Became a Dynasty Defender: May 25, 2002 20:20:04 GMT -5
|
Post by fiddling on Apr 21, 2012 7:49:36 GMT -5
Often we see the statement "so and so" is a better coach than "this one". I'd like to read some ideas on the correct way to determine how to rate a D1 coach.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Nov 14, 2002 7:09:12 GMT -5
|
Post by ironhorse on Apr 21, 2012 8:02:38 GMT -5
Recruiting talent Motivation...not only players but the fans. Team management. Using assets effectively in game situations. (x's & o's)
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Feb 14, 2006 21:37:14 GMT -5
|
Post by robcat1 on Apr 21, 2012 9:03:32 GMT -5
Player development
I wonder what coach displays all of these attributes...hummmmm! #th_3d_emoticon_thumbUp#
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: May 25, 2002 20:20:04 GMT -5
|
Post by fiddling on Apr 21, 2012 9:09:59 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for the one I used to read all the time.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jan 1, 2009 14:37:42 GMT -5
|
Post by cincicat on Apr 21, 2012 9:43:22 GMT -5
First and foremost, he must be a "nice guy" and kiss babies! Oh and like fishing. #th_rofl2# #th_tubsucks#
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: May 25, 2002 20:20:04 GMT -5
|
Post by fiddling on Apr 21, 2012 9:46:51 GMT -5
First and foremost, he must be a "nice guy" and kiss babies! Oh and like fishing. #th_rofl2# #th_tubsucks# Definitely heard that, but that's not the one I'm thinking about.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Mar 10, 2007 2:26:36 GMT -5
|
Post by TomahawkChop10 on Apr 21, 2012 11:06:41 GMT -5
Obviously recruiting is #1. You can't do much without players, no matter who you are.
The thing I tend to look at the most is how much better a coach's team gets between the first game in November and the last game in March.
Tubby's teams always got worse as the season went along. That, to me, is the sign of a horrible coach.'
Calipari's teams improve immensely as the season progresses, and I love that about him. It's become a common phrase for TV talking heads to say, "Calipari doesn't just roll the ball out there." But it's true. The progress you can see with his teams, both individually and as a team, is pretty remarkable. Some of that improvement is natural because they are freshman, but I see plenty of other superstar freshmen around the country who do not improve and develop nearly as significantly as Calipari's freshmen. When combined with his recruiting, I don't think there is any question who the best coach in the college game is.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: May 25, 2002 20:20:04 GMT -5
|
Post by fiddling on Apr 21, 2012 12:24:52 GMT -5
Obviously recruiting is #1. You can't do much without players, no matter who you are. The thing I tend to look at the most is how much better a coach's team gets between the first game in November and the last game in March. Tubby's teams always got worse as the season went along. That, to me, is the sign of a horrible coach.' Calipari's teams improve immensely as the season progresses, and I love that about him. It's become a common phrase for TV talking heads to say, "Calipari doesn't just roll the ball out there." But it's true. The progress you can see with his teams, both individually and as a team, is pretty remarkable. Some of that improvement is natural because they are freshman, but I see plenty of other superstar freshmen around the country who do not improve and develop nearly as significantly as Calipari's freshmen. When combined with his recruiting, I don't think there is any question who the best coach in the college game is. The #1 defense of tubbi used to be his supporters saying look at his winning % and I've yet to see anyone in this thread name it as a criteria for judging a coach. Over the long haul, it should be a major factor, but it can't stand alone for many reasons. "Talking heads" used to say tubbi can beat you with his players or can beat you with your players. In effect, that was "damning him with faint praise", though that wasn't their intention. At UK, how can you justify getting the caliber of players that would allow you to be in a situation where your players and his players are essentially the same?
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jan 26, 2007 15:53:32 GMT -5
|
Post by Mr.Lair on Apr 21, 2012 14:05:10 GMT -5
One that people use, and I don't agree with, is national championships or # of them.
There's an idiot on another board that use to claim Cal was a good coach but Tub of shit was better because he had a national championship ring and Cal didn't. Clearly one of the worst takes ever. Cal was a better coach before without a ring but the point is mute now because he has one now.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jun 29, 2005 10:47:26 GMT -5
|
Post by bignnastyblue on Apr 21, 2012 14:12:21 GMT -5
I really think you have to look at the entire body of work that a coach achieves. Also over a period of time longer than 10 years. I had a friend who would use this phrase. ________ has done less with more or vise versa. He used to say this about Dean Smith, that he had done less with more than any other coach. He also favored Bobby Knight as a person who could motivate players to exceed there own expectations and also coach basketball. I remember when the "talking heads" would say that the game had passed Rupp by. That he was getting to old for the "modern" game. He answered his detractors by creating another great run with some very good players during the 1966 season. Also remember that his Issel led team was very close to a final four the year that Gilmore and Jacksonville beat us out in the regional finals.
