Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="husky429, post: 4562475, member: 6696"] "Better" is subjective. If you put Hurley at UCLA, he'd probably be terrible because he left his recruiting grounds and culture (this is what happened to Shaka down south IMO). There are a few really good coaches that probably would look as good as Hurley if they had found jobs close to their connections. Realistically, I don't think you can say that Holloway or Pikiell is better than Hurley right now. Oats? Beard? Musselman? Mcdermott? I think you could probably make an argument they are better, but I'm not sure I'd agree with it. McDermott and Musselman are probably a step above Hurley, but they're older and we have to take that into account. What did they look like at 50? There's a bunch of coaches aged 50-55ish that haven't quite done enough to separate themselves from the pack IMO, including Hurley. Hurley has the potential to create that separation with a strong post-season run this year. Shaka is, IMO, probably the best young coach in the country. Hurley has catching up to do. Cooley is an interesting one. He's probably a better in-game coach and has a great eye for talent, but overall I don't think you can reasonably say he's a better coach than Hurley. I think between Cooley, Shaka, Hurley, and McDermott, we're going to have some battles in the Big Esat for the next decade or so. [/QUOTE]