Playing the whining, wounded party today are we?
Eddy Landreth dropped a scathing column in the Chapel Hill News during which he hit every Roy Williams hot button issue there has been in the past five year except Stickergate which I am sure he would have gotten to had his editor not cut him off.
“The best team won today,” Williams said in a brief statement afterward. “The toughest team, the smartest team, the best-coached team. That’s all I have to say.”
There is also, no doubt, a good reason why Maryland stayed in the game for a long period of time with one player scoring all its points against a team of “kids” destined to make millions playing pro basketball someday who failed to find a way to guard him.
Of course, we know defensive whiz Marcus Ginyard is sitting out the season as a redshirt because of an injury, so that naturally explains why the rest of a team filled with seniors (who played far superior defense as freshmen) and juniors consistently watches its opponents shoot 50 and 60 percent from the field. The others simply cannot play defense.
“It’s the ACC, folks,” Williams said recently. “North Carolina cannot shut people out.”
Ah, this is true, but is it too much to ask for just a little defense?
Then there is the whole issue of timeouts. Williams did not call a timeout from the time UNC extended the lead to nine until the margin had dissipated to two points and just 37 seconds remained. By then the building had become a sizzling inferno, and Maryland had seized every ounce of momentum.
Maybe college basketball coaches can cash in their unused timeouts the same as Marriott points when they retire, which will extend Williams’ stay in Hawaii once he retires to the islands and no longer has to listen to ignorant sports writers and fans question his team or his decisions.
You will just have to pardon this dumb sports writer for thinking back to the 2005 national championship game against Illinois, when the Illini staged a furious comeback in the final moments before what was basically a home crowd in St. Louis. Williams courageously dared to call one of those prized timeouts before it was too late to calm his team and guided it to the title that he wanted more in his little finger than any fan could ever dream of.
Hey, who knows? Williams is not big on having to explain his reasoning to the ignorant masses and sports writers, especially if the questions arise on that radio show he has to do for several hundred grand every Monday night.
Dadgumit, who can blame him? He has to sit and listen to a bunch of stupid people who have the audacity to love his team and his school and want to ask the coach a few questions. What a degrading experience.
The possibility that some of them are trying to find a little joy in a life otherwise burdened by being laid off from their jobs and maybe having their mortgages foreclosed should not factor into a guy getting better than $1.7 million to coach a game for a living having to answer their stupid questions, such as “Coach, why didn’t you call another timeout before the lead evaporated to two and your team was stumbling over its feet like a team of 5- and 6-year-olds?”
But then again, what do any of us know? Whether we type words for newspapers and the Internet, we’re just part of the ignorant masses. Williams and his team will surely work it out, and we’ll all just have abandoned ship too early once again, as he likes to say.
Let me say upfront this comes off as petty, whiny and generally like a temper tantrum from a member of the media who is acting like Roy urinated in his cereal bowl this morning. Seriously, this is the alleged high standard of journalism bloggers supposedly do not approach? At THF, we have discussed at length Roy’s penchant for hoarding timeouts(Dean did the same thing, funny how Eddy forgets that). We have hashed out the defensive issues as well as the recent stumbles in answering questions from fans and the press.
You know what?
At no point in either what I have written or in the majority of the comments written has anyone on this blog presented the shrill, woe is me, hold my breath, stomp my feet, bile spitting rant Landreth presents here. I don’t say that to toot my horn as much as to commend the THF community for approaching the issues with respect, common sense and without resorting to the abject negativity of the message boards. This worthless screed by Landreth is message board fodder because it fits perfectly in with the kinds of rants that have been seen on Inside Carolina lately. At THF, the content is much more circumspect which is credit to all of you out there for driving the discussion that way and being focused on the relevant information.
Along those lines it should be pointed out that if your intention is to write about the Heels’ struggles on defense why on earth are you yammering on about the failure to call timeouts in certain situations or dragging up the call-in show gaffes? This is like having an argument with your spouse and instead of focusing on the topic at hand, one or the other starts dragging up past indiscretions for the sole intent of scoring points in a fight. This is no different. Landreth is not writing a column to talk about the Heels defensive woes. Landreth is writing an attack column meant to land zingers and garner him “hey, right on Eddy” emails in his inbox.
This kind of garbage is neither constructive nor should be it considered journalism. While some might say I do not criticize the coaches and players enough, I would like to think it is because I am careful to make sure such criticisms are constructive as well as being couched with relevant facts. The comments section seems to validate that. I also believe that if I ever wrote anything like the above piece I would be lambasted as just another stupid blogger who does not know anything. Funny how an objective journalist can do it just fine. The Old Media Guard says that bloggers like myself do not have the training and journalistic standards/integrity required to be taken seriously. If this column is any indication, I am not sure Eddy Landreth does either.
And one more thing. Off you go Eddy. Say hi to Heather for me.
![[Bloglines]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
You have to take a step back and address the entire story (or lack there of). I wasn’t born and raised in ACC country. Unfortunately, I am from “Big Ten country”. I am, however, positive that Roy Williams knows a little bit more about basketball than the rest of us do. He is the head coach at the University of North Carolina. He has the highest winning percentage among active coaches (over so many wins).
If I have ever doubted something that could possibly fall or blame on Williams (or Dean Smith), I get a sudden revelation. I work for Xerox, not UNC. People do not come to your job and tell you how to do it. Just because you are a basketball fan does not mean you know the game inside and out. It’s extremely easy, and sometimes cowardly to sit at home on your couch and criticize the coach. Sure I would love to see the Heels be the top defensive team in the nation – but is that realistic? No. Given the tempo the Heels like to push, they aren’t going to get stop after stop and hold opponents to a Big Ten score of 33 (though that was more poor offense than high quality defense).
The point is, Roy Williams knows how to coach. Why would you be a Tar Heel fan if you thought he was incompetent? THF, great points about Eddy quickly going away from “defense” and questioning the time out situation. If Roy doesn’t call a time out, and we lose, it’s his fault. If he doesn’t call a time out, and we win, he’s a genius. Who are we, fans and media, to judge a man like that? It doesn’t matter how much or how little he makes. Roy is a basketball genius and so was Dean Smith. The numbers are there to back it up. Leave it alone, Eddy.
I agree that the article could have been written better, but Roy did an extremely poor job against Maryland, both in preparation of his team’s defense, and during the end of the game where he allowed his team to lose a lead on the road without calling a timeout until much later than he should have.
We are not talking about the first half here. He was hoarding timeouts with 2, 3, and 4 freaking minutes left in the game.
He’s a good coach, and I’m definitely not questioning that, but there have been other games where his stubborness with timeouts have cost us points, and sometimes games. Sometimes articles like this are good even if you would not have written them this way.
I think criticisms are fine but I do not call this criticism. It is an attack. It is about landing zingers. My bigger beef is with the journalism or lack thereof rather than his attempting to criticize parts of Roy’s coaching.
“The possibility that some of them are trying to find a little joy in a life otherwise burdened by being laid off from their jobs and maybe having their mortgages foreclosed should not factor into a guy getting better than $1.7 million to coach a game for a living having to answer their stupid questions, such as “Coach, why didn’t you call another timeout before the lead evaporated to two and your team was stumbling over its feet like a team of 5- and 6-year-olds?””
Do not be ignorant. If you get joy out of harassing a coach of your favorite team, you have serious issues. Again, his money does not make one darn bit of difference to me. Even though you can look at the forbes list and clearly see the basketball program pulls in A LOT of money for the school. And the “5- and 6-year olds” makes Eddy sound like a complete moron. He’s taken it beyond criticism of the coach. It’s downgrading our players. This guy needs a life. Maybe he should focus more on that and paying his mortgage than making useless, trashy comments.
