Oldbear300, Dana, ScottS, Setshot, Adriacus

15,966 Views | 142 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by TechDawgMc
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

Wait what? Void of recruits? 2 years ago: 5 star Gusters, 5 star Andrews, and McDaniel the transfer from PSU. This year: 5 star Dauda, Transfer Carr from TT, Transfer Lewis from Bama, and possibly Carr from KSU. Not really sure where the notion recruiting was all the sudden sucking comes from.
Many folks consider "recruits" & "transfers" to be two different buckets. Assuming that position was intended, 3 signees in 2 seasons is fairly small volume [although each was highly touted]. And one was lost. Two current "recruits" for two classes is small by any standard.

Part of the issue is that everyone faces the changing world of the OTT Rule. Trying to see transfers as something more than short term rentals is new. On top of that item, the COVID issue exists. Are players "Seniors" or "COVID Juniors"?

Baylor lost its Louisiana pipeline. Baylor faces four "significant players" in Texas recruiting: Baylor, UT, ATM, and now LSU. Baylor may be losing its best connection to Arkansas and Missouri recruiting pipelines.

But.......and it is a big but........it is smart to wait and see who Collen hires as assistants. If she gets a top Texas recruiter and gets someone with strong ties in Atlanta AAU circles, the recruiting opportunity gains and losses probably net out at zero.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fair points, I've always grouped transfers and recruits together. Although as stated most of the time transfers are rentals. However, with the new One time transfer rule we could get a few for multiple years aside from Lewis who was clearly going to be a 1 year rental type.
BaylorRocks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Success in the women's game is two things: Elite 6'4" or better posts/forwards and layups. Nothing else matters if you want banners. When you stop attracting/signing elite 6'4" or better players.....you'll quickly become part of the middle-of-the-pack teams. Tourney's? Perhaps. But Elite 8's and legitimate Natty opps fade away.

Sic'em
blueeyedbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Adriacus Peratuun said:

IowaBear said:

Wait what? Void of recruits? 2 years ago: 5 star Gusters, 5 star Andrews, and McDaniel the transfer from PSU. This year: 5 star Dauda, Transfer Carr from TT, Transfer Lewis from Bama, and possibly Carr from KSU. Not really sure where the notion recruiting was all the sudden sucking comes from.
Many folks consider "recruits" & "transfers" to be two different buckets. Assuming that position was intended, 3 signees in 2 seasons is fairly small volume [although each was highly touted]. And one was lost. Two current "recruits" for two classes is small by any standard.

Part of the issue is that everyone faces the changing world of the OTT Rule. Trying to see transfers as something more than short term rentals is new. On top of that item, the COVID issue exists. Are players "Seniors" or "COVID Juniors"?

Baylor lost its Louisiana pipeline. Baylor faces four "significant players" in Texas recruiting: Baylor, UT, ATM, and now LSU. Baylor may be losing its best connection to Arkansas and Missouri recruiting pipelines.

But.......and it is a big but........it is smart to wait and see who Collen hires as assistants. If she gets a top Texas recruiter and gets someone with strong ties in Atlanta AAU circles, the recruiting opportunity gains and losses probably net out at zero.
Thanks AP. Could not have said it better.
We lost Jersey and HVL - both highly sought by CKM
Yes you lose some - you cant get them all but 3 sigs in two years and the following year not looking so good either was a very troubling trend to me. Your playing with fire counting on transfers to bail out your lack of high school recruiting success is a very risky position to be in.
I think BU WBB needed a fresh redo and I hope Collen brings it big time.

74Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AP...can you list several top state of Texas recruiters she might consider
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ABC BEAR said:

Not sure what to make of the new coach. Much of her career indicates she was there during someone else's success. Her husband's record at louisville was strong but his tenure at Arkansas was unimpressive and ultimately he was let go by the Razorbacks and replaced by ESPN analyst jimmy Dykes.

I would like to have seen a hire with more floor coaching and recruiting experience. I know everyone is supposed to be impressed that she comes directly from the WNBA but I am more inclined to value the floor style and winning percentage of Molly Miller. Just my opinion.
Not trying to be disrespectful, your opinion is as valid as mine. But, I think the board got almost obsessed with Mollie Miller. She may indeed be a very fine coach looking back 10 years from now. But I don't think you would find any top 20 program, much less top 10 that would go after someone who has only 1 year experience at the D1 level. Heck, not even Oklahoma who went almost a month in their search pick her or even gave any indication of doing so.

As far as recruiting, I suspect that Collen with her experience as an NCAA assistant coach has more years recruiting experience than does Miller. Collen also brings the perspective that high level recruits may be looking for because of her WNBA background.

