Can’t wait to laugh at him while UCLA is awful this year and the funniest part is helll have to spend a 2nd probably worse year after
Travis Branham crystal ball Kentucky
- Thread starter Anon953436
- Start date
Exactly. Just like Wilkerson at IU not wanting to be just another guy at Kentucky.
Why would UCLA be awful? They were a 7 seed, same as us last year. They are bringing back three starters and have a couple solid guards transferring in. I don't think they will be great, but they aren't far off from our 'national' expectations.
I mean they can bring in as many solid gaurd and starters from last year as they want and Kentucky will still be ranked higher.
If Kusturica goes to ucla I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s the number 1 scorer
You can shred it all you want, but it's a fact with a “monstrous “ sample size and will follow us into 2026-27.
Exactly. I live in SoCal and I lived in Europe. When Europeans think of the USA, they think NYC, LA, Las Vegas, Miami. Selling a basketball player from Europe on Kentucky is much different than a player from the states.
They aren't coming on vacation. They are coming to make money, and prepare themselves for the NBA. Young European basketball professionals are a lot more sophisticated about American basketball, including the college game, than you seem to think. If Lexington Kentucky offers this guy his best chance to make money now and prepare for the NBA draft, he's not going to turn that down to hang out on South Beach or the Malibu pier.
I'm not saying that Kentucky does offer Kustirica that, but if so, he'll come to Lexington. He's not some hick from Novi Sad hoping to see the Statue of Liberty or the Hollywood sign...
Well said. He’s playing for Barcelona now too and he’s from Serbia so he’s seen some cool places already and wouldn’t be as impressed with LA as you’d think.
Neither is winning anything that matters so not sure what u are beating your chest about.
I'm to the point that I want coach to drop out of the running I think we're getting played and if he did come there would run the risk of having too many cooks in the kitchen
Last edited:
Not going all in for Holt when we had a legit shot was an epic failure. I do think he has learned from it
I have previously gone to extreme lengths on this topic. I certainly welcome someone else taking a crack at it and look forward to seeing what you offer up on the topic.
I’m looking forward to it. Unfortunately, it’s probably going to be this weekend. There’s a reason I haven’t posted much today. I’m now having to even work at home because of some customer breakdowns at work. I’ll send you a draft of what I have so far if you want to peer review it. I have an outline for where I’m going next with it. Again, shouldn’t even need to be said. This stuff is basic common sense. There is no magic argument, because it doesn’t need one. Simply requires good-faith effort and honest analysis.
I posted on this extensively before and I can only assume you are playing dumb on this topic. I'll copy and paste from my older posts.
Tom Izzo 33-28 54.1% after 2 seasons at MSU
Dean Smith 23-15 60.5% after 2 seasons at UNCheat
Billy Donovan 27-32 45.8% after 2 seasons at UF
Coach K 27-30 47.4% after 2 seasons at Puke
Nolan Richardson 31-30 50.8% after 2 at Arkansas
Danny Hurley 35-29 54.7% after 2 seasons at UConn
Todd Golden 40-29 58% after 2 seasons at UF
Scott Drew 17-40 30% after 2 seasons at Baylor
Tony Bennett 31-31 50% after 2 seasons at Virginia
Jay Wright 34-29 54% after 2 seasons at Villanova
Jim Calhoun 29-33 46.8% after 2 seasons at UConn
Gary Williams 35-26 57.4% after 2 seasons at Maryland
Lute Olson 31-27 53.4% after 2 seasons at Arizona
That's a few National Championship coaches (13 of 22) since 1991 (accounting for 21 titles) with a worse record their first 2 seasons at the schools that they won it at than Pope's first 2 seasons at UK.
Someone then asked about the jobs previous to the one's where they won a title. This was then provided.
Smith and Izzo held no previous job.
