Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="bballnut90, post: 3012498, member: 2117"] Best of the best are great at both. Good coaching is the backbone of it though. Recruiters who land prized players but cant coach end up with dysfunctional teams like Tennessee right now. As someone pointed out, it is crucial to get the right players though even if they arent highly ranked. To be a consistent powerhouse like UCONN, Notre Dame, Stanford, Tennesse under Pat or Duke under GG, you need great players to maintain that success. Pat and Geno consistently had loaded rosters, Muffet's success took off once she started landing elite kids, Tara's best years have centered around prized recruits, and GG's best teams were loaded with talented kids. It is hard to maintain an elite program without top kids coming through. To win a title in a given season, great coaching can get you there. Vic Schaefer took a team with 0 HS AAs to back to back title games and easily could have won 2 championships. His players werent chopped liver but last year he started three guards 5-6 and under and they went 37-2. All of his players improved by leaps and bounds under him. That is 100% coaching. Scott Rueck also has taken unheralded teams on great runs and gets the most out of his kids. Gonzaga and Marquette are other programs that look extremely good despite not having any highly touted recruits. The best coaches are ones whose teams are better than the sum of its parts. [/QUOTE]