Quote :

"Their hoops prowess dies with Calhoun."

i don't understand how this isn't the first sentence out of everyone's mouth when they talk about uconn basketball.

maybe they replace calhoun, but a lot more likely is that they don't. he hasn't turned that job into duke.

9/22/2011 2:57:03 PM

I dunno, it's not like there isn't an example up the road of a program whose star head coach retired and they managed to keep being good (a few bumps in the road excepted). So naturally NCers don't really consider that.

Ultimately, it depends on the athletic department. UConn's jumped to Div-1a in 2000 and kept building to the point where they've been co-champion of the Big East twice now. Crap on the Big East all we want to (it's fun for the whole wolfweb!) that's still an impressive thing to do.

I'm not sure if that's more or less impressive than what USF has done since 1997, but it still indicates a fairly competent athletic department. One which would probably be able to handle a coaching search to replace Calhoun.

9/22/2011 3:06:25 PM

Who's the biggest name on Calhoun's tree, though? George Blaney? Not exactly Roy Williams.

[Edited on September 22, 2011 at 3:21 PM. Reason : I don't see top-flight coaches running to UConn in a crippled Big East or (lol) MAC]

9/22/2011 3:20:55 PM

True, but Calhoun himself wasn't even a UConn guy. There's no reason to expect UConn to limit themselves to his coaching tree after he retires.

9/22/2011 3:22:47 PM

did you just compare pre-dean smith unc to pre-jim calhoun uconn?

9/22/2011 3:23:20 PM

Quote :

"There's no reason to expect UConn to limit themselves to his coaching tree after he retires."

My point is that UNC has (had?) the most impressive roster of extended family coaches to choose from and were playing in the best conference with as much if not more history than anyone else.

UConn is 100% Calhoun and will be playing two games against ECU every year, one of which is played in what is basically a women's gym. They're gonna skip a beat alright.

9/22/2011 3:26:14 PM

Indirectly, yeah, but that's kind of a pointless statement. UConn after Calhoun will be very different from UConn before Calhoun, just as UNC after Smith was different from UNC before Smith.

Both schools had some measure of basketball success prior to these coaches arrivals (UNC had more, obviously).

But it's ridiculous to think that there's going to be any other program in the country that is a 1for1 comparison to another program.

9/22/2011 3:27:05 PM

I can think of a program that had a roughly 30 year period of sustained success with multiple national championships before falling off the fucking map thanks mostly to bad coaching hires.

9/22/2011 3:30:06 PM

Carneseca was St. Johns
Tark was UNLV
Knight was Indiana

Butler is Stevens
Gonzaga is Few
Uconn is Calhoun



When the first three coaches left, so did their school's place among the elite.

The same thing will happen with the second three.

[Edited on September 22, 2011 at 3:33 PM. Reason : x]

9/22/2011 3:33:02 PM

so, too, will Duke after K.

They'll probably be decent, but not a powerhouse.

9/22/2011 3:34:40 PM

Relax guys, Dave Leitao will be happy to step in when Calhoun retires.

9/22/2011 3:41:21 PM

Application for SEC Membership:

http://www.sportspickle.com/opinion/8071/application-for-sec-membership

9/22/2011 3:49:39 PM

Quote :

"Carneseca was St. Johns Tark was UNLV Knight was Indiana Butler is Stevens Gonzaga is Few Uconn is Calhoun When the first three coaches left, so did their school's place among the elite. The same thing will happen with the second three."

IU made a national final with Davis in 2002.

application for ACC membership: http://www.sportspickle.com/opinion/8088/application-for-acc-membership

[Edited on September 22, 2011 at 3:57 PM. Reason : /]

9/22/2011 3:52:14 PM

that was a fluke tourney run and you know it

9/22/2011 3:53:37 PM

yes, that's what the NCAA basketball tournament usually is for teams in the Final 4

9/22/2011 3:58:30 PM

http://www.sportspickle.com/opinion/7931/flowchart-should-my-school-change-conferences

That's about the laziest damn flowchart I've ever seen.

