Started By
Message
First 4 Years: Tanner vs Holbrook
Posted on 6/8/16 at 8:42 pm
Posted on 6/8/16 at 8:42 pm
I put this on TOS but I thought I'd put it here too. Comparing how each coach started their HC job at SC.
I'll start with some stats/records and then some speculation.
When Ray took over in '97, the last time we made the CWS was in '85 and we hadn't made the post season (Regionals) since '93.
In '97 we went 33-24.
in '98 we went 44-18 ,and we made Regionals for the 1st time in 5 years but were knocked out (Super Regionals didn't exist at that time.)
In '99 we went 35-23. we won the SECe, and did not make Regionals
In '00 we went 56-10 , we won the SECe, we won the SEC, we won Regionals and we went to Super Regionals
Summary: 168-75, 69% winning, 1 Super Appearance, 1 SEC, 2 SECe and 2 Regional Appearances.
When Chad took over for Ray in '13 we were the previous year National Runner Up, won the SEC, and we were National Champions the 2 years Prior. We had 4 Consecutive Top10 Ranked Recruiting Classes prior to Holbrook taking over.
In '13 we went 43-10. we won Regionals and were eliminated in Super Regionals
In '14 we went 44-18, we lost in Regionals
In '15 we went 32-25, no post season
In '16 we are 45-16. in Super Regionals...still playing at the time of this post.
Summary: 165-69, 70.5% W, 2 Super, Appearance, 0 SEC, 1 SECe, and 3 Regional Appearances.
Conclusion: Holbrook had a better 4 year start to his HC career than Tanner...but everyone knows Holbrook was handed a LOADED deck/program, so it may be fair to say the program hasn't performed up to expectations...however, Holbrook has indeed got off to better start than Ray.
I'll start with some stats/records and then some speculation.
When Ray took over in '97, the last time we made the CWS was in '85 and we hadn't made the post season (Regionals) since '93.
In '97 we went 33-24.
in '98 we went 44-18 ,and we made Regionals for the 1st time in 5 years but were knocked out (Super Regionals didn't exist at that time.)
In '99 we went 35-23. we won the SECe, and did not make Regionals
In '00 we went 56-10 , we won the SECe, we won the SEC, we won Regionals and we went to Super Regionals
Summary: 168-75, 69% winning, 1 Super Appearance, 1 SEC, 2 SECe and 2 Regional Appearances.
When Chad took over for Ray in '13 we were the previous year National Runner Up, won the SEC, and we were National Champions the 2 years Prior. We had 4 Consecutive Top10 Ranked Recruiting Classes prior to Holbrook taking over.
In '13 we went 43-10. we won Regionals and were eliminated in Super Regionals
In '14 we went 44-18, we lost in Regionals
In '15 we went 32-25, no post season
In '16 we are 45-16. in Super Regionals...still playing at the time of this post.
Summary: 165-69, 70.5% W, 2 Super, Appearance, 0 SEC, 1 SECe, and 3 Regional Appearances.
Conclusion: Holbrook had a better 4 year start to his HC career than Tanner...but everyone knows Holbrook was handed a LOADED deck/program, so it may be fair to say the program hasn't performed up to expectations...however, Holbrook has indeed got off to better start than Ray.
This post was edited on 6/8/16 at 8:48 pm
4
Posted on 6/8/16 at 10:51 pm to CockInYourEar
Yeah I think the fact that we had 2 titles and national prominence and loaded teams when Holbrook took over really kinda makes this comparison a bit unfair.
Posted on 6/9/16 at 1:14 am to CockInYourEar
quote:
Conclusion: Holbrook had a better 4 year start to his HC career than Tanner...but everyone knows Holbrook was handed a LOADED deck/program, so it may be fair to say the program hasn't performed up to expectations...however, Holbrook has indeed got off to better start than Ray.
Tanner came to USC with a decade of head coaching experience at NCSU with 7 NCAA postseasons. Coach Holbrook had zero HC experience when he took over for Tanner. That can't be dismissed - experience does matter....
And Holbrook was handed a LOADED program, but it was mostly loaded with talent based on paper but like him it was extremely inexperienced at the highest levels of NCAA competition. Most all of the stars that led USC under Tanner to the Championship series in 2010-12 were gone by the time Holbrook took over.
