No way 20 gets us in with the 2 horrible losses on our record.
Frank Martin has been at Carolina for 8 years and all he has to show for
- Thread starter world famous 3rd base hecklers
- Start date
No way 20 gets us in with the 2 horrible losses on our record.
We don’t know if that is true or not. I did a quick little research based on Lunardi’s bubble watch using us and Cincinnati below:
Cincy: currently “last 4 in”; 19-10
Current NET: 51
Road record: 5-6
Worst losses (by NET): UCF-131, Bowling Green-154, Tulane-172
Best wins (by NET): Houston-18, Wichita State-43 (on the road), Tennessee-57, UCONN-64
USC: currently “next 4 out”; 18-12
Current NET: 61
Road Record: 6-5 (with a chance to get #7 on Saturday)
Worst Losses (by NET): Ole Miss-94, Boston U-158, Stetson-300 (ugh)
Best wins (by NET): Kentucky-21, Arkansas-47 (on the road), UVA-48 (on the road), Miss State-53
We each have one game left both against teams that are low in NET rankings; however, we play on the road, which would give us 7 road wins. You know how many teams have at least 7 road wins in the Top 60 of the NET? Only 14; if we get that win on Saturday; we’ll be in the top 25% of teams with 7 road wins. The reason I did this was to show you that when you put our resume up against a team that is “supposedly in” based of Lunardi’s picks; we are not that far off (and some may pick us over Cincy). When it comes to the bubble teams, the committee will look at the WHOLE picture and not just the one bad loss (the Boston U loss was bad)—the Stetson loss was HORRIBLE. Just win Saturday and see what happens in the SEC tournament—then it will be up to the committee (unless we win the whole thing). But we are RIGHT THERE.
Imagine thinking we're about to get rid of a coach with back to back 11-7 SEC records
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Good point. Taking it a bit further, South Carolina's SEC finishes over the past five seasons under Martin:
- 2015-16: 11-7
- 2016-17: 12-6
- 2017-18: 7-11
- 2018-19: 11-7
- 2019-20: 11-6 (with one game to go)
This is the best five season stretch in program history since joining the SEC, and it ain't even close. Oh, and there was that Final Four in 2017.
I've written it before, but Martin is immensely respected in the basketball world, despite the naysaying MENSA members on this board.
He is the best coach we have had since McGuire, and that is not even objectively debatable. And the man literally resurrected this program from the very depths of apathy and incompetence. Good things on the horizon for this program under Martin.
By no means am I defining success with National Championships in MBB at USC, that is a long way off for the Gamecocks. However, I am defining success with making the NCAA Basketball Tournament more than once every four years.
I just don't what you guys expect based on our history. We are not getting the 5 star athletes in the area as long as Duke, KY, and UNC are around. I'm happy with Frank...runs a good program and his players play hard for him. If these guys ever learn how to shoot FT we would already be in the tourney.
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Reasonable people on this board (i.e. those who have the capacity to consider not just the past eight years, but the past four decades), will understand what Frank walked into in 2012. Arguably the worst Power Five men's basketball program in the country.
Eight years and a massive rebuilding job later, it is, at this point, reasonable to expect NCAA tournament invites on a more frequent basis.
To your point about Duke, UK, UNC, etc, South Carolina had an opportunity to join the ranks of those elite programs, and was on the cusp of doing just that, circa 1968-1971, however our administration was led by our football coach/AD Dietzel into committing an act of self-immolation by bolting the ACC, thereby marginalizing our basketball program in favor of football.
Thus marked the sad, slow decline of our legendary Coach McGuire, followed by decades of bad hires and worse luck, interspersed by a rare bright spot here and there (the 97 SEC Championship, two NIT Championships, and not much else).
The program bottomed out during the disastrous four years under Horn. Had Martin realized how bad of shape the program was in in 2012, he might still be coaching at Kansas State.
We're damn lucky to have him.
Last edited:
Jeez, so does everyone else in the country. You take it when it comes.
I think once the program matures, that may be possible. But to expect that right off the bat is not reasonable, given where the program was when he started.
This is not a good metric. Look at wins per games played. Much better metric and {(wins)/[Annual salary (adjusted for inflation)]}
Yes they will. They think if you have a over .500 record in the conference without any post season it is a major accomplishment and you should keep the coach for 20 years and give him a pay increase.
Frank McGuire wished he was treated this way, rather than being pushed out...
Do you think that a team that has advanced to play in the final four is roughly the same as a team playing in the college football playoffs?
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Good grief. Its not "new love". Its metrics. Data. Perspective. An understanding of the history of the program. An appreciation for progress.
How about instead of assuming the worst, which you see so eager to do, we table this for an after season review? You seem almost giddy over the possibility of this team failing when there is still a lot to play for. Weird.
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Apples and oranges. McGuire was treated like royalty by our fanbase. He was adored. Worshiped. It was our administration, primarily Holderman, Carlen and our BOT that treated him disrespectfully. Although they did name a certain 12,401 seat arena for him.