I’m not familiar with Eddy Landreth, but I think he is blowing the Maryland game a little out of proportion. There is no question we totally blew that game, and Roy took the blame on himself. But we are still in line for a #1 seed and a good run in the NCAAs if things break our way. Plus, Roy did win the championship in 2005, so he can’t be that bad.
Eddy is making the argument that Roy is paid to put up with certain things like questions from fans and the media. The flip side of that is Roy is also paid a lot of money because he is frickin’ good at his job. Yes, Roy should give more fan friendly answers but it is not like we are looking at Bobby Knight who curses you out for the smallest of infractions.
Here is my letter to Landreth, thanking him for his article and bravery in writing it. Nobody dislikes Roy, but some of the defenses that people try to make for him are ludicrous, first of all and second, this notion that you are not a true fan if you question Roy Williams is utter garbage.
Carolina basketball far predates Roy Williams and he has had very, very little effect on the ultimate greatness of the program, as opposed to its revitalization, which is similar to what has recently happened to Alabama football. Saban has revitalized the Crimson Tide but certainly, the Crimson Tide football program is vastly larger than Saban.
Frank McGuire and Dean Smith and Eddie Fogler, as coaches, and Michael Jordan, as a player, are the four individuals who can take the foremost part of the credit, for the behemoth that UNC basketball has become, from my study of UNC basketball history.
Roy Williams, on the other hand, was never a very important UNC assistant, until right before he left to go to Kansas. He obviously was not an important player, and was not a particularly visible part of the program when he left to go to Kansas. I doubt that I had ever heard of him, except in passing, growing up and I attended the university from 1983 to 1987. Nobody talked about Roy Williams. Eddie Fogler, on the other hand, was very well known and respected.
This is not to disparage Williams’ achievements at Kansas or his skills at digesting Smith’s system and teaching it. He may be better at teaching Smith’s system than Smith was. Nevertheless, McGuire and Smith came up with the concepts, not Williams.
Had Roy Williams stayed in Kansas in 2004, where would we be now? I don’t know, but I would guess probably about where Duke is now. Either George Karl or Larry Brown would probably be the coach. Could Larry Brown have won that title in 2005 with the same core? Absolutely. Both Georgetown and UNC suffered similar dips about the same time, when Thompson and Smith/Guthridge left and both pulled out of it quickly and easily, due to their strong basketball brand names.
Letter to Landreth:
Thank you for writing this, although you are certain to get hammered for it. I have Williams’ biography and his SI article and have considered myself a true fan of his, but his friends need to get to him and help him ease back a bit on a few things. I really do worry that the pressure is getting to Williams, and some of it is his own fault after the lost Final Four weekend last April. Ultimately, sports are supposed to be fun, not about insulting armchair doctors and lawyers and pharmacists.
In spite of some comments that Williams has recently made that seem to indicate otherwise, the program does not in fact belong to him and his players, and is much, much bigger than that. Maybe he might even remember from when he was in grade school, a certain Frank McGuire, who once went an entire year without losing, 17-0 in ACC play and a record 32-0 overall.
Let’s all take a deep breath and remember that everyone involved in UNC basketball is standing on the shoulders of giants. Roy is a pretty good coach but Dean and Frank were pretty good too. Even Bill Guthridge somehow made it to two Final Fours and people said he couldn’t coach a lick.
Some UNC fans say that you can’t ask Roy about strategy because he is a Hall of Fame coach.
Well, that Frank McGuire also took two different teams to the Final Four and to the Number one ranking, and did I mention that he also went undefeated one year, over all, and went undefeated two different years in the ACC regualar season? He even have coached Wilt Chamberlain in the NBA. I am pretty sure McGuire is in the Hall of Fame, too. I wonder if anyone ever asked him about coaching strategy?
Yours truly,
William Loeffler
I think it proves he’s passionate about his team. (thankfully not in a Bobby Knight choke you sort of way)
It also proves he wasn’t very good with facts, because the 2005-06 team was not better defensively than this team is.
William –> “this notion that you are not a true fan if you question Roy Williams is utter garbage.”
It’s not the questioning that is in question (sounds like a Boondock Saints intro), it is the class with which the question is asked. Eddy’s comments do not come across as criticism, but as insults to his intelligence. There is a simple way, as classy way if you will, to present your questions.
Yes, UNC basketball predates Roy Williams, but without Roy Williams it is possible that the fan base would not have grown like it has in the last 5 years. I don’t want to speculate on the “what ifs”. Roy has continued the tradition set forth by Smith and McGuire. Winning. With class.
Strangely enough, here is an article about a Dean Smith team that could not get the foul committed at the end of the game, either, just like last week at Maryland, so let’s remember in fairness to Roy, that people tend to remember the past in a way that is not always altogether correct.
But I do think that there are many, many Tar Heel fans who still do not understand letting the score get to the 40-12 mark, without burning a few times out, and let’s face it, Roy lost in a crushing and humiliating defeat, perhaps, unlike any other in UNC history. This followed a loss the previous year in an eminently winnable game against Georgetown. Plenty of lawyers and pharmacists could have lost those games just as easily, I would be willing to venture. In fact, if K had lost two games like that, we would all be laughing our ….s off. Oh, that’s right, K has lost games like that and we have laughed, but I digress:
http://www.gopack.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=109274&SPID=13527&DB_OEM_ID=9200&ATCLID=3651858
My problem with the timeout conversation is people say he should have called a timeout like the game went on for 13 minutes without there being a timeout of some sort. There were indeed two TV timeouts during the 40-12 run by Kansas and they were all longer than any 30 second timeout Roy would have taken in that span. Is there value to the players to have their coach take the timeout and bring them over? Maybe. But I have always thought in THAT case the timeout issue was overwrought and also because it is highly speculative to say it would have helped.
I do agree we could discuss at length why there seem to be these moments like the Georgetown game or the Maryland game where the team falls apart with the game seemingly in hand. It that the coach? Is that player execution? The refs? Probably a little bit of each.
I suspect, that if we go back over the last 5 years, for every KU/G’town moment the Heels have suffered, they have deliver 5-10 such moments to their opposition. The G’town/KU ones stick out because of the timing, and because they are so rare.
C. Michael —> Any loss the last few seasons appear to be rare. Great point in that the team has delivered more blows to opponents than those received.
I watched the Kansas Oklahoma game on Monday night, and it was interesting to see Self use timeouts to try and stop Oklahoma’s run in the 2nd half as their lead was slipping.
Here’s how it worked out looking at the play-by-play:
11:38 54-38 – TV Timeout
10:38 58-38 – Kansas’ lead peaks
9:04 58-43 – Kansas 30 Second TO
7:42 62-53 – Kansas 30 Second TO
6:43 62-56 – TV TO
5:28 66-62 – Oklahoma pulls within 4
Oklahoma eventually pulls to within 3 points, but never has the opportunity to tie the game.
0:00 87-78
When I started looking at the play-by-play, I figured Kansas’ TOs might eventually prove (on paper)effective in stopping Oklahoma’s run. Well, there’s no support for that hypothesis in the play-by-play. From 10:38 to 5:28, Oklahoma outscored Kansas 24-8. Kansas used 2 TOs and got a TV TO during the run too, none of which appeared to stop the run.
Maybe not calling a timeout is Roy’s way of showing confidence in his system and his players. Keep doing what we practice everyday and everything will be okay.
I love Roy Williams, in a lot of ways. I love his life story, but I do think that too many people have short memories. Wake Forest has not been to the Final Four since 1962. How many years had UNC gone without a Final Four before Roy “saved” us? Five years.
