Arizona/Duke

[greenyellow]

With players like aflalo, love, farmar, Westbrook ect he should have won a title or two. This years team had as much talent on it as UO had on the last elite 8 team and they lose to us by 20 and can't make it out of the 2nd round. he is also an ass to his players and thats why they have been quiting on him the last few years.

Making it to the final four is a great accomplishment. The most talented team rarely ever wins the Tourney.... and losing against arguably the best team this past decade in the finals is another great accomplishment.

And how do you figure that this team is as good as our '08 team? We had a veteran team filled with upperclassmen (several of whom are playing pro overseas) led by a 1st round pick NBA point guard..... This UCLA team doesn't even have a 1st round pick on it.

losing to the 2 seed in the NCAA tourney is not a sign of quitting on your coach.

Have to agree with you here. Winning the Tourney takes having good draws every game as much as having the most talented player(s). UCLA this year, when compared to their Final Four teams, is nowhere near as talented. They don't have a decent backcourt and the depth is not there.

[TheMaehlMan]

Seriously? They lost to a loaded Florida team 2yrs in a row.... and then they lost to a very good Memphis team...Derrick Rose was the best player on the court... Dorsey & Chris Douglas Roberts were great college players... It's not like they lost to bad teams.

No they didn't, but they got absolutely crushed by Memphis if I remember correctly. That should not have happened with the talent that Howland had at his disposal. I also did say Howland was a good coach, but he isn't great.

[buckmarkduck]

I'm not saying he's a bad coach, he's a good coach just not great. Like MM said, he's unwilling to change his offense for his players, and often times tries to put a square peg in the round hole. Chip Kelly is a great coach, and he's said it a 1000 times, he doesn't have a set offense he just works it to what his players strengths are. If we had landed Dane Christ we would be a throwing team, he coaches to his players strength which Howland refuses to do. Coach K coaches to strength. If he had let UCLA play up tempo against Memphis and let his players play they would have won by 10. Jrue Holiday was the #1 rated SG in his class, but because Howland wouldn't work around his skill set he was never as dominating as he could have been. J'mison Morgan was a 5* center the same year and left for Baylor because he couldn't handle the way Howland is as a coach towards his players (again he's a ahole). Crap just look at UCLA 08 class, 2 5* and 3 4* yet they did nothing. I guess that's not wasting talent when you do absolutely nothing with the #1 overall recruiting class in 08. The great thing about the great coaches around basketball is they have their players respect, and they coach to their (players) ability's not the other way around.

In my opinion Miller is a better coach than Howland which was the original post, I also think once Altman gets some studs in he will be beating Howland. Right now all things equal it would probably be Miller, Montgomery, Altman then Howland in the Pac-10 in terms of coaching ability, though Montgomery better start recruiting because signing classes full of 2* wont keep Cal competitive no matter how good of a coach they have.

[Boom]

Seriously? They lost to a loaded Florida team 2yrs in a row.... and then they lost to a very good Memphis team...Derrick Rose was the best player on the court... Dorsey & Chris Douglas Roberts were great college players... It's not like they lost to bad teams.

No they didn't, but they got absolutely crushed by Memphis if I remember correctly.

Are you saying that Florida team wasn't loaded?

That should not have happened with the talent that Howland had at his disposal. I also did say Howland was a good coach, but he isn't great.

Arizona just destroyed Duke last night..... Duke has equal or more talent than that UCLA team.

That happens often in cbb.


You might not like his style, but Howland is easily a top 10-15 coach in cbb.

[Boom]

I'm not saying he's a bad coach, he's a good coach just not great. Like MM said, he's unwilling to change his offense for his players, and often times tries to put a square peg in the round hole. Chip Kelly is a great coach, and he's said it a 1000 times, he doesn't have a set offense he just works it to what his players strengths are. If we had landed Dane Christ we would be a throwing team, he coaches to his players strength which Howland refuses to do. Coach K coaches to strength. If he had let UCLA play up tempo against Memphis and let his players play they would have won by 10. Jrue Holiday was the #1 rated SG in his class, but because Howland wouldn't work around his skill set he was never as dominating as he could have been. J'mison Morgan was a 5* center the same year and left for Baylor because he couldn't handle the way Howland is as a coach towards his players (again he's a ahole). Crap just look at UCLA 08 class, 2 5* and 3 4* yet they did nothing. I guess that's not wasting talent when you do absolutely nothing with the #1 overall recruiting class in 08. The great thing about the great coaches around basketball is they have their players respect, and they coach to their (players) ability's not the other way around.

