Started By
Message
re: North Carolina AD wants 40% increase in UNC's athletic revenues
Posted on 4/16/13 at 7:06 pm to engie
Posted on 4/16/13 at 7:06 pm to engie
the whole Duke/UCLA basketball debate is pointless.
saying Duke could one day be Stanford in football has nothing to do with how attractive they are to the SEC.
at the end of the day the ONLY shot Duke has at the SEC is if UNC says they will not come without them and even then its dicey for the Blue Devils.
The SEC is going to want either UVA or VPI far before they ever consider Duke simply b/c it gets them into another state.
Hell, one of the main reasons NC State has a shot is b/c the SEC does not want to double up on a state during expansion.
saying Duke could one day be Stanford in football has nothing to do with how attractive they are to the SEC.
at the end of the day the ONLY shot Duke has at the SEC is if UNC says they will not come without them and even then its dicey for the Blue Devils.
The SEC is going to want either UVA or VPI far before they ever consider Duke simply b/c it gets them into another state.
Hell, one of the main reasons NC State has a shot is b/c the SEC does not want to double up on a state during expansion.
This post was edited on 4/16/13 at 7:11 pm
0
Posted on 4/16/13 at 7:25 pm to Tiger Live2
VT does the best in the Tidewater area... Vick bros., Bruce Smith, Tyrod Taylor... UVA does better in Richmond. but imagine if VT could have kept other Tidewater talent like Ronald Curry, Dre Bly, Lawrence Taylor, Plaxico Burress, Jerod Mayo in state.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 7:37 pm to winyahpercy
I get your point, but Curry might be bad example. He was commited to UVA before flipping to UNC.
But remember till 92 or 93, UVA was the main football team in the state.
ODU becomming 1-A could hurt both schools recruiting in the Tidewater.
But remember till 92 or 93, UVA was the main football team in the state.
ODU becomming 1-A could hurt both schools recruiting in the Tidewater.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:14 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
Wouldn't it be safe to say it would of been impossible to remain what they were under Wooden? Most schools would love to have UCLA's last 15 years of basketball.
That is the core issue. being good is good enough for most schools but being elite is the measure of the real top schools. Since UCLA won their 10 under Wooden look at how they compare to schools in the "elite" category :
I did not include the UTEP because they never went back but included NC State because they did.
multiple school wins by multiple coaches in the post Wooden era
(4) Kentucky - 4 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
2012 John Calipari
1998 Tubby Smith
1996 Rick Pitino
1978 Joe Hall
(4) North Carolina - 2 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
2009 Roy Williams
2005 Roy Williams
1993 Dean Smith
1982 Dean Smith
(3) Louisville - 2 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
2013 Rick Pitino
1986 Denny Crum
1980 Denny Crum
(2) Kansas - 2 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
2008 Bill Self
1988 Larry Brown
(2) Michigan State - 2 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
2000 Tom Izzo
1979 Jud Heathcote
(2) North Carolina State - 2 different coaches! - Elite program status confirmed
1983 Jim Valvano
1974 Norm Sloan
multiple school wins by single coach in the post Wooden era
(4) Duke - only 1 coach - Elite coach status confirmed
2010, 2001, 1992, and 1991 Mike Krzyzewski
(3) Connecticut - only 1 coach - Elite coach status confirmed
2011, 2004, and 1999 Jim Calhoun
(3) Indiana - only 1 coach - Elite coach status confirmed
1987, 1981, and 1976 Bob Knight
(2) Florida - only 1 coach - Elite coach status confirmed
2007 and 2006 Billy Donovan
schools with a single NCAA banner in the post Wooden era
2003 Syracuse Jim Boeheim
2002 Maryland Gary Williams
1997 Arizona Lute Olson
1995 UCLA Jim Harrick
1994 Arkansas Nolan Richardson
1990 UNLV Jerry Tarkanian
1989 Michigan Steve Fisher
1985 Villanova Rollie Massimino
1984 Georgetown John Thompson
1977 Marquette Al McGuire
UCLA post Wooden has been good but certainly not elite, especially since the PAC top to bottom is not the toughest basketball conference nor has it been. UCLA in basketball is like Southern Cal in football in that they are the 1 eyed man in the land of the blind.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:24 pm to Cheese Grits
Exactly. Tremendous post...