How many years has it been since Duke has been to a Final Four? Five years.
If Sean May had not gotten hurt, UNC certainly would have won 20 games in 2003, which is something that ironically, Williams was not able to do the next year. UNC ended up with 19 wins both years, going 7-11 in ACC play under Doherty in 2003 and going 8-9 in ACC play, under Williams in 2004 and losing five fewer over all, with a healthy May.
That is not a lot of progress. But of course, the prevailing myth is that Doherty had screwed those guys up so bad, that it took two years to straighten them out. I sincerely doubt it, although obviously Doherty had to go.
But, ironically, regarding the time out issue, I was talking on the phone to my brother, who is also a UNC grad, but much less interested in UNC basketball these days and he brought up the time out issue.
Dean Smith used to save them, mostly, because the game clock did not stop at then end of games back in the olden days. I don’t think any of us can deny, that when we get in a rhythm, that a time-out seems disruptive, whether you are a surgeon, trial lawyer, or basketball player, but I don’t have any data to prove the value of calling disruptive time outs. Unless Roy has a good reason not to use them, he could at least deflect some criticism without doing himself or the team any real harm.
About your other question, I corresponded via email with a small time Kansas columnist back in 2005, who stopped responding after we won the title, but it was his contention that Williams places undue pressure on his players and he blamed the terrible free throw shooting against Syracuse on this pressure.
The sentiment in Kansas is that Doherty’s players actually won the title because Roy didn’t have enough time to screw up their heads, lol, which is the opposite of what must people out here believe about the title year of 2005.
I’ll stick with the prevailing myth.
What would be examples of how Roy puts undue pressures on his players and how would free throw shooting be a result of this, or did he not elaborate? I guess I’m not following the columnist’s line of thought.
I am not saying I agreed with the columnist. Kansas had lost very winnable games against Duke in 1991, against UNC in 1993, against Arizona in 1997, against Maryland in 2002 and against Syracuse (everybody’s pick for choke team of the last 25 years) in five different years where Kansas fans thought that their team could have won it all.
Kansas had also had several other years where they had gone out early in a very disappointing fashion in the tournament against Rhode Island, UVa and Duke.
In fact, when everyone in Kansas was screaming for Roy to stay at Kansas, back in 2000, he hadn’t been to a Final Four since 1993, so no one can say Kansas fans weren’t loyal.
Compare this to Dean, where basically, nobody really expected him to win a national title until the Final Four in 1977. So, yes, Dean was one for seven when UNC finally won his first national title in 1982, but it felt more like one for three, because nobody expected to beat UCLA those other four times.
No, I didn’t take it that you agreed with him, I just was curious in what context he meant it.
While I may disagree with some of William’s points about officials being above criticism, or the fact that there shouldn’t be any checks & balances to their officiating, I completely understand his point about Coach Roy’s nature of being above all the rest of us. Roy is not greater than the program of UNC. While he certainly doesn’t have an obligation to answer any dadgum questions, Roy could address his, and UNC’s fanbase with much more consideration that we are actual FANS. While the timeout thing may not have made a difference, it seems to be an understanding fact that a coach does burn one if nothing more than the sake of re-focusing his team, or maybe changing stratagies to not allow yourself a complete meltdown as we witnessed in that Kansas game. Getting leads like that is precious, and should be treated as such. It’s not like our opposition was frikkin Duquesne, it was Kansas and Maryland, who have proven to be dangerous teams that you don’t want hanging out it your ballpark.
And in my defense as a Roy Williams supporter, here are some THF archives, where I, formerly known as williamodouglas, tried to deflect rampant criticism of Coach Williams on some of these same issues after the Georgetown loss. A lot of us same guys were hanging around back then, too. Roy sure doesn’t want to lose me as a fan:
http://www.tarheelfanblog.com/2007/03/he-is-not-going-to-call-a-timeout/#more-594
Of course, none of us really care about Roy’s losses while at Kansas. But with regard to whether Roy’s UNC teams have lost important “winnable” games, it is really one only one game. We should have won the Georgetown game and gone to the Final Four in 2007 (our KenPom ranking was #1). I think this is offset by our 2005 championship. The Kansas loss last year was terrible, but I honestly think they were the better team.
The good news for Roy is that he is in the Naismith Hall of Fame and has won a championship. His winning percentage is crazy. He is definitely a success as a coach.
William, your post seemed well thought out. And you make a great argument. I really do not see any need in defending yourself in that last post. Roy has been quasi out-of-hand with not only a few of his comments, but his general nature of dealing with his supporting base, us fans. Also, time-outs exist for a reason, and when we have substantial leads against dangerous teams, and see our lead dwindeling, I feel they are used for such occassions, as do most other coaches in the world of college basketball.
Is Roy Williams above me? Sure he is. That does not mean a collective fanbase wants that shoved in their face, especially when there has been some evidence (although not conclusive) that maybe a different decision should have been made in some instances we have seen on the court.
This is no real major knock on Roy. Our program was in a real mess in terms of winning games for a while, and we for sure do not have that problem now. Some thanks and consideration for what Roy has done may be in order as well, and I am sure Roy feels like his accomplishments are being dis-respected when such questions come flying his way.
Coaching probably matters more in the NFL than in any other team sport. And yet, we have seen three different franchises, S.F., Dallas and Pittsburgh win multiple titles with different head coaches, while maintaining the same core of players. The Baltimore Colts lost in the Super Bowl under Hall of Famer Don Shula but the same core of guys won in the Super Bowl two years later under the largely forgotten Don McCafferty.
Does that mean coaches don’t matter at all? Well, in MLB, managers seem to not be all that important. In the NFL, I think head coaches are very, very important, but not irreplaceable.
In basketball, the answer is in between. You simply are not going to win a title without good players. It seems to me that to a large extent, great coaching in basketball now means being able to get Kobe and Shaq not to kill each other, or to keep Rashad on an even keel. We have heard a lot about the dribble drive offense and Calipari lately, but last time I checked he had about the best starting five in the country. Dribble drive indeed.
Following that link back brought back some memories! 52 and I were really going at it vis a vis Wayne Ellington!
^ College basketball coaches that can recruit are certainly the most successful coaches. It’s a good thing we have one of the best. If Roy brings in the best players and then wins, he can tell me I am stupid all day long. I won’t care.
We have all had our criticisms of Wayne Ellington, one of which got Chris so riled up he started speaking in tounges, and then the boot. A lot of those arguments had merit, at least to me. Please do not view any of my archives, I would probably have a different stance by now.
I swear, I just about exploded when I read that. It’s all “Roy’s so stupid” and not one bit of “Roy thanks for all you’ve done for the program and the school”. Good grief! After all he has done for Carolina basketball, all this jerk can do is criticize? Roy is human! All humans make mistakes, in case you haven’t noticed! Geez Louise! Another thing, why bring the economy into this? THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BASKETBALL! I DONT GIVE A FLIP ABOUT WHAT ROY WILLIAMS MAKES! Seriously! My mom got mad too! That is not something she does often. My advice to this guy: Shut up and be happy that we even have a coach as great as Roy. Stop complaining, seriously.
UNC Girl, where are you from. I thought I was the only one that used terms such as “Geez Louise” or “Goodnight Irene”.
Born and bred in NC! I usually don’t say things like that…I don’t know why I said them now…maybe beacause I just watched Footloose.
When people love people or institutions, I don’t believe they generally should be calculating what they “owe” to each other or who has done what for each other. Roy loves UNC basketball and most UNC fans love Roy.
