USA today Poll: Coach K greatest coach ever?

[bigeastfan]

There's a poll on USA Today that asks if Coach K is the greatest coach ever:
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-coach-ever-/1

As my moniker implies I'm a Big East fan (NYC native) and I'm also a UNC alums so naturally I hate Duke.

But I voted "Maybe his resume puts him in the discussion."

John Wooden, Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson also have to be in the discussion and maybe Dean Smith and Bob Knight.

If I had to choose the best coach I would probably have a toss up between Wooden and Jackson.

I don't think COach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did.

What do others think?

[uh_no]

There's a poll on USA Today that asks if Coach K is the greatest coach ever:
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-coach-ever-/1

As my moniker implies I'm a Big East fan (NYC native) and I'm also a UNC alums so naturally I hate Duke.

But I voted "Maybe his resume puts him in the discussion."

John Wooden, Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson also have to be in the discussion and maybe Dean Smith and Bob Knight.

If I had to choose the best coach I would probably have a toss up between Wooden and Jackson.

I don't think COach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did.

What do others think?

I wonder what you call 7 final 4s in 9 years...

[TonyWR]

There's a poll on USA Today that asks if Coach K is the greatest coach ever:
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-coach-ever-/1

As my moniker implies I'm a Big East fan (NYC native) and I'm also a UNC alums so naturally I hate Duke.

But I voted "Maybe his resume puts him in the discussion."

John Wooden, Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson also have to be in the discussion and maybe Dean Smith and Bob Knight.

If I had to choose the best coach I would probably have a toss up between Wooden and Jackson.

I don't think COach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did.

What do others think?

What do I think? Uh well first I think we have a Tar Heel that's trying to dis-credit the best college coach in the nation. You say "I don't think coach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did". LMAO, but you mention Dean prior to that as being on the list with Wooden? typical hole. K has twice the national titles, more acc titles and more overall wins than deano but yet you believe he is better than K? Coach K has created solid dynasties at Duke and continues to do so, why is that so hard for you haters to admit? Wooden was great no doubt, as was Jackson but K is hands down the best, period.

[bigeastfan]

I wonder what you call 7 final 4s in 9 years...

I call it great and enough to put him in the conversation but not better than 2 NBA three-peats and working on a third (Jackson), 10 national championships in 12 years (Wooden), or 8 straight NBA championships (Auerbach).

Still I put him in the conversation because his record is very impressive. I just don't think it matches the other 3 guys I mentioned above.

[bigeastfan]

What do I think? Uh well first I think we have a Tar Heel that's trying to dis-credit the best college coach in the nation. You say "I don't think coach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did". LMAO, but you mention Dean prior to that as being on the list with Wooden? typical hole. K has twice the national titles, more acc titles and more overall wins than deano but yet you believe he is better than K? Coach K has created solid dynasties at Duke and continues to do so, why is that so hard for you haters to admit? Wooden was great no doubt, as was Jackson but K is hands down the best, period.

I never said Dean was better than Coach K, only that he too could be in the conversation. If I had to pick one I would Pick Coach K over Dean. Truth be told I never was a big Dean Smith fan. Growing up I didn't like the Tarheels with their 4-corners and all. Remember I'm a Big East fan. After I went to UNC for graduate school I became a convert.

Still, Dean belongs in the conversation. He certainly produced some great NBA players ;o)

[dukebluesincebirth]

There's a poll on USA Today that asks if Coach K is the greatest coach ever:
http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-coach-ever-/1

As my moniker implies I'm a Big East fan (NYC native) and I'm also a UNC alums so naturally I hate Duke.

But I voted "Maybe his resume puts him in the discussion."

John Wooden, Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson also have to be in the discussion and maybe Dean Smith and Bob Knight.

If I had to choose the best coach I would probably have a toss up between Wooden and Jackson.

I don't think COach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did.

What do others think?

I have to disagree with the "maybe" part of your choice. I don't think there's a shadow of a doubt that Coach K is in the discussion. It's just very hard to compare K to Wooden (very different basketball eras, rules), and harder to compare K to Jackson (college game vs. NBA game). The other part of the debate is that 2 out of these three are still coaching and thus still creating their legacies. The book isn't totally written yet. If I had to break it down:

Phil Jackson vs. Coach K: I just feel like in the NBA, the ultimate superstars (like Jordan/Bryant) end up coaching the team as much as the coach. It takes away from Phil's accomplishments so therefore I give the advantage here to K.

John Wooden vs. Coach K: Wooden doesn't have as many wins, but has more titles. However, he didn't have to win as many games in a NCAAT to win the title (not as many teams in the field), which saved him from potential 2nd round nightmares like Duke nearly had with Michigan last week. I also think Coach K has to contend with a more competitive field of teams than UCLA did. This is the closest contest in my opinion, but I still give the advantage to Coach K.