In my opinion Miller is a better coach than Howland which was the original post, I also think once Altman gets some studs in he will be beating Howland. Right now all things equal it would probably be Miller, Montgomery, Altman then Howland in the Pac-10 in terms of coaching ability, though Montgomery better start recruiting because signing classes full of 2* wont keep Cal competitive no matter how good of a coach they have.

Howland is a defensive minded coach who demands kids to work hard...... It's not surprising that he's had a kid transfer.

Jrue Holiday only stayed 1 year.... the rest of the kids in that 08 class were overrated (that's not Howland's fault).... including J'mison Morgan.

I like the 4 coaches you mention, but you can't logically list them above Ben Howland... your going off pure bias.

Motgomery is the only guy that stacks up... Miller lucked into Derrick Williams... and Altman still has a lot to prove to be in that conversation.

[TheMaehlMan]

Are you saying that Florida team wasn't loaded?


Arizona just destroyed Duke last night..... Duke has equal or more talent than that UCLA team.

That happens often in cbb.


You might not like his style, but Howland is easily a top 10-15 coach in cbb.

That Florida team was very good, but UCLA had more talent. And yes, Memphis was a very good team that beat UCLA. But, Derrick Rose was not as good of a college as Kevin Love(and UCLA had more talent overall than Memphis)...but then again, you probably don't even remember. It's not about losing, it happens, but this team clearly had more talent than anyone else...I just find it difficult to believe that he didn't capitalize. Look, I believe he is a very good coach...but I'm inclined to believe he isn't a great coach..just because he gets great talent doesn't make him a great coach..Also, I don't dislike his style...but with that team he should have moved up the tempo because of the type of players he had, sometimes slowing it down is the right move though.

[Boom]

Are you saying that Florida team wasn't loaded?


Arizona just destroyed Duke last night..... Duke has equal or more talent than that UCLA team.

That happens often in cbb.


You might not like his style, but Howland is easily a top 10-15 coach in cbb.

That Florida team was very good, but UCLA had more talent. And yes, Memphis was a very good team that beat UCLA. But, Derrick Rose was not as good of a college as Kevin Love(and UCLA had more talent overall than Memphis)...but then again, you probably don't even remember. It's not about losing, it happens, but this team clearly had more talent than anyone else...I just find it difficult to believe that he didn't capitalize. Look, I believe he is a very good coach...but I'm inclined to believe he isn't a great coach..just because he gets great talent doesn't make him a great coach..Also, I don't dislike his style...but with that team he should have moved up the tempo because of the type of players he had, sometimes slowing it down is the right move though.

Derrick Rose was the best player on the court.... not Kevin Love... not even close

And no way in hell that UCLA team had more talent than Florida......were are you getting that? seriously, I think your the one that doesn't remember.

Florida had 5 guys drafted from that team.... 3 were 10 picks! That's also not counting Lee Humphrey who was a 45% 3pt shooter.

[TheMaehlMan]

Derrick Rose was the best player on the court.... not Kevin Love... not even close

And no way in hell that UCLA team had more talent than Florida......were are you getting that? seriously, I think your the one that doesn't remember.

Florida had 5 guys drafted from that team.... 3 were 10 picks! That's also not counting Lee Humphrey who was a 45% 3pt shooter.

My mistake, for some reason I confused the years when i wrote earlier. UCLA didn't have more talent the year Florida won the title, I agree..but UCLA had more talent than Memphis and Kansas the year after.

The fact is that with Darren Collison, Russell Westbrook, Kevin Love, Mbamoute(spelling?),etc.(also had good role players like Aboya and Mata, proly others I'm missing, think they had Shipp as well) they were capable of running more and just went with a slow it down game. My opinion is that they could have been a lot better if they had done this since the skill-set of each player more suits a running game, yet Howland stubbornly did not loosen the reigns. He is a good coach, but a great coach would have made adjustments to fit his players more. I'm done with this conversation though, you clearly disagree, so no point in beating a dead horse. Anyways, on to more important stuff since I really don't care about UCLA and Howland