is example), but that can only be done by moving through stages of program development and having some good long-term fortune. X is like the poker player who is the table tall-stacks now. They have the clout working for them.

Honestly, I am skeptical that you can sustain 2 elite teams like that in the A10. If we want to acheive that tip-top success, you have to knock X off the peak. Every year, one of us is going to steal some of the national perception mojo from the other. That extra mojo is what gets you a terrific seed in the NCAA tournament and allows you to have a dominating long-term presence in the NCAA tournament.

BG: 21/11 average wins and loses MD: 17/11 average wins and loses MD did say in a DDN article that BG was the best hire for UD

Buster Goode · #13 10-08-2010, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan

Would the person who gave BG a C please be man (or woman) enough to explain your reasoning.

Would the people who gave BG an A please be man (or woman) enough to explain your reasoning?

An A??? 7th place in the A10 the last three out of four years. An A? I wish you people were grading me in college.

I'm not totally hating on the guy...on a real scale, I give him a B-, but with that not available, he was closer to a B than a C for me.

Come on....to get an A, you would have to finish in the top half of the conference more than one time in the last four years.

ClaytonFlyerFan · #14 10-08-2010, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Buster Goode

Would the people who gave BG an A please be man (or woman) enough to explain your reasoning?

An A??? 7th place in the A10 the last three out of four years. An A? I wish you people were grading me in college.

I'm not totally hating on the guy...on a real scale, I give him a B-, but with that not available, he was closer to a B than a C for me.

Come on....to get an A, you would have to finish in the top half of the conference more than one time in the last four years.

It is 7 days and 164 posts in this thread since I asked for an explanation. Many people have stated why they gave BG an A. Some have great points, some not so great. Ain't America great, we all get our own opinions.

Since you quoted me, I assume your aiming your post at me. So, for the record, I gave BG a B. Would be a B+ if we added + and - to the poll. Just do not see how you can call him "average", which most on here view a C to be.

forego1 · #15 10-08-2010, 02:25 PM

I did my provoking and goading, and I finally voted just now. 'B'.

Now I won't have some 'splaining' to do to Buster.

I'll add a teacher's note to my 'B'. 'G' for good/great effort.

Buster Goode · #16 10-09-2010, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by ClaytonFlyerFan

It is 7 days and 164 posts in this thread since I asked for an explanation. Many people have stated why they gave BG an A. Some have great points, some not so great. Ain't America great, we all get our own opinions.

Since you quoted me, I assume your aiming your post at me. So, for the record, I gave BG a B. Would be a B+ if we added + and - to the poll. Just do not see how you can call him "average", which most on here view a C to be.

Sorry, don't have time to read 170 posts...

Plus, I don't see anywhere where I called BG "average". Not sure if that was directed at me. He's above average in my book. As I stated, I gave him a B.

The attacks on people who try to be objective and grounded in their assessments of this program is why I have curbed my UD Pride appettite by at least 80%.

UDEE79 · #17 10-01-2010, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by SeasonTicketFan

BG could be graded in several areas.

Recruiting --> A much higher caliber talent than his two predecessors
Performance against BCS schools --> A+
A10 league performance --> B- some disappointments
Representing the University --> A honors tradition, education and graduation

I agree with all this except a C- for his A10 and A10 tournament performance both have been a bit less than mediocre.

Overall grade B

lilrudy4787 · #18 10-01-2010, 11:12 PM

I have said this for years,

A++++ recruiter

C (at best) bench coach

evens out to about a b

hawkoooo · #19 10-01-2010, 11:35 PM

it has to be an A. simply because we have the horses. chris johnson = brian roberts (diamond in the rough). + 2 stars staten/wright. the quality of our transfers is also increasing (parker/dillard). not to mention the array of quality roll players and specialists. oh did i mention not many teams in the nation are more athletic?

i know we have only one ncaa tournament win and two appearances, but he did win an NIT and compete in others. this team is guaranteed to be in or around the top25 year in and year out. let's not forget he had us at #14 in the nation and rolling. that season was going to be magical and disaster struck.

he is one of the most sought after coaches in the nation. he has brought this university back into the discussion nationally. A all day.

his system will work now that he is getting all the recruits he wants and this program will be taken seriously as long as he is here.

Viperstick · #20 10-02-2010, 03:58 AM

A-

I was one of the folks a couple of years ago who said Gregory needed to show us more than athletic recruits. While I continue to be frustrated by our February swoons in conference, you can't deny that he has built an exciting team and instilled a championship mindset in this program. The demolition of four well regarded BCS programs in last year's NIT solidified in my mind that BG has elevated this program beyond where it was under OP.

Marysville Flyer · #21 10-02-2010, 12:17 PM

I would give him an A-. From a professional standpoint, he has done everything that can be expected. He is very professional, above reproach, graduates his players, great in the community etc. For that he gets an A+.

I took into consideration what the cupboard looked like when he got here, the impact of Meechum to the progression, how he has reacted / adapted to that in his recruiting. While the jury is still out on the latest class, it sure looks like he continues to improve the talent and skillset of that talent each year. For growth and development, I'll give him an B+ to A-.

The only real ding that numbers can support on him is overall results. Our league records have not been what they should be. We have tended to fade down the stretch. Sometimes there were injuries and other factors, other times not. While there is more to performance then wins and losses, I give him a B here leading to the overall A-.

Furio · #22 10-02-2010, 03:39 PM

Overall grade of a B
Nonconference games A
conference games C
Just basing it past results.

flyerfanatic86 · #23 10-02-2010, 04:40 PM

I gave him a B. He's done excellent against non-conference opponents, but mediocre at best in conference. I don't know how you can give him an A when he hasn't won conference championships, but that's just my opinion.

Flyer'95 · #24 10-02-2010, 05:43 PM

I agree with furio. I think my biggest criticism for BG is that i wish he leaned more on his players sometimes rather than his system. And by that i mean, play more to the strengths of his guys from time to time. A thing that has always bugged me is that he rarely has two shooters working together to do pick and rolls on the outside. It's usually a big man who picks and is left 22 feet from the hoop, or it's just a poor shooting guard setting a pick for a shooter. Why not double the threat and have two shooters? That way, the defenders have to pick their poison. Right now, all they normally have to do is just fight through the big man's pick or switch on D. And it negates the whole point of the pick and roll.

I also think he could get much better at end of half and end of game possessions. But that may be simply due to the fact that he hasn't had a real PG since he's been here.

Also, I can't tell if it's just his players who fail to do this or if it's him, but we rarely exploit mismatches. If we have a big size advantage, or speed advantage in a certain matchup, we rarely play to it more than once. I wish we'd take advantage of things until the other team can stop it. Sometimes, it looks like neither the coaches nor the players are seeing the potential mismatch out there, and that can be frustrating.

His biggest challenge will be learning how to beat the coaches that know him and his team the best. Namely the A10. He hasn't been doing that well enough to earn an A. I like the guy, his passion, how he represents the university, how he beats the BCS schools most of the time, and the kids that he's brought in. But until he starts being consistently in the top of the A10 and getting us to the dance, he's a very solid B in my book.

FLYER FANATIC 88 · #25 10-02-2010, 06:04 PM

If Brian Gregory was coach at a powerhouse school like UNC or Duke, then I would give him a D based on the record and results. It would be completely different and it is hard to say what the team would be like if he was coach there. He probably would be canned from there.

However, he is coaching at Dayton and is doing a pretty decent job for the type of basketball school Dayton is. His winning percentage is 1 of the better coaches in the history of Dayton basketball.

During the 08-09 season, I think Dayton had the second most wins in school history and an undefeated record at home. He helped coach Dayton to the second round of the NCAA tournament, for the first time in almost twenty years.

He has a great record against BCS teams. I don't know if BCS coaches just get arrogant or what it is, but he has done an excellent job and most recently defeated all those BCS schools, including UNC for a NIT championship.

The 1 weakness is doing mediocre in conference play. In 3 of the last 4 seasons, Dayton has gone 8-8 in conference play. In 2 of those 3 seasons, it was very critical and hurt Dayton's chances for a NCAA bid. The conference foes must just have a better game plan or something. He also needs to win a few conference or tournament championships.

