Early deflections or not, and fair or not, UNC during the Dean Smith era had more talent than any other team on an annual basis and he had two titles to show for it.

 

He did a fine job, but I still think it is fair to say that for the level of talent he had, Smith did not always maximize.

 

But in fairness, I do not think it is fair to always judge a coach on how they do in a single elimination tournament.

 

And, FWIW, Fred Brown threw away the pass and I do not think Arkansas was a 1 seed in '95.

 

I wouldn't consider UNC's win over UK in '95 an upset either, regardless of what the seeds were. UNC was a better and more talented team.

True, but comparing their stints at UNC, Roy is well on his way to being UNC's best coach IMO.

 

Sure...if you project his current pace over an extended period, he'll probably end up second only to John Wooden on the all-time list.

 

Should we go ahead and declare him the second greatest coach in college history?

Early deflections or not, and fair or not, UNC during the Dean Smith era had more talent than any other team on an annual basis and he had two titles to show for it.

 

He did a fine job, but I still think it is fair to say that for the level of talent he had, Smith did not always maximize.

 

But in fairness, I do not think it is fair to always judge a coach on how they do in a single elimination tournament.

 

And, FWIW, Fred Brown threw away the pass and I do not think Arkansas was a 1 seed in '95.

 

 

My bad. Looked it up. Arkansas was a 2 Seed. The #1's that year were: UK, Wake Forest, Kansas and UCLA.

 

http://a.espncdn.com/ncaatourney/brackets/1995Bracket.pdf

Dean Smith imo was the better coach.

R.W. is a better recruiter imo and may end up being recognized as a better coach before he is done. JMO

I picked Roy because of what he has been able to accomplish, plus he will be there for several more years and probably more championships too.

Since choker Roy finally won one with his own players I voted for him.

Ah really the way I see it, Roy has been just as big, if not bigger of a choke artist in his career. He won zero titles at Kansas, a top 10 program. Both of his championship teams were clearly the class of the country. While this years UNC team struggled at times, during this tournament they made it obvious that they had more talent than anyone.

I'm not bashing Roy he does a great job. I just can't put him in Dean Smith's class. Yet.

I think winning the whole thing today is actually harder than it was say 15-20 yrs ago. I say this b/c recruits are more spread out due to limitations in scholly #'s. Used to be that the powerhouses would stockpile the talent on the bench. Today everyone has talent. So I voted for Roy. Dean had overwhelming talent but did not close the deal many times.

I think winning the whole thing today is actually harder than it was say 15-20 yrs ago. I say this b/c recruits are more spread out due to limitations in scholly #'s. Used to be that the powerhouses would stockpile the talent on the bench. Today everyone has talent. So I voted for Roy.

 

Question: Where would Billy Donovan rate on your coaching list? How does that compare to where he would have rated two years ago?

 

What about this question two years ago...

 

Who's better...Billy Donovan or (Rick Pitino, Roy Williams, etc.)?

 

What if you asked it now?

 

Why don't we wait until Roy's career is done before we crown him king of Carolina?

I think winning the whole thing today is actually harder than it was say 15-20 yrs ago. I say this b/c recruits are more spread out due to limitations in scholly #'s. Used to be that the powerhouses would stockpile the talent on the bench. Today everyone has talent. So I voted for Roy. Dean had overwhelming talent but did not close the deal many times.

 

I think that is an interesting debate when comparing "then" verus "Now."

 

It is true there are better players and more spread out now than ever. However some things that might have made the tourney more difficult.

 

1. Prior to the early 80's a conference could only have two schools in the tourney. Prior to '75, only one. It was harder to get into the tourney then versus now.

 

2. The home court advantage some seem to have in the first round of today's larger tourney seems almost an annual event. Duke and UNC play within their state. There are others I'm sure that do the same on a nearly similar basis. How hard is it to win 2 games where half the crowd is for you?

 

3. Because the old pre-seeded tourney was geographically driven for the most part, some had easier roads (out west for instance) and some had Regionals that were packed (MidEast and East). I remember when UK won in '78 the Mideast Regional had them (#1), Marquette (#3), Syracuse (Top 20) and Michigan State (Big Ten Champs and #6 or so I believe).

