I don't mind Gottlieb as an analyst, but i don't care for him as a 'person' or as a 'journalist.' He has a bias and an agenda and neither of them serve objectivity. That said, i wholeheartedly agree with what he's saying, but only in part because of his four-part outline.
I think you're judged on other matters, but whatever. No 1 — sure, that's valid. But, 3 Championship Games is nothing to sneeze at. However, in 40 years, i'm underwhelmed by the number of Elite 8s.
No. 2 — I agree this is a consideration. A coach is charged with DEVELOPING players. And, if they come into a program at a certain level, and perhaps manage to contribute at a college level but do not progress beyond that, that is a fault in development. It's not enough that they are 'good enough' to help our system. Greatness implies a larger responsibility and capability.
No. 3 — No comment.
No. 4 — The matter is misstated. If your (winning) style is NOT replicable, that's a testament to your coaching. If it IS replicable, but no one chooses to replicate it, that's a knock on your coaching. Commentators love to talk about the 2-3 zone. Because it's a quick, easy talking-point. Doesn't mean any more than that, although the orange faithful lap it up like... like Cream Ale. Boeheim is NOT smarter than everyone else. Even if he were, everyone else is still smart enough to copy something that works. That's why every phone looks like an iPhone now.
The reason we've won 'so many games' isn't because of the zone. Unless you consider that JB seems to have forgotten how to coach man, so maybe it is because of the zone... The reason we win, when we win, is because we have more talent than the opposition on 95% of game days. I don't think this is even remotely debatable. And, yet, we don't win 95% of games. So, there's that.
No. 5 — There is a need to define "great," as JB noted. How many coaches have been "great?" In any case, i don't put JB there. He doesn't transform, like a Brad Stevens. He doesn't overcome. He doesn't motivate. What he does well is put enough good players in orange uniforms, and then minimize his coaching responsibilities. Fewer plays. He says it's because we can't remember more plays. Everyone else does, though... Zone. Because the other kids can't shoot. Until they do, and Joe Nobody puts in 8 catch-and-shoot 3s against us. But, we win that game, because it was against. 8 Joe Nobodies, and commentators and fans say, yeah, Joe 1 went nuts, but we wanted that, and we contained everyone else. All the other Nobodies couldn't beat our McD players... You give JB a team of non-top 50 players — even guys who play his style, and have his reputed "body type" — and he doesn't win with them.
No. 6 — Everyone ignores the power of the Dome and/or contrives an invalid causal relationship between JB's success and the Dome. JB would not have been nearly as successful if we played in a 12,000 seat, typical gym. Period. His recruiting and consistency and resulting longevity are all tied into the allure of the Dome. Success follows and self-perpetuates, but only in the shadow of The Dome. We had a name with Manley, certainly. But, it would take a lot of fingers and toes to count the number of programs that had 'names' at one point, but could not sustain it. We surely would have fallen into that category without the 30k.
No. 7 — Everyone seems to have a short memory. It was only a few years ago that we ended a significant streak of being on the NCAA bubble. "Will we get in?"