I'm not sure where this Miller stuff got started, but it got into the feedback loop frequently found on message boards. Someone throws out a name. Then some twitter nerd tweets it out as if it were fact. Then more message board people treat it as fact because they found it on twitter. And the cycle just feeds on itself. Certainly Miller would be a cheap hire, but I think she would be eaten alive right now by what she would face at the Power 5 level.....Just my opinion.

We just need to let things play out and see how it goes. I would say the same thing regardless of the hire. We have seen flops at UT, TT, Tennessee, and ND, just to name a few when legends get replaced. Some of them tried long-term assistants, some tried bringing in a name coach. We have no control over it anyway. Just let it play out.
TechDawgMc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here's the reality in women's basketball. We've had a relatively small number of "coaching legends" who have retired. So far, NOT ONE single school has made a hire that worked after that coach left.

La. Tech - failed
Old Dominion - failed
(granted, both of those had money issues as big schools were coming in)
Texas - failed
Texas Tech - failed
How did I forget? Tennessee - failed
Notre Dame -- jury still out, but didn't start well
Duke - failed (though Gail never won it all anyway)
even UNC (though I wouldn't call Hatchell elite) and NC State (Yow was an Olympic coach) have struggle

While I would agree with some of AP's criticisms of Mulkey (heck I've made them more than once in the last 10-12 years), it's ludicrous not to consider her elite. She's tied for 3rd on all time national titles won. That's stinking elite in my book.

It's going to be tough to be the first school that got it right. Rhodes made an interesting hire. Maybe it works. Maybe it doesn't. There clearly isn't a magic formula.
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TechDawgMc said:

Here's the reality in women's basketball. We've had a relatively small number of "coaching legends" who have retired. So far, NOT ONE single school has made a hire that worked after that coach left.

La. Tech - failed
Old Dominion - failed
(granted, both of those had money issues as big schools were coming in)
Texas - failed
Texas Tech - failed
Notre Dame -- jury still out, but didn't start well
Duke - failed (though Gail never won it all anyway)
even UNC (though I wouldn't call Hatchell elite) and NC State (Yow was an Olympic coach) have struggle

While I would agree with some of AP's criticisms of Mulkey (heck I've made them more than once in the last 10-12 years), it's ludicrous not to consider her elite. She's tied for 3rd on all time national titles won. That's stinking elite in my book.

It's going to be tough to be the first school that got it right. Rhodes made an interesting hire. Maybe it works. Maybe it doesn't. There clearly isn't a magic formula.
I would also add that there is not a lot of movement in top level program coaches. Most of them make well enough and the risk of moving (unless an unusual situation like Mulkey back to her home area exists) is more risky than rewarding, possibly after seeing what happened with Goestenkors and Curry.

When this search started, I never saw the upside for any of the types of names being thrown out, Frese, the coach at Arizona, the one at Michigan, etc. to come to Waco. It was completely out of their area of the country where they have recruiting ties and they were in the upcycle they had worked for and were being compensated enough or were in line for a substantial raise. WBB coaches just don't move for money like some think. There has to be something else. Unfortunately, I don't know of any that want to get back to Texas (state of) right now that would look at Texas as Mulkey looked at LA. Shafer may have been the one and only.

I think we are going to be OK. I think KM was burned out here, and unlike the period before 2013, she wasn't the only game in town. Much of it having nothing to do with the administration. Her bout with Covid, the team disruption because of it, the UConn game where she saw another potential championship go down to injury right before her eyes (just like with Wallace) plus how that game ended. And had the game been a minute or two longer, that 2019 championship had a good chance to slip away as well. Sometimes you just need to get out and get a fresh start.
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TechDawgMc said:

Here's the reality in women's basketball. We've had a relatively small number of "coaching legends" who have retired. So far, NOT ONE single school has made a hire that worked after that coach left.

La. Tech - failed
Old Dominion - failed
(granted, both of those had money issues as big schools were coming in)
Texas - failed
Texas Tech - failed
How did I forget? Tennessee - failed
Notre Dame -- jury still out, but didn't start well
Duke - failed (though Gail never won it all anyway)
even UNC (though I wouldn't call Hatchell elite) and NC State (Yow was an Olympic coach) have struggle

While I would agree with some of AP's criticisms of Mulkey (heck I've made them more than once in the last 10-12 years), it's ludicrous not to consider her elite. She's tied for 3rd on all time national titles won. That's stinking elite in my book.

