under that rule you'd have to expel many players and coaches. It's total body of work, contribution to the sport etc... that defines worth being inducted and L has done a lot without the fanfare of a K, Izzo, Calipari and more. He showed the sport you can make it to the final four without a single highly rated player and has a win count that by itself is 'worthy' What he did at GM literally changed the game and opened the door for mid-majors to share the spotlight.Controversial opinion: He should be in the Hall of Very Good. HOF members should have at least one championship on their resume.
All you did was re-rationalize the conventional wisdom that I disagree with in the first place.under that rule you'd have to expel many players and coaches. It's total body of work, contribution to the sport etc... that defines worth being inducted and L has done a lot without the fanfare of a K, Izzo, Calipari and more. He showed the sport you can make it to the final four without a single highly rated player and has a win count that by itself is 'worthy' What he did at GM literally changed the game and opened the door for mid-majors to share the spotlight.
Let it never be written that a HOF coach is good enough for the University of Miami.It seems like only yesterday some of this board was ready to kick him to the curb.
He is destined for and deserving of the hall.
Guy Lewis was **** good for DECADES,.never won a title. Winning an NCAA Basketball Championship is extremely difficult,and honestly is more luck than anything, considering the format. Keep in mind that Jimmy V and Jim Herrick have as many titles as John Thompson, Jerry Tarkanian and John Calipari. John Chaney doesn't have a title at the D1 level, dude is a legendary coach.Controversial opinion: He should be in the Hall of Very Good. HOF members should have at least one championship on their resume.
Correct. If you were a HOF worthy coach, you'd have beaten Wooden.Guy Lewis was **** good for DECADES,.never won a title. Winning an NCAA Basketball Championship is extremely difficult,and honestly is more luck than anything, considering the format. Keep in mind that Jimmy V and Jim Herrick have as many titles as John Thompson, Jerry Tarkanian and John Calipari. John Chaney doesn't have a title at the D1 level, dude is a legendary coach.
With all due respect, your opinion is trash on this one. So, if you were a great coach when Wooden was winning everything, your career doesn't mean anything? Make that make sense.
You forget that in that era, it was even more difficult to win a title due to there not being multiple bids from a conference. Dean Smith had multiple teams that could have won a title, but didn't even get in because of not getting through the ACCT.Correct. If you were a HOF worthy coach, you'd have beaten Wooden.
It really seems to bother you that I have a different opinion. Mark Few isn't in the HOF despite having a much higher winning percentage, many more NCAA tourney appearances and wins. All that despite having less resources than a Power 5 school. Larranaga has won the ACC conference title once since he's been here. He also just had three losing seasons in a row. It's not like he's pioneered some coaching style or contributed to the game in any unique way either. He's essentially a compiler- a very good coach that's just good enough for a school that is willing to settle for good to very good.You forget that in that era, it was even more difficult to win a title due to there not being multiple bids from a conference. Dean Smith had multiple teams that could have won a title, but didn't even get in because of not getting through the ACCT.
The fact you are doubling down on this highly flawed reasoning is a bit odd. So, from 1955-1975, there's 1-3 HOF coaches? Brilliant. Which titles count? Does Big House Gaines count? John McLendon forever changed how the game was played, only had NAIA titles. Does that count?
It really seems to bother you that I have a different opinion. Mark Few isn't in the HOF despite having a much higher winning percentage, many more NCAA tourney appearances and wins. All that despite having less resources than a Power 5 school. Larranaga has won the ACC conference title once since he's been here. He also just had three losing seasons in a row. It's not like he's pioneered some coaching style or contributed to the game in any unique way either. He's essentially a compiler- a very good coach that's just good enough for a school that is willing to settle for good to very good.
It really seems to bother you that I have a different opinion. Mark Few isn't in the HOF despite having a much higher winning percentage, many more NCAA tourney appearances and wins. All that despite having less resources than a Power 5 school. Larranaga has won the ACC conference title once since he's been here. He also just had three losing seasons in a row. It's not like he's pioneered some coaching style or contributed to the game in any unique way either. He's essentially a compiler- a very good coach that's just good enough for a school that is willing to settle for good to very good.