I think all of the credit goes to Scott Padgett, Jeff Shephard, Wayne Turner, Heshimu Evans, Allen Edwards, and Cameron Mills! :thumb:

 

And those were Ricks boys, right?

I wonder How many blame Tubby for the cats losing the big game in 97...:creepy:

I've always credited Tubby with the title. He was the coach and they lost a lot of punch from the '97 team. I'm not sure Pitino would have pulled the coaching moves that Tubby did to bring them back vs. Duke and later vs. Utah and Stanford.

 

I've always thought the '98 team had very good talent but was an even better TEAM.

As I recall they seem to start out slow and look for good shots. Then since that didn't work and they got behind("Comeback Cats") they had to put up some points quick and went to a more up-paced game.

 

Except in the SEC tourney and the first 3 rounds of the NCAA they pretty much blitzed the opposition early. The tore apart UCLA (albeit without Baron Davis) in the opening 10 minutes and coasted. It was their last 3 games that they played from behind in.

Those were Pitino's players, but Tubby guided them to the championship.

Tubby coached them...he had to do the majority of the work.

 

So it was Tubby.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks we all have opinions. Tubby was on the bench with the players as the Coach in 98. A hundred years from now when we are all dead and gone in the UK history book it will list Tubby as the Coach. There will not be an asterisk beside his name saying he won with Pitino's players.

Tubby was the coach so I have to give it to Tubby.

If picking just between the two, then Tubby Smith.

 

Obviously, the kids on the team were recruited by Rick Pitino, no person can argue that. They had been to two championship games and a veteran team.

 

However, of the three back-to-back-back Final Four teams, this one was the least talented (in the sense there was no All-American type talent). It was essentially a team of role players, not really suited for the typical Pitino type system; but, they fit in perfectly with Tubby's system. I have seen teams with a lot more talent be ousted in the tournament because they were outcoached... that team never suffered that consequence.

Rick Pitino, nuff said!

Although I didn't like Tubby when he was at UK you still have to give him the majority of credit for them winning. Pitino wasn't even there so how can he get the majority of credit? Tubby coached them and called the plays for them to run. Like him or not he got them to the game whether it was his team or not!

Rick Pitino. Easy choice for me. UK has not beat a team any higher than a five seed since 1998. That is all you need to know.

 

I had no idea this was the case. WOW, that is really, really bad.

Well since it worked out then he was right and your are still questioning him. This was 10 years ago and my goodness some people should give it up. Tubby won and most people can't give him credit for something he did.

 

I am a HUGE Tubby supporter but was just puzzled by the decision. Nice try.

However, of the three back-to-back-back Final Four teams, this one was the least talented (in the sense there was no All-American type talent). It was essentially a team of role players, not really suited for the typical Pitino type system; but, they fit in perfectly with Tubby's system. I have seen teams with a lot more talent be ousted in the tournament because they were outcoached... that team never suffered that consequence.

 

Couldn't agree more.