Bear Down Wildcats

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

Lmao Spaceman.....Damn, got enough on my plate without having to seriously consider this too! Lol...My Aggie Bro keeps teasing me about my love-fest for CSM and every Xmas promises to bring me his 'gizz' for a Xmas present (he visits every year) so I can have his DNA.....I keep asking him to 'put up or shut up!', ha ha

Chicat wrote:

NYCat wrote:Doesn't really happen that often does it (high major coach taking asst. coach job), maybe when Jeff Capel went back to Duke. I'd rather Book leave and Romar take the position not Pasternak

I would too, but far more opportunities out there for Joe.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

Lmao Spaceman.....Damn, got enough on my plate without having to seriously consider this too! Lol...My Aggie Bro keeps teasing me about my love-fest for CSM and every Xmas promises to bring me his 'gizz' for a Xmas present (he visits every year) so I can have his DNA.....I keep asking him to 'put up or shut up!', ha ha

I actually just posed the indecent proposal to my wife. Her answer was "I'm not doing that, but if he's into you, I can live with that."

So, you're telling me there's a chance...

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

Merkin wrote:

Chicat wrote:

NYCat wrote:Doesn't really happen that often does it (high major coach taking asst. coach job), maybe when Jeff Capel went back to Duke. I'd rather Book leave and Romar take the position not Pasternak

I would too, but far more opportunities out there for Joe.

I honestly cannot believe he is still here. Well respected, well liked, good XO guy, brought in some nice recruits. Had a couple of good seasons as HC at UNO.

rgdeuce wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

I certainly would let Miller bang my wife for that if she was ok with it. If it had to be me, my contract would have to be for Sean Miller money each season for me to even begin to contemplate it.

rgdeuce wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

MrMeow wrote:
I have followed UA sports closely, including basketball, long before Lute arrived. I never bashed him. Not ever. Like us all, he isn't perfect, but he's a HOF coach, UA is a national basketball power with a packed stadium every game, and Sean Miller is our present coach primarily due to what Lute achieved. Lute is the gold standard of UA basketball. This is not to detract from Sean Miller. He is obviously an excellent coach with a bright future, but it takes longer that eight years and a couple of "Elite eights" to reach gold standard status.

The other thing to consider is both Lute and Miller have played on level fields. What happened in Lute's day applied to all schools and coaches. The same applies to Miller today. One and done's are everywhere today. Could Lute thrive in today's environment? He was an excellent recruiter, but who knows. Total conjecture.

Couple things, for clarity purposes: My post wasn't directed at you specifically, was speaking generally. I'd give a kidney to Lute or CSM without any hesitation and fully realize Arizona basketball is nothing today without Lute. I do, however, look back at Lute's career and realize it wasn't perfect and the man wasn't perfect, and that's fine. There is no perfect coach, but both Lute and Miller are perfect for Arizona.

I think you're only partially correct with the assertion that what applies to Miller today applies to everyone else. Yes, most competitive programs can have issues with the one and done/guys leaving early. However, it only largely affects a handful of schools, us, the Kentuckys, Dukes, UNCs, Kansas, etc. For everyone of us, there are plenty of other elite/historic programs who generally keep most of their guys four years, like Wisconsin, Oregon, Michigan State, Louisville, etc. So it does put Miller at a disadvantage, and the Wisconsin situation is the perfect example:

First year, Wisky beats us with Juniors Kaminsky and Dekker, and a bunch of other upperclassmen, plus a great frosh Nigel Hayes. It's a Lute era type of situation. We had Sophomores Zeus, Ashley (hurt), and York, JRs Nick Johnson and TJ, and Freshmen Aaron Gordon and Rondae. Remember, that team lost Grant Jerrett early to the draft, but who knows, maybe he transfers in the Lute era, rather than declare. So they beat us at the wire. Next year, we get them again and they bring back everyone pretty much, with Seniors Kaminsky and Dekker, again, Lute era type of situation. We lost our best player, 1st team All American Nick Johnson, and Aaron Gordon. Now think of the situation had Miller been in a Lute era situation.

C - Zeus JR
PF- Ashley JR (healthy)
SF- Aaron Gordon SO (All American level likely, best defender in nation)
SG- Nick Johnson SR (1st Team All American)
PG- TJ McConnell SR (All American level)
bench (and we can even assume that Grant Jerrett merely transferred)
SG/SF- Stanley Johnson FR (all pac 12 1st team)
SF/PF- Rondae SO (one of best defenders in nation, all pac 12 1st team)
SG - York JR
C- Dusan FR
PG - PJC

There is no way in hell that team loses to Wisconsin. They get their revenge. People say nobody could have stopped Dekker on that night, but he wouldn't have done what he did against Aaron Gordon. We now have two of the top defending forwards in the league to throw on Dekker and Kaminsky. Matter fact, that team above could have been the greatest defensive NCAA team of all time. I'll take that team over the 88 final four team. So no, the playing field isn't level. Now, would that team smear Kentucky in the semifinal? Probably not, cuz they could have used the same argument we have here. But at least we would have gotten there. I have no doubts a healthy Lute Olson would win well in today's game. All I am saying is, we cant penalize Miller for not doing what Lute did because the circumstances and eras are not the same. There is WAY more parity in today's game and despite that, CSM only has one early exit from the tourney and it was in a dumpster fire of a season due to a max exodus and to a Wichita State team that was way underseeded. To me, the ideal goal is to put a top 25 team on the floor every year, and as many of those years as possible, have a national contender (ie top 5 or 10) team with aim at a title/final four. Lute accomplished this by losing a key piece or two (Chris Mills), and having two key pieces returning (Reeves, Stoudamire) and bringing in a future key piece (Simon). That was how Lute reloaded. Miller has to do it in a much more difficult fashion. His Mills, Reeves, Stoudamires all leave early, so he has to reload with multiple new Mills, Reeves, and Stoudamires each season on the recruiting trail. It's tough to do.

