Giles at U19

[bucsrule8872]

Unless I am missing someone, here are the coaches with a title that are active D-1 coaches right now and how many they have won (years in parenthesis):

K- 5(91, 92, 01, 10, 15)
Williams- 2(05, 09)
Pitino- 2(96, 13)
Brown- 1(88)
Cal- 1(12)
Boeheim- 1(03)
Self- 1(08)
Izzo- 1(00)
Fisher- 1(89)
Ollie- 1(14)
Tubby- 1(98)

That's pretty good company. And most of them are at the end of their careers, while Cal could still coach several more years. Unless I am mistaken, he is the third youngest on the list (Ollie is obviously the youngest, and Self is a few years younger than Cal). All the rest are in their 60's or 70's.

 

[CUT-NETS]

I can't speak for cutting nets but I can tell you straight up I think Cal needs two championships and I think when he does he's fully exonerated in ALL walks, much like Roy Williams and Pitino when they did it. Lots of coaches have won a championship. It's a special feat no doubt, but it's not legendary. I'm waiting on legend status for Cal. It takes the right circumstances to do what K has done. He's got so many factors in his favor, the first being he's been at the same place since the galactic expansion. To me, a coach winning title(s) sets him as one of the top tier all time greats. How many after that is dependent on other situations besides the talent of the coach.

Some of you take these sorts of comments the wrong way. I guarantee if I were articulating this face to face there would be no misunderstanding. I'm very thankful for Cal, and he's done great, but he's still capable of more. Get that second title in 10 years and he's in the mega books. There should be zero debate about anything Cal related.

Excellent post and I share your opinion. It often gets misconstrued on here as "Cal bashing" or "Cal Hate".

If someone could guarantee me that Cal will be here for 30 years (similar to Coach K longevity-wise) I would never complain and I would patiently wait on him to win national titles. But the fact is he is NOT going to be here that long. He said it himself that "this isn't a 10-15 year job". So with that being the case, combined with the fact that he has the best players every year, YES, I think he has to bring home the bacon.

 

[Wall2Boogie]

Giles=Henson

 

[W_Heisenberg]

If Cal had won the championship in '10 or this season things might be different,but K now has Cal taking his leftovers and I just hope Cal is a good enough coach to overcome it, but I don't see it

I don't think Cal is or will be taking any "leftovers".

Plenty of guys out there for both programs. There will surely be players K and Cal are pursuing, but just like last year and this year, both coaches get who they need. (i.e. Duke gets Okafor/Jones/Winslow and UK gets KAT/Booker/Ullis/Lyles).

 

[blueisblood]

UK WILL get good players. Certainly no leftovers. It certainly helps Duke with Giles since he is from the state of NC.

 

[Macy's socks]

He's coaching Team USA, he's the best coach in the game, and they're winnjng titles.

I don't like it, but that's my guess as to why he has somewhat of a stranglehold on a lot of top recruits right now.

Yep, kinda hard not to understand this. Why wouldn't a top recruit not be attracted to this?

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

IMO, the biggest problem is that SO much talent comes from the state of NC, whereas almost no top players come from Kentucky anymore.

 

[BBNinSC]

I know people that are friends with Giles he is a Duke homer. Love to see the heels get him or Tatum, both will be NBA superstars

There won't be any elite players going to Chapel Hill, that's for sure.

 

[tommyg4uk]

Look like he will be at Duke, the heels have a shot.

Not really. Duke and Wake Forest...it will likely be Duke.

 

[.S&C.]

IMO, the biggest problem is that SO much talent comes from the state of NC, whereas almost no top players come from Kentucky anymore.

It's definitely another advantage for coach K.

I still think Cal could Yank Giles,

IMO titles don't mean as much as you two think.

Cal had the number one class in 2010, 11 and 12 without a title.

How many titles has California won? Mississippi State? UNLV's last one? We lost kids to Kansas and they haven't won since we have.

Past titles really mean less than the coach, the atmosphere, playing time, shoes maybe? Lots of stuff.

