• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

The argument for excluding Manning's first two years would be a lot stronger if not for this year's disaster. This year's results make it easier to conclude that WF's awful first two years were attributable both to the lack of talent [] left behind and Manning's failure to make the most of the players on hand, rather than just the [] dumpster fire.

No one can argue the point that WF should've been better than 11-20 (4-14) in year 4 of Danny's tenure at WF. Given the resources at hand, WF should've been better; the fault lies with the head coach. Unless Manning quits (which seems extremely unlikely), he will coach WF next year. Even so, the support for Manning eroded this year. He cannot survive another disappointing year, but he will survive this year. A reasonable argument can be made that Manning's return is a mistake, but Manning will get the chance to prove that retaining him was not a mistake. We shall see.
 
Strickland33 said:
19-12 is a great argument against him being a bad coach? Why? Plenty of bad coaches post 19-12 records when they have John Collins-caliber players (one of the most productive and efficient big men in college basketball history, fwiw).

ETA: We were worse in season 4 than in seasons 1 or 2. What does that suggest?
Click to expand...

No they don’t. In college basketball, coaching includes acquiring talent.

I love JC but calm down. I love that PER is unassailable when it suits your argument but Kenpom is completely irrelevant.

And we aren’t worse this year than years 1and 2.
 
RChildress107 said:
I’m not certain he is/will be a good coach because I refuse to ignore evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

You refuse to ignore evidence??

Plenty of evidence proffered here that INDICATES Manning is not a very good coach.

But there is nothing to PROVE IT. It would help if we could see what in the hell actually goes on at practice, but doesn't seem like we are developing breakthrough defensive zone concepts that can protect a smallish guard getting exploited in man to man, ad nauseam. Actually, it's even more of an indictment on Manning that he often likes to employ TWO smallish guards at the same time, along with one that may or may not be a pirate with a trick knee. And for kickers, let's throw in a very limited 4 when Crawford and Key are resting and see how well Childress and Wilbekin can get the ball into Moore when the other team can slough off TT cuz he can barely get the ball over the rim even if Doral were to find him off a backdoor cut or pass.

Yes, Danny was dealt a tough hand, but he certainly didn't seem to make things any easier on himself when it comes to opening himself up to loads of criticism with his decision-making.
 
Regardless of what attrition we have this off season, if Danny doesn't make the tourney, AND, IMO win a game and advance to the round of 32, then he should be fired.

Personally, I've defended Danny for the most part of the season but our last two games are almost as indefensible as our first 3 games. Pretty much any P5 coach in America would have been fired right after the game last night. The leash he's given, and what he'll continue to get, is troubling. He'll be here next season and most likely the season after that, regardless of next seasons outcome.
 
RChildress107 said:
Can you name a specific poster you expect to make this argument.
Click to expand...

CharlotteDeac1 and RJKarl come to mind

Maybe Deac83, too

You’ll undoubtedly move the goalposts elsewhere by then, so I wouldn’t include you in that group.
 
Pilchard said:
The argument for excluding Manning's first two years would be a lot stronger if not for this year's disaster. This year's results make it easier to conclude that WF's awful first two years were attributable both to the lack of talent [] left behind and Manning's failure to make the most of the players on hand, rather than just the [] dumpster fire.

No one can argue the point that WF should've been better than 11-20 (4-14) in year 4 of Danny's tenure at WF. Given the resources at hand, WF should've been better; the fault lies with the head coach. Unless Manning quits (which seems extremely unlikely), he will coach WF next year. Even so, the support for Manning eroded this year. He cannot survive another disappointing year, but he will survive this year. A reasonable argument can be made that Manning's return is a mistake, but Manning will get the chance to prove that retaining him was not a mistake. We shall see.
Click to expand...

Not sure you can argue year 1 and 2 results are any more or less predictive based on whether or not they correlate to later performance in one particular instance.
 
Pilchard said:
The argument for excluding Manning's first two years would be a lot stronger if not for this year's disaster. This year's results make it easier to conclude that WF's awful first two years were attributable both to the lack of talent [] left behind and Manning's failure to make the most of the players on hand, rather than just the [] dumpster fire.

