I'd Like To Thank Sean Miller For Proving My Point.

He shouldn't. Mears won at a higher rate than Pearl over a 15 year period.

Exactly. I am not trying to take anything away from Pearl. He reinvigorated our program and put it BACK on the map. Some just don't know who put us on the map. Pearl might have had one or two players that would have started during the King/Grunfeld era.

Like I said earlier, Pearl has some work to do before he is as good as Mears. Mears went 15-15 against KY, which was unheared of considering this was during a time when everyone else had a dismal record against them.
 
I think this is right. Mears was left out twice when he was 12-4 and in second place, so I imagine Pearl's first team wouldn't have made it over LSU.

No, it would have to have been either 12-6 or 14-4. All SEC teams played a round robin schedule in the days when there were ten teams. It was either 1974,75 or 76 when the NCAA went from a 16 team field to a 32 team field. When it went to a 32 team field, the bigger conferences (SEC, BIG Ten, Big Eight, SWC, Pac 8 and ACC) would usually get two teams..one automatic qualifier and one at-large berth. There were about 16 automatic qualifiers and 16 at-large births.
 
The field expanded to 32 teams in 1975.

That's correct. Prior to that time it varied from 22 to 25 teams and only one team per conference was invited. If I remember correctly, Mears finished 3rd or better in the SEC in 13 of his 15 years and had a winning conference record 14 times. In the modern 64/68 team format, I think its safe to assume that Mears would have made the NCAA's at least 13 times, and some of his better teams were probably capable of making a deep run had they gotten the chance.
 
I'd love to see the historical comparisons between Arizona without Lute's record and Tennessee's without Pearl. Guess which one would be better?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Before 1985 Arizona only had 3 NCAA tournament appearances.

It's 2011, that was 26 years ago. Lute Olson had been their coach since 1983. It's not like this one coach was there a couple of years. He coached there for 25 years, you can certainly make a name for yourself at a school in that time. Please. Arizona is a basketball school because of that one coach.

UCLA was absolutely nothing before John Wooden. One coach over time can certainly make a name for a university.
 
No, it would have to have been either 12-6 or 14-4. All SEC teams played a round robin schedule in the days when there were ten teams. It was either 1974,75 or 76 when the NCAA went from a 16 team field to a 32 team field. When it went to a 32 team field, the bigger conferences (SEC, BIG Ten, Big Eight, SWC, Pac 8 and ACC) would usually get two teams..one automatic qualifier and one at-large berth. There were about 16 automatic qualifiers and 16 at-large births.

Not until '67. Mears went 12-4, finished 2nd, and got left out in '65. He got left out with 13-5 2nd place teams in '68, '69, and '73.

So I maintain Pearl would only have one.
 
It's 2011, that was 26 years ago. Lute Olson had been their coach since 1983. It's not like this one coach was there a couple of years. He coached there for 25 years, you can certainly make a name for yourself at a school in that time. Please. Arizona is a basketball school because of that one coach.

UCLA was absolutely nothing before John Wooden. One coach over time can certainly make a name for a university.

Wooden took over the program in 1948 not 1983. Come back with that comment in a couple more decades and you may have a valid point.
 
It's 2011, that was 26 years ago. Lute Olson had been their coach since 1983. It's not like this one coach was there a couple of years. He coached there for 25 years, you can certainly make a name for yourself at a school in that time. Please. Arizona is a basketball school because of that one coach.

UCLA was absolutely nothing before John Wooden. One coach over time can certainly make a name for a university.

Exactly
 
I'd love to see the historical comparisons between Arizona without Lute's record and Tennessee's without Pearl. Guess which one would be better?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

so we are going to take out 23 years of history from Arizona and 6 years of history from Tennessee. Yea thats even.

Anyone who thinks Tennessee is equal to Arizona as far as basketball tradition and program are concerned is one of two things: 1) an absolute homer 2) an idiot
 
so we are going to take out 23 years of history from Arizona and 6 years of history from Tennessee. Yea thats even.

Anyone who thinks Tennessee is equal to Arizona as far as basketball tradition and program are concerned is one of two things: 1) an absolute homer 2) an idiot

Seems to me that this whole argument just reinforces Hat's original point that one good coach combined with a high level of admin commitment can turn any program around very quickly. Maybe there's a Lute Olson out there for us.:)
A guy can dream, can't he?
 
So basically, the big differences between the programs is they hired someone infinitely better than Bruce Pearl.

Actually in Lute Olsen's first six seasons at Arizona, He went to one final four, one sweet sixteen, 3 times he was knocked out in the first round, and did not make the tournament the first year compared to Bruce Pearl who made it all six years getting knocked out in the first round twice, second round once, two sweet sixteens, and an elite eight.

Judging by their records in the same amount of time, it looks like Bruce Pearl was pretty similar to Lute Olsen.
 
For everyone talking about what a long, dark road UT has ahead of them, Arizona was a bigger mess when Miller took over than Tennessee is now. It's taken him all of two years to return to the Elite Eight.

It's a simple equation. Commitment by the administration + Hiring the right guy=Big success.

Anyone with common sense realizes that a high level of commitment plus the right hire will lead us to great things in the future, but where are the counter-examples of commitment but making the wrong hire and where that leads team.

I think its harder to find the right guy than you make it sound but I do have the positive outlook that our administration will make the right choice.
 
Actually in Lute Olsen's first six seasons at Arizona, He went to one final four, one sweet sixteen, 3 times he was knocked out in the first round, and did not make the tournament the first year compared to Bruce Pearl who made it all six years getting knocked out in the first round twice, second round once, two sweet sixteens, and an elite eight.

Judging by their records in the same amount of time, it looks like Bruce Pearl was pretty similar to Lute Olsen.
Also had 3 conference titles.
 
Would that mean Duke is just riding the coat tails of one man?

Huh. Although they certainly reached new heights under Krzwkszki, I thought the Dukies had a pretty good program before he arrived. Of course, I'm only basing that on final four appearances, conference championships, and entrenchment in the top 25, so maybe I'm missing something.
 
:good!:
For everyone talking about what a long, dark road UT has ahead of them, Arizona was a bigger mess when Miller took over than Tennessee is now. It's taken him all of two years to return to the Elite Eight.

It's a simple equation. Commitment by the administration + Hiring the right guy=Big success.


I hope to see a new thread every time one of your opinions is validated. Also, make sure you jump on MHF every time he is wrong.
 

VN Store



Back
Top