Donovan 63.6% at Marshall
Hurley 63.2% at Wagner
57.9% at RI
Coach K 55.3% at Army
Todd Golden 61.3% at SF
Drew 64.5% at Valpo
Tony Bennett 67.6% Wash St
Jay Wright 58.9% at Hofstra
Jim Calhoun 64.4% Northeastern
Nolan Richardson 76.3% Tulsa
Gary Williams 63.2% American, 62.8% BC, 59% Ohio St
Last edited:
Yeah and nobody in SoCal gives two craps about UCLA in anything unless they are playing for a championship. Otherwise it’s pro sports all day long.
Don’t forget about the NFL now. Highly successful team in the most popular U.S. sport too.
Thanks for the research. Seriously, I appreciate actual numbers.
How many of them were at established blue bloods? That last question is significant. This isn't UConn or Virginia or Baylor (or even Arizona, which had never won conference title before Olson arrived and they were coming off a 4 win season the year before), where the sun rises and sets with the coaches who ended up winning titles there. There was no standard before those coaches arrived, so they had time.
I'm not going to act like your stats don't matter, because they do, but you're also making a case for giving Mark Pope an indefinite leash. How long is your leash? How many more years do you think Pope should get? Does he get a pass for three or four years because he might turn into Billy Donovan or Jim Calhoun? Where is the cut off in your mind?
The bigger question I have is this: what has he demonstrated to you that has convinced you he deserves that longer leash (beyond three years)?
What standards and milestones does he need to reach in order for you to feel like Pope's had enough time?
Here's the list of the first eleven years of each coach below. Again, how long does Pope get. Does UK give him the leash Coach K was given at Duke?
| Rank | Coach | Record | Win % |
|---|
| 1 | Nolan Richardson | 260–92 | .739 |
| 2 | Dean Smith | 217–82 | .726 |
| 3 | Tom Izzo | 255–109 | .701 |
| 4 | Tony Bennet | 257–116 | .689 |
| 5 | Todd Golden* | 160–77 | .675 |
| 6 | Billy Donovan | 228–112 | .671 |
| 7 | Lute Olson | 202–110 | .647 |
| 8 | Mark Pope | 233–134 | .635 |
| 9 | Gary Williams | 207–128 | .618 |
| 10 | Mike Krzyzewski | 195–127 | .606 |
| 11 | Jim Calhoun | 173–118 | .595 |
| 12 | Jay Wright | 198–139 | .588 |
| 13 | Danny Hurley | 201–142 | .586 |
| 14 | Scott Drew | 200–149 |
*Golden has only coached 7 seasons thus far.
Here's some other numbers. Let's keep in mind that Pope is approaching his mid-50s. Does he have 10 years to figure this thing out like some of the other guys on the list? I mean, sir, seriously. This is Kentucky. Do you give guys five year auditions?
| 1 | Tommy Lloyd | 136–20 | .872 |
| 2 | Mark Few | 771–154 | .834 |
| 3 | Jon Scheyer | 89–20 | .817 |
| 4 | Bill Self | 856–263 | .765 |
| 5 | John Calipari | 903–285 | .760 |
| 6 | Rick Pitino | 915–317 | .743 |
| 7 | Bruce Pearl* (no longer coaching) | 731–273 | .728 |
| 8 | Hubert Davis* (no longer coaching) | 106–40 | .726 |
| 9 | Sean Miller | 520–196 | .726 |
| 10 | Nate Oats | 353–133 | .726 |
| 11 | Tom Izzo | 764–309 | .712 |
| 12 | Mick Cronin | 547–228 | .706 |
| 13 | Todd Golden | 160–77 | .675 |
| 14 | Rick Barnes | 858–425 | .669 |
| 15 | Danny Hurley | 350–180 | .660 |
| 16 | Mark Pope | 230–134 | .632 |
| 17 | T. J. Otzelberger | 254–163 | .609 |
Dodgers and Lakers are way higher on the totem pole of popularity in LA compared to the Rams. Like not even close
True. But that may not be important to him. The millions of beautiful women and palm trees may be though.