If he can fix that 1 weakness in the near future, I would give him an A grade.

My overall grade for Coach Brian Gregory is a grade of B.

shocka43 · #26 10-02-2010, 06:20 PM

A=Recruiter
B=Overall A 10 play
C-= overall A10 road play
A+=results versus the BCS
A=representation of UD

Overall grade B.

I agree with some of what has been posted regarding BG. I have problems with some of his issues, but I still think he represents UD well and gives us a pretty good shot at future success. With that said, the talent everyone wanted is here. All of the seasons past led to the "wait till next year" theme. Well, this is the culmination of "next years". It is time to put the C and B aspects of UD hoops to bed and make them closer to the A category. If not, then the real assessment of BG's report card will have some red marks on it.

Giving him an A says there isn't much room for improvement. There is plenty of room for improvement. Ending mediocre A-10 finishes with the expectations that are out there could possibly put him over the hump. A-10 wins fix non-NCAA appearances.

rollo · #27 10-02-2010, 08:55 PM

I don't understand those who are calling out the people who are giving BG a 'C' on the poll as it seems quite clear that the only unreasonable grade you could give him is an 'A'. As Shocka said, an 'A' means there's no room for improvement and with God as my witness, I sure as heck hope that our Dayton Flyers aren't locked into the NIT for eternity.

As for my 'C':

Our non conference schedule is designed for wins, so I don't think it's fair to give BG an 'A' for beating Prairie View and Eastern Kentucky for no other reason that he's supposed to beat them. And with 11 or 12 of our first 14 games against such competition, BG's winning % as head coach better be high. Face it, I don't pay $1000+ per season to watch us beat Alabama A&M, and from the regular comments on this site when the non-con schedule is announced, I'm not alone with that feeling. Quite honestly, I pay to see us beat _avier, St. Joe's, Temple and the other big boys in the A10, which hasn't happened often enough. To me what truly matters is (1) Conference record and (2) NCAA wins and it's those games that I base my grade.

BG's A10 record is abysmal considering our resources, facilities, equipment, tradition etc... There is no good reason why we should ever finish outside the top 4 of the A10. None. Ever. Our A10 road record under BG stinks....and I only use that term because the filters on this site won't let me use more accurate and descriptive language. And for that reason - mediocre A10 success over an extended period of time - I give BG a C-.

As for NCAA wins, we've had one. I'll admit that it was a great and unexpected win against the 2nd biggest jerk in NCAA hoops (Huggins #2, Calipari #1), but it's only happened once. Nobody deserves and 'A' because the aced one exam just as nobody makes the HOF by hitting 50 homers once. Someone earns an 'A' because they consistently overachieve and outperform their piers over a reasonable period of time. In the classroom, that would be over a semester. In sports it's over a decade. BG has had success, but he hasn't had enough of it over a long enough time so, again, I give him a C-.

Intangibles are also important, so I'll give him credit where it is due. He has beaten some 'good' teams on neutral courts....2010 NIT games, Maui Classic, Marquette, stomped Pitt at home....but he's also been embarrassed at Pitt and UNC. He's also 0-fer at _avier, which is a difficult place to play. For those efforts, I give BG a 'B'.

Put it all together and he's earned a 'C'.

To earn a 'B' from me, he needs to win both the A10 regular season/post season and get us to a Sweet 16 or beyond. To earn an 'A', he's got to do it again...and again....and again.

As a person, father figure and representative of our fine University, there's nobody I'd rather see than BG, so for that, he gets an 'A++'.

Fudd · #28 10-02-2010, 09:35 PM

Rollo, I am curious how you would grade Oliver Purnell and Don Donoher in your system.

UD62 · #29 10-02-2010, 10:33 PM

he must be feeling kind, I thought it would be a D

Furio · #30 10-03-2010, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Fudd

Rollo, I am curious how you would grade Oliver Purnell and Don Donoher in your system.

Using his proposed system there wouldn't have been a B for the last 40 years. In 74 and 84 sweet sixteen and elite eight finishes came when UD was not in a conference but the regular seasons in those 2 years where not great and UD barely made the tournament so it is unlikely they would have met the criteria if they were in a conference at the time.
The last time UD would have earned a B or an A would have been the 60's.
So after his first 7 years DD would be a C at best and OP would be a C at best under his system.

rollo · #31 10-03-2010, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Fudd

Rollo, I am curious how you would grade Oliver Purnell and Don Donoher in your system.

Furio obviously is void of rational thought this morning, so despite his illinformed comments, I'll attempt to answer Fudd's intelligent inquiry with equal aplomb.

Donoher: Inherited a national power and for 20 years kept the UD program in the national spotlight. Near the end of his era college basketball changed, and UD's Athletic Dept didn't react fast enough. I can't solely blame Donoher for the late 80's failures as the reasons for it were in many ways institutional, although his reluctance to recruit outside a 50 mile radius of Dayton was, to a degree, under his control. Donoher will always be a legend at UD, and for that he gets high marks!

Grade: A-

Purnell: Wow....where to start? He was handed a pile of manure and told to serve filet mignon...and darn near pulled it off. His teams, IMHO, typically overachieved. Not every year, but more often than I thought possible with the talent he had on the bench. The promise shown early in OP's tenure reignited the fan base that had slowly disintegrated under O'Brien. I loved his coaching style and poise. Under OP I rarely thought we'd be outsmarted or unprepared. Had he only landed another stud or two (Trotwood's Andre' Hutson) we really would have been tough to beat for a three or four year period. But, alas, OP moved on to greener pastures having left UD in much better shape than when he showed up, but lacking in depth due to two subpar recruiting classes.

For his ability to resurrect the program, I give OP a strong 'B'.

And for the record, I love BG and want him to continue coaching here for as long as he'll have us...but as I've clearly stated, I'm not convinced he's the greatest coach on the planet, but do believe with all my heart that he can move this program forward. How far we go will be limited to his ability to outsmart and outplay A10 opponents for 40 minutes (as opposed to 36), especially on the road. Because, quite honestly, does any A10 team fear us in their home gym?

jcubspoe · #32 10-03-2010, 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by rollo

BG's A10 record is abysmal considering our resources, facilities, equipment, tradition etc... There is no good reason why we should ever finish outside the top 4 of the A10. None. Ever. Our A10 road record under BG stinks....and I only use that term because the filters on this site won't let me use more accurate and descriptive language. And for that reason - mediocre A10 success over an extended period of time - I give BG a C-.

This to me is the important paragraph. I've said this over and over and over. There is no reason, NONE, why UD should not finish in the Top 4 year in and year out in the A10. I'm not saying BG has to win 6 straight conf titles or anything like that...win one every so often, but there's no excuse for only finishing in the Top 4 I think in 2/7 years. We brag about our facilities, fan support, money, history, ect, but seems like we always are fighting for 5th or 6th place in the A10, or worse.

SeasonTicketFan · #33 10-03-2010, 01:21 PM

My grading is different than Rollo's in two areas:
1) Rollo is weighting the A10 performance very heavily in the evaluation and downplays the out of conference games. I agree that the A10 performance has been below expectations, but I disagree on the non-conference.

Most upper Tier D1 schools play cupcakes. North Carolina and Ohio State shared a common beat up opponent last year. However, there have been some powerful non conference wins (especially against Big East schools) in that mix that I consider. Pitt, Marquette, UC, Louisville are all powerful schools that lost to Dayton. And there are more. BG deserves more credit for those wins.

2) Road winning percentage. If you look at Donoher and Purnell's road records they are very similar if not worse than BG. Digger Phelps slammed Donoher at a roast by claiming that 399 of his 400 wins came at home. While I detest Digger, this humor had a bit of truth to it. UD has always been weak on the road! BTW. Creighton, another university like Dayton in terms of NCAA power and prestige has the exact same problem. Their road record is much worse than Dayton's!

rollo · #34 10-03-2010, 02:26 PM

I'm interested in hearing from the 'A' givers as to how they graded and why they think the results from the past 5-7 years is the best we can expect.

Fudd · #35 10-03-2010, 02:57 PM

I'm grading on the curve with respect to what has been accomplished at UD in the last 35 years.