Bob Knight vs. Coach K: Easy decision. Both coached only college bball, K will end up with more wins and more titles. End of discussion. Advantage K.

Dean vs. Coach K: Even though I hate UNC I've always had respect for Dean, but Coach K has surpassed him right now, and K is still coaching. Advantage K.

I understand all of this is debatable on a few levels, but I'm a little biased... COACH K is the best coach ever!

[ChillinDuke]

I think it's silly to compare Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach to Coach K.

The two coached a different game in the NBA vs. college and had rosters that didn't turnover each year. And Phil Jackson had the single greatest player in the NBA (maybe in NBA history) on his roster for those two 3-peats (and arguably the greatest player right now).

The college game is simply different and not conducive to building a "dynasty" in this day and age. Wooden was able to do it in a different era.

I think the discussion is simply between K and Wooden. And the debate is a good one. JMO

- Chillin

EDIT: DBSB beat me to it.

[The Gordog]

I call it great and enough to put him in the conversation but not better than 2 NBA three-peats and working on a third (Jackson), 10 national championships in 12 years (Wooden), or 8 straight NBA championships (Auerbach).

Still I put him in the conversation because his record is very impressive. I just don't think it matches the other 3 guys I mentioned above.

Different eras and/or leagues = different challenges = different degrees of difficulty.

Wooden? He only had to win 4 games (or was it 3?) for some of his titles, the regions were not mixed (he could get to the Final Four without playing anybody from the East) and he did not have to deal with early entry to the NBA.

Auerbach? His championships were with the same main characters year after year.

Jackson? I'd rate him the best of those 3 in that he has done it with Jordan and then with Kobe.

[bigeastfan]

I have to disagree with the "maybe" part of your choice. I don't think there's a shadow of a doubt that Coach K is in the discussion. It's just very hard to compare K to Wooden (very different basketball eras, rules), and harder to compare K to Jackson (college game vs. NBA game). The other part of the debate is that 2 out of these three are still coaching and thus still creating their legacies. The book isn't totally written yet. If I had to break it down:

Phil Jackson vs. Coach K: I just feel like in the NBA, the ultimate superstars (like Jordan/Bryant) end up coaching the team as much as the coach. It takes away from Phil's accomplishments so therefore I give the advantage here to K.

John Wooden vs. Coach K: Wooden doesn't have as many wins, but has more titles. However, he didn't have to win as many games in a NCAAT to win the title (not as many teams in the field), which saved him from potential 2nd round nightmares like Duke nearly had with Michigan last week. I also think Coach K has to contend with a more competitive field of teams than UCLA did. This is the closest contest in my opinion, but I still give the advantage to Coach K.

Bob Knight vs. Coach K: Easy decision. Both coached only college bball, K will end up with more wins and more titles. End of discussion. Advantage K.

Dean vs. Coach K: Even though I hate UNC I've always had respect for Dean, but Coach K has surpassed him right now, and K is still coaching. Advantage K.

I understand all of this is debatable on a few levels, but I'm a little biased... COACH K is the best coach ever!

It is true that Wooden did not have to go through as many rounds to win the title. But that doesn't necessarily mean it was easier. THis also means that tough opponents were also less likely to be knocked out in earlier rounds. Moreover, there were fewer at large bids so it was harder for UCLA to make the tournament in the first place. So I'm not so sure Coach K has the advantage?

What about Auerbach?

[moonpie23]

also have to be in the discussion and maybe Dean Smith and Bob Knight.

PLEASE enlighten us... how does deano get in the discussion....

[bigeastfan]

Different eras and/or leagues = different challenges = different degrees of difficulty.

Wooden? He only had to win 4 games (or was it 3?) for some of his titles, the regions were not mixed (he could get to the Final Four without playing anybody from the East) and he did not have to deal with early entry to the NBA.

Auerbach? His championships were with the same main characters year after year.

Jackson? I'd rate him the best of those 3 in that he has done it with Jordan and then with Kobe.

I'm not sure why not having to deal with early entry to the NBA made it easier for Wooden. WOuldn't this apply to Wooden's rivals too?

[moonpie23]

I'm not sure why not having to deal with early entry to the NBA made it easier for Wooden. WOuldn't this apply to Wooden's rivals too?

only because they stayed....

[Indoor66]

It is true that Wooden did not have to go through as many rounds to win the title. But that doesn't necessarily mean it was easier. THis also means that tough opponents were also less likely to be knocked out in earlier rounds. Moreover, there were fewer at large bids so it was harder for UCLA to make the tournament in the first place. So I'm not so sure Coach K has the advantage?

What about Auerbach?