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:28 pm to Cheese Grits
Wow. This thread has taken a weird turn since I last clicked on it.
If we're ranking basketball teams (all-time)that are better than UCLA
1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Indiana
4. Kansas
5. Duke
6. UCLA
ETA: You could also make cases for Louisville and Michigan State
If we're ranking basketball teams (all-time)that are better than UCLA
1. Kentucky
2. North Carolina
3. Indiana
4. Kansas
5. Duke
6. UCLA
ETA: You could also make cases for Louisville and Michigan State
This post was edited on 4/16/13 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:31 pm to engie
quote:
I simply agreed that UCLA is no longer the same type of elite job that it was in the past.
You might be right about that, but if I had a dollar for every time I've heard in my life time that a traditional power was "dead" I'd be rich. All we heard as Bama fans was, Bear is dead, you'll never be elite again, blah blah blah. Many people said the same thing in the 90's about USC, OU, OSU, Texas, etc until they all won NC's this past decade. People said the same about ND football, and they played in the Natty last year and will be pre-season top 10 this year. These historically elite programs have a way of finding their way back. That's all I'm saying.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:32 pm to tider04
I don't think UCLA is necessarily dead. I just think they were a flash in the pan. A very extended and successful flash, but a flash nonetheless
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:47 pm to tider04
I agree with what you are saying -- but the problem we have is the terminology calling that PROGRAM elite. 99% of the program history was made in a single run by one transcendent coach. Hence why UCLA is a different situation than those that you listed IMO...
Alabama football was elite(won titles) under(at least) 2 coaches prior to Bear.
USC football has been elite(won titles) under at least 4 different coaches.
OU football has been elite(won titles) under at least 4 different coaches.
OSU football has been elite(won titles) under at least 3 different coaches and have had undefeated seasons under at least 4 more.
Texas football has been elite(won titles) under at least 2 different coaches and had undefeated seasons over several others.
Notre Dame has been elite under numerous coaches.
See the difference?
Alabama football was elite(won titles) under(at least) 2 coaches prior to Bear.
USC football has been elite(won titles) under at least 4 different coaches.
OU football has been elite(won titles) under at least 4 different coaches.
OSU football has been elite(won titles) under at least 3 different coaches and have had undefeated seasons under at least 4 more.
Texas football has been elite(won titles) under at least 2 different coaches and had undefeated seasons over several others.
Notre Dame has been elite under numerous coaches.
See the difference?
This post was edited on 4/16/13 at 9:48 pm
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:51 pm to tider04
quote:
You might be right about that, but if I had a dollar for every time I've heard in my life time that a traditional power was "dead" I'd be rich. All we heard as Bama fans was, Bear is dead, you'll never be elite again, blah blah blah.
I agree which is why i separate the elite schools into 2 categories :
a) won multiple titles under a single coach
b) won multiple titles under multiple coaches over multiple decades
UCLA is an example of the first as they had a "golden" decade under a single coach. Impressive yes, but not long term elite.
Kentucky is an example of the second in that they have fewer banners yet they are in second place. The impressive stat is that they have done it from World War II to the present and done it with 5 DIFFERENT coaches. Like Bama in football they have great coaches but the program survives and thrives beyond them. Rupp and Bryant have been in the grave for ages but both schools are still elite programs in their respective sports.
Here are some quote's on true elite programs like UK :
"I see no reason to end the basketball season in February just so some of these schools can start spring football practice early... Someday they are going to wake up and realize that basketball is here to stay." - Adolph Rupp on his Southeastern Conference brethren in 1934.
"Apparently the University of Kentucky basketball dynasty is to continue forever." - Philadelphia Inquirer, December 23 1954.
"It's not wise to come to Kentucky and try to run them off their court. Not too many teams have ever done that." - Mississippi State Coach Babe McCarthy in 1962.