Donoher had a great run of 5 years winning over 60 percent of his games (1980-1984)

Purnell had 4 really good years of over 60 percent winning percentage (1999-2002) in his 9 year career at UD.

Gregory now has his > 60% 4-year and counting run (2006-2009)

And during Gregory's 4 year run, I think he has recruited well enough to sustain that run for at least a few more years, with no end in sight, IMO.

I am not grading against a hypothetical perfect performance. If you did that where would you draw the line on the ceiling of the program? Heck, forget X, I think we can get to where Butler was last year with enough program building and some good fortune. I am grading on how I would look at performance as an athletic director who hired Gregory. What performance can I reasonably expect from a head coach hire at UD given the CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PROGRAM when they were hired? I think if I were to give Purnell a "B" on his 9 years at UD, I would feel compelled to give Gregory at least a "B" as well. I think Gregory's performance given the circumstances of the program have been equal, if not slightly better than Purnell's. And that is not a slam on Purnell, in my eyes.

Purnell had farther to go in his rebuild than Gregory did when he had to replenish the talent below the Waleskowski class. But because Gregory's rebuild/replenishment job has not been as big, he has gotten us back to NIT/NCAA berths faster and gone a little farther. And he does get some extra points for winning more once he gets to those tournaments. Purnell did better in league play by the end of his 9 years, but I think league play is overweighted in Rollo's system of analysis. NCAA/NIT success ought to outweigh league success.

rollo · #36 10-03-2010, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by Fudd

but I think league play is overweighted in Rollo's system of analysis. NCAA/NIT success ought to outweigh league success.

Considering League play determines whether we make the NIT or NCAA, shouldn't it be given a higher weight?

Look at it this way...

'08-09: Success in league play led to an NCAA birth (and win)

'09-10: Failure in the league led to a bid in the NIT (Champs).

I'll take scenario (a) over (b) every year.

Fudd · #37 10-03-2010, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

Considering League play determines whether we make the NIT or NCAA, shouldn't it be given a higher weight?

I simply say no. League play is a big player in whether we make the NCAA/NIT, but not deserving of outweighing the goal itself: post-season tournament success.

That is where I have the biggest issue with your coach grading system.

masonflyer · #38 10-03-2010, 03:20 PM

I gave BG a B. I am very surprised that he was given more A's than B's, but I don't need or want an explanation from the A givers. Kudos to Rollo for giving his reasoning, although I don't agree with the C. I do agree on his grades for Donoher and OP.

I really would have expected about 60% B's, 25% A's, and 15% C's based on overall results, particularly the A 10 tournament results.

shocka43 · #39 10-03-2010, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by SeasonTicketFan

My grading is different than Rollo's in two areas:
1) Rollo is weighting the A10 performance very heavily in the evaluation and downplays the out of conference games. I agree that the A10 performance has been below expectations, but I disagree on the non-conference.

The A10 performance should be heavily weighted and definitely more than OOC. A handful of those OOC wins that we all thought were going to be on the "key wins" list come selection Sunday weren't due to mediocre finishes by those OOC BCS schools. Considering that, the conference schedules of any DI program striving to make it to the NCAA's every year depend on well played conference games. Had BCS schools played stronger in their conference, it would have looked better for us. We can't beat a couple BCS schools a year and think that those wins are going to set us apart from the pack and place the program where it needs to be. We have to treat the A10 with a higher amount of respect, because the outsiders don't. That means if we aren't at the top, there is a good chance we may struggle to get in. We can loose to the BCS schools in the non-con, win the A10, and we get in. That makes most happy.

Flyer68 · #40 10-03-2010, 05:51 PM

I give BG a B+. I am from the 64-68 Donoher era and I thought he was an excellent floor coach before and during the game. I don't think he ever got outcoached by the coaches from Chicago Loyola, DePaul, Louisville, Western Kentucky, Marquette etc. Floor coaching during the game is where I think BG has and will improve. I still feel that he get's outcoached. I also feel that he does not use the inside big men enough to take the pressure off his outside shooters. Maybe he just has not had the athletic big man yet to work with. Altho Donoher was an assistant, he moved into the same program and system. BG became a head coach after being an assistant and you never know what you are going to get when you hire an assistant. No track record. That's a tough thing for any new coach to do at a school, like UD, which does have an excellent basketball history and reputation. Anywhere I go, the Dayton Flyers are known. Plus it was all new for him so it takes a while to really get your feet on the ground, understand yourself etc. I give him an A+ for passion, revival of the program, recruiting, creating expectations, concern for his players etc. Look, he has all of us looking forward to the next basketball season. I think he is improving in all ways and UD has a bright future with him particularly if his energetic recruiting continues. The recruting grind, not the coaching and games, is what burns out these coaches.

THirt · #41 10-03-2010, 08:34 PM

I gave BG an A because I think he's building the program the right way, and has us quite clearly moving in the right direction. Of course I was not pleased with our finish in the A-10 last year, or three years ago, and I agree that UD ought to be in the top 4 of the A-10 year in and year out. We ought to be making the NCAA on a semi-regular basis and winning games there. But the fact is that we've won one NCAA game under BG, and an NIT crown, with a pretty decent showing in the other NIT. It's hard to say too much about BG's first year - we did win the Maui Invitational against the worst field in its history (to be fair, OSU and Villanova were in the tourney that year, but both had down years that year). We did come pretty close to winning an NCAA game his first year, but that and $2 will get you a cup of coffee. We coulda, woulda, shoulda beaten SLU and URI this past year, but we didn't.

However, I think that win-loss record is not the only measure by which a coach should be judged. I have said this elsewhere, but I think BG is honestly not all that concerned with the outcome of any individual game. He is building a program the way he believes it should be built in order to sustain long-term success. If that means starting Jimmy Binnie over Charles Little, then that is what he'll do. Nobody I know would argue that Binnie was a better matchup against say, Derrick Brown than Little (bad comparison b/c Little was hurt for the "traffic cone" game). However, if Binnie practiced and competed the way BG wanted, and Little didn't, then Binnie gets the start. I can understand those who would disagree with that philosophy, but that's the way BG wanted to build the program. People may not like the weave, but it works when it is executed crisply, with the proper personnel. Marcus invariably got an open foul line jumper when that offense was run properly, for example.

So look, results are what they are. We have not won plenty of games that we should have, especially last year, and again, three years ago (I'll keep arguing that Wright's injury was devastating, and while I understand those who say we should have won those games anyway, I'll respectfully disagree). I get that every program has injuries and transfers, but we've had some bad luck in both of those areas - I won't rehash everything, but it sure would have been nice to have a solid, if unspectacular Stephen Thomas last year, for example. Long term, I think Josh Parker is a significant upgrade, and I'll take Dillard over Jesse Berry any day of the week. So perhaps our luck is changing.

Remember that Sandoval broke his foot, rushed back, and probably was not healthy/in shape when he did come back. Wright's injury sucked. Little's injury was one we could not afford. Lowery's injury was devastating as well, and he certainly was not 100% last year.

Look, I'm not making excuses for BG, but plenty of things beyond his control have in fact contributed in a negative way to our won-loss record. I think his in-game coaching has more to do with stubbornly running a system. You can certainly argue that he ought to be making more adjustments, but I think he feels the way he is coaching is best for the long run. There's nobody who works harder than he does, and he is a stand-up guy who represents the university as well as one could. I liked OP, but he was aloof, and didn't really seem to care much about our tradition.

So I think BG is doing things the right way, and while the results are not perfect, I don't think that's what you need in order to garner an A. An A to me does not mean there is no room for improvement. I expect the improvement to come over the next several years, as this program takes off.

masonflyer · #42 10-03-2010, 08:46 PM

Nice post Thirt - I totally respect your opinion. I guess that is the difference. You won't get 5 people attacking you busting chairs over your head.

PerrymanFan · #43 10-04-2010, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by THirt

So I think BG is doing things the right way, and while the results are not perfect, I don't think that's what you need in order to garner an A. An A to me does not mean there is no room for improvement. I expect the improvement to come over the next several years, as this program takes off.

THirt - I understand where you're coming from in your post, but my question then becomes: how long do you use the same thought process to grade your coach?

