Upset Alert, Michigan State in trouble

[superjohn]

Debatable, yes, and probably not.

Pitino does a nice job, but he doesn't put anybody into the pros, and he doesn't have as impressive a record in the tourney as Izzo.

FWIW, Brown is the best in-game coach I've seen in college. But "play by the rules, or at least be good at hiding the fact that you don't" is part of being a good college coach, and he doesn't do that. If you want a program-builder, it goes like this:

1) Calhoun
2) Krzyzewski
3) Izzo

I'm guessing he was talking about current coaches. I could easily name 5 better than Izzo if we are talking about all time.

 

[Matrim55]

I'm guessing he was talking about current coaches. I could easily name 5 better than Izzo if we are talking about all time.

I'm not 100% sure you could. Izzo's a great coach - 7 , 1 title, plenty of guys in the league, and he's raised a mid-tier B1G's program to best in the league while never sniffing controversy.

Only coaches of the last 30 years who are definitely better are Calhoun & K. All-time, the list isn't really that much longer.

 

[HuskyHoosier]

Also Izzo does it without a bunch of top recruits. His teams usually have a lot of hard nosed workers who get the best out of their abilities.

 

[80shusky]

Debatable, yes, and probably not.

Pitino does a nice job, but he doesn't put anybody into the pros, and he doesn't have as impressive a record in the tourney as Izzo.

FWIW, Brown is the best in-game coach I've seen in college. But "play by the rules, or at least be good at hiding the fact that you don't" is part of being a good college coach, and he doesn't do that. If you want a program-builder, it goes like this:

1) Calhoun
2) Krzyzewski
3) Izzo

@Matrim55 agree with Calhoun obviously but as far as program builders go, wasn't Duke already a power long before K got there? Didn't they already have good teams prior? Clearly he has made them one of the best programs ever but just curious.

 

[Matrim55]

@Matrim55 agree with Calhoun obviously but as far as program builders go, wasn't Duke already a power long before K got there? Didn't they already have good teams prior? Clearly he has made them one of the best programs ever but just curious.

Duke was the 3rd-best program in North Carolina, and had zero titles before K. Hate him all you want - it's justified for his sanctimony - but he's been a brilliant coach and an even better program builder. There are two dozen different programs that could have gone from "pretty good" in the '70s and early '80s to "Nation's premiere program" in the '90s and beyond, but only Duke managed it.

Calhoun had a steeper climb, which is why I rate him highest. But let's not undersell what K (or Izzo) accomplished. They're great, great coaches.

 

[superjohn]

I'm not 100% sure you could. Izzo's a great coach - 7 , 1 title, plenty of guys in the league, and he's raised a mid-tier B1G's program to best in the league while never sniffing controversy.

Only coaches of the last 30 years who are definitely better are Calhoun & K. All-time, the list isn't really that much longer.

K, Calhoun, Knight, Pitino and Smith are all more accomplished, Larry Brown isn't as accomplished at the college level but he's one of the few greatest coaches ever in my opinion. Roy Williams is also more accomplished but I think Izzo is the better coach, you could also make an argument for Donovan. I'm not even bringing up the old timers. Izzo is great but you could certainly make an argument for 5 or more coaches being better.

 

[Matrim55]

K, Calhoun, Knight, Pitino and Smith are all more accomplished...

Maybe. Pitino and Smith both took already-premier programs and kept them at that level (and Pitino, at least, cheated). Knight was a product of his time, and only had about 10-12 really good years before a steep decline. I put Izzo's accomplishments over the past 20 years up with Knight's and am willing to lose the argument, but I really do think it's an argument.

I mean, 7 final fours in 18 years, including 3 in a row, is pretty amazing. And he's never really had a GREAT recruiting class until the one coming in next year. I wouldn't be shocked if he put something remarkable together over the next two seasons, even without Valentine.

 

[superjohn]

Maybe. Pitino and Smith both took already-premier programs and kept them at that level (and Pitino, at least, cheated). Knight was a product of his time, and only had about 10-12 really good years before a steep decline. I put Izzo's accomplishments over the past 20 years up with Knight's and am willing to lose the argument, but I really do think it's an argument.