No one can argue the point that WF should've been better than 11-20 (4-14) in year 4 of Danny's tenure at WF. Given the resources at hand, WF should've been better; the fault lies with the head coach. Unless Manning quits (which seems extremely unlikely), he will coach WF next year. Even so, the support for Manning eroded this year. He cannot survive another disappointing year, but he will survive this year. A reasonable argument can be made that Manning's return is a mistake, but Manning will get the chance to prove that retaining him was not a mistake. We shall see.
Click to expand...

That's why RChill's argument has changed. Rather than only claiming that S1/S2 don't count because of what [name redacted] left behind, he had to adjust this season to say that you simply can't judge Manning as a coach of talent deficient teams. He can ONLY be judged when there is X level of talent, where X is defined by a very imprecise and subjective measurement of recruiting stars and RChill's feelings.

Basically, in an effort to prove he's the smartest and most rational person in the chatroom, when analyzing Manning's abilities, RChill creates his own internal algorithm, heavily discounting S1/3/4 because "not enough talent" and heavily weighting S3. He picks the only season that gives his argument an ounce of credence and writes off the remaining 75% of the data.
 
Last edited:
RChildress107 said:
Not sure you can argue year 1 and 2 results are any more or less predictive based on whether or not they correlate to later performance in one particular instance.
Click to expand...

Sure you can. Imagine Clawson this year tanked back down to 4 wins instead of increasing to 7. Had that happened Clawson's S1/S2 would be viewed more as futile efforts to install a program that had a blip of mediocrity in S3, but reverted to the unworkable mess that plagued S1 and S2. Instead, his 7/8 win S4 shows that everything was a building process, and his mastery is confirmed.
 
Strickland33 said:
CharlotteDeac1 and RJKarl come to mind

Maybe Deac83, too

You’ll undoubtedly move the goalposts elsewhere by then, so I wouldn’t include you in that group.
Click to expand...

Why do all of you establish arguments for me all the time that I never make and/or future arguments that I wouldn't make? It's funny and annoying at the same time.
 
RChildress107 enjoys arguing with Deacon fans more than he enjoys watching the Deacons win basketball games. Enjoy being right. I would prefer to have a team that actually wins with the same frequency from 1991-2010 seasons. That should be the expectation of any fan of Wake Forest basketball and we have proven with multiple coaches and lots of different players and different styles of play that two decades of good teams are possible. It is clear that Danny has been an abject failure in comparison with our past decent coaches. Why wait to make a change. Only prolongs the 8 years of complete failure. BTW, a first four appearance with an NBA first rounder and 14 losses does not signify a tremendous success to me. We should have been better last year and the fact that we were not was due to how poorly Danny recruited the 2016 class, his maddening substitution patterns and his team's almost refusal to play even a modicum of defense. I like Danny. He seems like a good and cool guy, but this coaching thing is not working out for him and Deacon fans deserve a lot more.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
You refuse to ignore evidence??

Plenty of evidence proffered here that INDICATES Manning is not a very good coach.

But there is nothing to PROVE IT. It would help if we could see what in the hell actually goes on at practice, but doesn't seem like we are developing breakthrough defensive zone concepts that can protect a smallish guard getting exploited in man to man, ad nauseam. Actually, it's even more of an indictment on Manning that he often likes to employ TWO smallish guards at the same time, along with one that may or may not be a pirate with a trick knee. And for kickers, let's throw in a very limited 4 when Crawford and Key are resting and see how well Childress and Wilbekin can get the ball into Moore when the other team can slough off TT cuz he can barely get the ball over the rim even if Doral were to find him off a backdoor cut or pass.

Yes, Danny was dealt a tough hand, but he certainly didn't seem to make things any easier on himself when it comes to opening himself up to loads of criticism with his decision-making.
Click to expand...