But, if you want to pursue that line of thinking, I think the point is, UNCGirl50, that UNC basketball has done just as much or more for Roy Williams, than he has done for UNC basketball. Certainly, Roy owes everything to Dean Smith and the excellence of UNC basketball, which was the only reason Kansas even agreed to give Roy a chance. Before that Roy was on his way to George Mason to coach.
Too late, JBowling, I have already download all archives with the term of reference, JBowling and have them indexed and categorized.
Boy, have you been inconsistent on some issues.
Quite, William but I still think Eddy should have maybe taken the time to thank him before attacking him like that.
Eddy is a journalist, granted one associated with UNC but the definition of journalism is sort of, not thanking the people you write about, or at least pretending to be objective.
Ah true, but still, I’m NOT happy.
LOL. So true.
UNC Girl, let me guess, you love Kevin Bacon too!!!
So here is something to ponder:
It is almost universally accepted that the last 4 minutes of a half are important because, “You want to grab momentum going into the half.” Yet at the same time, an almost equal number of people believe that a 30 second TO is enough to, “stop momentum.” So this is my great conundrum: if a 30 second TO is enough to stop momentum, then what is the point of trying to seize it before a 30 minute break? And conversely, if momentum can span a 30 minute break, what effect will a 30 second TO?
My personal opinion has always been that if you can see something that is readily correctable, you call a TO and fix it. If that is not the case, then you are really just doing something for the sake of doing it, and the odds of really affecting the run are probably slim.
“Boy, have you been inconsistent on some issues.”
Maybe I should be a politician!
C. Michael, even if our players are doing things that don’t warrant an adjustment, there may be a point to be made that a timeout can effect the psych of an opposing team, or breaking up their momentum, or to stop a run of theirs.
JB, no but I do love the senior who played Ren in my schools version of it. He’s such a hottie! :p
Also: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/dukes-smith-out-indefinitely
Read it and smile.
Oh Lord. I remember those days. Now that I am a father, those hotties are going to get some great life lessons when they come knocking on my door wanting to see my precious little girl. They will be 1st class nerds by the time I get though with them.
When I was at Carolina, during the last half of the last century, we used to call over to the basketball office and ask them to send someone over to the dorm to talk about the upcoming season, or recruiting, or whatever would give us an excuse to drink beer and watch film of the ‘Heels during the offseason. They always sent this young assistant, who looked like he could have been a student and who I now realize was probably between JV practice and selling calendars to make ends meet. He always took time to talk about the incoming freshmen and the prospects for that year, sometimes engaged in gossip about what (Freshman Sensation) Al Wood and O’Koren were really like and even explained the shuffle and the passing game offense. I’ll always remember Roy for being decent to a bunch of drunk college guys, so I’m surprised when I hear him get snippy with callers to the radio show. I’ll chalk it up to the pressures of the season, and though I like the old Roy I met briefly in the basement of a dorm, I’m willing to admit I’m not exactly the person I was then either.
I can’t speak about what Roy has done for Carolina or what Carolina owes Roy, but I can say without reservation that Carolina, and Carolina Basketball, have brought me untold hapiness over the years and that for a little while, when I was more impressionable than I am today, Roy Williams was an important part of that experience.
JB, thats how my dad feels. It’s even worse with my sis who is fifteen. I do know that this hottie is single. He’s not a Tyler but, oh well.
uncgirl50,
Even if it’s a Dookie, concussions are nothing to be happy about, this I can assure you.
Take it from a former hottie, sometimes they are not all they are cracked up to be, but sometimes they are. Just make sure they have some level of humility to go with that great charm & looks. If Tyler is a hottie to you, then I completely trust your judgement on those matters.
Now, back to UNC basketball, or the lack thereof according to the journalist.
“Now that I am a father, those hotties are going to get some great life lessons when they come knocking on my door wanting to see my precious little girl.”
Two words: NRA membership!
C. Michael, EXACTLY!!!!
CM, I can’t help myself. It’s not a good thing I know, but Dookies are the scourge of the Earth and I can’t help it. But if he’s not 100% by the time our game rolls around (which probably won’t happen) it’s good for us. I do feel a little sorry for him (just a little) but not that much.
JB, He’s a UNC fan how bad can he be? But yes I will be careful.
Whether Smith is available for UNC may not matter. The matchup to watch for that game will be Elliot Williams guarding Ty Lawson. Still no match for the Heels on the interior but Williams will be better on Lawson than Smith or anyone else was.
Great Post, Ya mama.
You guys will probably not believe this because the story has become trite now, but I believe the first time that I had ever heard of Roy Williams was some time in the early 1980′s. My father had hired someone who had been at UNC and this woman told him that a friend of hers from Carolina that she used to work with (I can’t remember all the particulars but I think she had been an intern with the basketball team) was selling Carolina calendars and wanted to know if my father was interested in buying some.
As I recall, the name of the guy selling calendars and the story didn’t mean much of anything to either my father or me, until April of 1991.
you were a pretty staunch supporter william when many of us were in meltdown-mode…but that would be consistent as I suspect you have a fairly substantial contrarian streak (as do I sometimes)…occupational hazard?
CM–moi? I know not of what you speak
helluva story yo mama!
I probably should go back and read the blog at the beginning but often times I get annoyed with the way I wrote something and if I start changing stuff you guys will get zero new material.
What is interesting about the aftermath of the Georgetown game is the end of that season was when the core of the THF community formed. The Elbow really got things moving and from there it has been steady ever since.
You guys do really well keeping things under control. In three years I have banned exactly one UNC fan and there was another one I did not allow through the door.
If I am a contrarian, 52bgj, it is because I am a firm believer that speech is a public good and that more speech is better than less speech. People convince me of things on here all the time. But if people are afraid to raise controversial topics for fear of being shouted down, we may all end up not learning something interesting about basketball, which is only sad. In other areas of life, it can be a tragedy.
I do remember last year when we had that big brew ha-ha about Roy and zone defense and the guy who kept saying that if Roy did not play zone against Duke, then Roy was an idiot. After UNC won playing only man, but actually switching on screens, the guy at least had the fortitude to come back and post and apologize. I think we all enjoyed that and the guy was glad that at least UNC won.
yeah, I think so too THF–credit to the proprietor. I think as william has pointed out, because of Tyler, and the experience of this team the pressure “we” all feel on this season has been ramped up a bit. I KNOW my life will be drastically different the day after, should UNC make an early exit
I had a great-uncle who quit watching ACC games when he realized he had dug a hole in the arms of his easy-chair lol.
I’m not afraid of controversy, or free speech, I just think Larry Drew is 10X’s the player QT was
ok…twice
Please let it be true! Ol’ Q.T. was pretty good last year so that would make Drew All ACC at least!
ah, “at the same stage”
The Pack gonna pull this out??
Just want to say how awesome you guys are. Thanks THF, for putting together a great site. I am realtively new to the site but y’all have become my blogging family. A family that won’t tell me to shut up because I’m talking during the game.
On the Drew subject, we have to get good production out of Drew next year. I know, we will have Ginyard as a backup. Everything I have seen on Dexter Strickland is that he is a great shooting guard. The clips I have seen do not lead me to believe he is going to be a ball handler for this team. I have no clue what Leslie McDonald will bring in terms of that at all. I haven’t seen him play any HS or AAU ball. To me, like it or not, we will nearly have sole reliance on Drew. I can’t see him pushing our current tempo. Maybe the off-season will enhance his ability to do these things?
Well, given that there has been no player in my recollection who played even close to as poorly as QT did his freshman year, that is probably not a good comparison, or rather, doubling a negative, is still a negative, no?
Honestly, in all the time that I have watched I cannot recall guys getting significant minutes who played as poorly as Thomas did that year, or as poorly as Frasor has this year(with the exception of the Duke game). I am trying to think back but I cannot remember guys who came in and just turned the ball over and over the way that Thomas did (and Drew to a lesser extent) or that shot and shot and shot and never made any baskets, or who made almost, no baskets, the way that Frasor has this year.
