Kentucky under Cal

[LadyCaytIL]

I figured you would say that. If you want to just count titles then fine, end of discussion.

I'm talking about the actual act of coaching tournament games and grinding your way through the early rounds, putting yourself in the best position possible.

K was really good at that back from '86 through the early '90s. Masterful even. But he's had a lot of flameout years.

Cal is just better at grinding it out and winning tourney games in general. Once they get to the Final Four, it's roughly flip a coin for Cal, while K is untouchable.

Since that Jay Williams title team, K has only made 3 Final Four runs. That was 17 years ago. Cal has been to 5 in 10 years.

So no, K isn't a better tourney coach. But he is a better tourney closer, when given the chance. For various reasons.

**Roy, unfortunately, is a different story. He's actually made 7 Final Four runs in that same time span where K has made three.

I understand where you are coming from.. Cal is more consistent in the tournament...

 

[Trashy1]

I read it twice and have no idea what you’re trying to say.

 

[Trashy1]

I read it twice and have no idea what you’re trying to say.

Would one of those reasons be that THEY GET SOFTER ROADS AND EASIER WHISTLES?

Maybe because they give them that road and base it off the fact that the ACC is the best conference outside of the NBA west? Every year, regardless?

Those reasons?

 

[Trashy1]

Let's quit bragging about having won the most NCs except for UCLA then, because they're catching us. I realize you're saying that we've never lost a game fairly and Duke and NC have never lost one if called fairly. Isn't that what the coach is hired for? I guess I'm the only on this board who prefers winning NCs instead of sending one and dones as lottery picks to the NBA.