Titles are big for lesser schools, brings them credibility. A kid is not going to decide against UK because we only won 1 title in the last 6 final fours...

Doesn't make sense to me. One of you has to prove it. And Duke winning it means nothing as K has reeled in big time talent for a long time.

You think Cal wouldn't have a leg up on K even in his own state had Cal won the championship last year? If coach K has all those early exits, and Cal was coming off of his second or third title, you can bet your ass we'd be in a much better position. Winning championships puts you at a clear advantage and I'm shocked you disagree with that.

It's not the end all, but for elite players, it helps tremendously. You over simplify this by adding "A kid isn't going to decide against UK based on Cal losing 5 out of 6 final four". That;s not how the process goes at all. Damn Poe you should know better than that.

When Cal walks into a kids living room, he's recruiting against coach K well over 40% of the time now I'd imagine. With 5 championships, and the ability to be coached by the legend of todays game, it's hard to say yes to Calipari in that situation. Reverse that and it's the opposite. Had we won it al in '10, '12, and '15, that statement is out the window. Cal would be the only man on the block. K would still get his, but even players like Giles would be hard pressed to say no to the Don.

I'm sorry it's not even debatable so I won't keep this going. Championships matter in recruiting for big time programs. Trust me, Indiana is teething right now and has trouble landing big time national prospects because they have nothing to point to in success. Their recruiting pitches are purely about tradition only. There's lots of examples.

There's nothing "to prove" as you say. Showing championships is a huge sell and the optics are a great advantage from it, period.

 

[brianpoe]

It's definitely another advantage for coach K.

I still think Cal could Yank Giles,


You think Cal wouldn't have a leg up on K even in his own state had Cal won the championship last year? If coach K has all those early exits, and Cal was coming off of his second or third title, you can bet your ass we'd be in a much better position. Winning championships puts you at a clear advantage and I'm shocked you disagree with that.

It's not the end all, but for elite players, it helps tremendously. You over simplify this by adding "A kid isn't going to decide against UK based on Cal losing 5 out of 6 final four". That;s not how the process goes at all. Damn Poe you should know better than that.

When Cal walks into a kids living room, he's recruiting against coach K well over 40% of the time now I'd imagine. With 5 championships, and the ability to be coached by the legend of todays game, it's hard to say yes to Calipari in that situation. Reverse that and it's the opposite. Had we won it al in '10, '12, and '15, that statement is out the window. Cal would be the only man on the block. K would still get his, but even players like Giles would be hard pressed to say no to the Don.

I'm sorry it's not even debatable so I won't keep this going. Championships matter in recruiting for big time programs. Trust me, Indiana is teething right now and has trouble landing big time national prospects because they have nothing to point to in success. Their recruiting pitches are purely about tradition only. There's lots of examples.

There's nothing "to prove" as you say. Showing championships is a huge sell and the optics are a great advantage from it, period.

Wrong. Ask Randle when Roy pulled out his rings. Using IU is a terrible example for obvious reasons.

Some kids want a chance at a title but don't really care about who had the last one especially with UK, Duke, and Kansas.

Just look at their recruiting classes the past few years. Had nothing to do with recent titles.

Kind of dumb to even suggest this. Look at this year. LSU, Cal, MSU, UNLV????

How did Cal get 3 #1 classes prior to UK winning a title since 1998?

We miss on kids every year and no recruit says well they won the title last year so i want to go there...??? After a title most of the kids are gone anyway.

It is most likely:

Coach - first
Playing time
Ability to showcase skills in the offense.
NBA considerations
Family connections.
Location.
Ability to win and gain exposure.

Most recent title is for the fans. These kids are making business decisions.


The titles apply to your recent Cal discussion more so than recruiting.

 

[.S&C.]

Wrong. Ask Randle when Roy pulled out his rings. Using IU is a terrible example for obvious reasons.

Some kids want a chance at a title but don't really care about who had the last one especially with UK, Duke, and Kansas.

Just look at their recruiting classes the past few years. Had nothing to do with recent titles.