I was never a Matt Doherty fan, but Matt Doherty was head and shoulders above Bobby Frasor.
Maybe because Dean was loathe to yank guys for poor performance during a game, he actually gave them fewer minutes, so that could be a point in Roy’s favor, that he may yell and yank guys but he does give a lot more guys a chance to play than Dean ever did. I still personally prefer Smith’s substitution patterns.
William, I appreciate your balance as you’ve approached and commented on this post. As an ardent UNC/Roy fan I would not be as balanced as you
. THF, I agree with your stance here and I appreciate you posting this. Eddy went a little past the point he was trying to make. He needed to be called out on it.
William, I get the feeling you think somehow Roy hasn’t been appreciative enough of “the shoulders he stands on”. I disagree. Of course I can only argue from my experience, but I’ve had the opporunity to hear him speak in person and seen or heard plenty of his visits to Asheville on TV and on our local AM affiliate. Never once have I heard or seen a clip of Roy, whether it be him here in town, his HOF presentation on ESPN, or my time with him in person, and not heard or seen him give all praise and credit to UNC for his position in life, and he especially gives credit to Coach Smith, Larry Brown and others. I believe Roy understands the program he is now blessed to work with. I have no doubt.
well, pg is a macho position, and probably even moreso at UNC & Duke. It requires both talent, and a huge amount of bravado and self-confidence (sometimes even pretending until you hopefully arrive). I like what I see of Drew’s cockiness–he’s got the base covered on that one. Who knows if he’ll develop into a top notch pg next season, but I certainly think the potential is there–his range and vision remind me a lot of Kenny Smith. QT as much as I liked him, never seemed to develop that self confidence, but he probably didn’t deserve much of the criticism some of us heaped on him, simply because he was a trooper.
I just can’t get over the image of Doherty (I believe it was in the Georgetown game) forfeiting a chance to go strong to the hoop on the break, and instead doing a “wimp-curl” back out to the perimeter–that summed up his presence as a player for me, and also left a bad taste in my mouth when he tried to go “macho” on his own brood.
I think that are two main things that I have been slightly disappointed in. One is the tendentiousness about the strategy questions. I mean, these are fans. Woe to the program whose fans are absolutely indifferent about whether they play zone or man-to-man defense. Nobody bothers to even call Dave Leitao anymore. I bet he would love some calls about his team’s strategy.
Second, as a basketball teacher, Roy should be thrilled that so many people are interested in the principles of the press and zone and man-to-man. Questions about switches are pretty high level stuff. He should go on that radio program every week and be thrilled that he has helped bring the joy of basketball even more to the people of North Carolina, instead of needling his callers.
Lately, Roy acts like those annoying doctors who give you that look and curt answer when you tell them that you were researching some symptom on the internet. Stop it. Stop it, now, Roy and if you can’t stop it, then either get therapy or get one of your assistants to do the show.
The second thing that really annoys me lately is the knee-jerk response by some, mostly on the IC boards, that you cannot criticize Roy’s strategy because he is a Hall of Famer, and “knows more than you.”
First of all, is that just me, or does that preclude Mike Gminiski and people of that level as well? Can only K and Bobby Knight and Dean Smith criticize Roy and no one else?
Once again, woe unto the sport where people are not allowed to criticize strategy, because interest will fail fast. I don’t know much about football but I know enough that Jake Delhomme would have been on the bench the entire second half against the Cardinals had I bench the coach of the Panthers.
William, it seems you’re saying that QT, his freshman year, and Bobby this year don’t deserve their playing time based on their performances. At the same time don’t you have to say who does deserve their playing time at their positions, and if there isn’t anyone on the bench, then the guys they’re subbing for should play more minutes? QT averaged 6 min. freshman year, and Bobby 16 min. this year. Who gets their minutes?
The starters got most of the minutes under Dean and Guthridge. Maybe they were in better shape back then. Brandan Haywood barely played in 1998. Almost nobody got off the bench back in 1982.
With as fast a pace as we’ve played since Roy got here, we would have to be in very good shape for Ty and Wayne to add most of 16 minutes to their time. That just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
Carolina has always been among the national leaders in possessions going back to the early 70′s. I think the 1972 team averaged over 90 points a game without a shot clock or three point shot. The 1993 was no slouch in scoring either. I guess that is something else that is annoying, LarryS and thanks for articulating it. Some Carolina fans and media people, and even Coach Williams to a lesser extent, sometimes act as though Williams brought fast-paced basketball to Chapel Hill.
Where do people think the idea for a secondary break and and a fast tempo originated? It wasn’t with Roy Williams, lol.
I see your point about high scoring teams from the past, although I don’t know what their tempo was as it relates to this year. I do know that this is the highest tempo team Roy’s had, and I think a huge part of Ty’s success this year has been because he can go flat out when he’s playing his normal minutes. I’m not sure he would be as effective playing 35-36 minutes and it doesn’t appear Roy thinks so either. You might entertain the thought of giving him a call Monday night and making a recommendation, lol. However, I do believe in the stretch run, and the ACC tournament the distribution will go more in the direction you mention.
I think the ACC Tournament could be supreme this year-I know I’m looking forward to it–should be quite a tune-up for the run.
The second thing that really annoys me lately is the knee-jerk response by some, mostly on the IC boards, that you cannot criticize Roy’s strategy because he is a Hall of Famer, and “knows more than you.”
The thing about it is he does know more from a perspective of seeing his players more than forty minutes at a time during a game 1-2 times a week. He is also more experienced and knowledgeable concerning how the game is played. So when you get into of questions about who should play more and whether this defensive scheme might work versus another, it is not as though the common fan is operating with the best/most knowledge of the situation.
That being said there are honest criticisms that can be made which are not hinged on being with the team. The timeout issue is one. Switching on screens versus fighting through is another. Yes the latter might be dictated by seeing personnel in practice but mainly these are matter of philosophy. These issues are also things you can raise because the game results are being impacted which is really the only measurement we have of whether something the coach is doing is right or not.
The important thing is for any such criticisms to be handled with respect and on the basis of the facts. Landreth did not do that and I think some of the “Roy is a HOF coach” reaction at IC is a response to stupid people who are venting on the coach rather than offering real discussion.
Take Roy out of the equation and we are Clemson at best this year, especially given the parity in the league this season. You don’t see Dook fans criticizing K…for whatever reason, they fear the dork. All of them do. He plays head games. Roy has the best winning percentage among active coaches. I love, no wait, I LOVE Dean Smith, but it took him nearly two decades to win his first title. It took Roy two years. The program hasn’t blinked since. Our equivalent, at the collegiate level, is probably USC. Every year they have the talent to win it, but come up short. I don’t know that their fan base is as critical of Pete Carrol as we are of Roy. He stepped in and brought their program back to national prominance, and he is essentially worshipped. Roy does it and it’s STILL not enough for some. That’s bullsh!+.
This should be one of our best tournaments in a long time. We have friends in Atlanta, 52bg, and I’ll be happy to take some of your extra mid-court, 12th row tickets if you need me to.
You’re right, William about the starters playing a lot of minutes on the 1982 team, averaging 35-36 minutes. But their pace of play was much slower because of them having to play so many minutes. They averaged 66 points a game with almost 54% shooting, which is indicative of a slower pace.
you must be mistaking me with my childhood friend, who retired here after he sold his 13 Golden Corrals in and around the Buckhead area. seriously they are whining about the potential low turnout–now would be a great time to “pop in” for a visit to those friends…
For someone named DeanForever, you make a poor case for Dean Smith in contrast to Roy in terms of winning. I honestly have no idea what the Williams equation and the “we are Clemson” remark means, but I will address the second point because I simply do not think it is fair to compare Roy Williams to Dean Smith, because Smith wins out in almost every way.
