He never said that, you took a shot at last years team, and he defended them with good reason. I honestly don't know what you expected of this team. There was no way they would duplicate the success of last years team after losing Grant and Connaughton. I came into this year expecting 2nd round at best. They got our hopes up with that amazing run starting with UNC but they're running out of gas. IMO if they get a double bye they would have overachieved already.
In regards to why we can't be like Virignia, they haven't done any better in the tourney then we have and since that's every bodies barometer on how to judge Brey, I don't see why they should be regarded as better.
This.
I just want people to be fair - both ways - with Brey. I'd criticize someone who only looked at the good (4x conference coach of the year, 6 different recognitions of national COTY between 2011 and 2012, NCAA tournament 9 out of 10 past seasons if you include this one [which is rather rare], etc.) as equally as I'd criticize someone who cherry picks only the bad data points.
In this case, looking at someone characterizing last year's post-season results as
"was able to squeeze past Butler in OT, whose best player was on one leg" is rightfully deserving of criticism. That post season included:
-Beating #2 Duke in North Carolina by 10 points on our way to our first conference championship EVER.
-Beating #19 UNC for the ACC title.
-Beating #14 Wichita State in a Sweet 16 game.
-Taking #1 and undefeated Kentucky down to the last shot in the elite 8.
The post season included all of that, and the post's author is going to try to paint it in a negative light because it took OT to
beat #24 Butler. That's right, we're now complaining about
how Brey beats ranked teams in post season play.
