SportsCenter discussion on greatest coaches ever....

[Husky25]

If the question is...where does Geno compare with Coach K, Belicheck, Pop and Saban against their historical peers in their respective sports then HE IS THE GUY. CoachK vs Wooden...no comparison. Belicheck is tied with Noll for SB victories and had the SB started 10 years earlier Lombardi would be at the top. Saban vs Bear Bryant...let the Alabama pundits sort that out and the Bear probably wins in a landslide. Pop ? No comment.
As to the issue of weak competition in WCBB, it is total nonsense. All the athletes are available to every WCBB coach in the country but Geno has done an unprecedented job of recruiting, training and mentoring which is all part of coaching. When John Wooden one 7 NC's in a row did anybody claim that his success was due to weak competition? The answer is no but he outrecruited( Alcindor, Walton Wilkes et al) out-mentored and out-trained everyone else.

So what's your opinion? You say no comparison or no comment on four of the five coaches, but don't say who has the edge.

...And the answer to your question in the final paragraph is actually yes. The NCAA Tournament was configured differently in Wooden's day than it is now. There was no Pac-10 Tournament and only the conference champ got the bid. Through much of UCLA's reign, USC (So. Cal) was the 2nd best team in the country and they didn't get a bid because they lost the conference to UCLA. Also, it is now widely known that Wooden had help from UCLA boosters, namely Sam Gilbert.

Belicheck is tied for Noll in Super Bowl wins, but Belichick has led his teams to the Super Bowl two more times than Noll. He is 6-3 in Conference championship games, and has made the playoff in 13/20 seasons including 12 of the last 14. Noll made the playoffs 12 times in 22 years and only once in his last seven. Lombardi is the best Coach in NFL history, IMO. (Huge limb, I know). He never had a losing season, 2 SB titles, and 6x NFL Champion (Pre-SB), but don't you think he is appropriately recognized? The Super Bowl winner does indeed receive the Vincent Thomas Lombardi Trophy, after all.

Saban is not in the conversation for best all time NCAA football coach. In terms of on field performance, Brant, Bobby Bowden, Joe Paterno, Knute Rockne, and Eddie Johnson all have a claim before him in my opinion.

Popovich is among the best of all time. Auerbach and Phil Jackson are the only ones in that conversation besides him, and I think it goes in that order. On the other hand, a case can be made that Pop is #2, but make no mistake that David Robinson and Tim Duncan are all time greats, who had a lot of help by otherwise would be superstars who played their role. (e.g. each other, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, etc.).

When comparing Coach Auriemma to his contemporaries, the only real competition is Pat Summitt, if even her. I don't still have the issue, but when she was approaching her final milestone win, SI published all of her wins. Remember that she started her career when most universities did not focus on women's sports and a number of wins in the early years came vs. community colleges or the likes of Chattanooga St. It's not a knock on her, it's just the way it was back in the day.

 

[Orangutan]

I think UConn WBB gets as much attention from ESPN as can reasonably be expected given that their core audience mostly dislikes the sport. The issue is that UConn needs a foil. ESPN built a lot of hype around and threw a lot of coverage towards the "Pursuit of Perfection" when it looked (or could be made to look to outsiders) like there was a plausible threat to UConn. Geno would probably, paradoxically, get a little more mainstream love if UConn lost more frequently in big games. If there were the Lakers to UConn's Celtics, it would be more impressive.

I recall a Zach Lowe ESPN podcast where he briefly mentioned women's basketball. Zach Lowe grew up in New England and loved the early great UConn teams. His guest said something like "Doesn't UConn just win every year" and he said that that was pretty much true, and that was the end of the conversation. They went back to talking about the NBA. Yes, the fact that the conversation about women's basketball starts and ends with UConn is a testament to Geno's greatness but it also makes the sport look small-time to outsiders.

 

[asuwish]

I'm going to be preaching to choir here but I needed to vent a little and am interested in others opinion...