If my memory serves me right Rupp had one loosing season and one .500 season in his tenure here. My point is that a coach has to be gaged by how he effects the game over an extended period of time. Rupp changed the game in a tremendous and profound way. Other coaches here and other places have done well, but Rupp was one of a kind and had more effect on the modern game then he will ever be given credit for.
Cal is in the same vein IMO. The most recent headlines state that Cal has proven that his system does work and will generate championships. This is the main reason that I hope and pray that Cal stays at UK. If he does he will solidify a legacy that will truly be what legends are made of. The college game only has had a few true legends and we were privilaged to travel down a glory road for 42 years with one of them.
Rupp is my measuring stick.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Apr 2, 2006 10:30:59 GMT -5
|
Post by Des Moines Rugby on Apr 21, 2012 14:17:43 GMT -5
all things being equal the number one attribute is recruiting top flight talent.....
as great as Coach Rupp was he wouldn't have been as successful if he hadn't brought in top flight talent....
Case in point....as much as I can't stand Bob Knight he can definitely coach....but his demise was due to his inability to attract top flight talent ultimately....He wouldn't change with the times and it took him down...
Look at Coach K or Cry Roy....they both still get top flight talent and remain relevant as coaches even though they are on the tail end of their careers....
bottom line talent trumps all......as fiddling always refers to Lombardi's quote about X's and O's being over rated....second on the list has to be a top notch motivational leader....
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jun 29, 2005 10:47:26 GMT -5
|
Post by bignnastyblue on Apr 21, 2012 15:15:19 GMT -5
all things being equal the number one attribute is recruiting top flight talent..... as great as Coach Rupp was he wouldn't have been as successful if he hadn't brought in top flight talent.... Case in point....as much as I can't stand Bob Knight he can definitely coach....but his demise was due to his inability to attract top flight talent ultimately....He wouldn't change with the times and it took him down... Look at Coach K or Cry Roy....they both still get top flight talent and remain relevant as coaches even though they are on the tail end of their careers.... bottom line talent trumps all......as fiddling always refers to Lombardi's quote about X's and O's being over rated....second on the list has to be a top notch motivational leader.... I agree to a certain extent. My point was that top talent does not always get the results that are expected. I was looking at some past recruiting classes just for giggles and noticed that within the past 2-4 years Alabama has had 2 top ten and I believe 1 top 5 recruiting classes. Talent out the yang, but the results did not seem to match expectations. Getting the talent and doing something with it are two different things. Hell T-5 had a #1 rated class during his tenure here but did not get us to a FF with those players. The question was what our views are of the criteria for rating a D-1 coach...my view is that getting the talent to your school is one aspect, but not the whole ball of wax. The true test must be over time and what you do with the talent you get. What impact have you had on the game itself. This is my criteria. For the young coaches, time is the only gage...JMO. I would ask this question. How would you rank Steve Fisher? He has a D-1 championship that he was not expected to win and lost in two finals that could easily have been won by Michigan. This is also a game where external forces can have an effect on a coaches win-loss record (zebras). I just believe that there are too many variables to put most of the load on one or two factors.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jun 29, 2005 10:47:26 GMT -5
|
Post by bignnastyblue on Apr 21, 2012 15:25:53 GMT -5
If you want an example of getting talent and flopping you dont have to look farther than Rick Barnes....He flat out sucks. I second this emotion. He had Kevin Durant right? And a few other good players that helped him to a #1 national ranking going into the NCAA tourney one year...got his hat handed to him as I recall.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Jan 26, 2007 15:53:32 GMT -5
|
Post by Mr.Lair on Apr 21, 2012 15:33:23 GMT -5
AP Report: Rick Barnes has decided to take his name out of the discussion of Great Coaches as rumors started to swirl he was one of them.
|
|
Became a Dynasty Defender: Nov 14, 2002 7:09:12 GMT -5
|
Post by ironhorse on Apr 21, 2012 15:34:16 GMT -5
What separates Calipri is his ability to recruit and motivate top talent. He also can manage emotions,team chemistry and he can manage expectations from the players and the fans...he can enforce discipline even with high ego prima donnas.
Calipari can get these guys to play defense ans play at pace. We saw that this year when he would reign the guys in,and take the foot off the gas and Grind it out...it takes a special coach that can get players to accept that and buy in to playing defense for 40 minutes.
I think he has changed the coaching game...Coaches all are trying to emulate Calipari and catch his magic.
|
|