Does the national media understand why KY fans are tired of Tubby?

Tubby Smith is the most overrated coach in the country.

 

It was Emery.

 

Tubby Smith's cursed because he won a national championship his first year at UK. He won with a team that he didn't recruit and that anyone could have coached to a title. I've always thought that.

But, just because Kentucky hasn't made a Final Four since 1998, that isn't grounds for dismissal. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they have made the Elite 8 a couple times since then. They have made the tournament every year (though, to be fair, UK doesn't need much to ever be considered for an at large berth), and he's owned Pitino the last few years. For that, UK fans should be estatic.

College Journalist: If Tubby is not the right coach for Kentucky, then who do you think is? There's no way in hell Billy Donovan would leave Florida for Kentucky, especially if he wins another title this year. In fact if Tubby's run out, I doubt a Pitino/Tubby disciple would even touch that job. And the fact that you think Pelphrey and Ford are ready indicates to me that you're either a) a blindly loyal fanboy or b) admitting that UK is no longer the prestigious job it once was.

I've seen Travis Ford's UMass team several times this season. They beat a Louisville team that was injured, down and lost. The Minutemen's big men -- considered their strength -- couldn't handle Kentucky. They're a decent team, but an NIT team (unless they win the conference tourney). Ford's only been at UMass for a couple years, I'm convinced he'll succeed up there because he appears to be a Pitino clone, but he needs a few years up there before he'd be ready for anything like UK.

Maybe it's time for Tubby Smith to go, but as buckdub and others have said, be wary of who you may get to replace him. If that's the case, UK basketball could become just as relevant as UK football in the SEC.

 

CJ, for a newbie, you do make a lot of points in your case, but you did overlook one I already wrote:

As I said on page 2, if Tubby isn't willing to change his approach, then that's on him. My assertion is that whoever is in charge of scouting should do a better job or he should get a new person in there.

We're curious to know about the kids highlighted in your post. Where did they go and what have they done so far? Oz is right, the fans and even the coach are not owed a damn thing and not a national title every five years because of who they are. If Big Blue runs him, Mitch Barnhart better have an A++ list of candidates, because Billy isn't leaving a dynasty and Pitino isn't budging out of Churchill Downs.

 

You talk shit about Woo, you go through me.

 

Mizzou, I know you're smarter than that last statement.
The line to get the Kentucky job will cross three states.

As for Hack's "anyone could have coached '98 Kentucky to a title" comment, that's just flat ridiculous. Allen Edwards, Wayne Turner and Jeff Sheppard started on the perimeter. Good players, but hardly legendary. That same year, Carolina lined up Vince Carter and Antawn Jamison, started Shammond Williams at shooting guard -- and brought Brendan Haywood off the bench -- and didn't get out of the semis. And the "anyone" coaching them was Dean Smith.

 

But the line of qualified seekers of the Kentucky job will cross about three inches.

If they're going to run Tubby, they better already know who they're going to get in his place. And as has been said, Donovan ain't budging. Pitino ain't budging.

Nobody of that ilk is going to be available for that job. And then UK will have to resort to bringing in a Matt Doherty-at-UNC type. (And we all know how well that worked out ...)

 

It'd take me about 13 seconds to come up with four people who could do the Kentucky job better than Tubby's been doing it lately.

 

But just because they could do a better job doesn't mean that they want the job.

 

Twoback,

There are good teams with great players (such as the UNC team you mentioned) and good players on great teams. The '98 Kentucky team is as good an example as you'll find from a major conference Division I team. Of course, they also had talent -- Scott Padgett, Jamaal Magliore and Nazr Muhammad did go on to play in the NBA for a while.

The 97-98 team had three seniors and four juniors who had been to the previous two NCAA championship games. They were leaders on their own and knew how to come up big when they needed to. So, yes, anyone could have coached that team to a title. Pitino, Smith, myself or even you.

 

It was a very good team that could just as easily have been knocked out in the Elite Eight (needed a miracle comeback v. Duke to reach the Final Four) or semifinals (needed OT to beat Stanford).
By your standard, anyone could have coached 2001 Duke to the title or 1982 Carolina. But it's faulty logic. The coaches in charge brought specific qualities to those teams that resulted in championships.
And that Carolina team that you conveniently label "good" to suit your argument was 30-3 in the regular season.

 

So Ralph Willard could have gotten the job done? Norm Stewart? Ricardo Patton? Danny Nee? Tom Asbury?