krzyzewski vs. rupp

[Olympic Fan]

Just to clarify something that's on the front page about the K vs. Rupp debate:

-- Rupp's first two titles (1948, 1949) were won against an eight-team NCAA field. He won his third title (1951) in the year when the field expanded to 16 teams. He won his fourth title in 1958 against a 24-team NCAA field.

Those first two titles came in a tournament that excluded many of the nation's best teams. The first AP poll came out in 1949 and that NCAA Tournament excluded No. 3 St. Louis, No. 5 Western Kentucky, No. 6 Minnesota, No. 7 Bradley, No. 8 San Francisco, No. 9 Tulane and No. 10 Bowling Green -- think if that, seven of the top 10 teams were not invited.

-- On the other hand, the selection process was much more haphazard in those early days -- the eight-team field was picked by regional selection committees who could pick whomever they wanted. That's why in 1946, UNC was picked ahead of Duke's conference champions. I've always wondered how Kentucky got the bid over 22-2 Duke in 1942 ... I'm sure the fact that Rupp was on the Region 3 selection committee had nothing to do with it (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).

Of course, that could work against him too. In 1950, Kentucky finished as SEC champs, ranked No. 3 in the nation, but did not get a bid when Rupp refused to play No. 5 N.C. State in a one-game playoff to determine the Region 3 bid.

It was the next year that the field expanded and all the major conference champions were guaranteed a bid. From that point, Kentucky had to win the SEC title to advance, which wasn't the hardest thing in the world.

I think the great argument for K is that he's been greater longer -- as hard as that is to believe, he's won his four national titles over a 20-season span (1991-2010) ... Rupp's four titles came in an 11-season span (1948-58).

K's also has 11 Final Four appearances to Rupp's 6.

K also has a 77-22 NCAA record (77.8 pct.), compared to Rupp's 30-18 record (62.5 percent).

And, obviously, early next season, K will pass Rupp on the career win list ...

Obviously, this is a Duke board and we're going to think K is greater. I'm sure Kentucky fans will argue for Rupp (indeed, before the finals, I saw K being ripped on the Kentucky boards for "only" winning three of his first 10 Final Fours ... better, I suppose, in their eyes to not get to the Final Four than to get there and not win it all).

But I think the numbers speak for themselves K>Rupp ...

Note: I actually saw it mentioned on the board and it did check it out -- K's won titles over the longest span of anybody else in history. The 20-year span between his first and last titles is longer than any multiple winner:

Wooden 10 titles in 12 years (all between 1964-76)
K 4 titles in 20 years
Rupp 4 titles in 11 years
Knight 3 titles in 12 years (1976-87)
Branch McCracken 2 titles in 14 years (1940-53)
Dean Smith 2 titles in 12 years (1982-93)
Jim Calhoun 2 titles 6 years (1999-2004)
Denny Crum 2 titles in 7 years (1980-86)
Roy Williams 2 titles in 5 years (2005-09)
Four coaches have won two titles in back-to-back years only:
Hank Iba (1945-46)
Phil Woolpert (1955-56)
Ed Jucker (1961-62)
Billy Donovan (2006-07)

That's the complete list of multiple title winners.

[OldPhiKap]

It's really hard to try and compare over different time spans.

Wooden was the best of his generation.
Rupp was the best of his generation.
K is, I believe, the best of his generation.

There are plenty of arguments as to which generation is superior to the others -- number of quality teams, number and method of tournament invitees, freshman playing or not playing, when NBA defections occurred as a matter of course or rule, etc.

Having said all that, I'll just stick with K being > about everyone except John Wooden if tournament success is the measuring stick.

[davekay1971]

I don't think there's any legitimate argument anymore about a coach other than Wooden being better than K.

He's got the numbers, the championships, the consistency, and he's done it at a time when the college basketball landscape has been continually changing, and changing in a way to make consistent excellence incredibly hard to maintain.

There are many college hoops coaches who had a place in the history of the game. The men who have shaped college basketball over the years deserve their due respect, and I mean no disrespect in elevating K over guys like Rupp, Dean Smith, Bobby Knight, etc.

But when it comes to winning...regular season games, conference championships, NCAA tournament games, Final Fours, titles, season after season for over a quarter century...there's no one better (with the one exception: Wooden's 10 NCAA tournament wins will always stand alone).

[davekay1971]

before the finals, I saw K being ripped on the Kentucky boards for "only" winning three of his first 10 Final Fours ... better, I suppose, in their eyes to not get to the Final Four than to get there and not win it all)..