9/22/2011 4:00:12 PM

NCSU TO THE BIG SKY

9/22/2011 9:39:07 PM

i thought the point of a flow chart was to... flow.

9/22/2011 10:06:56 PM

arizona might be a good example of a situation similar to uconn and they are doing well, but I'm not sure the uconn job is as appealing for a new hire

9/22/2011 11:26:04 PM

uconn is one of six million schools in the northeast with potential

the only program that arizona has to compete with out west is ucla. and its not like they were able to coach steal from a major program, either. the transition years between olsen and miller were very mediocre

9/22/2011 11:32:11 PM

Quote :

"the transition years between olsen and miller were very mediocre"

a first round and a sweet sixteen. rough transition.

9/22/2011 11:35:55 PM

were you pro or anti shaka?

9/22/2011 11:39:14 PM

anti.

9/22/2011 11:40:12 PM

ok well i expect you know where I'm going with this so I'm not sure there's even a point to spelling it out

9/22/2011 11:41:12 PM

you said that the two years between lute olson and sean miller were "very rough". i pointed out that they weren't. now you're asking me about shaka smart, so no, i have absolutely no clue where you're going w/ this.

9/23/2011 12:32:32 AM

^ lol. Seriously tower what point are you trying to make?

9/23/2011 6:50:32 AM

Not going to argue about UConn in this thread but what about Syracuse? Before Boeheim they made 7 NCAA tourneys to UConn's 12 before Calhoun.

For what it's worth, Kevin Ollie is already going to be be next coach and he is cleaning up recruiting.

9/23/2011 7:24:00 AM

Let's return home to our traditional roots in the Southern Conference.

9/23/2011 12:21:33 PM

^ Agreed, and the games could be closer too.

9/23/2011 12:25:48 PM

damn I saw the comment about nc states academics and looked it up and we are fucking 101 now wtf, seems like we've been going down about 5 points every yr since 2000

also rutgers was much better than I thought

[Edited on September 23, 2011 at 2:36 PM. Reason : k]

9/23/2011 2:36:13 PM

how do you misquote "very mediocre" to "very rough" within the span of like 5 posts? they were down years for arizona (I know that makes them high watermark years for us post-Valvano but we arent arizona) and it could be (and was at the time) argued that they didnt deserve to make the tournament each of those years

the s16 they got out of it is where i brought shaka into the equation. i mean, great job to actually pull that off once they got in...but the selection committee couldve easily greenberg'd them and theyd have NIT wins against the likes of marist to boast about instead. miller going 16-15 his first season reflects the direction that program was headed without a good hire

drawing a parallel between them and uconn is fine, and the situation is similar in many ways. get another good coach and theyll be able to sustain success. with the wrong one they could pull an indiana. i dont think they can win a national championship with a guy like tubby or have 2 bad hires in a row like UNC and come out of it without any problems

difference between uconn and syracuse is the carrier dome. uconn has ESPN and 2 more national championships on their side tho. id say both have about equal potential to fall off unless uconn ends up in some joke conference with ECU

9/23/2011 2:48:55 PM

WVU to SEC

WVU to inform Big East on Wed

SEC announcement on Fri

9/26/2011 8:34:08 PM

Yeah, right. Post a link or GTFO.

9/26/2011 9:22:15 PM

9/26/2011 9:33:42 PM

Yeah nothing of substance about WV to SEC (or anywhere) on twitter or anywhere else.

[Edited on September 26, 2011 at 9:54 PM. Reason : ]

9/26/2011 9:52:28 PM

I was just trying to share some inside info. No source yet I can link (rec'd a text and a phone call) but there is a lot of chatter. Wed is the big day.

9/27/2011 8:30:57 AM

Sure it is.

If WVU goes to the SEC, I feel sorry for the rest of the SEC.

9/27/2011 8:33:31 AM

Quote :

"I can think of a program that had a roughly 30 year period of sustained success with multiple national championships before falling off the fucking map thanks mostly to bad coaching hires."