Hey we got the American chestnut and Diane sawyer
Wouldn't be impressed with L.A. but would be with Lexington LMAO? I can't imagine anyone wanting to okay for UCLA over UK in Hoops, but city vs city for a foreigner, Brother please
I absolutely in no way have advocated for an indefinite leash. I don't know that he gets the same leash K did at Duke but it obviously would have been a horrendous mistake to have pulled the plug on him prior to year 6. I don't necessarily want to try set a hard timeline or specific numbers but we definitely need to see progress and return to seriously challenging for final fours and championships in the not too distant future. I think nuance and realistic factors should be considered and ultimately it will be up to the A.D. if and when a change must be made.
Last edited:
This is an apples to oranges type comparison in a lot of ways. What was the basis for the coaches you've selected here other than it puts Pope next to last in the comparison? I specified my list was pulled from National Championship coaches since 1991.
I never suggested a 5 year audition but I would like to see at least one year not crippled by injuries.
Last edited:
This is of course largely affected by how long they were at what school.
Utah Valley did not start a Basketball team until the '04-'05 season. BYU has a historical winning percentage of 63%.
In the 6 years prior to Smith getting the job Frank McGuire had gone 126-27 82.4% with a National Championship in '57. UNC had gone 19-4 the season before Smith's debut.
Jud Heathcote had gone 126-56 69.2% while making the tourney 5 times in the six years before Izzo. Heathcote had gone 22-6 in his final season. This also was not an example of a struggling downtrodden program.
After struggling his first 3 seasons Bill Foster was 73-24 75.3% with 3 tournament appearances, a championship game appearance, and an elite eight in his final 3 years including a 24-9 record the year before K took over.
Uconn had won four National Championships while making the Final Four 5 times in the 20 years prior to Hurley's arrival.
None of this proves Pope will reach the heights of these coaches by any means but it does provide precedent for coaches having great success after slow starts at solid programs.
Last edited:
That's not what I said.
The idea of being starstruck by LA isn't likely to be as important to him as some people here are making it out to be.
Pope has perhaps the biggest budget in the NIL era. That changes the game completely. And renders these old comparisons obsolete imo. The guys you listed may have been in rebuilds or just needed more time to turn things around with their HS recruiting. With the biggest budget and the impact of the portal, Pope is in a completely different situation where results are expected immediately.
The so-so winning % would be garner more patience if:
-The losses did not include several embarrassing blowouts and indifferent play
-He was 40 and not 53 or so
-There were no very weird post-game interactions
-The recruiting was on par with other top teams
-The losses did not include several embarrassing blowouts and indifferent play
-He was 40 and not 53 or so
-There were no very weird post-game interactions
-The recruiting was on par with other top teams
The basis was overall career winning %. We keep leaving out the part that Mark Pope is about to turn 54 years old. He's not some young up and comer who just needs a shot at a legit program. He's done nothing virtually everywhere he's been, and now he's at Kentucky hoping he can turn into Danny Hurley as he approaches his mid 50s. That's needle in a haystack level thinking, and it's entirely more likely he becomes Matt Doherty or Mike White than he does Dean Smith or Billy Donovan.
This recruitment sure has gone quiet the last few days
Not sure why Cronin can't just close this out and we all can move on.
Once you see one palm tree you've seen them all and its not hard to find beautiful women on most college campus's. I'd rather not pay California taxes and compete with those women with tech and crypto bros.
Just throwing numbers against the wall here. But lets say this kid is offered $7 million dollars. He's going to pay almost $1 million in taxes in California vs $300,000 in Kentucky. Now add cost of living and this kid is going to lose millions and have to play for Cronin. Oh to to be young and be able to make these mistakes.
Yes, end this suffering already.
We got the guys we need for a FF run. This guy would just be a bonus. Im not worried one way or the other on him.
Last edited:
This has been my take from the beginning even when it looked like we had him wrapped up. I got all excited about the news then watche the tape and I feel like I'm missing something. My immediate reaction was kind of deflating. I know he's young, is skilled and has a lot of upside, but just didnt see all the all world, next big thing in him after watching film. Kid is going to have to grow a lot to handle the physical nature of the game going forward IMO
no. Just waiting on his UCLA announcement. He may not even make one since he will just wither away in LA