Kind of dumb to even suggest this. Look at this year. LSU, Cal, MSU, UNLV????

How did Cal get 3 #1 classes prior to UK winning a title since 1998?

We miss on kids every year and no recruit says well they won the title last year so i want to go there...??? After a title most of the kids are gone anyway.

It is most likely:

Coach - first
Playing time
Ability to showcase skills in the offense.
NBA considerations
Family connections.
Location.
Ability to win and gain exposure.

Most recent title is for the fans. These kids are making business decisions.


The titles apply to your recent Cal discussion more so than recruiting.

True, those things can matter as much or more. But not always, and championships are the main underlining factor for how great a program is seen. Great programs are nearly impossible to turn drown, and thats why those examples of last years recruiting woes are not USUAL. Cal doesnt typically lose recruits to LSU or Mississippi State. You just proved my point actually.

Randle Doesnt work here in your assessment either because Cal was coming off of a national championship.

 

[.S&C.]

True, those things can matter as much or more. But not always, and championships are the main underlining factor for how great a program is seen. Great programs are nearly impossible to turn drown, and thats why those examples of last years recruiting woes are not USUAL. Cal doesnt typically lose recruits to LSU or Mississippi State. You just proved my point actually. How about all the studs that leave their home state for Duke, UK, Kansas? Leave those out? Titltes create the optics and set the table for being a top program. They mean everything really.

Randle Doesnt work here in your assessment either because Cal was coming off of a national championship.

 

[.S&C.]

To add to that, I do think a good portion of recruits make their decision on location. It's just like in political polling, 40% always one way, 40% always the other way. It's the 20% that is different that I'm really speaking towards anyway. And for the recruits that fall in the sway category, the optics and perception your program gets from winning championships matters probably more than anything. Thats why we have blue bloods. The championships create blue bloods. Blue bloods attract the players.

I don't see how theres anything here worthy of debate?

 

[brianpoe]

True, those things can matter as much or more. But not always, and championships are the main underlining factor for how great a program is seen. Great programs are nearly impossible to turn drown, and thats why those examples of last years recruiting woes are not USUAL. Cal doesnt typically lose recruits to LSU or Mississippi State. You just proved my point actually.

Randle Doesnt work here in your assessment either because Cal was coming off of a national championship.

Randle? What?? We lost in the first round of the NIT.


Since 2008 here the facts…


After winning back to back championships Florida’s top recruit was Elroy Vargas.

After winning the title Kansas had the 5th ranked class because Xavier Henry didn’t follow Cal and went to the Jayhawks.


UNC was reigning champs and finish 3rd behind UK who hadn’t won a title since 98 and Ohio State who won their only championship in 1960.

Duke won the title and still finished behind UK, also of note Duke had not won a title since 2001 and had a perennial Top 5 -10 recruiting class despite the drought.


UConn won the previous title and did not make the Top 25 in recruiting

After UK wins the title they come in 2nd for the first time since Cal arrived as far as recruiting classes to UCLA

UL won the next title and finished 8th in recruiting

UConn wins again, 2nd time in 4 years!!!!! 3rd time in 10 years!!!! Doesn’t finish in the Top 40 of recruiting classes….


I just destroyed your point. Titles are great but you have zero proof that the bluebloods need to have won the most recent one over the other.

UK, DUke, Kansas and even UNCheats are already seen as great programs. Thus the reason Cal could recruit #1 classes prior to winning the championship in 2012.

Sorry friend. Damn facts kicked your butt.

 

[Nick Horvath]

Randle? What?? We lost in the first round of the NIT.


Since 2008 here the facts…


After winning back to back championships Florida’s top recruit was Elroy Vargas.

After winning the title Kansas had the 5th ranked class because Xavier Henry didn’t follow Cal and went to the Jayhawks.


UNC was reigning champs and finish 3rd behind UK who hadn’t won a title since 98 and Ohio State who won their only championship in 1960.

Duke won the title and still finished behind UK, also of note Duke had not won a title since 2001 and had a perennial Top 5 -10 recruiting class despite the drought.