I always enjoy the bad math involved in this kind of argument. Only 3 titles in 10 Final Fours. Given that there are 4 teams in the Final Four, if it were decided on flips of the coin, you would expect 2.5 titles out of 10 trips. So K's 3 titles is doing slightly better than averages would predict. Of course, the games aren't decided on coin flips, so you look at which Final Four participants are favorites. About the only Final Four trip where we were the favorite coming in and didn't win was 1999, where we lost to a UConn team that was sharing the #1/#2 argument with us all season...hardly the choke job upset that K-haters like to pretend it was. Even in 1986, when we were a 1 seed, we weren't a prohibitive favorite. In our other Final Four losses (1988, 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2004) we weren't the favorite coming into the weekend.

Not that K-haters will pay attention to any such logic. Since he won this year, they will simply revise their argument...K's won ONLY 4 titles in 11 Final Fours. He sucks!! (ps: he paid the refs for the 4 titles he did win)

[bdh21]

About the only Final Four trip where we were the favorite coming in and didn't win was 1999, where we lost to a UConn team that was sharing the #1/#2 argument with us all season...hardly the choke job upset that K-haters like to pretend it was.

IIRC, UCONN actually spent more weeks at #1 than Duke did in 1998-1999.

[Olympic Fan]

I always enjoy the bad math involved in this kind of argument. Only 3 titles in 10 Final Fours. Given that there are 4 teams in the Final Four, if it were decided on flips of the coin, you would expect 2.5 titles out of 10 trips. So K's 3 titles is doing slightly better than averages would predict. Of course, the games aren't decided on coin flips, so you look at which Final Four participants are favorites. About the only Final Four trip where we were the favorite coming in and didn't win was 1999, where we lost to a UConn team that was sharing the #1/#2 argument with us all season...hardly the choke job upset that K-haters like to pretend it was. Even in 1986, when we were a 1 seed, we weren't a prohibitive favorite. In our other Final Four losses (1988, 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2004) we weren't the favorite coming into the weekend.

Good points ...

I've always thought that once you get to the Final Four, you're playing somebody pretty darn good -- in what should be close to a 50-50 game.

It's interesting to me that K is now 8-3 in national semifinal games, which is much better than you would expect ... he's 4-4 in title games, which is exactly what you would expect.

Let's see ... for comparison sake, let's take Dean Smith who is tied with K with 11 Final Fours. El-Deano is 5-6 in semifinal games (just a little below expectations) and 2-3 in title games (again, just a little below expectations).

Just for fun, let me break down K's NCAA record by round:

First round: 23-2 (lost to E. Michigan in 1986; VCU in 2007; bye in 1984)
Second round: 19-5 (lost to Washington in 1984, Boston College in 1985, Cal in 1993, Providence in 1997, West Virginia in 2008)
Sweet 16: 12-7 (lost to Indiana in 1987, Florida in 2000, Indiana in 2002, Kansas in 2003, Michigan State in 2005, LSU in 2006, Villanova in 2009)
Elite Eight: 11-1 (lost only to Kentucky in 1998)
NCAA semifinals: 8-3 (lost to Kansas in 1988, Seton Hall in 1989, UConn in 2004)
Championship game: 4-4 (lost to Louisville in 1986; UNLV in 1990; Arkansas in 1994, UConn in 1999)

The oddity is Coach Ks' struggles in the Sweet 16 round ...

[jimsumner]

But Rupp won all those Helms' titles. K doesn't have a single Helms National Title, not a single, solitary one.

So, there. That settles it.

[ZJDUBYA]

I don't think there's any legitimate argument anymore about a coach other than Wooden being better than K.

He's got the numbers, the championships, the consistency, and he's done it at a time when the college basketball landscape has been continually changing, and changing in a way to make consistent excellence incredibly hard to maintain.

There are many college hoops coaches who had a place in the history of the game. The men who have shaped college basketball over the years deserve their due respect, and I mean no disrespect in elevating K over guys like Rupp, Dean Smith, Bobby Knight, etc.

But when it comes to winning...regular season games, conference championships, NCAA tournament games, Final Fours, titles, season after season for over a quarter century...there's no one better (with the one exception: Wooden's 10 NCAA tournament wins will always stand alone).

I agree 100%. Wooden is the only one probably better than K. Players are better now, there is more parity, 3 pt line makes a difference. What K has done is amazing. There are things Wooden did that no coach will ever come close to IMO. However if Coach K wins a couple of more titles I think you could make a strong case calling him the best college coach ever.

[throatybeard]

The oddity is Coach Ks' struggles in the Sweet 16 round ...

And even that isn't really that bad. This is just counting off the top of my head, but seven final fours and the 1987 loss to Indiana mean he was 7-1 pre-back-injury. Post-back, four FF appearances and the 1998 Region final mean five more wins in the S16. So that's 12-1. S16 losses in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2009. 12-7 altogether I think. Of those latter-day S16 losses, the only one that's arguably a travesty is 2002, and IU was the NCAA runner up.

Here's amazing, I think: since K got the engine purring in 1986, he's missed just five sweet sixteens. (93, 96, 97, 07, 08). Not counting 1995. So you're talking 19 S16s in 24 seasons.