In light of Popovich's 1000 win last night, they were the discussing greatest coaches ever in every sport on ESPN. The list included Pop, Belicheck, Geno, Nick Saban and Coach K. Now, it's obviously an honor for Geno to be included on the list but it's also just plainly obvious that Geno should be included on the list. Of the panel of four, not one choose Geno as the greatest ever. This didn't surprise me and when they did discuss him, they said the level of competition just didn't compare to the level of other leagues. True.
However, what I think they fail to recognize and what I think so many people who ask this question fail to recognize is that the level of competition is only small factor in what Geno has done. The fact that these "experts" rarely recognize how he has built the program from scratch, how he has masterfully crafted player after player to perform at their ultimate level, how he constantly demands the highest level of play, how he is the king at preparing and playing in large games i.e. last night (and I could continue) seems to be lost on so many. And yes, in a world where women's sports is still considered a joke to many, it can be a fine line for the folks at ESPN to highly regard a women's program on a show dominated by male viewership but It would be nice if the mastermind that is Geno Auriemma was more vocally recognized by those who discuss sports on a national scale. Although I'm sure Geno doesn't give a hoot either way.

The level of competition argument has a little flaw. Geno isn't having the Uconn men play a woman's schedule. Geno takes the players he gets and goes against another group of woman. Men's basketball didn't nearly have the depth of talent in the Wooden era it has today, and nobody says he won because of the level of competition. Freshman couldn't play varsity back then and when Lew Alcindor was a freshman he and the other freshman beat the varsity team and they were the defending national champs. Talk about stock piling talent. Over a four year period of time Geno only has 9 players, Yes, 6 were HS AA's, (not everyone becomes a college star) but at about 20+ a year, another 74 are on the other teams. He recruits the players he feels fit in with what he wants to do, and he coaches them into a team better then anyone! San Antonio convinced it's stars to take less money so they can have depth and uses that to play a style were all 5 player can score making them harder to defend - sound familiar. NOBODY will have his resume in the end.

 

[watanabe]

Or I'd take the Mercedes, sell it and buy a Honda (and keep the extra cash).

Ha ha, now you're thinking like a coach.

 

[Striper69]

Geno's fantastic, the absolute best the women's game has seen bar none, and it actually isn't close. But to even think Geno is ahead of Jim Calhoun, never mind the others on the list is downright ridiculous. Is this list the coaches "ever" or still coaching? here's why:

1) 1-2 years and done - great players leave early....he gets them ALL for 4. Huge difference

2) No way JC ever had 5-6 of the Top 10 players in any given recruiting class because of the parity of recruiting. (by no meads diminishing why the girls want to play for Geno)

3) Party is huge - I mean beating the Top 10 teams by an average of 25-30 is all you need to know. Not happening in the men's except once in a great while, never mind Top 25. 25 can beat 1 in the men's can never happen in the women's


Geno is great, his accomplishments are unbelievable. But it's a whole different world, not close sorry! This talk of him being up there is crazy but hey, everyone has an opinion.

Sorry but I think Geno could have done just as well or better than Calhoun if he chose to do so.

Could Calhoun do as well as Geno in the women's game? I doubt it.

 

[Aluminny69]

With all due respect to Geno, people seem to be forgetting the "lost" years from 2005-2008. Geno is a great coach, but it certainly helps to have the best player in the country, and stay injury free. So, what happened from 2005-2008? First, DT graduated, and her supporting cast could not maintain UConn excellence. Second, UConn went for a few years without the TOP recruit. Simone Augustus, Sylvia Fowles, Candace Parker, and Brittany Hunter all chose different schools. We all know the impact Parker had. Meanwhile, UConn did not make the final four for three straight years. In 2006, they got #1 Tina Charles, who helped turn things around. In 2007, they added #1 Maya Moore, and made it back to the Final Four, losing to Stanford in the semis. Injuries to Mel Thomas and Kalana Greene were major contributing factors. Since then, UConn has been on an extended run, led by Maya Moore, and now Brianna Stewart. Brianna had arguably the best freshman performance in a Final Four.

