What are Realistic Expectations for Clemson Hoops Program?
Brad Brownell and the Clemson men's basketball team walked off the court Friday night for the last time in the 2020-21 season with mixed emotions.
On one hand, the seventh-seeded Tigers in the Midwest Region had just lost a nailbiter to 10th-seeded Rutgers, which won its first NCAA tournament game for the first time since 1983.
Clemson mustered just 56 points in a four-point loss. That's almost never going to win a game in the Big Dance. It was the second time in as many contests that the Tigers lost to an opponent many thought they should beat, even though Brownell's squad was technically a betting underdog.
But don't tell that to a fan base that took to social media to show its displeasure in what some consider a disappointing season.
On the other hand, though, Clemson defied expectations. Picked to finish in the bottom half of the ACC, this team of a couple of veterans and a ton of youth earned a fifth-place finish in the conference and made the NCAA tournament for the second time in four years.
"Absolutely I think (this season) was successful," Brownell said after the loss in Indianapolis.
The head coach has a legitimate argument. For years, fans have been clamoring for this program to make the NCAA more times than it has in the 11 years under Brownell. So it went out and made the tournament, which only 67 other NCAA teams can claim.
For some, that's still considered mediocrity, even though it shouldn't be. Getting to the NCAAs is hard for the non-blue bloods, something Clemson will likely never be in college hoops. Is that shortsighted? Maybe, but it's a reasonable argument and currently factual.
The ACC had a down year, something others might dispute but based so far on the NCAA tournament results and the fact that no team in this conference was seeded higher than fourth in a region, it's a fair judgment.
It won't be that way every season. Duke won't miss the tournament again for a while. North Carolina won't go one-and-done all the time. Lousiville isn't going to be the first team out very often. Virginia isn't going anywhere. Florida State will keep recruiting at a high level.
Those are the most consistent programs in this league year in and year out. Clemson simply doesn't get the same caliber of players as they do, and there might not be a coach in American who can change that.
However, there's no question the Tigers have played catch-up and received plenty of support from the Clemson administration and boosters. The practice facility is finally top-notch, and Littlejohn Coliseum received major renovations a few years ago. Recruiting has seen an uptick.
Al-Amir Dawes is one of the highest-rated guards Brownell has ever signed. P.J. Hall turned down plenty of higher-level suitors to stay in-state and play for Clemson last year. It's getting better, folks.
Whether or not it turns into enough wins, however, is up to the coaches and the players they have to develop, but this is not a fledgling program that is on the way down. It's a matter of what fans, administrators, media and others want to define as success at Clemson.
Throw football out of this conversation. Just look strictly at what the Tigers have to work with, who they compete against and factor in the difficulties of landing top-level talent a couple of years after a major hoops scandal unveiled how some of the top programs cheat the system to get recruits.
Clemson isn't doing the latter, so what should the expectation be? If it's being more consistent making the NCAA postseason, well, Brownell has accomplished that. The program went to the Sweet 16 in 2018. It took a step back to the NIT a year later and then was likely to miss the NCAAs last March before COVID-19 canceled the tournament.
Is it graduating players, staying out of the police blotter and developing good young men? All boxes checked there.
Ken Ruinard
Is the expectation to be considered a "consistent" program?
Clemson has only had two double-digit finishes in ACC play under Brownell. Now, if you want to take his entire era into account and point out six consecutive years without making the NCAA tourney, that's fair. You'd be right about the lack of consistency. It has to improve. Plain and simple. But you can't say making March Madness isn't enough all of a sudden. You're moving the goalposts.
Should the goal be to win a game in the NCAA tournament? Well, based on Clemson's history as a whole in the Big Dance, no. From 1997-2010, the Tigers lost five consecutive NCAA tourney games. Who ended that streak? Brownell in 2011.
Granted, he didn't get back to the Big Dance until 2018, when Clemson beat New Mexico State and Auburn, but this year was his first one-and-done.
Is the expectation to win an ACC tournament game? There's no legit excuse for losing in this past postseason event to Miami in Greensboro, N.C. It was the worst loss of the season for a team that beat eight NCAA tournament teams during the regular season. But why does winning one game in the ACCT make or break how you feel about Clemson hoops?
Is the expectation to win the ACC? Well, that's never happened so it's probably not where you want to hitch your wagon.
Is the expectation to win the NCAA championship? Again, probably not logical. Sure, you can dream, but you don't fire and hire with that expectation in mind. That's not a mentality some fans can accept, especially those who have watched Dabo Swinney win two national titles since 2016 and turn the Tigers into an annual contender.
Hypothetically speaking, if there was a coaching change and prospective hires were told the expectation was to make the NCAAs every year (or at least every other year), win an ACC title during their tenure and make the Final Four, there wouldn't be many, if any, true candidates willing to take the job.
That's reality, like it or not.
The bottom line, this is not about firing or hiring anybody. The whole point is to get fans asking themselves what legit expectations should be placed on this program. There might never be a consensus on that, and ultimately it comes down to what athletic director Dan Radakovich wants, but it's hard to define what you consider success.
It's a lot easier to just complain about disappointments.