UConn won the previous title and did not make the Top 25 in recruiting

After UK wins the title they come in 2nd for the first time since Cal arrived as far as recruiting classes to UCLA

UL won the next title and finished 8th in recruiting

UConn wins again, 2nd time in 4 years!!!!! 3rd time in 10 years!!!! Doesn’t finish in the Top 40 of recruiting classes….


I just destroyed your point. Titles are great but you have zero proof that the bluebloods need to have won the most recent one over the other.

UK, DUke, Kansas and even UNCheats are already seen as great programs. Thus the reason Cal could recruit #1 classes prior to winning the championship in 2012.

Sorry friend. Damn facts kicked your butt.

You are a complete moron if you think winning titles doesn't mean anything when it comes to recruiting...

 

[brianpoe]

You are a complete moron if you think winning titles doesn't mean anything when it comes to recruiting...

Thanks for chiming Duke fan. Maybe if you understood the context of the conversation you wouldn't be so disrespectful.

Previously mentioned was the thought that since Duke won the recent title they had a tremendous leg up on recruiting and UK needed to start winning more titles.

My point is Duke will have a good class either way. Cal proved he would have #1 classes. Titles are important for schools. But because Duke won the most recent one, doesn't mean we can no longer recruit on that level.

Now take your "moron" remarks back home with you. Or read the entire thread before being disrespectful.

 

[CUT-NETS]

Thanks for chiming Duke fan. Maybe if you understood the context of the conversation you wouldn't be so disrespectful.

Previously mentioned was the thought that since Duke won the recent title they had a tremendous leg up on recruiting and UK needed to start winning more titles.

My point is Duke will have a good class either way. Cal proved he would have #1 classes. Titles are important for schools. But because Duke won the most recent one, doesn't mean we can no longer recruit on that level.

Now take your moron remarks back home with you. Or read the entire thread before being disrespectful.

Yeah i definitely think we can recruit at an elite level without titles, but I do think Cal needs to bring home another title. If he makes another final four this year and doesn't win it all that makes him 1 out of 7.

 

[brianpoe]

Yeah i definitely think we can recruit at an elite level without titles, but I do think Cal needs to bring home another title. If he makes another final four this year and doesn't win it all that makes him 1 out of 7.

As I mentioned earlier, you and SC make a good point about Cal needing to win another to take the next step legacy wise.

And of course titles can help, but as shown previously past titles are not the main reason for recruiting.

 

[BostonCat2001]

Yeah i definitely think we can recruit at an elite level without titles, but I do think Cal needs to bring home another title. If he makes another final four this year and doesn't win it all that makes him 1 out of 7.

this is more for you then it is about getting more recruits.

 

[.S&C.]

Randle? What?? We lost in the first round of the NIT.


Since 2008 here the facts…


After winning back to back championships Florida’s top recruit was Elroy Vargas.

After winning the title Kansas had the 5th ranked class because Xavier Henry didn’t follow Cal and went to the Jayhawks.


UNC was reigning champs and finish 3rd behind UK who hadn’t won a title since 98 and Ohio State who won their only championship in 1960.

Duke won the title and still finished behind UK, also of note Duke had not won a title since 2001 and had a perennial Top 5 -10 recruiting class despite the drought.


UConn won the previous title and did not make the Top 25 in recruiting

After UK wins the title they come in 2nd for the first time since Cal arrived as far as recruiting classes to UCLA

UL won the next title and finished 8th in recruiting

UConn wins again, 2nd time in 4 years!!!!! 3rd time in 10 years!!!! Doesn’t finish in the Top 40 of recruiting classes….


I just destroyed your point. Titles are great but you have zero proof that the bluebloods need to have won the most recent one over the other.

UK, DUke, Kansas and even UNCheats are already seen as great programs. Thus the reason Cal could recruit #1 classes prior to winning the championship in 2012.

Sorry friend. Damn facts kicked your butt.

Almost none of that makes a lick of sense.

