Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Watch this and you will understand

24567

Comments

  • AtomicDawg
    AtomicDawg Member Posts: 7,368
    Consistent winners in big time basketball are dirty. Real dirty. uw boosters only seem to care about football. It's easy to be good at basketball as you really only need a few at one time to dominate. If our fan base cared more we would be good. They don't so we aren't that good. With a better coach we could be a little better but the top recruits 9/10 times are going to zona and ucla or out of conference.

  • RoadDawg55
    RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,524 Swaye's Wigwam

    Consistent winners in big time basketball are dirty. Real dirty. uw boosters only seem to care about football. It's easy to be good at basketball as you really only need a few at one time to dominate. If our fan base cared more we would be good. They don't so we aren't that good. With a better coach we could be a little better but the top recruits 9/10 times are going to zona and ucla or out of conference.

    I mostly agree, but it's not impossible to be good without reeling in the top recruits. Wisconsin finally broke through this year to reach the Final 4, but they have been one of the best teams in the Big 10 for awhile. It's early, but Tony Bennett at Virginia looks like he is building a program the same way. We could go that route or we could hire a Billy Donovan type that is an unproven coach who will be a relentless recruiter that's not afraid to bend the rules. Romar is neither a great coach with a good system or a great recruiter. His system only works with great athletes and guards like B-Roy, Nate, and Isaiah.

    To expect us to be Duke or Kansas is stupid, but there is no reason we can't be Wisconsin. A perennial tournament team that reaches and Elite 8 or Final 4 every 5 years.

  • doogsinparadise
    doogsinparadise Member Posts: 9,320
    dnc said:

    Im talking long term ucla, arizona, unc, kansas type of success, not Butler or Creighton

    Arizona was nothing before they hired Lute Olson. UCLA was nothing before they hired John Wooden. UConn was nothing before they hired Calhoun.

    Etc.
    So? Washington was nothing before they hired Dobie, it's been a few years. I agree with Atomic, there just isn't a commitment to the basketball program from the Athletic Department and boosters like there is with the football program. Until that happens, does it really matter who the coach is?
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,902
    Pressing.

    UW can be anything it sets its mind out to be. And no, I didn't watch your stupid video. Ain't nobody got time for dat
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,902

    You can win with the right coach. Butler made back to back NCAA finals. Not like they were ever a power previously.

    Can UW be a power? Define power.

    If George Mason, Butler, VCU and Witchita State can make a final four then UW certainly is capable.

    This may be unpopular, but it's not in the interests of the corporate side of collegiate sports for schools like Washington to be good; simply not strong enough as a national brand. You can hire a good coach and be in the sweet sixteen for a few years, but to sustain long term success is another animal.
    I'm not letting you on the bandwagon when peterman wins multiple rose bowls
  • AtomicDawg
    AtomicDawg Member Posts: 7,368
    edited April 2014

    Consistent winners in big time basketball are dirty. Real dirty. uw boosters only seem to care about football. It's easy to be good at basketball as you really only need a few at one time to dominate. If our fan base cared more we would be good. They don't so we aren't that good. With a better coach we could be a little better but the top recruits 9/10 times are going to zona and ucla or out of conference.

    I mostly agree, but it's not impossible to be good without reeling in the top recruits. Wisconsin finally broke through this year to reach the Final 4, but they have been one of the best teams in the Big 10 for awhile. It's early, but Tony Bennett at Virginia looks like he is building a program the same way. We could go that route or we could hire a Billy Donovan type that is an unproven coach who will be a relentless recruiter that's not afraid to bend the rules. Romar is neither a great coach with a good system or a great recruiter. His system only works with great athletes and guards like B-Roy, Nate, and Isaiah.

    To expect us to be Duke or Kansas is stupid, but there is no reason we can't be Wisconsin. A perennial tournament team that reaches and Elite 8 or Final 4 every 5 years.

    Good point. I can't argue with that. Wisconsin's style of play makes me want to gouge my eyes out most of the time though they were watchable this year.

    Have to hit a home run with a coach like that and then hope they don't use you as a stepping stone. We are never going to pay a coach like the elite teams for basketball. I feel like the chances of that happening are pretty slim but if that is the route you want to go you have to be willing to fire the wrong guy often until you find mr right.

    I actually think romar is a decent recruiter but these kids aren't dip shits and can see our shitty half court offense as easy as anyone else and it seems we don't really pay our players or their aau coaches. Nor do we even have a basketball only practice facility which isn't everything but rather just shows how much we don't give a shit.
  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,778
    Just wait until Terrence Jones gets here and plays with Gaddy!!!1 Final four or BUST!!
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781

    You can win with the right coach. Butler made back to back NCAA finals. Not like they were ever a power previously.

    Can UW be a power? Define power.

    If George Mason, Butler, VCU and Witchita State can make a final four then UW certainly is capable.

    This may be unpopular, but it's not in the interests of the corporate side of collegiate sports for schools like Washington to be good; simply not strong enough as a national brand. You can hire a good coach and be in the sweet sixteen for a few years, but to sustain long term success is another animal.
    It's why I asked Damone to define power. I didn't say UW can be the next Duke or even UCONN/Arizona(Both nothing before Olson/Calhoun).

    But if the small schools I mentioned before can make the final four why can't UW? That's my point.
    We can't they be...simple. They do t want to be is the main reason.