Are you talking about State?? Because it wasn't the coaching hires that did us in...it was the probation and the shackles that were put on the Athletic Department that set us back 10 years. Les actually did a pretty good job with the talent that V left. After that, he couldn't get a top 100 recruit to set foot on our campus with the academic restrictions that were put on. Sendek might not have been the best hire, but I doubt we could have done much better at that point. And Lowe was a fucking disaster, but we had already fallen so far that it really didn't matter.

And Kansas hasn't fallen off the map since Roy left (they MAY have taken a very small step back). The only difference between UConn after Calhoun and Kansas after Roy is that UConn might be left in a decimated conference. But if they can get a big name to come in and replace Calhoun, I don't see that program faltering as much as you are predicting.

[Edited on September 27, 2011 at 8:42 AM. Reason : .]

9/27/2011 8:41:11 AM

Did you just compare Kansas basketball to UConn?

Larry Brown, Phog Allen, James "The inventor of freaking basketball" Naismith

vs

Nobody

Remember we're talking about men's basketball.

9/27/2011 9:31:14 AM

The Gringo got on gunzz's email list, i see.

9/27/2011 10:24:53 AM

Quote :

"Did you just compare Kansas basketball to UConn? Larry Brown, Phog Allen, James "The inventor of freaking basketball" Naismith vs Nobody Remember we're talking about men's basketball. "

UConn has won three NCAA championship in the last 12 years. They have a 75% NCAA tournament winning percentage under Calhoun. They are next door to ESPN headquarters and are pretty much the only team that gets as much press as Duke/UNC.

The ONLY thing that could hamper their ability to get a name coach and keep the machine running is the future of the Big East.

If the past that you mentioned about Kansas had any bearing on current success...then State wouldn't be in the shit-position it is in right now.

Remember we're talking about men's basketball. A sport that is largely run by the decisions of where a few 17 year olds want to play college basketball. Those kids don't even know who Phog Allen is and might only know Larry Brown because he was coaching Allen Iverson during the infamous "practice" press conference.

[Edited on September 27, 2011 at 10:35 AM. Reason : .]

9/27/2011 10:34:43 AM

That would be relevant if big name coaches were 17 year old kids.

Maybe history doesn't matter that much to recruits but I bet it matters a lot to coaching candidates. NC State's legacy and prestige might be underrated by most but it's overrated by us and is nowhere near Kansas, which is possibly the 2nd most prestigious school in the country after Kentucky (UNC and UCLA also with an argument for #2).

Also State's position isn't great but it's way better than Wake Forest's, probably because we do have some history. We're always going to be a bigger name school than somewhere like Virginia Tech even if recent history says we aren't any better.

[Edited on September 27, 2011 at 10:58 AM. Reason : ]

9/27/2011 10:57:01 AM

I'm not taking too much stock in it, but the fine folks at CFN usually at least have some idea of what they're talking about

Quote :