Cal won a championship in 2012. Randle was in the next recruiting class. The NIT doesnt matter as much as the fact that UK had been in 2 final fours in the last 3 years. You're being short sighted.

Eloy Vargas was a top 25 recruit, did you forget that? Not to mention, I think Billy Donovan winning the national championship 2 years in a row did a lot for his recruiting and the perception of Florida basketball to lots of players, including some big time guys. Again, nothing here.

Uccon was in the middle of the conference shifts and looming NCAA probation. They've got issues that have nothing to do with this conversion. You are conflating these issues. Uconn is in trouble for the future regardless of championships. When you play Tulane as an in conference foe, you're screwed. They are essentially a mid major now. another reach.

Kansas had a fifth ranked recruiting class after wining the title? LMAO? Yea, well whats that got to do with anything and whats wrong with that? Seems like a weird statement you just threw in to add something. Same with the UNC comment on Uk, what does this mean? UK was still UK, and the past success always helps in recutiing. Championships make this true, and again, just proves my point. You are literally proving points for me, lol.

All I'm saying it programs are built on national championships. These players are attracted to UK, Duke, UNC, Kansas, etc because of the prestige programs attract from those big wins. Coach Calipari with 3 titles is a totally different beast on the recruiting trail than he is right now with one. There's no doubt in that. Most of your responses were, no offense, off base. If you don't believe winning championships matters in these situations we just shouldn't debate it. I know from experience it matters. I don't need to question it.

EDIT: wanted to add, you are using lots of outliers. Calipari, Uconn etc. are not good examples. Nothing conventional about those situations. But ima be dun in dis convo bra. Just no point.

 

[.S&C.]

this is more for you then it is about getting more recruits.

I agree with what you're getting at, and it is true to an extent. But this works in others aspects as well. For example, coaches want to coach at Blue Bloods for the most part. Players are more concerned with who the coach is than anything. What builds a coaches rep and a schools rep? Championships.

Damn, championships. All about the ships.

 

[.S&C.]

As I mentioned earlier, you and SC make a good point about Cal needing to win another to take the next step legacy wise.

And of course titles can help, but as shown previously past titles are not the main reason for recruiting.

I completely agree with this so I have no idea where the other chit came in.

the ships.....

 

[brianpoe]

What do you mean you know from experience?

What have you done in the recruiting world? I spent years in a full time job in the business.


And my post was in reference to you chicken littles crying about this year's recruiting:

CUT-NETS said: ↑
Yep, Cats gotta start reeling in some titles.

We have far too many posters who don't think this matters. It's completely does.

Coach K's teams are looking great, and they're winning at the highest level. Add the media treatment and his coaching u19 and that's it.

we need to win a big one coming up.

As if our teams are not looking great and titles will push us over the top.

Just because Duke won the most recent one doesn't mean we won't be very good in recruiting.

We lost to Robert Morris in the NIT, the next day Randle committed.

Vargas Top 25, so what, you guys are complaining when we have the #1 recruit.

Your point was not that titles make a program. You were complaining about recruiting and we needed to win another "coming up" soon.

No shit titles make a program but we are already a program, just had a championship in 2012.

And if titles were that important to recruiting for BLUEBLOODS then why did we have 3 straight #1 classes before 2012??

Titles are great, but they are not as crucial as you and Cuts made them out to be. Especially when you already have as many as we do.

Don't back track now. I have given ample evidence of kids going to schools with no titles, and schools not recruiting terribly better after winning one.

Stop trying to change what was said, because that is all my remarks are relating to.


Most recent title is not on the top 5 reasons why a recruit chooses a school.

 

[BostonCat2001]

I agree with what you're getting at, and it is true to an extent. But this works in others aspects as well. For example, coaches want to coach at Blue Bloods for the most part. Players are more concerned with who the coach is than anything. What builds a coaches rep and a schools rep? Championships.