Meaning, if the last 3 years repeat themselves with some highly touted recruits achieving mostly NIT appearances (even a championship), one NCAA win, a yearly appearance in national rankings, mediocre A-10 results, not making A-10 any tourney championships, beating down BCS schools yearly, having a losing road record, sustaining some important injuries, etc, are you happy with the same results in 2013? At which point do wins and losses matter?

More food for thought (but very important to consider if grading BG):

If you knew in 2006 that Chris Wright might spend 4 years at UD with one NCAA victory, would "2006 you" be satisfied?

For everyone who is grading BG on his recruiting and future expectations, how many NCAA victories/appearances do you expect from Juwan Staten in his tenure?

(PS - What a great thread, its been an incredibly dull off season)

Fudd · #44 10-04-2010, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by PerrymanFan

More food for thought (but very important to consider if grading BG):

If you knew in 2006 that Chris Wright might spend 4 years at UD with one NCAA victory, would "2006 you" be satisfied?

If you are going to ask that question of BG/Wright, you have to ask the same question of OP/Waleskowski. Were you satisfied with Waleskowski going 0-4 seasons on NCAA victories? Wright is 1-3 with one season taken out of play by a broken ankle. Would you rather have one A10 tournament championship or one NCAA victory?

There used to be posters here asking God for 1 NCAA victory before death in the OP years. That victory should be a nuclear bomb in this discussion. If OP released us from the curse of the two consecutive awful O'Brien years, BG has released us from the curse of the 25 year NCAA victory drought. That is 25 years with mainly an "A" and "B" coach according to the Rollo grading system. Now you are telling me a "C" coach broke that streak!

Right or wrong, that one victory did more than anything else to get us back on the map. I can't even think of the last A10 team to get an NCAA victory outiside of Xavier. Was it Saint Joseph's?

rollo · #45 10-04-2010, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Fudd

BG has released us from the curse of the 25 year NCAA victory drought. That is 25 years with mainly an "A" and "B" coach according to the Rollo grading system. Now you are telling me a "C" coach broke that streak!

That 'A' coach won 400+ games, took us to an NCAA Finals, and NIT Championship, 5 other NIT's, an Elite 8 and triple OT against UCLA.... I'll take the lows if some highs are sprinkled between....

That 'B' coach saved this program, took us to 3 NIT's and 2 NCAA's in his final 6 years here and consistently won on the road in the A10...we became a threat anywhere, anytime under OP's coaching.

Our current coach has taken an NIT regular and NCAA hopeful team and turned it into an....well...ummm..an NIT regular and NCAA hopeful team. Yes, he won our first NCAA game since 1990, which was an 19 year drought, but failed to build on that. Had we advanced to the Sweet 16 last season, like many of us expected in the preseason, our program would have taken a very large step forward. As it stands a very strong arguement could be made that our NIT Championship was a small step backwards from the previous season. IMHO, very little has changed since he took charge and this season, like no other, may define his tenure.

PerrymanFan · #46 10-04-2010, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by Fudd

If you are going to ask that question of BG/Wright, you have to ask the same question of OP/Waleskowski. Were you satisfied with Waleskowski going 0-4 seasons on NCAA victories? Wright is 1-3 with one season taken out of play by a broken ankle. Would you rather have one A10 tournament championship or one NCAA victory?

There used to be posters here asking God for 1 NCAA victory before death in the OP years. That victory should be a nuclear bomb in this discussion. If OP released us from the curse of the two consecutive awful O'Brien years, BG has released us from the curse of the 25 year NCAA victory drought. That is 25 years with mainly an "A" and "B" coach according to the Rollo grading system. Now you are telling me a "C" coach broke that streak!

Right or wrong, that one victory did more than anything else to get us back on the map. I can't even think of the last A10 team to get an NCAA victory outiside of Xavier. Was it Saint Joseph's?

You can't compare the expectations of high school KW to high school CW, in fact that might be the worst example you could have used. KW was offered a walk on spot in what many think was a chance for OP to land his brother. His results on the floor were completely unforseeable and need to be attributed in part to coach Purnell. If you ask me in 1999 if I would be satisfied with KW and Purnell if UD made two NCAA and two NIT tournaments with Keith on the floor, the answer is an emphatic yes!

Chris Wright is the biggest recruit to choose UD since who? Jim Paxson? We counted down to his first game like he was Lebron James. Yes, he was sidelined in what was sure to be a tournament year in 2008, but perhaps better coaching/preparation in CW's absence would have taken that team to the dance?

BG gets all the credit in the world for the NCAA win over West Virginia, God bless him for it. But last year's team should have won multiple NCAA games, and BG gets credit for that too. Get more NCAA tournament wins, I'll give him a higher score.

Fudd · #47 10-04-2010, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by PerrymanFan

You can't compare the expectations of high school KW to high school CW, in fact that might be the worst example you could have used. KW was offered a walk on spot in what many think was a chance for OP to land his brother. His results on the floor were completely unforseeable and need to be attributed in part to coach Purnell. If you ask me in 1999 if I would be satisfied with KW and Purnell if UD made two NCAA and two NIT tournaments with Keith on the floor, the answer is an emphatic yes!

Chris Wright is the biggest recruit to choose UD since who? Jim Paxson? We counted down to his first game like he was Lebron James. Yes, he was sidelined in what was sure to be a tournament year in 2008, but perhaps better coaching/preparation in CW's absence would have taken that team to the dance?

BG gets all the credit in the world for the NCAA win over West Virginia, God bless him for it. But last year's team should have won multiple NCAA games, and BG gets credit for that too. Get more NCAA tournament wins, I'll give him a higher score.

KW may have been misdiagnosed by every college coach out there, but from the time he stepped onto the floor as a freshman, it was obvious he was going to be an immediate impact player. Pinning your coaching/program expectations on recruiting rankings will only lead to chaos. Player recruiting rankings just are not accurate enough to do that. People who are counting NCAA victories over the next 4 years just because we have one top 50 ranked player coming in next year are not looking at the historically loose connection between the two very closely. We should have won an NCAA game during KW's time here, IMO. He was here after Purnell had time to get the program healthy again, and was surrounded by enough talent to get it done. A10 championships are nice, but NCAA wins are where it's at. A10 performance is just a means to getting to the NCAA victory end.

Let me add that top 4 A10 finish EVERY year, based on program resources is a miss in my thinking. Basketball performace is a lot more volatile than that. Look at this history of UD basketball. How many times have we had that type of performance since we have been in a conference (about 20 years?)? There is a lot more necessary in a "program" than just dollar resources. You can't argue with the proof of history.

cicvi17 · #48 10-04-2010, 06:41 AM

Because the poll didn't have plus and minus grades, I went with B. It's probably closer to B+ for me. The thing that bothers me is the fact that alot of people seem to be grading BG on one of two things: 1) projected results down the line, and 2) the talent that has come through during his tenure. All of that is fine, and I do understand that recruting is a big part of college sports. BUT, if you're grading on his "COACHING," I don't think it's possible to give him an A. He underachieved with the 09-10 team, and you could at least make the argument that the 07-08 team also underachieved. Yes, I get that Chris Wright got hurt, which is why he's probably taken off the hook for that one. I guess the one aspect that does bother me is our lack of finishing close games in the big spotlight prior to the NIT

I think he's a pretty good coach who's still learning and improving, and I think with the talent currently in the program, he'll have a chance to develop and cultivate that talent and take this program to another level. But, until that happens, he's still one level below elite for a top tier, non-BCS team.

BallgameJohnny · #49 10-04-2010, 09:45 AM

I gave BG a C because I knew ClaytonFlyer, longtimefan, THirt, JohnR and a few others would soil themselves if somewhere dare give BG a C...

Rollo, excellent post. Winning non-conference games are great and all and the NIT was a great finish to a bad season, but winning the A-10 and getting to the NCAA is the goal.

Great Guy, Great representation of the university, great recruiter. Love to have him as UD's coach. But he doesn't get an A for that.

ClearTheRunwayForWLJ · #50 10-04-2010, 11:23 AM

I won't say much this year ... but how can anyone give Brian Gregory an A? He simply has met expectations. A grade of a B is high in my mind, I would have settled for a C+ if that was available.