I alluded to the situation above, but when I was growing up, essentially 3 coaches who were active, in the entire country, had ever won a national championship. There really wasn’t a lot of pressure on Smith to win a national championship until Norm Sloan did it at State in 1974. When the ante upped, Smith upped his game too.
Looking back at recent titlists when Smith was coaching, you had USF, who won two in the mid-50′s. Cal won one, OSU and Cincy won three between them, Loyola won one, Texas Western won one and guess what, except for Don Haskins, whom you never heard about, none of those coaches were active when Smith came into his prime in the late 60′s and 70′s.
So basically you had Frank McGuire and John Wooden and nobody else on the national scene had won a title until Norm Sloan broke through in 1974, followed by Bobby Knight and the other McGuire. Once the barrier fell, Dean Smith won his title in due course, but UCLA basketball during that first quarter of Smith’s career was like UNC women’s soccer in the 1990′s, and you really couldn’t expect Smith to defeat those teams that had Gail Goodrich, Lucius Allen, Lynn Shackleford, Lew Alcindor, Sidney Wicks, Curtis Rowe, Keith Wilkes, Swen Nater and Bill Walton.
UCLA had the two greatest centers in the history of college basketball, essentially back to back. Imagine if UVa had had Ralph Sampson for six years, and also a slew of other top NBA players like Allen, Nater, Wicks, Rowe and Wilkes.
Alcindor, Allen, Row and Wilkes would all play significant roles on NBA championship teams. Nater, Walton’s back-up would go on to win ABA rookie of the year and have an excellent NBA career. During the same period, UNC had Charles Scott, Bobby Jones and Bob McAdoo(only for one season), which wasn’t bad, but those three never played together and Jones was only a sophomore during his one season playing with McAdoo.
It took NC State with two all-time great (and pretty good future pro’s until injuries) David Thompson and Tom Burleson to finally beat UCLA(plus a lot of help from UCLA itself, doing stupid things down the stretch) to finally dethrone UCLA in double overtime in 1974. All told, UCLA won 10 titles in 12 years.
Roy may have a higher winning percentage than Dean, although not that much higher. Bill Self may have a higher winning percentage than Roy at Kansas, but who cares in the abstract. That is comparing apples to oranges. K has a better NCAA tourney record than Dean, but Dean never got the two easy victories every year that top coaches get now, until late in his career. On the other hand, it probably was easier to make the Final Four in the 1960′s. Things were different and you can’t just quote winning percentage to “prove” that Roy is somehow better.
You say it took Dean two decades to mean a title and Roy only two years. Well, Guthridge must have been way better a coach than Smith because it took him only one year to achieve the number one ranking and to go to the Final Four, something that would take Smith two decades to achieve in the same season, but come on, nobody buys that. Bill Self must be a way better coach than Roy because Self won a national title in only five years at Kansas and Roy couldn’t do it in 14 years there.
Pete Carroll is a good example, however. Winning at USC in football is very similar to winning at UNC in basketball and rebuilding a program and then winning, at either place is very, very easy to do for any decent coach who is a decent recruiter. It probably wasn’t true at either place back in 1955, but it is true now and Carroll’s success in now way means that he is “better” than John Mckay.
All of that being said, UNC basketball is stronger now than it has ever been, ever.
UNC has benefited from Williams’ excellent performance and also from the media attention nationally on the Duke-UNC rivalry which gives us the kind of recruiting leg-up that other schools would kill for. Dean never had that. Duke-UNC was a local game until the advent of ESPN in the 80′s and 90′s.
Williams is an excellent coach but he simply is not in Dean’s category yet. Smith was influential worldwide. He was a great recruiter and he was a great innovator. He was also known as a great game coach in terms of adjustments and end of game strategy. Williams is not really known for any of these things.
I try to go back through and look at the posts, because, at least on my computer, some of them do not post in order.
C. Michael, you make a good point about the time outs (actually the term should be times out, like culs de sac, but it seems sort of pretentious). I have wondered in a similar way, in the NFL and perhaps in college basketball, why teams don’t play the clock just before the half, the same way that they do in the fourth quarter.
For instance, if UNC is trailing Duke by 11 with 2 minutes in the first half. Why don’t we go all out to try to even things up before half-time? Why do NFL teams who are trailing in the first half just let the clock run out.
I would be willing to bet that trailing in the first half in both football and basketball is significantly correlated with losing the game in question. So why not try harder just before the half? I think it has to do with a general human aspect of procrastinating, but maybe there are other reasons.
“The second thing that really annoys me lately is the knee-jerk response by some, mostly on the IC boards, that you cannot criticize Roy’s strategy because he is a Hall of Famer, and “knows more than you.”
The thing about it is he does know more from a perspective of seeing his players more than forty minutes at a time during a game 1-2 times a week. He is also more experienced and knowledgeable concerning how the game is played. So when you get into of questions about who should play more and whether this defensive scheme might work versus another, it is not as though the common fan is operating with the best/most knowledge of the situation. ”
Absolutely, THF and that proposition carries the day most of the time. But I think 52bgj might argue that he didn’t care how many times Roy had seen QT in practice back in 2005. 52bgj was probably cringing the entire 30 seconds QT played against Villanova and Illinois in the tournament. The poor guy would come in and turn the ball over the instance he touched it, it seemed and a lot of UNC fans might say they didn’t need to see QT practice that year, to know that.
Perhaps the exception to the general rule above, about the practice coach knowing more than the fans, due to seeing the players so much more, may have to do with coaches, who like parents and teachers, are sometimes unable to be unbiased about certain players. Al McGuire made no bones about that fact that another Marquette player would have to be a heck of a lot better than his son Allie, if he wanted to start in place of Allie at Marquette.
I think that Roy Williams may have soft spots for certain players and he may play them more than a more neutral outsider would. That may or may not be a negative, but I do think that Williams has been less than circumspect with some of his public utterances about certain players. I think that he has been a bit too open about his affection for Hansbrough (and I am an emotional Irish type) and Frasor. And who wouldn’t want to have a son exactly like Tyler, but still, being a coach is a bit like being a parent and you have to watch what you say. Ty Lawson has been every bit as good or better in his three years at UNC but he gets many fewer shout-outs from Coach Williams. Danny Green seems to get some praise but probably more criticism from Williams. Wayne Ellington seems to simply never get mentioned by Williams. Ginyard used to seem to be a favorite of Williams but now seems to be in the doghouse for some reason, apparently for being a “slow-healer.”
I never had the the feeling that Dean liked Jeff Lebo better than say, Kenny Smith, but I do get the feeling that Roy likes Frasor better than most of the other Carolina guys he has coached. I will keep watching and I can be convinced, but I simply am not certain that Bobby Frasor is currently getting over twenty minutes a game based strictly upon game performance.
Good points LarryS, thanks for those stats. They did do a fair amount of four corners that year, probably about the last year that they used it. But it also shows Dean’s ability to adjust his playing style from year to year based upon his personnel. I will have to take a look, but off the top of my head, I believe the 1987 and 1993 teams played at a pretty fast pace, as did the teams from the early 70′s.