Damn, championships. All about the ships.

like the championships sean miller, rick barnes, josh pastner, jim boehiem and freakin cuonzo martin have? please.....

again i get it....uk didnt win a title last year so uk fans have lost whatever functioning part of the brain they had. but let me break it down to folks....

recruiting is 100% about relationships. and lets be real...i'm talking about the kids in the top 25-30. some kid ranked 87th....whatever. the state of kentucky sucks and does UK ZERO favors. all the real talent is from everywhere else not named UK where there are forces pulling kids anywhere but UK. but Cal wins (and he is winning) because....relationships. what used to work in Cal's advantage is now working against him....the too cool for school stuff. despite what gets reported, despite what recruits say, despite what people on this board think...very few kids actually get a real honest to god offer to come to UK. Cal has generally put all his eggs in a few baskets and doesnt come on strong until very very late. and even then....its not that strong. there is a reason why Cal is now getting offers out to 2017 players....other schools are now pushing harder on kids earlier and earlier to beat Cal to the punch. again its about relationships...why did jaylen brown go to Cal...because of shareef abdur-rahim. why was Murray going to Oregon? because of relationships....why did he end up at UK....because of better/bigger relationships. who does Cal have strong relationships with the 2016 class? any guesses?

people clamoring away about titles....just looking for an outlet for dealing with not winning a title last season.

 

[.S&C.]

nm

 

[.S&C.]

What do you mean you know from experience?

What have you done in the recruiting world? I spent years in a full time job in the business.


And my post was in reference to you chicken littles crying about this year's recruiting:

CUT-NETS said: ↑
Yep, Cats gotta start reeling in some titles.





As if our teams are not looking great and titles will push us over the top.

Just because Duke won the most recent one doesn't mean we won't be very good in recruiting.

We lost to Robert Morris in the NIT, the next day Randle committed.

Vargas Top 25, so what, you guys are complaining when we have the #1 recruit.

Your point was not that titles make a program. You were complaining about recruiting and we needed to win another "coming up" soon.

No shit titles make a program but we are already a program, just had a championship in 2012.

And if titles were that important to recruiting for BLUEBLOODS then why did we have 3 straight #1 classes before 2012??

Titles are great, but they are not as crucial as you and Cuts made them out to be. Especially when you already have as many as we do.

Don't back track now. I have given ample evidence of kids going to schools with no titles, and schools not recruiting terribly better after winning one.

Stop trying to change what was said, because that is all my remarks are relating to.


Most recent title is not on the top 5 reasons why a recruit chooses a school.

No offense, but I actually see kids go every single year to Division 1. It's mainly in baseball and football mind you, but I am right there to see it, hear it, and know what I'm talking about. You were some kind of AAU journalist? yea, sorry thats fluff. And I mean no disrespect but you can have some out of bounds comments.

 

[.S&C.]

like the championships sean miller, rick barnes, josh pastner, jim boehiem and freakin cuonzo martin have? please.....

again i get it....uk didnt win a title last year so uk fans have lost whatever functioning part of the brain they had. but let me break it down to folks....

recruiting is 100% about relationships. and lets be real...i'm talking about the kids in the top 25-30. some kid ranked 87th....whatever. the state of kentucky sucks and does UK ZERO favors. all the real talent is from everywhere else not named UK where there are forces pulling kids anywhere but UK. but Cal wins (and he is winning) because....relationships. what used to work in Cal's advantage is now working against him....the too cool for school stuff. despite what gets reported, despite what recruits say, despite what people on this board think...very few kids actually get a real honest to god offer to come to UK. Cal has generally put all his eggs in a few baskets and doesnt come on strong until very very late. and even then....its not that strong. there is a reason why Cal is now getting offers out to 2017 players....other schools are now pushing harder on kids earlier and earlier to beat Cal to the punch. again its about relationships...why did jaylen brown go to Cal...because of shareef abdur-rahim. why was Murray going to Oregon? because of relationships....why did he end up at UK....because of better/bigger relationships. who does Cal have strong relationships with the 2016 class? any guesses?

people clamoring away about titles....just looking for an outlet for dealing with not winning a title last season.