It's going to be tough to be the first school that got it right. Rhodes made an interesting hire. Maybe it works. Maybe it doesn't. There clearly isn't a magic formula.
My starting point is that I think our society is far too ready to use superlatives in describing people. Every player is a GOAT, every coach is a legend. My perspective is that few people so anointed are actually deserving of the superlative. Overusing such terminology diminishes the meaning.

WBB is particularly tough. Unlike MBB with a century of data and therefor a strong comparison point, WBB has only crowned 39 champions at the NCAA level [the AIAW years being a very different animal (ask Immaculata, Delta State, Wayland Baptist, etc.). Of those 39 championships, 19 were won by two schools [11 for UConn, 8 for Tennessee]. The other 20 championships were won as follows:

1 win: Old Dominion, Texas, Texas Tech, North Carolina, Purdue, Maryland, Texas A&M, South Carolina

2 wins: La Tech, USC, Notre Dame

3 wins: Baylor & Stanford

Given the difference, I don't think lumping in Mulkey, Vanderveer, etc. with Summitt & Auriemma is merited. Those two are "Legends". I might [might, not definite] say a MBB coach with 3 NCs is a legend due to the high level of competitiveness. I can't say it about WBB since each season has 2-6 teams realistically competing for the title.
ABC BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

ABC BEAR said:

Not sure what to make of the new coach. Much of her career indicates she was there during someone else's success. Her husband's record at louisville was strong but his tenure at Arkansas was unimpressive and ultimately he was let go by the Razorbacks and replaced by ESPN analyst jimmy Dykes.

I would like to have seen a hire with more floor coaching and recruiting experience. I know everyone is supposed to be impressed that she comes directly from the WNBA but I am more inclined to value the floor style and winning percentage of Molly Miller. Just my opinion.
Not trying to be disrespectful, your opinion is as valid as mine. But, I think the board got almost obsessed with Mollie Miller. She may indeed be a very fine coach looking back 10 years from now. But I don't think you would find any top 20 program, much less top 10 that would go after someone who has only 1 year experience at the D1 level. Heck, not even Oklahoma who went almost a month in their search pick her or even gave any indication of doing so.

As far as recruiting, I suspect that Collen with her experience as an NCAA assistant coach has more years recruiting experience than does Miller. Collen also brings the perspective that high level recruits may be looking for because of her WNBA background.

I'm not sure where this Miller stuff got started, but it got into the feedback loop frequently found on message boards. Someone throws out a name. Then some twitter nerd tweets it out as if it were fact. Then more message board people treat it as fact because they found it on twitter. And the cycle just feeds on itself. Certainly Miller would be a cheap hire, but I think she would be eaten alive right now by what she would face at the Power 5 level.....Just my opinion.

We just need to let things play out and see how it goes. I would say the same thing regardless of the hire. We have seen flops at UT, TT, Tennessee, and ND, just to name a few when legends get replaced. Some of them tried long-term assistants, some tried bringing in a name coach. We have no control over it anyway. Just let it play out.
I mentioned Molly Miller because she has become a known quantity on this board in recent days. Regardless of which team she has coached there is no doubt that she is a game day coach with a 90% winning record. I just wish our new coach had a little more of a 'I Was In Charge When This Happened' rather than a 'I Was There When It Happened' resume.
BearFan33
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I liked the idea of M Miller but admit it came with substantial risks. I think for her, she may want to go the route of Toyelle Wilson and get an assistant job at a high profile place (one that needs an offense boost) and then slide into a higher profile head coaching job. It doesn't matter now.

I think Mack did his homework and got us someone with good coaching experience who will run a good program. She has my support and patience as she gets set up at BU.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
baylor1984 said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

Reverend said:

Come on. They will now have to "scout us"? When we never (hardly) lost a game? Come up with something that makes sense, if you're an expert.
In 20+ years, Mulkey ran about 30-35ish plays in half court O. Each season she picked about 12-14 to run that season based upon personnel. Of that number, about 7-8 of those plays were run 85-90% of the time.

Watch any season.....it is 3-4 weeks into the season before you see more than 4-5 different plays run in a game.

Every single coach in the B12 has a binder with every single Baylor play drawn up. They know what Kim runs. Everyone knows what Kim runs. Her keys are multiple plays from same alignment, solid execution, superior players. It is "win by Jimmys and Joes" not win by Xs and Os.