There was no seeding for Wooden. Teams played ONLY in their region. East - MidEast - MidWest - West. Then in the final four, East played MidEast and West played MidWest. Then East played West in the finals. This meant no balance or parity as the East was always the far more difficult route.

Wooden was a great recruiter and coach but to compare his era with modern coaching accomplishments is way off base. Players were different, freshmen were ineligible, all stayed four years unless they transferred (rare) or became ineligible for grades or discipline. It is a completely different world.

[bigeastfan]

PLEASE enlighten us... how does deano get in the discussion....

879 career wins, 11 Final Fours, coached later NBA stars later Michael Jordan, Larry Brown, James Worthy, Sam Perkins, Phil Ford, Bob McAdoo, Billy Cunningham, Kenny Smith, Walter Davis, Jerry Stackhouse, Antawn Jamison, Rick Fox, Vince Carter and Rasheed Wallace. I think this is his most impressive trait. ALthough it could be argued that a college coach's job is not to produce NBA superstars. Still this reflects favorably on him.

In the end I would not vote for Dean SMith and would vote for Coach K over Dean, but I think Dean can be in the discussion.

[JRH1010]

What do I think? Uh well first I think we have a Tar Heel that's trying to dis-credit the best college coach in the nation. You say "I don't think coach K is the best because he never established the dynasties that Wooden, Auerbach or Jackson did". LMAO, but you mention Dean prior to that as being on the list with Wooden? typical hole. K has twice the national titles, more acc titles and more overall wins than deano but yet you believe he is better than K? Coach K has created solid dynasties at Duke and continues to do so, why is that so hard for you haters to admit? Wooden was great no doubt, as was Jackson but K is hands down the best, period.

Coach K passed Dean in wins this year, but passed him in losses 4 years ago. But K is a great coach, none the less. To define greatest is futile. Most wins does not equal greatest just like fewer losses does not. There is an elite group of coaches that have come through college basketball and Duke and UNC have had some of the best.

[dukebluesincebirth]

And how does the ability to lead college kids to titles AND the ability to lead the NBA's best to gold medals in the Olympics weigh into the discussion? I can't recall Wooden or Jackson ever doing this? Again, advantage: Coach K.

[J4Kop99]

Phil Jackson is number 1 and those of you trying to discredit him because he coached great players are ridiculous. Which of the coaches in the discussion weren't/aren't constantly coaching great players?

After that, it get's very hard. Aurbach, RMK, Coach K and Wooden are all in the discussion. My only problem with Aurbach(and somewhat with Wooden) is that they were not coaching in what I would consider modern times. For Aurbach, winning 8 NBA championships in a row shows how good you were, but I also believe it shows how bad, or maybe, different, the league was. The seasons were shorter, there were less teams and the playoffs were different. There is just no way that any NBA or NCAA team could go on the runs that Aurbach and Wooden did. I think that hurts their case more than it helps them.


The fact that Coach K has won twice in the early 90's, then again in 2001 and most recently in 2010 says a lot about how great he is. Nobody else has won like that.

[J4Kop99]

Coach K passed Dean in wins this year, but passed him in losses 4 years ago. But K is a great coach, none the less. To define greatest is futile. Most wins does not equal greatest just like fewer losses does not. There is an elite group of coaches that have come through college basketball and Duke and UNC have had some of the best.

Ol' Roy probably coming in at #1.

[moonpie23]

coached later NBA stars later Michael Jordan, Larry Brown, James Worthy, Sam Perkins, Phil Ford, Bob McAdoo, Billy Cunningham, Kenny Smith, Walter Davis, Jerry Stackhouse, Antawn Jamison, Rick Fox, Vince Carter and Rasheed Wallace. I think this is his most impressive trait.

sorry, you don't get to use these as examples of dean's inclusion. These guys would have ALL been in the pros if they'd gone to coastal carolina...notice how, when discussing K, there's a lot more about his coaching rather than players who have gone on to other accolades...

now, if you want to put him in a TOP TEN list....by all means...

K has left everyone in the rearview excpet Red, Phil and John. Let's keep in mind, K is still going...

[bigeastfan]

And how does the ability to lead college kids to titles AND the ability to lead the NBA's best to gold medals in the Olympics weigh into the discussion? I can't recall Wooden or Jackson ever doing this? Again, advantage: Coach K.

That is impressive.

One knock on Coach K is that his players while successful in the NBA rarely achieve superstar status. Certainly Duke's players have not had the NBA success that UCLA (Wooden) or UNC(Smith) have had.

On these measures I would give the advantage to Wooden and Smith. One could argue that he's a college coach, but if he is developing each player to their fullest potential why the underwhelming NBA performance?

It's not like Duke doesn't get top high school ball players. Again, I am not saying DUke players are not solid NBA players. Just that few turn into superstars or even stars.