A coach who has never won an A-10 Regular Season Championship or even competed in the Atlantic 10 Tournament does not deserve an A. UD has the most resources in the A-10 and it is laughable to continue to see them lose @ Duquense, @ Charlotte, etc, etc when there are 5 fans in the stands.

The future looks bright, but you cannot grade on that. You have to grade on the results on the court. His "talented recruits" have not shown they are more talented than any of OP's teams. I like BG and think things are going in the right direction, but in no way, shape or form has he earned a grade of an A.

To me, an A grade is for excellence and exceeding expectations. In 7 years the Flyers have made the dance two times (one time with OP's players) and the NIT two times. They have 0 A-10 regular season crowns and 0 A-10 championships. They also collapsed mightly when they expectations were placed upon them with 6 seniors (last year).

Sean Miller, he deserved an A ... multiple tournament runs, deep, deep runs and multiple A-10 Crowns.

If you rated BG an A ... what is Sean Miller? An A+++++++++ ... it doesn't make sense!

Atlantic 10 · #51 10-04-2010, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

I won't say much this year ... but how can anyone give Brian Gregory an A? He simply has met expectations. A grade of a B is high in my mind, I would have settled for a C+ if that was available.

A coach who has never won an A-10 Regular Season Championship or even competed in the Atlantic 10 Tournament does not deserve an A. UD has the most resources in the A-10 and it is laughable to continue to see them lose @ Duquense, @ Charlotte, etc, etc when there are 5 fans in the stands.

The future looks bright, but you cannot grade on that. You have to grade on the results on the court. His "talented recruits" have not shown they are more talented than any of OP's teams. I like BG and think things are going in the right direction, but in no way, shape or form has he earned a grade of an A.

To me, an A grade is for excellence and exceeding expectations. In 7 years the Flyers have made the dance two times (one time with OP's players) and the NIT two times. They have 0 A-10 regular season crowns and 0 A-10 championships. They also collapsed mightly when they expectations were placed upon them with 6 seniors (last year).

Sean Miller, he deserved an A ... multiple tournament runs, deep, deep runs and multiple A-10 Crowns.

If you rated BG an A ... what is Sean Miller? An A+++++++++ ... it doesn't make sense!

Dont get me started on OP and what does Miller have to do with this thread?

ClearTheRunwayForWLJ · #52 10-04-2010, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by Atlantic 10

Dont get me started on OP and what does Miller have to do with this thread?

Sean Miller is an example. He has the same time period as BG, had the same resources and produced "A" type results in his tenure.

Miller's results warrant an "A" grade. A grade worth of excellence and excelling.

BG has not had those results, he has not even come close to them. He has simply met expectations on the court resulting in a "C" grade. If C+ was available, I would have given him that because I do believe he is slightly above average.

Recruits who are athletic and can jump high are great, but you need results on the court. BG needs to seriously compete for an A-10 Crown, regular and post-season and make back to back trips to the Ncaa Tournament with wins in both to receive a B+ to A grade.

Atlantic 10 · #53 10-04-2010, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

Sean Miller is an example. He has the same time period as BG, had the same resources and produced "A" type results in his tenure.

Miller's results warrant an "A" grade. A grade worth of excellence and excelling.

BG has not had those results, he has not even come close to them. He has simply met expectations on the court resulting in a "C" grade. If C+ was available, I would have given him that because I do believe he is slightly above average.

Recruits who are athletic and can jump high are great, but you need results on the court. BG needs to seriously compete for an A-10 Crown, regular and post-season and make back to back trips to the Ncaa Tournament with wins in both to receive a B+ to A grade.

All the X coaches were left with something, that kept the beat going for them. BG had one class and thats it from OP. Its nice when you can walk into a situation like Miller who was a asst under Thad during those years at X. You cant compare that to BG. X was set for Miller, BG had to build after year one

NCkevi · #54 10-04-2010, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

Sean Miller is an example. He has the same time period as BG, had the same resources and produced "A" type results in his tenure.

If you're going to bring Miller into the equation - a couple things need to be considered in the comparison: Miller was an assitant at x, so he was coaching players he recruited from day 1 - no transiiton or 'rebuilding' needed

Also, In the 15 years before Miller became head coach, x was 11-10 in the NCAA tournament
In the 15 years before BG became head coach, UD was 1-3

They may have technically had the same resources, but the programs were in very difference places

ClearTheRunwayForWLJ · #55 10-04-2010, 12:03 PM

Ok then in year 4, 5, 6 he did it all on his own with his own recruits and took X to multiple Elite 8's and A-10 championships.

BG in year 4, 5, 6 did what? An NCAA win and an NIT Appearance ... how does that equal an A grade?

I am sorry but A is for excellence ... C is for average, the answer lies somewhere in between. C+ is the grade that defines his tenure right now.

I personally believe that if you can't even make it to the A-10 finals in 7 years with the most resources in the conference then you have not done your job. A-10 championships (regular and post) define teams and coaches.

Atlantic 10 · #56 10-04-2010, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

Ok then in year 4, 5, 6 he did it all on his own with his own recruits and took X to multiple Elite 8's and A-10 championships.

BG in year 4, 5, 6 did what? An NCAA win and an NIT Appearance ... how does that equal an A grade?

I am sorry but A is for excellence ... C is for average, the answer lies somewhere in between. C+ is the grade that defines his tenure right now.

I personally believe that if you can't even make it to the A-10 finals in 7 years with the most resources in the conference then you have not done your job. A-10 championships (regular and post) define teams and coaches.

NIT championship against some very good teams. Still the pipeline at X was in sinc. BG gets a B from me, finally with some point guards this could change;]

rollo · #57 10-04-2010, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

if you can't even make it to the A-10 finals in 7 years with the most resources in the conference then you have not done your job. A-10 championships (regular and post) define teams and coaches.

BINGO! We have a winner!!!

Atlantic 10 · #58 10-04-2010, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

BINGO! We have a winner!!!

Didnt BG make it to the A10 finals at UD arena in his 1st year?

ClearTheRunwayForWLJ · #59 10-04-2010, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Atlantic 10

Didnt BG make it to the A10 finals at UD arena in his 1st year?

I am going by your logic with Miller ... since he already had a team in place from previous, why should it count?

Atlantic 10 · #60 10-04-2010, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by ClearTheRunwayForWLJ

I am going by your logic with Miller ... since he already had a team in place from previous, why should it count?

If Keith and Ramod hit those foul shots at the end, BG has a A10 championship;]

rollo · #61 10-04-2010, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by Atlantic 10

Didnt BG make it to the A10 finals at UD arena in his 1st year?

Yes, we lost to _avier, at home, 58-49.

THirt · #62 10-04-2010, 01:18 PM

Sometimes, I don't understand all the anger that comes out on the internets. This is a message board poll where folks were asked to state their own opinion. What I have in mind for my own objective criteria may not be the same as what someone else has in mind. There's really no need for personal attacks when someone has stated their opinion. You can disagree with it, and state your position. That's totally cool. I don't think it's cool to say that I will soil myself if "somewhere" dare give BG a C. But if that makes you feel better about yourself, that's fine.

Perryman Fan, you ask some excellent questions. For one, I would say that no, 2006 me would not have been happy if you told me CW would only have 1 NCAA win in 4 years. I know you know this, but of course so far, we've only had about 2.5 years of CW, not 4, and in my mind that weighs heavily. I firmly believe the 2007-08 Flyers would have made the NCAA and won a game had not CW broken his ankle. Can you use that belief of something that *might* have happened in your criteria to judge the head coach on the job he is doing? Well, I just did, so in my mind, yes.

Quick aside: the question for this poll/thread was not to grade BG's results over the last 7 years. It was not "give BG's entire tenure a letter grade." It was not "are you 100% pleased with the Flyers' record over the last 7 years?" I think he is currently doing an excellent job as the coach, and to me, that warrants an A grade. I listed plenty of reasons in my other post, and won't repeat them here.

Back to the other specific questions from Perryman Fan: W/L record does matter, as does national ranking, and NCAA success. I personally don't weigh the A-10 as much as some do, although of course that is quite relevant in terms of the national success of the program. I totally get that we need to do better in A-10 play in order to have NCAA success.