Name the last time Baylor beat a team that had better players/athletes than Baylor.
Baylor didn't play many but you'd probably have to go back to 05 and the semi-final against LSU. Mulkey flat out coached Pokey in the second half of that game. Excited to see what the new offense brings. Sammie and Maddie should love this offense if they come to Baylor.
that was the game that came up in my head...
greggor25
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I agree that it is highly likely Mulk was burned out here. It's tough to "feed that monster" she created year after year. Unfortunately, that's what we've all come to expect. We all knew things would change one day and I think the change started several years ago. I'm ready to see more of a modern offense. I'm tired of feed it to the post.
Eball
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A whole bunch of idiots posting stuff about Kim, Baylor WBB, and the new coach...that I do not recognize at all...will be glad when we get back to normal...I love Kim, I love Baylor WBB and all Baylor sports, I also love our new coach and hope she is very successful...I am not sure why anyone has to choose one or the other or put down one to build up the other...
lookin4awin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
greggor25 said:

I agree that it is highly likely Mulk was burned out here. It's tough to "feed that monster" she created year after year. Unfortunately, that's what we've all come to expect. We all knew things would change one day and I think the change started several years ago. I'm ready to see more of a modern offense. I'm tired of feed it to the post.

well, we are all entitled to what we like to watch, but based on her success and 3 NC's I was pretty happy playing whatever offense she liked, even if it was not as exciting as some fans wanted. She had a sound approach with bang it in offense-and speeding up the offense with her spectacular defense that led to lots of exciting transition buckets. She knew what worked for her-she demanded that from her players-and it got her 3 NC's and into the HOF> It is hard to offer much criticism of her coaching abilities. She knows what she is doing....hard to deny that by anyone.
Texasjeremy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Old300Bear said:

I honestly have no clue. Lot depends on her staff. She has never recruited, so that is concerning. She gets the full wait and see treatment from me. I am all for her.
I would not say she has never recruited. She spent 9 seasons as an assistant coach (Colorado State, Ball State, Louisville, Arkansas, & FGCU). She was heavily involved in recruiting at each stop. Another interesting thing to watch is how she utilizes the transfer portal (aka College Free Agency), after spending the past few seasons in the pro ranks. There are new rules in place and there is a learning curve to it when your building your team.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You can't be taken seriously. Mulkey is on a lot of short lists. Winning 3 times makes her elite, alone. We say plenty of coaches are elite that have won once. In some cases, not at all.

She was involved in 6 national championships, and that also makes her elite. Please, even if you hate the lady, make an attempt at being rational.
Bear2393
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm with you Reverend, you would think by that post that Kim was the worse coach in the country instead of the best.
Reverend
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sometimes you're just too damn smart for anyone to understand you. AP May fall into that category.
DanaDane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So you win 3 national championships, inducted into the Hall of Fame, and you're not an elite coach?

I've seen some rubbish posted in these forums before but I don't think I've ever seen anything that idiotic.

IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whole lot of hot takes on here:
Kim isn't elite
Baylor's recruiting has went to crap
All this tells me is there's a ton of uneducated fans or just plain Kim haters. Fully believe it's a mixture of both. Either way those two takes are hilariously bad.
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.
Bear-Runner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

Wait what? Void of recruits? 2 years ago: 5 star Gusters, 5 star Andrews, and McDaniel the transfer from PSU. This year: 5 star Dauda, Transfer Carr from TT, Transfer Lewis from Bama, and possibly Carr from KSU. Not really sure where the notion recruiting was all the sudden sucking comes from.
Truth be told, that's all Messer. So if Coach Collen can hold on to her we may not skip a beat too much.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who said Kim is a legend? But you're doing your very best to discredit Kim. Whether intentional or not. At least that's what it seems like. Nothing against your opinions as we're all entitled to them, but to win 3 in 21 years is pretty impressive considering they probably win it this year if Richards doesn't get hurt and had a good shot during the COVID shortened 20 season
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

Who said Kim is a legend? But you're doing your very best to discredit Kim. Whether intentional or not. At least that's what it seems like. Nothing against your opinions as we're all entitled to them, but to win 3 in 21 years is pretty impressive considering they probably win it this year if Richards doesn't get hurt and had a good shot during the COVID shortened 20 season
The exact discussion.....note the circled language.

Reverend
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AP. You've done your best to discredit her method of coaching and her place ( which is the HOF).
Seriously, what are your credentials?
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So 6 total national titles isn't worthy of being in the legend discussion ? I'd be willing to bet if coaches like Geno, Tara Etc were ask point point is Kim Mulkey a coaching legend ? They would say yes. Sure she had a few years she didn't win it all with the so called most talented team. You keep referencing the 2011 season. Same BU team beat AM 3x that season. Upsets happen. Not saying I believe Kim's a legend but it's not near as far fetched as you're trying to make it
baylor1984
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.
If Kim somehow wins one at LSU what do you think then since no other coach in WBB history would have done that. I do agree with your assessment as it stands today.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.

