OT-Boheim in the 80s

[Letsgohuskies11]

I was talking to someone at work who watched a lot of big east basketball in the 80s, 90s whatever.... he was telling me that Boheim was always known as being a good recruiter but a bad game time coach, i was wondering from some older posters if that was actually true or not.

 

[Deepster]

You don't win the number of games that Jim Boeheim has won with a decade or two of being a "bad game time coach". I think that, because he lives solely on that 2-3 zone, he might seem simple to a common fan but it's just not that case.

Think about a football coach. Over the years, they run a no huddle offense. A wildcat offense. A wishbone. An I formation. An option. A spread offense. There are fads, but nothing that lasts. Boeheim has carved a niche in college basketball and perfected it like no one else has. What other coach has more wins with a signature defense like that?

 

[Chin Diesel]

Some truth to it. During that time fram his teams often under achieved in the NCAA tourneys and got bumped by lower seeded teams which didn't help the perception.

He did have some crazy good players during that time frame from Pearl Washington to Derrick Coleman, Rony Seikley, Stevie Thompson, etc, etc. They had first team AA players for almost a decade straight. And all they had to show for it was one FF and a loss to IU in the Finals.

SU was often a case of the whole being less than the sum of its parts. And they were notoriously bad FT shooting teams too.

 

[ar inj]

Actually only 2 first team AA in the 80's: Sherman Douglas one year and Coleman one year.

They are remembered for losing to Richmond, but also lost in a geat regional final to Illinois the year Michigan beat Seton Hall and in an overtime game against a good Misisouri team in LA another year.

And even Orange fans do not remember Syracuse use to play a lot of man-to-man in Boheim's earlier years.

 

[guyergym]

In addition to a few big upset losses, I think one thing that definitely contributed to the "bad game coach" perception was the fact that no one called timeout after Keith Smart's shot in the 1987 final. Normally you would expect all five guys to immediately signal for time out when the shot went through.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dgkmikdVM8

 

[HuskyFan32]

Boeheim surely does get a ton of talent and big time recruits with "little to show for it". Obviously he has accomplished a ton, but comparatively speaking for the amount of MCD AA's and top recruits he gets has less to show than some other coaches. His teams usually dont do much in the tournament, save the Carmelo year. And his teams arent top 5 as often as youd think for the talent he brings in. Im not just talking Championships and Final Fours, but the past 15 years Cuse doesnt seem to have the '06 or '09 type years, where we didnt win but we were a top 3 dominant team all year long. They also dont ever have teams that make unexpected deep runs into the tourney and they dont really have a whole lot of college stars either, again for the level of talent he brings in.

 

[HuskyFan32]

Id like to add a disclaimer: my post above is referring to the past 15 years when Ive been old enough to follow college basketball like I do now. I cant comment on the 80's, but Im obv aware of Pearl and Coleman.

 

[Husky1964]

The guy does the least with arguably the best talent around. We would never lose to them if JC coached his talent against ours. Additionally except for Melo's year he CRAPS the bed in the Dance-----no Elite 8s since 1999. The 2-3 is effective in the Dome and on the road somewhat. NO ONE will win a Ring playing the zone for the entire game.

 

[Letsgohuskies11]

I'd argue rick barnes does the worst with talent

 

[Kitaman]

Not sure what this post is about. JB is in the HOF so its obvious he can coach in-game. His 80s/90s win count while playing in a tough conference, is proof enough, no?

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Jim Boeheim can now officially join Tom Izzo and Coach K on the list of Hall of Famers who have been declared lousy coaches by Boneyarders this week.

Who will be next?

 

[Excalibur]

The question was really about how he was perceived in the 80's and 90's. He's certainly moved past that reputation now, regardless of what a few blowhards here might say. But in the late 80's and early 90's in particular, yes, that was his reputation. Not sure why the opinion became so prevalent. Maybe it was because his teams did things that "poorly-coached" teams do -- shoot free throws poorly, rely on athleticism or individual skills. It was cemented after a few early flameouts in the tournament.

 

[HuskyFan32]

Jim Boeheim can now officially join Tom Izzo and Coach K on the list of Hall of Famers who have been declared lousy coaches by Boneyarders this week.

Who will be next?

Nobody said he was a lousy coach. The OP asked if there was any truth to his in game coaching limitations. And other said there is some truth to it. Its not so much is he a lousy coach, but should he have done more with the kind of talent he brings in. I actually like Boeheim, but I think hes overrated. I dont think he belongs in the top tier with Calhoun, K, Izzo, Pitino, Roy.

 

[Palatine]

Back in those days Boeheim was considered a "roll out the basketball and let them play" coach. He could do that because he had elite talent and spectacular playmakers

That characterization isn't fair anymore. He has gradually lost that reputation and has evolved to more of a system coach.

 

[freescooter]

I agree with Palatine. I also think gettin gto the championship game the second time, even though they lost, helped his rep some. As I recall they were something like a 5 seed. But in any case, they weren't expected to make that run.