Sorry to bring up a "dark" time in UConn's recent past, And taking nothing away from the great coach that Geno is, but it certainly helps to have the countries best players, and a strong supporting cast. Of course, it takes more than that, as Duke and recent Tenn teams have shown.

 

[Striper69]

Ha ha, now you're thinking like a coach.

More like a GM or AD...

 

[CL82]

Interesting post.

Yeah, I watch PTI a lot and saw that. They should've had Geno on to interview him. IMO

The "athleticism" of women's BB is very high. They just don't have many who can "dunk" and that's what I think keeps men away from the game. Guys want to see other guys do what they can't do. Most of these women are better BB players than most guys ever dreamt of being.
To be fair though- you have to be "into" women's BB if you're a guy.

I'd like to hear what people say is what made Wooden's UCLA teams so dominant. I know for one thing he had Jabbar and Walton but there were other great players even then.

Wonder why Geno and Calhoun weren't great friends? I don't think Geno would like coaching men's CBB with it being the way it is now with the best players going "one and done".

The athleticism of woman's basketball is very high, compared to what it was say, pre '95 and that's a good thing, but it isn't on the same planet as the men's game. That's okay, it doesn't have to be.

A lot of factors contributed to Wooden's run. Lack of parity, smaller post season field, the quality of the players he had (and perhaps some recruiting help), and of course Wooden's ability to coach, which shouldn't be discounted.

My understanding from someone who was there at the time is Jim Calhoun can be great guy, particularly if you came and kissed the ring. Geno, who arrived in Storrs a year earlier, being Geno felt no need to defer to Jim. I think it was a case of two guys with huge personalities not wanting to share the spotlight and there was a little competition between the programs. Still there is mutual respect for what each achieved just not friendship per se.

 

[rugbymate]

So what's your opinion? You say no comparison or no comment on four of the five coaches, but don't say who has the edge.

...And the answer to your question in the final paragraph is actually yes. The NCAA Tournament was configured differently in Wooden's day than it is now. There was no Pac-10 Tournament and only the conference champ got the bid. Through much of UCLA's reign, USC (So. Cal) was the 2nd best team in the country and they didn't get a bid because they lost the conference to UCLA. Also, it is now widely known that Wooden had help from UCLA boosters, namely Sam Gilbert.

Belicheck is tied for Noll in Super Bowl wins, but Belichick has led his teams to the Super Bowl two more times than Noll. He is 6-3 in Conference championship games, and has made the playoff in 13/20 seasons including 12 of the last 14. Noll made the playoffs 12 times in 22 years and only once in his last seven. Lombardi is the best Coach in NFL history, IMO. (Huge limb, I know). He never had a losing season, 2 SB titles, and 6x NFL Champion (Pre-SB), but don't you think he is appropriately recognized? The Super Bowl winner does indeed receive the Vincent Thomas Lombardi Trophy, after all.

Saban is not in the conversation for best all time NCAA football coach. In terms of on field performance, Brant, Bobby Bowden, Joe Paterno, Knute Rockne, and Eddie Johnson all have a claim before him in my opinion.

Popovich is among the best of all time. Auerbach and Phil Jackson are the only ones in that conversation besides him, and I think it goes in that order. On the other hand, a case can be made that Pop is #2, but make no mistake that David Robinson and Tim Duncan are all time greats, who had a lot of help by otherwise would be superstars who played their role. (e.g. each other, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, etc.).

When comparing Coach Auriemma to his contemporaries, the only real competition is Pat Summitt, if even her. I don't still have the issue, but when she was approaching her final milestone win, SI published all of her wins. Remember that she started her career when most universities did not focus on women's sports and a number of wins in the early years came vs. community colleges or the likes of Chattanooga St. It's not a knock on her, it's just the way it was back in the day.[/QUOT

So what's your opinion? You say no comparison or no comment on four of the five coaches, but don't say who has the edge.

...And the answer to your question in the final paragraph is actually yes. The NCAA Tournament was configured differently in Wooden's day than it is now. There was no Pac-10 Tournament and only the conference champ got the bid. Through much of UCLA's reign, USC (So. Cal) was the 2nd best team in the country and they didn't get a bid because they lost the conference to UCLA. Also, it is now widely known that Wooden had help from UCLA boosters, namely Sam Gilbert.