"They had it before you, they had it during you, they'll have it when you're gone"...." - Al McGuire on Kentucky Basketball Tradition
These 2 quotes are specific on the difference between UCLA and UK
"When you see Kentucky's fans, you just wonder. You think how wonderful it would be to go to their school. You wish you could trade places for a day, just so you could experience that feeling." - UCLA player Kris Johnson
"Really, UCLA's a great place as well, but they don't have the kind of environment they have here. The fans here have a passion." - Dick Vitale on Kentucky fans, December 23, 1999.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:53 pm to Cheese Grits
So Duke has twice as many championships and no telling how many more final fours than Kansas, Michigan St, and NC STATE, but is not an elite program... We will just have to agree to disagree because that is absolutely absurd. God I hope none of yall do anything important in society.. Would hate to know you were in control of anything
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:54 pm to WAOMrebears
How can you have Michigan St in elite program with the vast difference of years between their championships, but UCLA isn't elite? hahaha man yall are crazier than i thought
Posted on 4/16/13 at 9:57 pm to WAOMrebears
So coaches who coach at an elite school can't be considered elite with that type of logic.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:01 pm to engie
I do, but this is your quote that I was responding to:
quote:You said it was elite, not me.
I simply agreed that UCLA is no longer the same type of elite job that it was in the past.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:05 pm to WAOMrebears
quote:
WAOMrebears
Duke has an elite coach
UCLA had an elite coach
UNC has an elite program
UK has an elite program
Short term UCLA and Duke are elite but time will tell if they can do it long term. UCLA has shown they can not and Duke has not gotten to the post coach K era. What you are missing is a fundamental shift back to the Dandy Diamond from Tobacco Road. Kentucky, Indiana, and Louisville are all back up again at the same time. Basketball is shifting back to the midwest so the long term viability of Duke is not assured to me the way it seems to be for you.
If you can not understand this simple difference in long term elite vs short term elite then you need to get a few years more under your belt to see this is the truth. Uconn and Duke in the past 2 decades have been elite but it does not mean they will sustain it beyond their "elite" coach. Long term elite schools travel well and sustain themselves in the down time.
The analogy comparing Duke to Note Dame is false as Notre Dame has a century of history under multiple coaches and had the catholic population to draw from in building their sidewalk fan base. Duke is a small elite private school with less history and less of a core base to draw from. Duke is not even #1 in their home state.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:11 pm to tider04
quote:
You said it was elite, not me.
I was referring to the job itself, not the program -- and I was referring to it in the past tense. Cheese Grits summed up what I basically meant by my initial point...
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:12 pm to WAOMrebears
quote:
How can you have Michigan St in elite program with the vast difference of years between their championships, but UCLA isn't elite?
If you look at the time period Michigan State has 2 NCAA banners to the single one from UCLA. Michigan State is not as elite as say UK or UNC but it is at least shown it can win at the highest level with multiple coaches.
You are hung up on coaches when I am suggesting you look beyond a single coach and look at the long term program as a whole. Take away coach K or Jim Calhoun and Duke + Uconn = 0 National Championships. Take away Bob Knight from Indiana and they still have 2 National Championships. Take away Rupp from UK and the Cats still have 4 National Championships.
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:14 pm to Cheese Grits
.
This post was edited on 4/16/13 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:17 pm to WAOMrebears
quote:
If they were all back to back then yes I would say okay it was a good run but not a program.
EXACTLY what we;re both claiming UCLA is. Just give it up Cheese Grits -- if he was going to get it, it would have happened already. Dude is dead set on relentless weak trolling...
This post was edited on 4/16/13 at 10:19 pm
Posted on 4/16/13 at 10:32 pm to WAOMrebears
quote:
A school with more than 3 national championships are an elite program. Especially spanning 25 years.
Not disagreeing with this, just pointing out that long term ultra elite schools survive a single coach. If Duke or Uconn falls back to middle of the pack - or falls totally off the radar - after their primary coach is gone they will no longer be elite. Schools like Kentucky, North Carolina, Indiana, and Kansas have already passed this threshold which puts them in a different level of elite. A big part of this transition is having a big enough and strong enough fan base to survive the bad years. In a similar vein, UCLA has fallen from the lofty perch they once occupied and is not currently an elite school.
I have been to Cameron, Dean Dome, Rupp, and YUM and there is a shift back to basketball power and rivalry in the tri state area. It would not surprise me if Louisville begins to dominate the ACC which means the showdown with UK every season will steal the thunder UNC vs Duke enjoyed the past 2 decades.
2012 UK won NCAA
2013 UL won NCAA
2014 UK is picked to win the NCAA
If this happens it means the NCAA trophy will remain in KY for 3 straight years. Think about that for a few and get back to me. Throw in Indiana, Ohio State, and Michigan State for good measure and that is some serious basketball power concentrated in a small geographic area.
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News