I think some of it depends on what you mean by "satisfied." That's tough to set a standard for these days. Every season is different, and every season, I want UD to win the national championship. But that doesn't mean I'm not satisfied with the season if they don't win the title. I think to be realistic, what I want to see is the program moving in the right direction. By that I mean sustained improvement. Others can call them excuses or fantasy if they'd like, but I think the injuries and some unlucky plays have kept UD from the success that we otherwise would have enjoyed under BG. So I don't know exactly when I would consider the team to not be meeting expectations. Last year, they didn't. I expected a return to the NCAA second round or better, but we didn't get there. This year, I expect at a minimum an NCAA bid.

So if someone wants to give BG a C, that's cool. I gave him an A, and I think the program is moving in the right direction because of him. Would I rather have won 5, 6, 7 NCAA games instead of one? Of course. Will I be "happy" with 1 NCAA win and 1 NIT championship over the next 4 years? No, I expect more than that from the program, and I think BG has us poised to have better success.

As one final aside, I think comparing recruiting and such between Donoher and BG is a waste of time. It was a totally different era, and there are quite literally thousands of significant differences that are not even worth addressing.

m21eagle45 · #63 10-04-2010, 02:00 PM

Putting my personal views of BG aside I gave him a C only because B- was not available. For me, an A is for excellence, B is Above Average, C average and so on. I would say he is between average and above average.

For every positive there is a negative. He has a great OOC record, but has been unsuccessful taking the next step in the A-10. In the OOC we are playing 10-12 teams a year that should be wins period. So OOC success is expected. In the A-10, years that we played well in conference have led to NCAA tourney appearances. Years that we went 8-8 or worse and we were NIT bound To me those equal out to a C.

BG had our first NCAA win in 19 years, but has only been to the NCAA tourney twice. He won an NIT title, but with a team that severely underachieved and missed the NCAA tourney. Again I feel this is a wash and is a C.

Recruiting I give him a B. I know this is not popular but hear me out. He has improved the athletes and players that have come to UD that is for sure. Year in and year out our recruits seem to improve. But with that being said he still recruits players with major holes in their game. CW has still not shown he can put the ball on the floor or consistently hit mid range jumpers. LW and KH, great players on D, but struggled on the offensive side of the floor. Many of these weaknesses have cost us over the last few years.

Player Development is another area where BG is about average. Guards seem to improve in their play, but where is the improvement in the post? I hate to pick on KH again, but he is a classic example. Although he finished up last year being a very solid player, many could argue he took a step back from his Freshman year to his soph and his soph to jr year. During that time no other post player has also shown improvement that we expected. In four years I am yet to see real drastic improvement and consistency from DS. Again I have to give him a C.

Finally, as a bench coach I give him a C. His teams continue to show that they cannot close out games. Even in 2008 when we won all those close games, in many of those close games the other side was able to make a run at UD and we were lucky to hang on to some large leads. Last year there were many games that we just could not put the the nail in the coffin and it cost us games. In most cases that reflects coaching. Also how many times have we seen UD play great in the first half, but failed to make adjustments at halftime and lost to coaches who were able to make adjustments at halftime. His initial game plan is often very good, but his in game adjustments are often not.

cj · #64 10-04-2010, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by THirt

Back to the other specific questions from Perryman Fan: W/L record does matter, as does national ranking, and NCAA success.

Please don't forget graduation rates and sanctions (or lack of sanctions for UD).

flyerfanatic86 · #65 10-04-2010, 03:30 PM

I stand by my idea that you can't get an A without winning a conference championship.

NCkevi · #66 10-04-2010, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by flyerfanatic86

I stand by my idea that you can't get an A without winning a conference championship.

If BG wins national championships but never wins an A-10 championship, I would happily give him an A!!

AC91 · #67 10-06-2010, 09:03 AM

I gave BG an A. I understand each individual season has had it's share of disappointments (as most schools/coaches have), but when i step back and look at the program he was given, how he has built it up, even after some adversity, to where it is today and where it is set up to be for years to come...all while doing it with what appears to be the highest level of integrity and focus on the student athlete part of things...I think he has done a great job. Never in my 25 years of being close to UD has this program been close to the solid footing it is on now. There are things to improve upon for sure, but what some may view as his deficiencies I think you can also view as strengths. Is it coaching inflexibility or knowing the limitations of your team and playing to their strengths? Each season is a series of gams that is won by a coach and his players. in the course of things, you hopefully win much more than you lose and show progress. BG has earned an A from me for what he has done so far, and he simply does not have his degree (to continue the school/grading analogies) yet, so there is more to come and accomplish.

I'm sure many disagree, but just know that, though i am an admittedly optimistic/positive fan by nature, I am not blind. I do admit there is still work to do, and i do understand the points of view of many. but when taking a long view, I sure do like how far we have come and where we are set up to go.

UD62 · #68 10-06-2010, 10:37 AM

I don't think many disagree AC. with about 92% of the respondents giving BG an A or B, I suggest that a few may disagree. But we do dwell on the few.

THirt · #69 10-07-2010, 07:42 AM

Fudd, what is this logic and objectivity you're trying to include? This is a message board, and I want to be able to state my opinion, base it on a very narrow set of criteria, and say that anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot.

I take offense that someone would say that me giving BG an A is just "blindness and red and blue glasses" while dismissing lengthy explanations given. If you'd asked me 4 years ago, BG would have gotten a C from me. If you ask me how he "is doing" as the coach (this poll question, remember?), right now, I think he gets an A because he is improving the program, improving our national standing, doing it the right way while running a clean program with players the school and its fans can be proud of. We've had more postseason success the last two years than at any point in the last 20 years. If you want to only look at wins and losses and compare that to some other school, that's fine. I don't think that's the only criteria that should be used. I don't think that comparing UD's current success to our last 20 years' (lack of) success is the only criteria either, but I think it's relevant.

forego1 · #70 10-07-2010, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by THirt

I take offense that someone would say that me giving BG an A is just "blindness and red and blue glasses"

THirt- don't insult the blind!

You have to be deaf, dumb, and near comotose (light banter)

I trust BG (red and blue glasses)

cicvi17 · #71 10-07-2010, 08:48 AM

If you ask me how he "is doing" as the coach (this poll question, remember?), right now

To quote a famous leader, what is the definition of the word "is?"

Cleve · #72 10-07-2010, 09:35 AM

I don't know about all of this (I gave BG an A), but I sure do love Fudd's avatar. Man! I'd definitely give her more than an A if given the chance...

Canonball · #73 10-07-2010, 10:20 AM

'1)Fran Dunphy. His teams are always well balanced and fundamentally sound on offense and defense. They don’t beat themselves. Dunphy is also the best coach in the league at developing players. His big downside is so-so recruiting. You’d think Temple would be getting higher-level recruits after three straight NCAA appearances and A-10 tourney titles. With Xavier-level talent, the Owls would be a Final 4 threat every so often.'

Fran Dunphy has 12 NCAA appearances and has won 1 of those first round games. Three of those games have been at Temple. The single victory was a first round upset of Nebraska in 93-94 while at Penn. I do like Dunphy and the direction he's going with Temple. But his tournament record is terrible, even though most of that is because he was trying to win first round games with an aq team out of the Ivy League.

Fudd · #74 10-07-2010, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Canonball

'1)Fran Dunphy. His teams are always well balanced and fundamentally sound on offense and defense. They don’t beat themselves. Dunphy is also the best coach in the league at developing players. His big downside is so-so recruiting. You’d think Temple would be getting higher-level recruits after three straight NCAA appearances and A-10 tourney titles. With Xavier-level talent, the Owls would be a Final 4 threat every so often.'

Fran Dunphy has 12 NCAA appearances and has won 1 of those first round games. Three of those games have been at Temple. The single victory was a first round upset of Nebraska in 93-94 while at Penn. I do like Dunphy and the direction he's going with Temple. But his tournament record is terrible, even though most of that is because he was trying to win first round games with an aq team out of the Ivy League.

Yeah, I can't imagine the beating he would take here as our coach with that 1st round NCAA loss record. The sad fact is that not many A10 coaches have come away with NCAA victories over the years. Getting an NCAA victory is like gold for a coach in this league. I think that is why our win in 2008-2009 is responsible for our leap forward in status among the pundits.