Those are some good observations, William, about a Roy’s comments on different players and I can’t say my impressions are much different. I always have a keen interest in how he describes their performances and contributions after games, as if I will be able to glean some hidden meaning from all of it. But I also try to view it in much the same way parents respond differently to their children, in a way that is tailored to their individual needs and personalities. And I try not to read too much into it. I have the feeling, as you say, that Roy values something more about Bobby than can be seen by his game performances or stats. Maybe he just trusts his calmness under pressure, his ability to make smart decisions, even his actions and work ethics off the court and in practice; qualities that he chooses to reward and value beyond the obvious, and a standard he would like to use as a model. Not to say other players are not capable of these same qualities, but every coach seems to have one or two players on their team whom they relate to in this way. I will say that I’m intrigued by Bobby’s situation and I think I’m going to record the next two or three games to go back and see if there is really a lot more to his game than we give him credit for, offensive production aside.
I would love to have been here to see that 1972 team running up and down the court. What a special team. Looking at George Karl now, it’s hard to believe he could ever do that. Course a lot of look different now than we did in 1972.
I have been recording most of the games, LarryS, but I have only kept the Duke and FSU games so far since I only have so much room on my DVR. Last year, I made DVD’s of most of the important games, but as with one’s second child (this season seems like a repeat of last year so far!) who never gets the same number of pictures as the eldest, I have lost a lot of interest in making the DVD’s. I do have last year’s Kansas game on a two DVD set for anyone who wants it, lol.
But, to get to your point, that is a great idea if you have the time and inclination to sort of try to chart Bobby’s play coming up. I know everyone here would be very interested.
About the 1972 team, I have always been interested in the 1971 and 1972 teams also. I really started watching college basketball in 1974 for the most part, so some of those 1972 guys were still playing for UNC in 1974.
The 1972 UNC team was probably Dean’s second best team (or core) until the 1982 champs. McAdoo only played the one year but was a prodigious talent, and arguably the second greatest UNC player ever as an NBA’er. Smith took McAdoo as his first and almost only Juco signee, after McMillen left UNC in the lurch on the purported first day of his freshman year at UNC, sending a telegram instead of showing up.
Bobby Jones was the recruiting consolation prize after we missed out on Tom McMillen, who was supposed to be better than Bill Walton. McMillen ended up only being excellent, not great, and by the time they graduated, Jones was almost as good or better, and ended up being a much better pro than McMillen.
George Karl and Dennis Wuycik were gritty Pennsylvania guys who would both go on to play pro ball, but Karl is obviously now probably known as one of the best NBA coaches to never quite win it all and Wuycik did the Poop Sheet for years.
UNC went 9-3 in conference and beat Maryland and McMillen in the ACC Finals. McMillen would never win an ACC title, either in the regular season or in the ACC tournament. Then the Heels won a huge game over Frank McGuire and USC in the NCAA tourney, getting some revenge for Lee Dedmon and the 1971 team.
Unfortunately, the team apparently lost its focus in the Final Four (some of it was L.A. host Charles Scott’s fault, according to Art Chansky, but you’ll have to read it yourself) and lost to FSU in a game that was very similar in many ways to last year’s debacle. UNC fell behind by over 20 points and came almost all the way back but was too exhausted at the end.
This was about the period where the NCAA stopped Smith from dressing his players in navy blue sports jackets and khaki trousers, as it once again elevated form over substance. I remember just how good the guys looked in their team pictures and McAdoo’s mother even said that that was one reason why she wanted her son to play for UNC, the blue sports coats.
“What is interesting about the aftermath of the Georgetown game is the end of that season was when the core of the THF community formed.”
Yeah, I was going to point out the Maryland loss in February of 2007 as the first time the comments spiked. I think there were 19, and before that, they were rarely if ever in double digits. Watching he viral growth of blogs can really be interesting.
Excellent stuff william, but Larry makes some good points too-I dare say if someone watched me coach, they would say I have my “favorites” because I treat them each differently based on what I think they need, when in fact (outside of my son) I love each of them equally–learning the uniqueness of each kid is a large part of what makes it so rewarding. I do understand how it appears to you he’s being unfair to some, but I almost guarantee you he loves each & every one of those kids, almost equally. I think if he didn’t, you would see more internal problems surface, much like what has happened in Durham over the last several years.
To add onto 52′s point, what is the transfer rate under Roy? Sure Alex left last year, but that was more for family reasons. I don’t recall him ever losing a lot of players at KU. Also, I seem to remember a big deal about the number of former players who went to Roy’s HoF induction and everyone making a big deal about how universally loved he was by the guys he coached.
That being said, and maybe to be a bit contrarian, but isn’t it human nature to have favorites? I would bet that every employer in the history of employment has had employees who, for some reason or another, they are more fond of. I doubt Roy is any different. However, I think it is pretty clear that the thing Roy “cares most” about is winning, and I doubt that he would ever let favoritism get in the way of that.
William-
I had no intentions of disrespecting Dean in any way. I put little thought into that post, as I had just returned home from a very intense, yet gratifying college basketball game. I’m simply tired of the Roy-hating, and I went straight to the well of the Almighty. I now that the basic frame of reference in sports nowadays are championships. I value Dean’s consistency over the Billy Donovan or Jim Calhoun system of winning one year, and then toiling in mediocrity for 3-4 years while rebuilding.
Again, I was tired and a little pissy. Forgive me my sins.
CM, you’re right–it is indeed human nature to have favorites, but there are sometimes special coaches who do recognize and appreciate the differences that make each player unique–I happen to believe we are blessed with one of those coaches. Stubborn? check…. As good as Dean at game mgmnt? nowhere near the same neighborhood….but knowing players as people, and helping them discover how to bring out their best, I’m not sure there’s any better in the game right now—-and THAT, to me, is the very definition of “The Carolina Way”.
I knew you didn’t, I mean you are DeanForever. But believe it or not, kids graduating from college this year, if they started watching intently when they were 11 years old, say in the 5th or 6th grade, may barely remember Dean or may not remember him at all!
To me, it sees like a little bit of a strange thing, this notion of Roy-haing, because he is probably the Ringo Starr of the coaching profession. Yes, I think that George Harrison was better over all, but come on, Ringo has hardly had a bad go of it in his chosen profession of acting–remember Caveman?
He may be standing on the shoulders of giants, to keep stealing a line from Oasis (and Newton), but Roy is right there with Dean’s best five year stretches from 1982-1987 and from 1992-1997.
Although in many ways, Dean is unlikely to be equaled, strictly in on court performance, watch for these four things:
1) Dean never won two national titles in a single decade (or in a row); 2) Dean never won more than three ACC titles in a row; 3)Dean never went undefeated against conference opposition (I thought this could be the year for UNC to do it); 4)Dean never went to more than four Final Fours in a ten year period–Coach Smithridge went to 6 Final Fours in 10 years, from 1991 to 2001–there were a couple of great teams in there, the 1993 and 1998 teams, a couple of darn good ones, the 1995 and 1997 teams, a ho-hum team from 1991 and a mediocre one from 2001. If Roy can do any or all of these things, then we have attained some new heights.
I know we had the one horrible year, and the overlap is not exact, but essentially, Roy, a guy with a great performance of 4 Final Fours and no titles, was coming to save a program that during the same period had 6 Final Fours and 1 title and had a record of 2-1 head to head against Roy, as we beat him in 1993 and then handily in the NIT the year before he came back to “save” us.
Some waggish Kansas fans noted that “saving” UNC was a bit like performing mouth-to-mouth on Marilyn Monroe, especially after Roy got to see the girl he would be getting run his team out of the building.
The big problem for both Dean and Roy is the curse of heightened expectations. When you create a program that is capable of winning every year, people are disappointed when you don’t win every year. It is a good problem to have, but I fear that it is taking its toll on Roy a little bit. I believe Dean handled it better, at least publicly.