 

 

It's an interesting discussion and debate and I remember Dean Smith said that the proudest stretch of players he had was 1967-69 who won the ACC tourney three consecutive years (never done at any other time) when that meant staying home or going to the NCAA. Of course he then went to 3 Final Fours those years as well.

I think that could be said of anyone in some fashion.

 

If a bad call is not made vs. Villanova late in the game in 2005, does UNC defeat them and go on to Roy's first title?

 

Did Dean "underachieve" all that much?

 

1967-69 First 3 Final Fours. UCLA was king. How can you say they underachieved then?

 

1972 Upset in Final Four by Florida State. They had Bob McAdoo among others and were probably more talented than the Noles but who was going to beat Bill Walton?

 

1977 Lost in final to Marquette. They had lost their starting center, Tom LaGarde, earlier in the year and Walter Davis and Phil Ford were pheoms but the Warriors were playing for a retiring coach and won. Maybe Dean was outcoached then. Maybe.

 

1981 Lost in final to IU. Isaiah Thomas ran wild and even though Dean had a freshman Perkins, a Sophomore Worthy, and a Senior Al Wood - that IU team was on as devestating roll as anyone in the tourney. Push at best.

 

1982 Sure Eric Brown (not Floyd) threw the pass away. But there was no guarantee of points and it's not like UNC didn't have Worthy go off for 28 and Jordan for about 17. Either team deserved to win that game and UNC did make the last shot. I say, not outcoached.

 

1984 I include this because of the last year Jordan played and they had Perkins and Daugherty. However Kenny Smith, PG, broke his hand late in the year and any team without their PG in college is in deep trouble. Outcoached by Knight. Maybe yes. Maybe push.

 

1991 Lost to Kansas in Final Four. I never thought that team was that great. Hubert Davis, Rick Fox. Foot, KY should have beaten them in Chapel Hill (lost by 3) if not for a few late calls that went powder blue way. Let's say Dean should have won because Kansas was a Cinderella that year. But it could have just been the players were off that night.

 

1993 Won it. Webber called the TO but he was trapped, a few seconds left and UM was down by 3 (maybe 2?). With or without the TO, UNC looked in the driver's seat. BTW, that was the fabled Fab 5. How did a collection whose stars were Montross, Williams and Lynch ever beat that other worldly team? Not outcoached here.

 

1995 Lost to Arkansas in the Final Four. He had Stackhouse and Wallace, and upset UK, but they lost to the defending National Champs. I don't see it as a blown coaching job. Arkansas was a 1 seed and UNC a 2 seed. Can't claim he was outcoached on this one.

 

1997 Lost in the Final Four to Arizona. This one is head scratching. But then how does UK feel about it? Probably outcoached. But then again, Arizona was on a pretty good Cinderella run.

 

 

There are other years we could throw in, I'm sure. Circumstances and competition often define post season success more than we think.

 

Dean dealt with early defections from Bob McAdoo, James Worthy, Michael Jordan, among others. He was in the competition even if he didn't always win. Then he often gets castigate when he does.

 

I am no Dean Smith or UNC fan. That is fact. I just think it sometimes gets too easy to call one coach better than the other over one factor (in this case Titles).

 

 

Excellent post!:thumb:

 

I would add.

 

1994: Had almost everyone coming back from the national champioship team and then add Wallace and Stackhouse. In the second round loss to Boston College, UNC PG Derrick Phelps took a hard foul on a break away in the first half and didn't return. Without thier PG UNC could not run their offense...

Back during the Smith years UNC, UK, IU, and UCLA got most of the talent in the country until the mid-late 80's when Duke and others started to spread the talent around. I personally never could understand why he always wanted to run the 4-corners when he had much more talent than the team he was playing. He was probably one of the major reasons for the shot clock which as made the game much more enjoyable to watch.

Both of Smith's titles were giftwrapped, thanks to Fred Brown and Chris Webber.

Dean Smith had Michael Jordan and Sam Perkins for 3 years, and it still took Sleepy Floyd to throw the ball directly to James Worthy for him to squeak one title out of that mess.

It was Fred Brown, not Sleepy Floyd.

Sure...if you project his current pace over an extended period, he'll probably end up second only to John Wooden on the all-time list.

 

Should we go ahead and declare him the second greatest coach in college history?

 

Where did I say, "if you project his current pace" ?