FM1 made the tourney 4 out of his 16 years, why do we expect FM2 to do vastly better than that?
he only made the NCAAT one out of seven years when he was in conference
4X NCAA Tournament wins than all other coaches combined!
There were also a LOT fewer teams that made it to the tournament back then.
You all are multiplying one year into a 10 year reign. That was a one shot deal, if he does it again, then that's progress. The hype of him having one good run(all the tournament wins) and above .500 is really putting progress where there is not that much. Other new SEC coaches have come in and been in the tournament and recruited well. Does Frank need 2 more years? or 5 more years or more?
25 out of ~119 teams (1970s) teams is ~21%
68 out of 353 teams (now) is ~19%
More teams making it but more teams
yes but you still had to win the conference tourney to go for all of McGuire’s ACC years. Under the current set up McGuire’s teams would have gone to at least 7. Our best team in school history did not make the postseason in 70-71 because of an injury in the ACC tournament after going undefeated in the regular season
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Great points. That the team you reference was 1969-70 though. The '71 team won the ACC Tourney (our last ACC game) and went onto the NCAA tournament.
Okay so there were 8 teams in the ACC so there was a 12.5% chance to make it. That’s not much less than 19%
Furthermore there were 18 conferences in the 70s (not sure all got bids but let’s just assume they all do) that leaves 7 at large spots for 119 teams which is about 6%
there are currently 32 at large bids for the 353 teams which is about 9%
still not vastly more difficult
there are currently 32 at large bids for the 353 teams which is about 9%
still not vastly more difficult
He's just hoping like hell that his earlier negative predictions come true. If we make the tournament all of his bullshit will be for nothing and he can't stand the thought.
Not to belabor the point but just for fun I checked the ACC tournament champions list. The 4 non-tobacco road schools won the ACC tournament 3 times in the conference’s first 30 years: Maryland in ‘58, South Carolina in ‘71, Virginia in ‘76. (Clemson in Never)
That is an interesting stat, compared it to the sec in the last 30. Florida and Kentucky won it a combined 20 of the last 30 years
Said it before and I will say it every time these stupid posts come up..
Anybody that counts Frank's first three years is a moron...
Anybody that counts Frank's first three years is a moron...
USC was picked 12th in the SEC before the season genius .
Right— but in the last 30 years the ncaa tournament hasn’t been limited to the conference champion ...
Look, I think Frank Martin is the best we’ve had since McGuire. I just don’t agree that making the ncaa tourney today is as remotely close to the same degree of difficulty as in the 60s & 70s
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Yes, I find this interesting as well. There have only been 12 non-Tobacco Road ACC tournament champions in the 66 year history of the conference (18%) with four of those coming during an unprecedented stretch of four straight between 2012 and 2015. That streak marked only the second streak of consecutive non-Tobacco Road champions, with the first coming from Maryland and Georgia Tech in 1984 and 1985 respectively.
Of the original non-Tobacco Road members of the ACC (USC, Clemson, Virginia and Maryland), there are a combined six championships (Maryland 3, Virginia 2, USC 1), leaving Clemson as the only original ACC member to have never won an ACC tournament championship. Of course, USC left the ACC in '71, and Maryland left in 2014.
Also interesting, the ACC Tournament has only been held outside of North Carolina 13 times in 66 years. Of those 13 tournaments, a non-Tobacco Road team has won 3 times (23%), including Georgia Tech in 1985, when the tournament was held at The Omni in Atlanta. Maryland narrowly lost 61-60 when the tournament was held in Landover, MD in 1981. One could reasonably draw the conclusion from this that had the tournament been held more often outside of NC, there very well could have been many more non Tobacco Road champions. Imagine if the tournament had been held in Columbia in 1969 or 1970?
All this to illustrate the point of a March, 1971 editorial I ran across from The State which posited that the ACC was formed by the four members from North Carolina, for the benefit of those four members. They needed USC, Clemson, Maryland and Virginia to round out a viable conference in 1953. But the outsiders were supposed to be step-children, to be seen but not heard.
I still think it was a mistake for USC to leave the ACC in 1971, but its always instructive to understand the stifling power structure in place during USC's days as a member.
Last edited:
Which is why we got out of the ACC, however if you take the SEC into consideration as a whole it’s around 3-4 bids a year which out of 14 teams is around 20% - and if you’re not Kentucky or Florida you are getting it at a much lower percentage as well
and I already broke down the at large bids which is not vastly different.
They always seem to pick us low. We don't have the big time recruits or hype surrounding the program. Frank's teams come in, work hard, and grind it out and always win more games than anyone expects. The year we went to the final 4 we barely made the tournament and nobody had us advancing. I think we were the underdog in every game we played in that tournament. We absolutely smoked Baylor and Duke(happiest basketball moment in my lifetime)
One analyst listed us as possibly being the worst 7 seed ever in the history of the tournament
Similar threads
