UVA hires Tony Bennett

Well done, LB ... except for that unnecessary cheap shot. "ESPNCC"? Get over it.

 

Lester, I've read three of your posts on this thread, and they were all spot on. UVa fans -- hell, make that most fans -- won't be satisfied unless their school hires a combination of Red Auerbach and John Wooden. Then they would whine about him being too old.

Bennett is an up-and-comer, young enough to be there a long time. And face it, none of those "name" coaches was coming. Rick Barnes is king of the Big 12 -- no way he gives that up to battle Duke and Carolina. Tubby Smith has now turned down Virginia twice. Capel won't leave OU until K retires. And VCU's Anthony Grant is an SEÇ guy.

Bennett has the makings of being a bold stroke.

 

Barnes: King of the Big XII? Last time I checked, Bill Self just won the title and had the kind of season, given the big personnel losses, that shows that the league isn't Barnes' little personal playground.

Rick Barnes left Clemson because he couldn't take down Duke or Chapel Hill. Might be able to add Wake Forest to that list.

 

All that may be true, but I still can't see leaving Texas for Virginia.

 

Why would he? He keeps doing what he does at Austin, he'll continue to get raises and be just fine. They're worried about what Mack Brown is doing around there, not what Rick Barnes is scheming.

Charlottesville isn't delusional, but there's more pressure there. And, given my choice between Barnes and Tony Bennett, Craig Littlepage picked the right man.

 

Yes, you can way playing this brand of basketball.

It is not fun to watch, it is not fun to play -- and the criticism that players don't want to play that way is valid when you consider the struggle teams that play this way have to land the top talent in the land.

But you are right beggers can't be choosers and my guess is that Virginia fans there will gladly take a long run of consistent 23-28 win seasons, a few big wins a year, go a few rounds in the ACC Tournament but rarely win it and get to the NCAA Tourney but almost never get past the Sweet 16..........

 

Well, I'm sure he realizes what he is getting into. Would you rather play second fiddle to Duke and UNC or to UCLA and Arizona? Obviously, it'll be harder to consistently win 20 games per year in the ACC.

I suspect the money is better is Virginia.

 

That's several steps up from where the Hoos are right now.

 

Oh c'mon ... my alma mater just lost its Golden Boy and I gotta be nice? My beef is more with ESPN than the ACC and even more with the Pac-10's shitty TV deal, which makes sure the conference's biggest stars toil in anonymity. I just kind of shake my head when ESPN has to cover the whole nation come Selection Sunday and calls one of the best big men in America Jon "Brockton."

That said, none of it is the ACC's fault.

 

Dude, I'm in Virginia and I get several Pac-10 games a week on Comcast SportsNet. Granted, they're at midnight, but that's a function of location. I have no idea what it's like on the West Coast - and the Pac-10 certainly doesn't get as much national run as, say, the Big East - but the fact that I can see Arizona every week on the East Coast says something.

 

The Pac-10's national exposure should be much, much, much better. Their games are hard to find if you don't know where to look, and that league deserves better in football and basketball.

 

How many N.C. State-Maryland games are shown in California? Most weeks, if I feel like it, I can watch a hoops game along the lines of USC-Oregon right here on my couch in Virginia. I know that a lot of that has to do with the time difference - it makes a lot more sense to show that game at 11 on the East Coast than it does to show Pack-Terps at 4 in California. But the fact remains that it's a West Coast league getting its games shown across the country. Nothing to scoff at.

Any league's games are hard to find if you don't look for them as long as you live outside their geographic area. The one exception is the Big East, a league basically built to get as many games on TV as possible. Maybe the Pac-10 does have a shitty TV deal out west, which I believe is what Lester was arguing to begin with. But nationally, they've got it better than most.