Belicheck is tied for Noll in Super Bowl wins, but Belichick has led his teams to the Super Bowl two more times than Noll. He is 6-3 in Conference championship games, and has made the playoff in 13/20 seasons including 12 of the last 14. Noll made the playoffs 12 times in 22 years and only once in his last seven. Lombardi is the best Coach in NFL history, IMO. (Huge limb, I know). He never had a losing season, 2 SB titles, and 6x NFL Champion (Pre-SB), but don't you think he is appropriately recognized? The Super Bowl winner does indeed receive the Vincent Thomas Lombardi Trophy, after all.

Saban is not in the conversation for best all time NCAA football coach. In terms of on field performance, Brant, Bobby Bowden, Joe Paterno, Knute Rockne, and Eddie Johnson all have a claim before him in my opinion.

Popovich is among the best of all time. Auerbach and Phil Jackson are the only ones in that conversation besides him, and I think it goes in that order. On the other hand, a case can be made that Pop is #2, but make no mistake that David Robinson and Tim Duncan are all time greats, who had a lot of help by otherwise would be superstars who played their role. (e.g. each other, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, etc.).

When comparing Coach Auriemma to his contemporaries, the only real competition is Pat Summitt, if even her. I don't still have the issue, but when she was approaching her final milestone win, SI published all of her wins. Remember that she started her career when most universities did not focus on women's sports and a number of wins in the early years came vs. community colleges or the likes of Chattanooga St. It's not a knock on her, it's just the way it was back in the day.

You are obviously a well informed sports fan and I agree with just about all of your conclusions....I did offer an opinion by saying if the question was the one I raised then , yes, Geno was the best( I think I said...HE IS THE GUY). The no comment on Pop was in deference to Auerbach, Riley and Jackson. I just believe him to be the next level down and don't think he is ready to be in that conversation yet. . As to Wooden...regardless of differences in the rules and practices of then vs now, they were the same rules and practices in place for everyone and Wooden was unparalleled in coaching/leading his team to NC's.

 

[CL82]

Sorry but I think Geno could have done just as well or better than Calhoun if he chose to do so.

Could Calhoun do as well as Geno in the women's game? I doubt it.

Hard to say. They both are among the best coaches of their generation in their respective sports. It's probably best to leave the comparisons there and just celebrate what each achieved.

 

[mauconnfan]

Sorry but I think Geno could have done just as well or better than Calhoun if he chose to do so.

Could Calhoun do as well as Geno in the women's game? I doubt it.

That's hilarious.

Hey I think Geno should be mentioned and tossed around in these discussions because of what he has accomplished. And he also WOULD be rated as one of the top program "builders" of all time because of the body of work and it's success. But what Jim Calhoun did is beyond belief of many and was rated by people like K as one of the most amazing transformations of a basketball program. Let's not try to compare the 2 it's foolish, let's just be happy we've had such great coaches. It's ridiculous to even think Geno could have waltzed into The Field House and done what JC did. And on the same hand JC wouldn't have been too good with the women, you ever hear him? LOL

 

[meyers7]

With all due respect to Geno, people seem to be forgetting the "lost" years from 2005-2008.
Sorry to bring up a "dark" time in UConn's recent past,

I have no idea what you are talking about. Pretty sure WBB did not exist then. I have no memory of it.

 

[Sky ball]

My main issue is that people refuse to acknowledge the greatness of Geno and UConn because it's not as competitive, quick, exciting or whatever as men's sports. But comparing the two is like comparing Mercedes to BMW's. They're both great cars and both have features and qualities that should be appreciated for what they are. And for people to refuse to recognize or downplay what he has done because he coaches a women's sport is ridiculous.

Maybe Mercedes and Kia's...LOL

 

[Aluminny69]

I have no idea what you are talking about. Pretty sure WBB did not exist then. I have no memory of it.

That's called "selective memory."