William, I truly appreciate all of the history and context you provide to this site, as I do the contributions of everyone else. Your recollections provide me with an inspiring vividness that helps keep me me highly intrigued with Carolina basketball, although I have never wanted for inspiration. Another thing you do, that is near and dear to my heart, is to call attention to all the wonderful accomplishments of athletes of the past, and in a way that helps remind us of that greatness existed way before our current favorites.
In 1972, I was living in Memphis, and quickly becoming a avid Tiger follower. My relocation to North Carolina a few years later, coupled with my marriage and conversion (sounds like we’re talking about religion……but then we are, aren’t we?) has given me the best possible situation for my basketball fanaticism. I really was quite amazed at the rich tradition and excellence that I found here, as well as in the ACC. I had always observed from afar but never quite understood the essence of it until I moved here and got involved. I went to Fayetteville, Arkansas, a couple of summers ago to attend my nephew’s high school graduation which was being held in Walton arena, the basketball facility. I noticed their national championship banner displayed , in replication, five different place aound the ceiling. I asked a man sitting next to me what was up with all the banners (meaning, how come you have the same banner in five different spots?) and he replied that they were very proud of their basketball tradition. I thought to myself, you want tradition, I can show you tradition.
He should have felt those same pressures at Kansas, as they are pretty storied as well. But I can see how ACC play has its own weight to be carried, and that may be a little more than he experienced there. This is a tough job when criticisms can come your way while winning at .900 percent. But it is a great job that has a smorgasboard of opportunities for success.
I took a look at the NCAA all time coaching records, through 2007 and it was kind of interesting.
John Wooden had a winning percentage of .805. Roy’s was .800 and surely higher now. Dean Smith was at .776. Larry Brown was at .744. Bill Guthridge was at .741. Frank McGuire was at .699. Knight was at .710; Rupp at .822; K at .748; Lefty at .666–Satan!; Al McGuire at .741; Phog Allen at .739; Bob Huggins at .737; Calipari at .736 and certainly higher now; Pitino at .731 and Tubby at .727. Bo Ryan, for me, may win the prize for attaining .769 at Wisconsin, far from a traditional power .
Obviously, apples and oranges applies here. Guys who build programs are likely to have lower percentages than guys who take over established ones. K coached at Army and had several losing years at Duke. Frank McGuire had success at St. Johns, reaching the finals and then made UNC the basketball school in the ACC and then built the South Carolina program from scratch and still ended up at .699. Lefty Driesell did some similar things, but was not quite as successful over all.
Maybe this is the ultimate irony: who do you think has the higher winning percentage at Kansas, Roy Williams or Bill Self?
2003–2004 Kansas 24-9 12-4 2nd NCAA Elite Eight
2004–2005 Kansas 23-7 12-4 T-1st NCAA 1st Round
2005–2006 Kansas 25-8 13-3 T-1st NCAA 1st Round
2006–2007 Kansas 33-5 14-2 1st NCAA Elite Eight
2007–2008 Kansas 37-3 13-3 T-1st NCAA Champions
2008–2009 Kansas 23-5 12-1 - -
Kansas: 165-37 (.814) 76-17
Dean is to Roy as Roy is to Bill?
Forgive me for being late to the party, but I am surprised at all the hand-wringing over a 24-3 basketball team.
I know the expectations for this team were in the stratosphere, but as I have asked earlier, what more is expected out of this group? We all know the ultimate success of this team (rightly or wrongly) is measured in April, not February. And yet there is this general angst among Tar Heel Nation that I understand, but don’t believe is worthwhile.
This team is cursed by the proverbial “doomed if you do, doomed if you don’t” scenario. If they lose, then they are fundamentally flawed and cannot win it all due to (insert reason here – chemistry, coaching, Ginyard, etc); and if they reel off 10 wins in a row, they are not beating teams badly enough, meaning they are fundamentally flawed and cannot win it all due to (insert reason here).
As for Roy, he is who he has always been, to his success and to his detriment. Stickergate was about him having a soft spot in his hear for Kansas. Not using timeouts to stop an opponent’s run is what he inherited from Dean Smith. Dean didn’t switch screens either. And no amount of message board blather or call-in show armchair coaches is going to change that.
Personally, I think Roy has always worn his emotions on his sleeve and the weight of the expectations is pulling on him, thus the snippiness with coaches show guests and the f-bomb slip-up. Then again, I am not a psychologist and cannot surmise what is in his head. I only base this on the two times I have met the man, both of which were casual situations in which he seemed like a good-natured soul, and the rest of the body of his career.
I say let’s wait until April before we pass judgment. If we hang a banner, a year from now no one will remember how upset we all were in February.
I am most happy to report that Carolina’s defense is much improved since our last game, going from 21st yesterday to 19th today, and we haven’t even played yet! You gotta love Pomeroy.
And one more thing:
Amateur coaches (e.g. journalists) harp on using timeouts to stop an opponent’s run. Dean, and by extension Roy, seem to want their teams to play through a run and save the timeouts for a later point. Dean was also criticized for hoarding timeouts, and yet some of those trademark Carolina comebacks were possible because Dean had three timeouts with a minute to play.
If calling timeouts was the magic key, Pete Gillen would be in the Hall of Fame.
As for switching screens, you know who switches screens? Duke. Tell me again how that worked out for them on the last play at Wake Forest?
There is a risk/reward for every strategy…
I know to some outsiders we must seem like cry-babies, but some of this is decent inside discussion. I agree, it needs to be tempered with the fact we are witnessing a team with only 3 losses.
The Clemson game in Chapel Hill last season was an example of Roy having his timeouts available for the rally. Other coaches would have used 2-3 when Clemson kept jumping out to double digit leads.
Yeah, but the clock stops now, guys.
It didn’t use to back when Dean made all those crazy comebacks or when Gar Heard hit that amazing shot for Phoenix against Boston in 1976 after Phoenix had to take a technical.
I don’t think hoarding does much of anything now. More often than not, these genius coaches call time out to set up a final play which is simply horrible and the team would have been much better off just playing without stopping.
On another fun topic: You guys are all going to tell me that I am crazy, but I have wondered if Roy should have recused himself from last years game against Kansas.
Recusal is a fairly normal practice among lawyers and is often ethically requred. I believe that the practice also exists to a smaller extent in the medical profession, where at times, the best surgeon in a particular field or the best treating doctor in a particular specialty may choose not to treat a family member or friend, due to emotional involvement or other factors that might actually decrease the doctor’s normal excellence.
For example, C. Michael might be the world’s greatest brain surgeon, but if asked to perform on his son, he might not be able to perform at his normal peak of efficiency–although apparently this notion has not made it to Grey’s Anatomy, where the doctors all operate on each other and their loved ones with alacrity.
Kansas only had one player left that Roy had recruited, so the ties were diminishing in terms of what lawyers might call “conflicts”, but this could have been more significant had they played say two years earlier. What if Wayne Simien had revealed certain facts to Roy that no one else knew, that UNC could now take advantage of in a game against Simien and Kansas? It is an interesting question.
Roy certainly had the sort of emotional distress in dealing with the KU situation that often guides lawyers and judges when they recuse themselves from cases. I am not sure if Roy has anyone on his staff who wasn’t at Kansas, however, so who could he pick to coach that one game in his stead. It couldn’t be Larry Brown, probably, for some of the same reasons and probably not Dean either.
Bill Guthridge. He hates Kansas and always has, being a KSU Wildcat. Guthridge had no trouble going against Roy when Roy was at Kansas, unlike Dean, to a certain extent. Guthridge doesn’t even like Roy anymore, so he would have been the perfect choice to guide our team to victory. What an amazing victory that would have been!
100 comments and no game…you guys have been busy.