I mean, 7 final fours in 18 years, including 3 in a row, is pretty amazing. And he's never really had a GREAT recruiting class until the one coming in next year. I wouldn't be shocked if he put something remarkable together over the next two seasons, even without Valentine.

7 final 4's is amazing but they have been blown out in most of them. Izzo will have a stronger argument when he gets more than 1 title. Michigan State also wasn't some garbage program before Izzo got there, there was this guy named Magic Johnson.

 

[Matrim55]

7 final 4's is amazing but they have been blown out in most of them. Izzo will have a stronger argument when he gets more than 1 title. Michigan State also wasn't some garbage program before Izzo got there, there was this guy named Magic Johnson.

Before Izzo they hadn't been to an Elite 8 in two decades. Magic's two years were the exception rather than the rule - they were pretty solidly the 6th or 7th best team in the B1G when he took over (Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Purdue, Wiscy, Ohio State).

 

[superjohn]

You were dismissive of Pitino for taking an already great program over. He took Providence to a freaking final 4 along with two other teams and he has 2 titles. I don't see how you can argue Izzo's accomplishments are greater. The same saying we always say around here for Boeheim also applies to Izzo. Tyler Olander has twice as many National Championships as Tom Izzo.

 

[Northbound]

Izzo has more Final Four appearances this century than any coach. Do you really question him that much?

If Peyton Manning got hammered for being good in season and not winning enough Super Bowls then Izzo deserves to get hammered as well.

Look, I get there are difference between player and coach, but Izzo should get called out a bit.

I think he does a great job but he has underperformed plenty of times.

 

[Matrim55]

You were dismissive of Pitino for taking an already great program over. He took Providence to a freaking final 4 along with two other teams and he has 2 titles. I don't see how you can argue Izzo's accomplishments are greater. The same saying we always say around here for Boeheim also applies to Izzo. Tyler Olander has twice as many National Championships as Tom Izzo.

I'm not dismissive of Pitino - I think he's a brilliant defensive coach, and was one of the first to understand the true value of the 3 (even though he's never been a great offensive schemer).

I just think 1) he's cheated, and 2) he's left two programs in the lurch. He's a really, truly accomplished coach, and you could argue that he's better than Izzo. I'd just argue the other way.

Re: Boeheim... he's a great coach, too. But Izzo's got 7 in 21 years, while Boeheim has 5 in 37. That's just a little bit different.

 

[CAHUSKY]

If Peyton Manning got hammered for being good in season and not winning enough Super Bowls then Izzo deserves to get hammered as well.

Look, I get there are difference between player and coach, but Izzo should get called out a bit.

I think he does a great job but he has underperformed plenty of times.

If your only definition of success is winning a title every year then yes, he underachievers. If you believe 7 final fours and anational title is success, like any rational human being, he is one of the most successful coaches in basketball history.

 

[MexicoHusky]

Name me 5 better coaches. Hell, name me 3.

He does plenty of things well. Coaching/Teaching guards is not one of them.

 

[Northbound]

he's a great coach and I've said that and defend that statement.

It's a very apt comparison, like it or not and I like Izzo and don't like Peyton even though I'm a bronco and a UT fan

I don't think you understand he idea behind the comparative. Sporty fan would tell you they think he's great, but aren't happy with 2 titles just like uconn fans wouldn't be happy with 2 in 7 - not right or wrong just is

 

[superjohn]

I'm not dismissive of Pitino - I think he's a brilliant defensive coach, and was one of the first to understand the true value of the 3 (even though he's never been a great offensive schemer).

I just think 1) he's cheated, and 2) he's left two programs in the lurch. He's a really, truly accomplished coach, and you could argue that he's better than Izzo. I'd just argue the other way.

Re: Boeheim... he's a great coach, too. But Izzo's got 7 in 21 years, while Boeheim has 5 in 37. That's just a little bit different.

That's why I only brought up Boeheim to point out that Izzo and him combined have as many titles as Olander. Izzo now shares the distinction with Boeheim of losing to a 15 seed.