In 2013 Holbrook led a young, inexperienced ,but very talented team to the Supers against the national #1 seed UNC in Chapel Hill and we out-classed UNC in most every category but the final win column. We out-scored them 17-11 but lost 2 of the 3 games by one run each. There was nothing to hang our heads over with that effort and in fact if you go back and look you'll find that Gamecock Nation for the most part was proud of CCH and the team, and was excited for the future.
In 2014 we had a great pitching staff although really only 3 starters that established themselves - but a great bullpen of situational relievers - and an offense that was full of table-setters but no table-cleaners. We lost to Maryland in the Regional in the 1st loss because Wynkoop was way off and couldn't get out of the 2nd inning, and we had to use up Widener in relief who threw 100 pitches. Because of that the next day we had already used up our 3 weekend guys plus Widener, so like how we did this year's Regional using Johnson to start, we start our closer of that season Joel Seddon who was a monster for us out of the BP. But he struggled in the game and gave up runs, while our own hitters couldn't keep up (MD started a guy who was 4-1 with a 2.45 ERA) and it got away from us. 2nd loss, season over.
Both the 2013 & 2014 teams were better than the final outcomes of the seasons indicate, and I'm sure if we had an experienced, veteran head coach manning the helm we would've had better results. But Tanner felt that Holbrook is a very talented coach that just needs HC experience, but won't get it without being a HC somewhere. That the investment in Holbrook would reap huge dividends in the long run. IMO Holbrook is improving every year in that department, and as long as he continues to have strong recruiting classes he's going to keep USC's program among the elite, and one day he'll become an elite head coach as well....
Posted on 6/9/16 at 6:01 am to CockInYourEar
quote:
'00 we went 56-10 , we won the SECe, we won the SEC, we won Regionals and we went to Super Regionals
Not the point of your thread but that should've been an Omaha team.
Posted on 6/9/16 at 10:23 am to CockInYourEar
Tanner took over a Raines team that had underachieved several seasons and made them a playoff team after one season. Holbrook took over a team that had just played in its third consecutive NCAA championship series. Tanner had a lot less to work with when he took over, he had to build what he had over his first four seasons. I'm not knocking Holbrook, but I think Tanner's first four seasons were much more impressive.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 8:11 am
Posted on 6/9/16 at 1:29 pm to CockHolliday
quote:
I'm not knocking Holbrook, but I think Tanner's first four seasons were much more impressive.
1 SEC title vs. 0 wins in Hoover. Edge: SEC title.
Posted on 6/9/16 at 2:15 pm to CockHolliday
IMO it more has to do with the typical South Carolina Gamecock fan: like how we trash our starting QBs and always raise red-shirted freshmen or incoming prospects to levels of being our next "savior". As soon as that kid makes the active roster, we immediately move on to the next red-shirted kid or incoming prospect after him, and wait with baited breath for him to appear in his first official game so we can start trashing him.
We trashed Ray Tanner for years until he surprised the shite out of everyone and won a national championship. Then we praised him as a God, only because we had to to keep from looking like clowns. But we were trashing Tanner and calling for his dismissal right up into the 2010 CWS, after the first game loss. Now we'll trash Holbrook no matter what the frick he does, until he wins a CWS championship. And even then only because to save face, not because we really want to stop....
We trashed Ray Tanner for years until he surprised the shite out of everyone and won a national championship. Then we praised him as a God, only because we had to to keep from looking like clowns. But we were trashing Tanner and calling for his dismissal right up into the 2010 CWS, after the first game loss. Now we'll trash Holbrook no matter what the frick he does, until he wins a CWS championship. And even then only because to save face, not because we really want to stop....
Posted on 6/9/16 at 5:23 pm to ConwayGamecock
So if we trash Holbrook will he win the CWS?
If so, he is a bum, a dirty rottin bum
If so, he is a bum, a dirty rottin bum
Posted on 6/9/16 at 8:22 pm to CockInYourEar
quote:
So if we trash Holbrook will he win the CWS?
If so, he is a bum, a dirty rottin bum
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News