Speaking of giving a kidney, I've always thought the Arizona fan version of the movie Indecent Proposal was if Sean Miller wanted one night with your wife (or you) in exchange for agreeing to sign a contract to coach the Wildcats until retirement with no outs. Do you do it? Does it matter if he prefers you or your wife/SO?

I certainly would let Miller bang my wife for that if she was ok with it. If it had to be me, my contract would have to be for Sean Miller money each season for me to even begin to contemplate it.

NYCat wrote:Naismith Coach of the Year finalists:

Chris Collins
Mark Few
Bill Self
Jay Wright

NYCat wrote:Naismith Coach of the Year finalists:

Chris Collins
Mark Few
Bill Self
Jay Wright

97cats wrote:

NYCat wrote:Naismith Coach of the Year finalists:

Chris Collins
Mark Few
Bill Self
Jay Wright

fan the flames

azcat49 wrote:

97cats wrote:

NYCat wrote:Naismith Coach of the Year finalists:

Chris Collins
Mark Few
Bill Self
Jay Wright

fan the flames

WTF? Self is that a joke. I guess balancing kids in and out of trouble is a sign of great coaching.

NYCat wrote:Naismith Coach of the Year finalists:

Chris Collins
Mark Few
Bill Self
Jay Wright

BMalo wrote:
RG- Mine wouldn't go for it due to his sweating. She comments on it every time and I asked if she could imagine what it must be like in bed. I could probably talk her into it tho.

rgdeuce wrote:

BMalo wrote:
RG- Mine wouldn't go for it due to his sweating. She comments on it every time and I asked if she could imagine what it must be like in bed. I could probably talk her into it tho.

Thinking of the name you were allowed to name your son, I am guessing it wouldn't be too hard to convince her

NYCat wrote:

Catintheheat wrote:

NYCat wrote:

I think Romar has been head coach at UW for a lot longer.

Catintheheat wrote:

NYCat wrote:

I think Romar has been head coach at UW for a lot longer.

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

CatFanOneMil wrote:

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

This is PURE SPECULATION...I think the reason Sean would say no to Archie taking that job (if he did) was because it is a program where whoever comes in would be vulnerable...it's not like Crean was a terrible coach...I think the AD and administration there is not conducive to the BB program...chances are Alford is gonna get that job and Archie making any effort towards it would be bad faith to where he is at right now.

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

CatFanOneMil wrote:

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

This is PURE SPECULATION...I think the reason Sean would say no to Archie taking that job (if he did) was because it is a program where whoever comes in would be vulnerable...it's not like Crean was a terrible coach...I think the AD and administration there is not conducive to the BB program...chances are Alford is gonna get that job and Archie making any effort towards it would be bad faith to where he is at right now.

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

Flatly, I don't know why Archie would be interested in NCSU regardless of Sean. NCSU is the third best program in a 10 mile radius and arguably the 5th best within a relatively short drive.

Archie can do better. I would think he is a legit candidate at Indiana.

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:Hmmmm..... green grass....

A NC State beat writer is privy to personal conversations between Sean and Arch? Yeah I'm a bit skeptical...

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

RichardCranium wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

So if Sean moves to UNC, would Archie be in line for Arizona?

UAEebs86 wrote:

RichardCranium wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

So if Sean moves to UNC, would Archie be in line for Arizona?

I thought his wife hated Tucson.

mofo wrote:When was the last time the AZ men's BB coach left for another program?

Seriously. It was no more recent than 1972, and I say that because I can't find any info before that so it could've been 70 years ago, or never. I'm sure I'm going to hear from the "well that means we're do" crowd, but c'mon guys. Can't we just enjoy ourselves? I know this is a message board and all and that's what we do, but worrying about this kind of stuff a) isn't going to change anything, and b) we're going to get a hell of a replacement if it happens as we're in a much better spot than we were when CSM took over. It's like some of us have this inferiority complex and I'm not sure why.

CalStateTempe wrote:The thinking is is Archie takes ncstate Sean won't take unc, except if what if Archie doesn't take ncstate? That is what the tweet is alluding to.

Trust me, I don't know much, but this is more than conjecture. When I was at UNC, I had some contacts high up in the ad who I discussed exactly this issue with.

Chicat wrote:

I don't hate Welsh. I just feel bad for him. You know he doesn't even get Lorenzo Matta level pussy.

Gato Salvaje wrote:

Chicat wrote:

I don't hate Welsh. I just feel bad for him. You know he doesn't even get Lorenzo Matta level pussy.

Totally botched this one liner last night chi. The only thing that saved me is that I hang out with idiots.

Having a few beers with a group of buddies watching the UCLA game last night and inevitably someone says they feel sorry for Lonzo Ball because his dad probably has his head all messed up.

I chime in by saying " I have a friend that says we should all really feel bad for Welsh be cause he doesnt even get Lorenzo Matta level pussy".

Or at least I thought I did. What I actually said was that Welsh doesnt even get THAD Matta Level pussy.

Only one guy got it. Or so I thought. Then I realized what I did and corrected it. The guy that laughed the first time was like "I like it with THAD MAtta better".

Why? That doesnt even make sense!

Yeah, he replied "but Thad MAtta looks like Someone boiled Larry Bird."