The NCAA tournament has to stop being a bloodbath for A10 teams.

Ohio Gaming Slots · #75 10-07-2010, 12:59 PM

I gave BG the Blame Guy an A also.

If he isn't doing "A" work then why were others interested in offering him a job during the off season?

Gazoo · #76 10-07-2010, 01:13 PM

Byron Scott has a career coaching record of 352-355 (0.498).

You were saying?

longtimefan · #77 10-07-2010, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Byron Scott has a career coaching record of 352-355 (0.498).

You were saying?

I'm not sure what you are saying here. His won-loss record does not necessarily show that Byron Scott has not done "A" work. The fact that he was in demand supports the point that won-loss record alone should not be used to judge a coach. I'm not saying BG should get an A (I gave him a B+). I am just saying that your post may help support that position. All the pundits seem to think Scott is an excellent coach, in spite of that won-loss record.

Gazoo · #78 10-07-2010, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

I'm not sure what you are saying here. His won-loss record does not necessarily show that Byron Scott has not done "A" work. The fact that he was in demand supports the point that won-loss record alone should not be used to judge a coach. I'm not saying BG should get an A (I gave him a B+). I am just saying that your post may help support that position. All the pundits seem to think Scott is an excellent coach, in spite of that won-loss record.

You're taking this post a little too literally / seriously. Just pointing out that just because he has other job offers doesn't mean that he's done his best work, or the best job that could be done, or even a really good job. There are lots of coaches who are not particularly good and yet, mysteriously, end up getting offers to coach. Once you're in the club you have an aura of competence.

Remember, I gave him a B+.

There was a person I worked for who was the biggest bumbleflip you could ever imagine. I could tell you stories all day long of this person's utter incompetence that you would not believe. The person was eventually fired for incompentence (a feat in itself in today's litigious world), but, because the person had a flashy title on the ol' resume, this person actually got a promotion by being hired at another company. After 2 years and being fired again for incompetence, there was another job offer with an even bigger title. Last I heard that title was CFO at a medium sized company.

I'm just saying, once you're in the club, you have to fight your way out.

longtimefan · #79 10-07-2010, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Remember, I gave him a B+.

I knew you were intelligent all along.

SideshowBob · #80 10-07-2010, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Byron Scott has a career coaching record of 352-355 (0.498).

You were saying?

That is a completely bizarre addition to this thread.

Gazoo · #81 10-07-2010, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by SideshowBob

That is a completely bizarre addition to this thread.

If you need subtitles to keep up, maybe you should go back to Spongebob.

forego1 · #82 10-08-2010, 08:33 AM

The BG topic is not overkill. At present BG is Dayton basketball.

NOTE* two contexts:

1) Dayton as a consistent (say top 20) program nationally.

2) Dayton as a solid A-10 (non-power nationally).

For #1: not making an NCAA this coming year tells me Dayton is not the venue, or BG is not the coach, or some combo of both.

For #2: maybe Dayton is this (no shame), and I'll adjust expectations.

Saying without derision: Perhaps I'm behind the curve, and the 'A' givers have already intelligently acceded to #2.

flyerfanatic86 · #83 10-07-2010, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by Ohio Gaming Slots

I gave BG the Blame Guy an A also.

If he isn't doing "A" work then why were others interested in offering him a job during the off season?

This is not a good argument. I can get all B's in school and still get a job offer, just not at a top employer (in this analogy, a school like Duke, Kentucky, UNC, etc.). BG has done a good job, but not an A job in my opinion, he's just been offered to replace coaches who were scoring D's and F's.

I also am not a fan of the posters who admit he has room to improve, but give him an A for what he's done thus far. If you are admitting he has room to improve, that by definition seems to preclude giving him an A. I don't see why there is such an aversion to giving the guy lower than an A as an admission that he has room to improve. It's not like we're saying he won't get an A or can't, it's just that after 7 years he has not earned the top grade you could give a basketball coach. I think this is why some are claiming posters are looking at it only though "red and blue glasses."

Fudd · #84 10-07-2010, 01:30 PM

Our coach needs offers from Duke, Kentucky, UNC etc to get an "A"? Those teams seem content with their coaches right now.

Gaming Slots, your logic makes perfect sense to me.

masonflyer · #85 10-07-2010, 01:37 PM

I give up! I change my grade to an A. And if we can get a 6th place finish in the A 10 this year, make it to the semi-finals in the A 10 tournament, and lose in the first round of the NCAA tournament, then I will change my grade to A+.

THirt · #86 10-07-2010, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by flyerfanatic86

This is not a good argument. I can get all B's in school and still get a job offer, just not at a top employer (in this analogy, a school like Duke, Kentucky, UNC, etc.). BG has done a good job, but not an A job in my opinion, he's just been offered to replace coaches who were scoring D's and F's.

I also am not a fan of the posters who admit he has room to improve, but give him an A for what he's done thus far. If you are admitting he has room to improve, that by definition seems to preclude giving him an A. I don't see why there is such an aversion to giving the guy lower than an A as an admission that he has room to improve. It's not like we're saying he won't get an A or can't, it's just that after 7 years he has not earned the top grade you could give a basketball coach. I think this is why some are claiming posters are looking at it only though "red and blue glasses."

I never took a class where you had to score 100% on every test in order to get an A. An A grade usually was 90% or better (sometimes a 93% or better). That's the point of a letter grade, right? If you perform on average at a high level over a wide range of criteria, you deserve an A.

This is how I look at it: if the options in this poll were "very good" "good" "average" "poor" and "terrible," then I would say BG is doing a very good job overall as our coach. Very good equates to an A, good to a B, and so on. If that's how you look at it, I don't agree that overall BG is doing an average job as our coach. I respect the right of anyone, even people who have been banned from this board in the past, to argue otherwise, but not if there is no rational thought or recognition of other perspectives.

I'm not going to argue that our A-10 performance has been much above average, but I will argue that BG overall is going a very good job as the head coach.

longtimefan · #87 10-07-2010, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by THirt

I never took a class where you had to score 100% on every test in order to get an A. An A grade usually was 90% or better (sometimes a 93% or better). That's the point of a letter grade, right? If you perform on average at a high level over a wide range of criteria, you deserve an A.

Excellent point. Many who don't think he should get an A argue that if you give him an A you are saying there is no room for improvement. That is simply not the case. You can get an A and there can still be room for improvement.

AC91 · #88 10-07-2010, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by flyerfanatic86

I also am not a fan of the posters who admit he has room to improve, but give him an A for what he's done thus far. If you are admitting he has room to improve, that by definition seems to preclude giving him an A. I don't see why there is such an aversion to giving the guy lower than an A as an admission that he has room to improve. It's not like we're saying he won't get an A or can't, it's just that after 7 years he has not earned the top grade you could give a basketball coach. I think this is why some are claiming posters are looking at it only though "red and blue glasses."

I got plenty of A's at UD where i had room for improvement. Got an A in calculus I but still didn't know all of calculus. I got an A in Kinematics of Machines by the skin of my teeth. I certainly did not score perfectly on every quiz, test and project in any given class, but got many A's. I also have no issue with anyone giving him any grade. And, converse to your statement, I don't understand the aversion to people saying he deserves an A for the job done to date while admitting there are still things to accomplish.

If one thing is clear in this debate it's that there are many, many ways by which Flyer fans judge BG and the Men's Basketball program. And that's is perfectly fine, as long as we're all there on game day.

rollo · #89 10-07-2010, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by AC91

I got plenty of A's at UD where i had room for improvement. Got an A in calculus I but still didn't know all of calculus. I got an A in Kinematics of Machines by the skin of my teeth. I certainly did not score perfectly on every quiz, test and project in any given class, but got many A's.

True, but I also bet that you didn't earn those A's with scores 50% or by finishing 8th out of 14 people in your class.

SideshowBob · #90 10-07-2010, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

True, but I also bet that you didn't earn those A's with scores 50% or by finishing 8th out of 14 people in your class.

Maybe his professor wasn't grading only on a portion of the tests he took. Maybe the professor was looking at the performance of the entire semester and grading off of the final position with respect to all of the other students at the end of the class rather than before the last 5 assignments were completed.