It's the word you used. You said you wouldn't call Mulkey elite. Maybe work on knowing what you yourself said, before questioning my reading comprehension.

Adriacus Peratuun said:


Overall, she was good but I don't subscribe to the "she is elite" school. Elite coaches consistently win when they have better talent and find a handful of wins with lesser talent.

geewago
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Reverend said:

AP. You've done your best to discredit her method of coaching and her place ( which is the HOF).
Seriously, what are your credentials?
Good post.

Good question.



DanaDane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Adriacus Peratuun said:


My issues with Mulkey were twofold:



Overall, she was good but I don't subscribe to the "she is elite" school. Elite coaches consistently win when they have better talent and find a handful of wins with lesser talent.




What part of "elite" did you not use in that description, chief? You can keep pedaling sh*t and try to tell us it's sugar......but it's still sh*t and you're still an idiot for saying it. Halls of Fame are made for legends of any sport, and that's where she'll be here shortly.
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
baylor1984 said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.
If Kim somehow wins one at LSU what do you think then since no other coach in WBB history would have done that. I do agree with your assessment as it stands today.
I don't consider Adolph Rupp a Legend with 4 NCs. Would probably apply the same standard to Mulkey. 5 NCs probably gets a coach to "Legend" status for me. In common usage [not dictionary exact], the term legend generally means the very best at some task. I see Wooden and K fitting that usage [during their different time frames]. Auriemma & Summitt......maybe Summitt wasn't as good as Auriemma but 8 NCs gets a coach "Legend" status for me.
baylor1984
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Adriacus Peratuun said:

baylor1984 said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.
If Kim somehow wins one at LSU what do you think then since no other coach in WBB history would have done that. I do agree with your assessment as it stands today.
I don't consider Adolph Rupp a Legend with 4 NCs. Would probably apply the same standard to Mulkey. 5 NCs probably gets a coach to "Legend" status for me. In common usage [not dictionary exact], the term legend generally means the very best at some task. I see Wooden and K fitting that usage [during their different time frames]. Auriemma & Summitt......maybe Summitt wasn't as good as Auriemma but 8 NCs gets a coach "Legend" status for me.
I agree on the 5 NC's but having 3 at one school and 1 at another which has never been done in WBB I think puts her into the Legend status. Unless she does that I would agree that she is just elite and Geno and Pat stand alone as Legends. Of course on the Mt. Rushmore of WBB she is up there with those two as well as Tara.
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.

It's the word you used. You said you wouldn't call Mulkey elite. Maybe work on knowing what you yourself said, before questioning my reading comprehension.

Adriacus Peratuun said:


Overall, she was good but I don't subscribe to the "she is elite" school. Elite coaches consistently win when they have better talent and find a handful of wins with lesser talent.


Then that usage is my bad. I should have used the same term we had been using "legend" which informed that offering.

I think she is a good coach but not an irreplaceable coach like Wooden, K, Auriemma or Summitt. Their consistency of winning far outstrips hers.
Adriacus Peratuun
How long do you want to ignore this user?
baylor1984 said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

baylor1984 said:

Adriacus Peratuun said:

Think several of you are lacking reading comprehension. The debate wasn't about "elite" coaches but "coaching legends".

Is there a difference between the two labels? Yes.

Jim Calhoun won 3 NCs at UConn. Was he an elite coach? Yes. Was he a coaching legend? No.

Coaching legend would be John Wooden. Possibly Coach K. But not Calhoun.

Same analysis applies to WBB. Coaching Legends: Auriemma & Summitt.

Mulkey: elite but not a coaching legend. And her playing championship doesn't count any more than Bobby Knight's playing championship does.

If you can't understand the difference between the two levels, can't help you.
If Kim somehow wins one at LSU what do you think then since no other coach in WBB history would have done that. I do agree with your assessment as it stands today.
I don't consider Adolph Rupp a Legend with 4 NCs. Would probably apply the same standard to Mulkey. 5 NCs probably gets a coach to "Legend" status for me. In common usage [not dictionary exact], the term legend generally means the very best at some task. I see Wooden and K fitting that usage [during their different time frames]. Auriemma & Summitt......maybe Summitt wasn't as good as Auriemma but 8 NCs gets a coach "Legend" status for me.
I agree on the 5 NC's but having 3 at one school and 1 at another which has never been done in WBB I think puts her into the Legend status. Unless she does that I would agree that she is just elite and Geno and Pat stand alone as Legends. Of course on the Mt. Rushmore of WBB she is up there with those two as well as Tara.
Fair enough. 5 is the number that I land on......but understand that thought.



 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.