Extremely successful? No. Not close.

 

By your definition no one is.

Extremely successful? No. Not close.

 

You're incredible.

By your definition no one is.

Extremely successful would be multiple titles since he's been here. I count 1. By that definition there are a ton of extremely successful college coaches.

You're incredible.

Explain to me how he is extemely successful?

Since he's been at UK these are other coaches that are also extremely successful and out of them Coach K and Pitino have been more successful in their careers and Cal hasn't equaled them yet. But here are others that I guess should be considered Extremely Succesful...do you agree? This just from 2010. Jim Calhoun, Kevin Ollie, Jay Wright.

 

So is the label "extemely successful" being tossed around to anyone who wants it to describe their coach?

 

I bleed UK blue, Cal is what we needed to turn the program around. Then again we are UK where just about anyone with half a brain could recruit so getting the best or second best recruiting classes for the majority of a decade should produce more

than 1 title if one and dones is the way to go.

By your definition no one is.

Coach K and Pitino are out of current coaches. Shoot even Roy Williams has been more succesful.

How many national championships does UK have with the one and dones? You can talk about sweet 16's or elite 8's or final 4's till your blue in the face. No one cares about that at all. Shoot 2 years after the fact, the majority of people couldn't even name all the final 4 teams.

 

UK has 1 title with one and dones. That is the same number that 6 other teams has in the same time frame who aren't all about the one and done. So I say one and done isn't getting it done. You can toss Duke in there for their one title if you want but that is 1 year.

 

How many Final Fours or titles did they have after the '98 season without one and dones? The answer is none. I'll take the current system over the old way. Read Hatz's post above. He explains it pretty good imo.

How many Final Fours or titles did they have after the '98 season without one and dones? The answer is none. I'll take the current system over the old way. Read Hatz's post above. He explains it pretty good imo.

Again, how many titles do they have in the same time frame? 1. If you want to compare different time frames, how many title games have UK had since Cal

got here compared to the 96,97 and 98 seasons?

 

Final fours are only as good

and meaningful as the number of titles. It's like the Bengals fan base that is estactic over the Bengals 5 straight years of making the playoffs, they ignore the fact with0 wins it all means nothing in the end. Don't get

me wrong, I like watching their runs in March but they have to win some titles along the way to be thought of as extremely succesful. I wish UK was run like an NBA team in that they had a GM and a coach. Cal would be the perfect GM but there are better coaches imo that could have multiple titles with the talent that has come

tbrough here. Just imo.

To be fair people who are not happy with one and dones, is fine and understandable. However cant make a list of other teams who have won titles by not doing one and dones during that time, and there was not a single team that has won 2 titles during Cals time frame by doing the experience team route either. Teams who have done the experience route have only won 1 title each too during Cals time here besides Uconn.

 

So it's hard to say one and done is not the answer and use the only one title as proof. When no other teams have won more than 1 title either by doing the experience route, except Uconn who does have 2 actually. Yet besides those 2 years, they have been so up and down mostly down that uk fans would be unhappy with them too year to year.

 

The fact of the matter is, is the tournament is so dang hard to win. You can have a talented experience team fall short. You can have a loaded one and done team and fall short, you can have and mixture of both and fall short. Uk with their one and dones beat a bunch of those extremely talented experienced squads during their 2011 and 2014 runs. So there is no guarantee way to win this tournament that is any better than another way. You have to be playing your best at the right time and also a little lucky.

Kentucky has won 8 NCAA titles in 77 years and 5 since 1951. If you expect them win titles on a regular basis I expect you will be extremely miserable. Sounds like a little, no a lot of perspective is needed.

Just asking not judging.

 

How did you mess this up? You should have titled this thread The Downfall of One and Done.

That is even better.

Again, how many titles do they have in the same time frame? 1. If you want to compare different time frames, how many title games have UK had since Cal

got here compared to the 96,97 and 98 seasons?

 

Final fours are only as good

and meaningful as the number of titles. It's like the Bengals fan base that is estactic over the Bengals 5 straight years of making the playoffs, they ignore the fact with0 wins it all means nothing in the end. Don't get

me wrong, I like watching their runs in March but they have to win some titles along the way to be thought of as extremely succesful. I wish UK was run like an NBA team in that they had a GM and a coach. Cal would be the perfect GM but there are better coaches imo that could have multiple titles with the talent that has come

tbrough here. Just imo.

 

Players that would be one and done by today's standards did not leave after one year in the time span you list, '96-'98. They hung around at least two years and sometimes three or four. The '96 team had seniors such a Delk still around. I'm sure UK's troubles would be much less this year if Booker, Ulis, and KAT were still around. Times have changed with NBA ready players that programs like UK, Duke, Kansas and other elite programs sign to play. Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, guys like that would be one and done players these days.

To answer the question, I will take my chances with one and done every year. Sometimes it won't work, but you can't win without talent. UK is 18-5, ranked in the top 10 (that will likely change) and have the capability and talent to compete for a national title.

 

Woe is me. :jump:

Explain to me how he is extemely successful?

Since he's been at UK these are other coaches that are also extremely successful and out of them Coach K and Pitino have been more successful in their careers and Cal hasn't equaled them yet. But here are others that I guess should be considered Extremely Succesful...do you agree? This just from 2010. Jim Calhoun, Kevin Ollie, Jay Wright.

 

So is the label "extemely successful" being tossed around to anyone who wants it to describe their coach?

 

I bleed UK blue, Cal is what we needed to turn the program around. Then again we are UK where just about anyone with half a brain could recruit so getting the best or second best recruiting classes for the majority of a decade should produce more

than 1 title if one and dones is the way to go.

 

Tubby was ripped for his recruiting ability. Won't even mention Billy G. It takes more than just being UK to recruit

If you don't think Cal has been very successful while at UK, then there is no point in engaging dialogue with you on this topic.