I like Bryce Drew and had hoped that things would have worked out better for him at Vandy. THAT said, I would be shocked if he is retained. Even without Garland, 0-19 is pretty futile.
Should Vandy fire Bryce Drew?
- Thread starter Friedas_Boss
- Start date
I like Bryce Drew and had hoped that things would have worked out better for him at Vandy. THAT said, I would be shocked if he is retained. Even without Garland, 0-19 is pretty futile.
First off.......... there are fans on the vandy board??? WHAAA??
Second. I think Drew deserves another year but if he starts massively struggling again fire him mid year. The team just quit after Garland was injured and before then the team looked pretty good...
Second. I think Drew deserves another year but if he starts massively struggling again fire him mid year. The team just quit after Garland was injured and before then the team looked pretty good...
I'm not going to say he should be fired because even though Garland wouldn't have been the all solved problems you had, injuries can hurt a team's consistancy and continuity on the floor. Our young teams in the past did not do well after injuries as 2013 and last year showed.
FB, you’re a solid guy by most accounts.
However, if you have a coach, who’s team was considered a top 25 team nationally before the season started, and lost 1 player to an injury, and then went on to post a perfect 0-19 record against conference opponents, well, I would fire his *** immediately.
This is where most are. I’ve heard he was fired today and also that he will be retained and we have another unnamed recruit that is a good add.
I really do t know what I think. I can see both arguments being acceptable.
I actually think things just spiraled after a while. I’d say give him another year. Garland would have made a big difference.
They'll give him another year imo. I mean like really, he can't get much worse.
I don’t think he’s worth the toilet paper I wipe with.
I could be wrong, but I’m usually not.
It made the team worse for sure.....but UK hardly quit and still was nearly a .500 team after Nerlens went down. UK finished that season with Polson, Goodwin, Mays, Porthress, Willie Cauley-Stein and Wiltjer...that is two walkons, a So and Fr that were really green. That team was able to fight and scrap (and basically crapped the bed in SEC and NIT tourney).
I could easily argue what Vandy had left after Garland was more talented than above.....but Vandy played literally non existent defense. It was a joke how that unit played.
I think that's a pretty good answer.
But I would understand why a Vandy fan would want him gone. I mean, going winless in the SEC is not acceptable. I would say the university is in a very difficult spot. I bet the group deciding this is split on it.
The Vandy fans need to realize that success does not come in only a season or two. Give him another 10-15 to see how he does.
I agree, I bet the powers that be are split.
I would have to think we'll know one way or the other before the end of the SEC Tournament.
Last edited:
if I was a vandy fan, I'd want him gone
0-19? Even with a good team, how much faith do you have now that he can compete in the SEC, much less a final four.
Vandy has quit as a team, they are ready for the season to end.
That's a gots to go situation for the coach.
0-19? Even with a good team, how much faith do you have now that he can compete in the SEC, much less a final four.
Vandy has quit as a team, they are ready for the season to end.
That's a gots to go situation for the coach.
I think the reason it's such a tough decision is that Drew has a coaching pedigree, seems a great guy, and has been able to bring in some good talent. But the problem is obvious- his teams don't win.
I was looking back at last season to see if I can find some evidence that his team can win, but Vandy finished 12-20 last year. Drew's best season at Vandy was his first year (they were 19-16). And you could easily argue that team was only decent based on Kevin Stallings' remaining players. It's a bad sign when the team gets worse each season. I guess you could just say this season is a wash because of losing your top player to injury, if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt. But 0-18, 0-19 including SEC-T game, is inexcusable. There is no doubt in my mind, Vandy had the tools to win some games on this team.
think of it this way - when someone says "oh you think you can do better?" - as a guy who has never coached a game in my life I can honestly say :"I can't do any worse".
Vandy could pull a guy off the street and pay him hot dogs and popcorn to coach the team to 0-19.. He wouldn't even have to show up to match that record.
It actually doesn't matter either way.
They can either cheat with him and not have the program culture and leadership to win with the good players he buys.
Or they can play by the rules with someone else and not get players good enough to win.
One lets you cling to hope and hype, the other to moral superiority and snobbery. I think Vandy is probably better off with #2, given their public perception.
They can either cheat with him and not have the program culture and leadership to win with the good players he buys.
Or they can play by the rules with someone else and not get players good enough to win.
One lets you cling to hope and hype, the other to moral superiority and snobbery. I think Vandy is probably better off with #2, given their public perception.
Leonardi has them as last team out with Texas and Indian
0-19.....That should be good enough for a 12 seed.
That call in the UT game was just pathetic. The refs served up that game to UT on a silver platter. Vandy kids played their hearts out in that game and deserved the win.