I agree with this actually. Brian has turned this into a "this way" that way" conversation and oversimplified the entire thing. There are fantastic coaches who can recruit well that don't have the ships. They are not the end all, but for Cal and what he's close to achieving, winning multiple championships will take to a higher altitude even if that doesnt seem possible.

So, thats really all I'm trying to say. People throwing up "they won a title and had the 8th recruiting class" is just silly and off base. It has absolutely no bearing on the conversation.

If you're someone who thinks championships are the only factor or even the biggest factor to all recruits, you're dead wrong. If you think championships don't elevate a coach and help him recruit, you're dead wrong.

That's where I'm at.

 

[BostonCat2001]

I agree with this actually. Brian has turned this into a "this way" that way" conversation and oversimplified the entire thing. There are fantastic coaches who can recruit well that don't have the ships. They are not the end all, but for Cal and what he's close to achieving, winning multiple championships will take to a higher altitude even if that doesnt seem possible.

So, thats really all I'm trying to say. People throwing up "they won a title and had the 8th recruiting class" is just silly and off base. It has absolutely no bearing on the conversation.

If you're someone who thinks championships are the only factor or even the biggest factor to all recruits, you're dead wrong. If you think championships don't elevate a coach and help him recruit, you're dead wrong.

That's where I'm at.

but a title wont elevate all coaches...like cal for instance. and if it does...its just marginal at best.

 

[.S&C.]

but a title wont elevate all coaches...like cal for instance. and if it does...its just marginal at best.

I think a championship will elevate most coaches if they are worth their salt. But to each their own I guess.

 

[.S&C.]

but a title wont elevate all coaches...like cal for instance. and if it does...its just marginal at best.

One last question. Take Cal vs. K for example.(which is what I was getting at anyway).....

Say they are both recruiting Giles. Say Cal won the title last year, 2010, and 2012. K hasn't won it all since 2010, and before that 2001. You don't think that would make a difference to Giles in his recruitment? Come on now.......We both know that scene is totally different.

And he could still end up at Duke, I agree. But still....

 

[BostonCat2001]

One last question. Take Cal vs. K for example.(which is what I was getting at anyway).....

Say they are both recruiting Giles. Say Cal won the title last year, 2010, and 2012. K hasn't won it all since 2010, and before that 2001. You don't think that would make a difference to Giles in his recruitment? Come on now.......We both know that scene is totally different.

And he could still end up at Duke, I agree. But still....

i dont know how you can know one way or the other. every kid is different. towns and randle wanted to play for Cal because its Cal and they had a great relationship for years! nothing to do with titles. what relationship does Giles have with coach k? answer that with authority then get back to me.

people thinking 1 more title is all of a sudden going to trump 3-4-5 years worth relationship building are believing what they want to believe.

 

[brianpoe]

No offense, but I actually see kids go every single year to Division 1. It's mainly in baseball and football mind you, but I am right there to see it, hear it, and know what I'm talking about. You were some kind of AAU journalist? yea, sorry thats fluff. And I mean no disrespect but you can have some out of bounds comments.

AAU journalist... that's cute.

 

[tommyg4uk]

UK could go 40-0 this year...Giles still will not be at UK.

 

[bucsrule8872]

It's just not that easy to win a title.

It takes a lot of luck.

K had two titles in the early 90's by the same team. It took him nearly a decade (from 92 to 01) to get his third. Then nearly another one (01 to 10) to get his fourth.

Williams had the luxury of playing guys he didn't have to send to class and he only has two.

Pitino went nearly two decades between titles (96 to 13).

They don't just give titles away.

Getting one is quite an accomplishment.

Cal has already accomplished more in six seasons than any other coach at UK besides Rupp.

Four Final Fours and a title beats everyone else since the Baron.

Yet we still gripe.

If Cal gets another title before he leaves, some will still say "well, he didn't catch UCLA."

Heck, the only way he leaves here with everyone happy is if he gets us number 12 and we pass the Bruins for most titles.

Scratch that, someone will still gripe that he didn't get an undefeated season or some other nonsense.

 

[CUT-NETS]

It's just not that easy to win a title.

It takes a lot of luck.

