Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Golden Husky, post: 2455650, member: 8090"] Two very good questions, HH. To the first, given that there are coaches in the HOF who did not achieve even one national championship, yes, then by that standard, MM belongs. As to the second question, it seems to me that the HOF sometimes confuses consistency with excellence. Does being "very good" for a long time mean that you are/were "great?" I tend to think not but recognize that others may feel differently. l like the distinction you made between a Hall of Famer and a first-ballot Hall of Famer but it's bit bulky in its application. I'm just looking for some semantic separation between Geno--I think his 11 national titles have earned him that--and the Muffets, Taras, Kims, Brendas and Dawns of the game who, combined, have what, seven championships? If we label Muffet "great" what adjective should we use for Geno? Thanks for a provocative but civil debate. [/QUOTE]