" Option 2. Take one team from the East for short-term balance. Factoring for geography, who would you take? The only one-off, non-ACC, value-add, non-overlapping property out “East” that’s even slightly attractive is WVU. We have usually been impressed with Mountaineer football, and the region (Pittsburgh/Morgantown) and alumni (Pennsylvania/Washington DC) markets are attractive. Also don’t kid yourselves, the flashy 4.0 rating the LSU/WVU game earned turned a lot of heads on Monday. However, we continue to hear that WVU is not regionally attractive “enough”, and doesn’t push the economic needle “far enough”, to be worth the bid. Remember also, the SEC has to eventually pick two teams from the East. When you actually break down all the available regional properties outside of the ACC, there aren’t two that are attractive enough to move the needle and drive enough revenue. Which means poaching the ACC. That's unlikely to go over well with the big money TV executives (not to mention the ACC); so like a Band-Aid, you do it once and quickly… And if that happens, then the conference is now a team short on the West. Nice huh. All of which is why we think Option 1 the more likely of the two choices. BOTTOM LINE. The SEC is not playing the 2012 season with only 13 teams. When all is said and done, and with geography playing at least some role, I believe the SEC woos Missouri now to pair with A&M, and eventually takes North Carolina State and Virginia Tech to balance out the East (though that likely means splitting AU/UA in the short-term). If it instead takes one team from the ACC now and waits until expanding further, it irritates a lot of folks only to have to do the same thing again, IF the ACC team it wants is then even available, and likely makes it harder to find a pair for A&M out West. There is an Option 3: move to 16 teams now. That day is coming…period. There’s too much money in it. It may not be tomorrow, it may take a few more years, but the day is coming. With it, the ACC, Pac-12 and Big Ten will have to keep pace. A: Missouri. But prepare yourself…this is going to be messy no matter how it’s done. Option 1. Take a property from the West to pair with Texas A&M. Remember, if its goal is to get to 16 teams, the SEC must eventually match a team with A&M out West or long-term the conference is out of balance. Unless the SEC’s goal is to eventually migrate into four groups of four teams, it must stay balanced throughout this expansion. If not, it has to split UT/Vandy, UA/AU or Ole Miss/Miss State – which is unpalatable given the likelihood that with an eventual eight team division and a 12 game season, we’ll lose the perennial cross-division game. Moreover, with geography playing a role, there are fewer value-add, non-overlapping properties/markets for the SEC to go after in the West than you might think. The conference doesn’t want Oklahoma State, and OU has made it clear that’s a package deal. The SEC only needs one team, and it is highly unlikely Texas could swallow its ego to play in the SEC. So, if not Missouri, now or later, who do you take for eventual balance? By the way, that clock is ticking… Given the pressure Missouri is facing, if you don’t make this deal quickly, and choose instead to take one team from the East for short-term balance, it’s quite possible the “Show Me” state Tigers might no longer be available. One last note with this option…IF the SEC takes Missouri for now and stops at 14, it would have to split Auburn/Bama for a year, as ugly as that might be, until it gets two teams lined up from the East. Though the Iron Bowl would have to be guaranteed. Option 2. Take one team from the East for short-term balance. Factoring for geography, who would you take? The only one-off, non-ACC, value-add, non-overlapping property out “East” that’s even slightly attractive is WVU. We have usually been impressed with Mountaineer football, and the region (Pittsburgh/Morgantown) and alumni (Pennsylvania/Washington DC) markets are attractive. Also don’t kid yourselves, the flashy 4.0 rating the LSU/WVU game earned turned a lot of heads on Monday. However, we continue to hear that WVU is not regionally attractive “enough”, and doesn’t push the economic needle “far enough”, to be worth the bid. Remember also, the SEC has to eventually pick two teams from the East. When you actually break down all the available regional properties outside of the ACC, there aren’t two that are attractive enough to move the needle and drive enough revenue. Which means poaching the ACC. That's unlikely to go over well with the big money TV executives (not to mention the ACC); so like a Band-Aid, you do it once and quickly… And if that happens, then the conference is now a team short on the West. Nice huh. All of which is why we think Option 1 the more likely of the two choices. BOTTOM LINE. The SEC is not playing the 2012 season with only 13 teams. When all is said and done, and with geography playing at least some role, I believe the SEC woos Missouri now to pair with A&M, and eventually takes North Carolina State and Virginia Tech to balance out the East (though that likely means splitting AU/UA in the short-term). If it instead takes one team from the ACC now and waits until expanding further, it irritates a lot of folks only to have to do the same thing again, IF the ACC team it wants is then even available, and likely makes it harder to find a pair for A&M out West. There is an Option 3: move to 16 teams now. That day is coming…period. There’s too much money in it. It may not be tomorrow, it may take a few more years, but the day is coming. With it, the ACC, Pac-12 and Big Ten will have to keep pace."