K had two titles in the early 90's by the same team. It took him nearly a decade (from 92 to 01) to get his third. Then nearly another one (01 to 10) to get his fourth.

Williams had the luxury of playing guys he didn't have to send to class and he only has two.

Pitino went nearly two decades between titles (96 to 13).

They don't just give titles away.

Getting one is quite an accomplishment.

Cal has already accomplished more in six seasons than any other coach at UK besides Rupp.

Four Final Fours and a title beats everyone else since the Baron.

Yet we still gripe.

If Cal gets another title before he leaves, some will still say "well, he didn't catch UCLA."

Heck, the only way he leaves here with everyone happy is if he gets us number 12 and we pass the Bruins for most titles.

Scratch that, someone will still gripe that he didn't get an undefeated season or some other nonsense.

In that long stretch between Coach K's first two titles and the next, did he have the best players every year? Did he have the number one recruiting class every year?

In the nearly two decades between titles for Pitino, did he have the best players in the country every year? Did he have top 3 recruiting classes every year in between?

The point Im making is everyone realizes that championships are damn hard to win. SVP used to always say "I dare say there is anything harder than winning 6 games in march and april". And he is right. The problem with your example of Coach K and Pitino and the time in between their titles is that they didn't have the best players every year. Coach Cal has had top 3 recruiting classes and the best players virtually every year. So what should the expectation be?

IF those coach's you named had the best players every year do you think people would say "geez why didn't Pitino win anymore titles? He had the best players." I do. But because people know what he had to work with they don't question it.

Coach Cal needs another title because great players are piling up. #1 recruiting classes are piling up. Lottery picks are piling up. Number one over all picks are piling up. The only thing that isn't piling up is titles. And eventually you have to say, "The guy has gotten to a lot of final fours with that talent, but he hasn't brought home the titles". What is the expectation when every year you have the best players?

 

[brianpoe]

In that long stretch between Coach K's first two titles and the next, did he have the best players every year? Did he have the number one recruiting class every year?

In the nearly two decades between titles for Pitino, did he have the best players in the country every year? Did he have top 3 recruiting classes every year in between?

The point Im making is everyone realizes that championships are damn hard to win. SVP used to always say "I dare say there is anything harder than winning 6 games in march and april". And he is right. The problem with your example of Coach K and Pitino and the time in between their titles is that they didn't have the best players every year. Coach Cal has had top 3 recruiting classes and the best players virtually every year. So what should the expectation be?

IF those coach's you named had the best players every year do you think people would say "geez why didn't Pitino win anymore titles? He had the best players." I do. But because people know what he had to work with they don't question it.

Coach Cal needs another title because great players are piling up. #1 recruiting classes are piling up. Lottery picks are piling up. Number one over all picks are piling up. The only thing that isn't piling up is titles. And eventually you have to say, "The guy has gotten to a lot of final fours with that talent, but he hasn't brought home the titles". What is the expectation when every year you have the best players?

Again Cut, having the best rated 18 year old pro prospects does not necessarily make the best college team.

And I won't disagree, Cal goes another 1 for 6 and his legacy will be looked at differently.

 

[CUT-NETS]

Again Cut, having the best rated 18 year old pro prospects does not necessarily make the best college team.

And I won't disagree, Cal goes another 1 for 6 and his legacy will be looked at differently.

Fair enough, and this is a respectful rebuttal and I appreciate that.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

You are a complete moron if you think winning titles doesn't mean anything when it comes to recruiting...

Probably not a good idea to be calling people morons on this board. Act like a guest or GTFO.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

UK could go 40-0 this year...Giles still will not be at UK.

What is with the people who just love to post this stuff? Do you have a fetish for it? Do you know how many people said Murray was going to Oregon? That doesn't mean Giles will come to UK, but people need to stop with these posts that act like they have some inside scoop. Most everyone who makes such posts don't know jack squat, so why act like you do? Qualify it with IMO and I got no problem with it. But enough with the "Player X ain't coming" crap. Such posts are worthless and pointless.