Much of which I have acknowledged and incorporated into my opinion of Manning and his likelihood of success. It’s nonsensical to think anyone can prove how Manning’s teams will perform in the future. Which is why I haven’t claimed to or asked anyone to. I’ve simply asked for people to back up their predictions and opinions with objective measurable evidence.

And I don’t think seeing practice would help us at all. There are very few people on here worth trusting (and I’m not one of those very few) in their subjective evaluation of a coach. Which is why I’ve been adamant since the time of Dino that I don’t care what sets a coach runs, what my subjective assessment of the team’s effort is, or whether our players put on their socks the right way. I’m not saying that stuff doesn’t matter, just that it’s not measurable by people on this message board.

I care about results and use the objective data available to me to set expectations and evaluate performance against those expectations.
 
Strickland33 said:
That will be Crawford’s fault (and a reason we lost so much this year) and an excuse for why we won’t make the tournament next year.
Click to expand...

I've made my position absolutely clear for year. It won't change.

No Dance, No job.

It's that simple.

But keep making shit up about me. You seem to love to do it.
 
CharlotteDeac1 said:
Why do all of you establish arguments for me all the time that I never make and/or future arguments that I wouldn't make? It's funny and annoying at the same time.
Click to expand...

yeah, and you've been consistent this entire time that it's next year or bust for you, regardless of attrition or other circumstances.
 
Manning will have plenty of talent next year, im afraid he doesnt know how to utilize all that talent. Sub patterns and minutes better improve or Manning is gone.
 
lbdeac94 said:
RChildress107 enjoys arguing with Deacon fans more than he enjoys watching the Deacons win basketball games. Enjoy being right. I would prefer to have a team that actually wins with the same frequency from 1991-2010 seasons. That should be the expectation of any fan of Wake Forest basketball and we have proven with multiple coaches and lots of different players and different styles of play that two decades of good teams are possible. It is clear that Danny has been an abject failure in comparison with our past decent coaches. Why wait to make a change. Only prolongs the 8 years of complete failure. BTW, a first four appearance with an NBA first rounder and 14 losses does not signify a tremendous success to me. We should have been better last year and the fact that we were not was due to how poorly Danny recruited the 2016 class, his maddening substitution patterns and his team's almost refusal to play even a modicum of defense. I like Danny. He seems like a good and cool guy, but this coaching thing is not working out for him and Deacon fans deserve a lot more.
Click to expand...

couldnt be further from the truth. I expect better than 1991-2010 and all Wake fans should to. I enjoyed last season more than most on here and have hated this season as much as all of you. I’m just capable and willing to separate my feelings about Wake basketball from my evaluation of Wake basketball.

Keep the strawmen coming though.
 
Lohengrin said:
Sure you can. Imagine Clawson this year tanked back down to 4 wins instead of increasing to 7. Had that happened Clawson's S1/S2 would be viewed more as futile efforts to install a program that had a blip of mediocrity in S3, but reverted to the unworkable mess that plagued S1 and S2. Instead, his 7/8 win S4 shows that everything was a building process, and his mastery is confirmed.
Click to expand...

Retroactively assigning predictive value to data when it turns out to be predictive in a specific instance isn’t how predictive value works.
 
Bottom line: The ONLY reason not to fire Manning now is Wellman. The premise is that we should wait another year b/c he'd just pick another loser this year. Why does anyone think Wellman won't still be here after S5? His retirement is not at all a given. If Wellman remains after S5, are we still firm in not firing Manning? Does Manning get an indefinite hall pass until Wellman leaves?

If we're waiting on Wellman, then we may be waiting a long time. Perhaps the Wellman rationale shouldn't even be a consideration unless we know for certain he is leaving prior to S5.
 
RChildress107 said:
couldnt be further from the truth. I expect better than 1991-2010 and all Wake fans should to. I enjoyed last season more than most on here and have hated this season as much as all of you. I’m just capable and willing to separate my feelings about Wake basketball from my evaluation of Wake basketball.

Keep the strawmen coming though.
Click to expand...

No, your not more capable of separating your feelings from your evaluation than others, you emphasize different data points and you are more patient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top