Quote :

"E-mail Barrett Sallee Follow me on Twitter: @BarrettSallee It's not a popular pick in SEC circles, but the 14th team will and should be Missouri. Say it with me, and say it with feeling - this isn't about football prestige, it's about money, plain and simple. By adding Missouri, the SEC would add the St. Louis and Kansas City television markets, the No. 21 and 31 markets, respectively. More eyeballs equal more money; and more money will make everybody happy - even if you have to travel to Columbia, Mo. But let's take this a step further. I have a hard time believing that the SEC will stop at 14 teams. Mike Slive is the type of commissioner that gets what he wants, and if the SEC only stops at 14, it will signal the gold rush, and the SEC would run the risk of not getting the teams that it wants. Now that the SEC has made the move to expand, it has no choice but to swing for the fences and go for the full 16. If the SEC does go to 16, I'd go with Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Virginia Tech would get the Washington, D.C. market (No. 8) and N.C. State would get Raleigh-Durham (No. 24). Yes, I know, N.C. State isn't a football power (actually, it's dreadful), but this isn't about football, it's about money; and getting into the Research Triangle would be very lucrative. Sure, the administrators have denied expansion rumors, but that's expected. Deny until the ink is dry. The ACC even increased it's buyout to $20 million, but that's chump change compared to what a 16-team SEC would bring in with a new television contract. E-mail Barrett Sallee Follow me on Twitter: @BarrettSallee It's not a popular pick in SEC circles, but the 14th team will and should be Missouri. Say it with me, and say it with feeling - this isn't about football prestige, it's about money, plain and simple. By adding Missouri, the SEC would add the St. Louis and Kansas City television markets, the No. 21 and 31 markets, respectively. More eyeballs equal more money; and more money will make everybody happy - even if you have to travel to Columbia, Mo. But let's take this a step further. I have a hard time believing that the SEC will stop at 14 teams. Mike Slive is the type of commissioner that gets what he wants, and if the SEC only stops at 14, it will signal the gold rush, and the SEC would run the risk of not getting the teams that it wants. Now that the SEC has made the move to expand, it has no choice but to swing for the fences and go for the full 16. If the SEC does go to 16, I'd go with Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Virginia Tech would get the Washington, D.C. market (No. 8) and N.C. State would get Raleigh-Durham (No. 24). Yes, I know, N.C. State isn't a football power (actually, it's dreadful), but this isn't about football, it's about money; and getting into the Research Triangle would be very lucrative. Sure, the administrators have denied expansion rumors, but that's expected. Deny until the ink is dry. The ACC even increased it's buyout to $20 million, but that's chump change compared to what a 16-team SEC would bring in with a new television contract. "

9/27/2011 11:04:37 AM

Quote :

"That would be relevant if big name coaches were 17 year old kids. Maybe history doesn't matter that much to recruits but I bet it matters a lot to coaching candidates."

But coaches know where they can get the 17-year old kids to come play. That's why if you take the upcoming conference realignment out of the equation....Kansas and UConn are equal, with UConn being a slight lead because they just won an NCAA championship and can point go NBA players like Ben Gordon and [soon-to-be] Kemba Walker that high school kids can identify with.

And I can promise you that coaches care a lot less about history of a school than whether or not they have a better chance at winning and keeping their job. That's why NC State can get turned down by a coach like Shaka Smart. Or are you going to give me a list of VCU basketball legends??

9/27/2011 11:07:22 AM

Now that the ACC is adding basketball schools, it only makes sense that State would leave for a football conference.

That would be the one and only thing to ever qualify as NC State Shit.

9/27/2011 11:10:00 AM

jbrick has butchered this thread with his antics. Short of leaving the toilet seat up, not recycling, and being interested in the new season of Hung, there isn’t much else he could’ve done to make things worse.

9/27/2011 11:11:50 AM

Quote :

"Yes, I know, N.C. State isn't a football power (actually, it's dreadful),"

Ouch, but come on... We are better than Kentucky, Vandy, and Ole Miss. And actually, I think we were right on par with Miss. St. until Mullen came in

What's wrong with leaving a conference we probably won't have a shot at winning in basketball or football to a conference where we can be at the top in basketball every year? Plus, I think it will help our football recruiting (Not enough to make a difference though).


[Edited on September 27, 2011 at 11:22 AM. Reason : .]

9/27/2011 11:18:56 AM

NC State would still be middle of the road in basketball in the SEC.

9/27/2011 11:21:15 AM

ahaha, NCSU to SEC. that's a good one.

9/27/2011 11:22:25 AM

Screw that, leaving the ACC would be terrible.

9/27/2011 11:25:37 AM