Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="IthacaMatt, post: 3299867, member: 405"]
Indiana and UCLA were never going to win multiple championships under the new guy.  Only a few handful of coaches EVER have done that.

Kelvin Sampson had a 43-15 record in his 2 seasons at Indiana, made the NCAA tourney both years, won the Big 10 regular season title once and was ranked in the Top 10 at Indiana before he was caught cheating and fired.

Saying that Crain was barely a .500 coach there is doing him a disservice.  Indiana went on probation, their best 2 players left and the roster was a dumpster fire for 3 years (going 28-66) until he signed Cody Zeller and Victor Oladipo.  Then he went 138-69 and made 3 Sweet 16s in 5 years.  Not at all bad.

UCLA had Jim Harrick lead them to an Elite 8 and another championship.  When Harrick was abruptly fired for recruiting violations, Steve Lavin was hired.  Lavin got them to 5 Sweet Sixteens in 6 years (only Coach K did better during that time period), and was hauling in great recruits, but was perceived to be underachieving with all that talent, and got canned.  Then came Ben Howland, who "only" got them to three straight Final Fours.  So, UCLA did better than about 95% of all of college basketball post-Wooden.

St. John's and UConn are not proper comps because neither one has the facilities that we do.  They both play in crap arenas.  They are both essentially commuter schools.

As for UNC, after Dean Smith, I think Bill Guthridge only coached for 2 years, and I believe Matt Doherty only lasted for 2 years as well, before Droopy Dog came back to save them.

So, no, unless we make a string of terrible decisions, I don't expect to suck for a decade - unless you are already counting time on that in these final years under Boeheim.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?