
Originally Posted by
uh_no
So by your argument, nobody who hasn't coached D1 basketball can ever have a valid opinion about college basketball that differs from Coach K, and by extension, no other active coach can have such an opinion?
There are different ways to go about things. K uses man to man, boeheim uses zone. Is boeheim wrong becuase his teams haven't won as many games as coach K's? That seems to be what you assert here. People can have reasonable disagreements with coach K's methods, and if coach K's methods are so defensible, then you should be able to come up with a better argument than the ad hominem "he's won more games than you so your opinion is invalid and wrong"
I think what he's trying to say is that it is amazing how many guys on here who have maybe coached in the local 10-year-old rec league and maybe played on their high school basketball team seem to think they saw something in the game that prolly slipped by Coach K, or think that if they had been coaching the game, they would've instituted such-and-such a strategy and it undoubtedly would have succeeded, as though they KNOW MORE about basketball than Coach K and the staff. The concept is a bit ludicrous. Sort of like telling the chief of surgery at Johns Hopkins how to perform a coronary bypass because you watch medical shows on TV a lot.
"We are not provided with wisdom, we must discover it for ourselves, after a journey through the wilderness which no one else can take for us, an effort which no one can spare us, for our wisdom is the point of view from which we come at last to regard the world." --M. Proust