AC91 · #91 10-07-2010, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

True, but I also bet that you didn't earn those A's with scores 50% or by finishing 8th out of 14 people in your class.

Depends how heavily you weigh that one aspect of what you are grading. I have certainly gotten A's in my life despite poor performance in a specific aspect of that class. I would agree there is room for improvement there for sure, and if the question was "How would you grade BG on his A10 performance?", I wouldn't have given him an A. And you may choose to weigh that portion of his job heavily enough to drag his entire grade down, which is your prerogative. I did not do that for reasons which I tried to articulate above and I do not think it's because of some blind love of UD (red and blue glasses). I feel like I am a pretty objective assessor of the program, but what I determine the success to be (and what I personally get out of it) may be completely different than the criterion you use, but no less valid.

Ohio Gaming Slots · #92 10-07-2010, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by flyerfanatic86

This is not a good argument. I can get all B's in school and still get a job offer, just not at a top employer (in this analogy, a school like Duke, Kentucky, UNC, etc.). BG has done a good job, but not an A job in my opinion, he's just been offered to replace coaches who were scoring D's and F's.

I also am not a fan of the posters who admit he has room to improve, but give him an A for what he's done thus far. If you are admitting he has room to improve, that by definition seems to preclude giving him an A. I don't see why there is such an aversion to giving the guy lower than an A as an admission that he has room to improve. It's not like we're saying he won't get an A or can't, it's just that after 7 years he has not earned the top grade you could give a basketball coach. I think this is why some are claiming posters are looking at it only though "red and blue glasses."

It is not an agrument but other than my opinion.

Had TI left for the pros .. BG would be replacing a D and F coach? At least I believe he would had been offered that position and from the posts that are on here a lot of others believe that he would have been offered the position too.

Pikaar Modeling Agency · #93 10-10-2010, 08:34 AM

I am not sure how many people will read 170 posts to hear my rhetoric, but this thread is both enlightening and bewildering. There is an extreme division within this passionate fan base as to what success looks like in terms of a single season, a coach's record and most importantly the program as a whole.

One common theme was the excellence of BG as a recruiter, which I think is a slight overstatement. There are as many complete bombs (Desmond, Stafford, Stephen T, Alvarez, Thiago C) as there are stunning success stories (Roberts, MJ, CW, CJ). I will take your hate willingly for this position, but the credit for CW and CJ is never tempered with equal credit for the duds.

Seems like a good man, solid representative of the school, runs a clean program who seems to have the program in a steady, gradual rise. That said, he has one NCAA win, an NIT championship that signifies a lost season of promise, no A 10 glory and a ton of wins against Prairie View and the like. Smells like a low B, high C to me.

NCkevi · #94 10-10-2010, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by Pikaar Modeling Agency

One common theme was the excellence of BG as a recruiter, which I think is a slight overstatement. There are as many complete bombs (Desmond, Stafford, Stephen T, Alvarez, Thiago C) as there are stunning success stories

Not sure how you define a complete bomb. Some of these guys were good reserves (remember ST's play against x when Lowery went out?), but even in BG's system, there will be players who want double figure minutes and won't get them.

Pikaar Modeling Agency · #95 10-10-2010, 10:02 AM

If you have to point to a single event to qualify the guy as a legit A 10 caliber player, then you have answered your own question.

To Fudd, I agree that he is a good recruiter. I just think it is somewhat over stated. Take a look at the 22 guys that he is responsible for that have played at UD to date. There are about 5 or 6 great successes, 5 or 6 bombs, and 10 role players. Tell me where I am wrong in that breakdown, and I will concede that he is not deserving of a B in his recruiting. An objective view of the whole recruiting picture would reveal the shortcomings, not just the success. Similar to comparing overall records buoyed by our dodgy non-con to the failures year on year in the A 10.

Fudd · #96 10-10-2010, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Pikaar Modeling Agency

If you have to point to a single event to qualify the guy as a legit A 10 caliber player, then you have answered your own question.

To Fudd, I agree that he is a good recruiter. I just think it is somewhat over stated. Take a look at the 22 guys that he is responsible for that have played at UD to date. There are about 5 or 6 great successes, 5 or 6 bombs, and 10 role players. Tell me where I am wrong in that breakdown, and I will concede that he is not deserving of a B in his recruiting. An objective view of the whole recruiting picture would reveal the shortcomings, not just the success. Similar to comparing overall records buoyed by our dodgy non-con to the failures year on year in the A 10.

You might feel that BG's recruiting is overstated by some person or group of persons and that is your prerogative. I would simply say that I think any team in the A10 (outside of X who is recruiting equally as well and whose fans claim to despise anything to do with UD.) would have happily taken the quality of our recruiting over the last 3-4 years of BG. When I see chat from other A10 fans, it's a point that I see often when discussing the quality of BG as a coach.

It did take BG time to bring the level of the recruiting up and he has openly stated that each recruiting class must be built on the successes of the previous classes. When you consider where we have come from the last 2-3 recruiting classes of OP, the improvement has been significant in my mind.

This is the general sentiment of fans that I see when I read about BG's recruiting, and I don't consider it overstated. It's just my opinion.

Pikaar Modeling Agency · #97 10-10-2010, 10:52 AM

Fudd, my opinion is closer to your own than you might think. Gregory was put in a great position for one season and a horrible one for 2 to 3 after taking over. People fell in love with the little guy for taking an OP based team to some nice accomplishments, and just as many fell out of love during the challenging 2 or 3 years after that initial success. I firmly believe he is bringing in better players now than he did in the past, not named Brian Roberts, and will continue to gradually improve the program. I would give him a grade of incomplete right now, as I think he needs a few more years of incremental growth to show what he has accomplished. But that wasn't an option in the poll.

At some point, the recruiting has to yield equal results on the court. Using your own anlaysis of our recruiting compared to the A 10, our A 10 results should have been superior to anyone other than Xavier in the past 3 to 4 years? That simply isn't true, but I am optimistic that a few more years will lead that to be the case.

Appreciate the respectful dialogue by the way. Doesn't happen all that often.

shocka43 · #98 10-11-2010, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by Fudd

You might feel that BG's recruiting is overstated by some person or group of persons and that is your prerogative. I would simply say that I think any team in the A10 (outside of X who is recruiting equally as well and whose fans claim to despise anything to do with UD.) would have happily taken the quality of our recruiting over the last 3-4 years of BG. When I see chat from other A10 fans, it's a point that I see often when discussing the quality of BG as a coach.

If it is this good, then why do we have so many problems on the road in the A-10? I gave the guy a decent rating in the recruiting category, but it is quite simply because it is one of his better qualities compared to the rest. So far he has recruited good athletes, not so many good fundamentally sound basketball players. There is a difference.

NCkevi · #99 10-10-2010, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by Pikaar Modeling Agency

There are about 5 or 6 great successes, 5 or 6 bombs, and 10 role players. Tell me where I am wrong in that breakdown, and I will concede that he is not deserving of a B in his recruiting.

Originally Posted by Pikaar Modeling Agency

That said, he has one NCAA win, an NIT championship that signifies a lost season of promise, no A 10 glory and a ton of wins against Prairie View and the like. Smells like a low B, high C to me.

I could understand if you argued that his recruits have had holes in their games and haven't been as good as people thought leading to elevated expectations; or if you argued that he had very good recruits but they have underperformed the second half of the season - however, it seems you're arguing it both ways by saying the recruits aren't as good as we think AND they aren't as successful as they should be with the talent they have

If I thought BG only had brought 6 players better than role players to UD, I would give him an A+ for bench coaching for winning as many games as he has, including one in the NCAA tournament and against teams like West Virginia, UNC, Louisville, UC, and Pitt

CvilleFlyer · #**100** 10-10-2010, 04:32 PM

What I like about BG's recruiting is his ability to spot talent early on. In the past OP and before him O'Brien wouldn't even try to recruit certain top 100 or top 150 players because they didn't think they had a chance. Now, if you notice, BG is in on the same players that Xavier is and we all know the recent success Xavier has had. Now if BG can turn it around and have better success in the A-10 conference games and carry it over to success in the NCAA Tourney we can all give him a higher grade instead of an incomplete.