Tim Floyd vs. Andy Enfield

This story makes Floyd look like a whiny pantload.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10051914/tim-floyd-says-andy-enfield-altercation

 

Floyd is a whiny pantload. He has been since he was at Iowa State.

 

Maybe so, but Enfield's taken some pretty harsh and unnecessary personal potshots at Floyd.

 

True, and if USC really did tamper with a recruit UTEP already had signed than Floyd already had a reason to be pissed.

That said, I think this is cool. I was thinking back to the 80s and early 90s when more coaches were characters and personalities. College basketball was more fun and more popular back then. It seems to be tip-toeing in the direction again.

 

To me, it comes off as Tim Floyd still bitter over getting fired at USC and then not rehired by Haden (like he had a realistic shot).

 

How does USC benefit if the player ends up at UCLA.

The biggest problem with El Paso is that is just so far from other cities - the nearest MLB team is 400 miles away. El Paso is a very livable city and, despite being next to Juarez, a pretty safe city for anyplace with over a half-million people. The UTEP basketball team is the main athletic draw there, and there will be a Triple-A team in a new stadium in the city. The area around UTEP is a lot better than the area around USC, and the UTEP basketball program means a lot more than USC basketball.

 

As much as I want to side with Andy Enfield and go against Tim Floyd, I still have a hard time respecting Enfield to say much of anything.

He's been a head coach for all of two years, took the "Stan Heath Expressway" to a big-time job at USC after beating a couple of sleepwalking teams in the NCAA tournament. He's never built a programs with his name out front. Always an assistant until Florida Gulf Coast.

At least Floyd built programs at Idaho, New Orleans and got Iowa State to a decent place before his NBA debacle. That I do respect.

If Enfield can win a few games in a conference where people care a little, then he should chirp.

(It's still interesting, I admit)

 

Enfield didn't know he'd resurface at UCLA when the alleged tampering happened.

My understanding of the Hamilton recruiting saga goes something like this: Originally signed a LOI to play for Floyd at UTEP. Enfield and staff then allegedly tampered by encouraging the kid to ditch Floyd and switch to USC. Kid notifies Floyd he wants to decommit. Floyd, angered by the alleged tampering, refuses to release him from his LOI. Meanwhile, as the bickering goes on between UTEP and USC, the kid ditches both schools and ends up at UCLA, where I believe he's sitting out this season because he never got the release.

If Enfied is guilty of tampering with Hamilton, it certainly backfired on him, as he's now at USC's crosstown rival instead of out in El Paso where he can't hurt him.

 

As long as the kid is playing for Steve Alford, he still can't hurt him.

 

In the case in question, the kid was not merely "committed" -- which as we all know is a load of crap -- but had actually SIGNED a letter of intent with UTEP. That is an enormous difference.

 

College basketball is a little like The Wire or the wild west. These murders, hustlers and thieves generally have a moral code, it just doesn't necessarily conform to the law, in this case the NCAA rulebook. Scott Drew is despised by other coaches and looked at as a cheater even though the stuff that pisses them off isn't necessarily "illegal." I bet most coaches would rather lose a recruit because the other program offered (more) cash than have one poached after signing.

It seems like Enfield has done a few things that aren't acceptable in the world of college basketball coaches. Maybe it's partially because he didn't spend the years as an assistant learning the way that world works.