1. #1
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Why do so many elite programs struggle???

    Michigan just beat OSU for the first time since 03. Granted osu has been very good but its Michigan and this shouldn't happen to elite programs.

    Notre Dame has all the history. However it's just that, history.

    Nebraska used to be one of the best year in and year out. However that was years ago.

    This isn't exclusive to football by any means. Shouldn't the big name, history rich, sports programs get the best coaches and players? How do the other schools with less to offer continue to make storied programs sit in the back seat?

  2. #2
    Shaudius
    Shaudius's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-21-10
    Posts: 1,112
    Betpoints: 702

    One word: parity

    But I will expound. There's just so much talent to go around in the major sports. A basketball roster in college is basically 8-9 guys(yes I know they have more schollies but you only need 8-9), there are way way way more than 8-9 guys who are capable of hanging with the vast majority of college players.

    Think about it this way by way of example, UK a couple years ago got a loaded class, totally loaded, and they still lost a few times, and didn't even make the final four. Similarly, a loaded class last year didn't win it all.

    Some of this has to do with youth and inexperience, the one and done rule, etc. But a lot of has to do with the spread out of talent, and more of it to go around(1-5 don't all go to one school even in the best of years for that school).

    To answer more aptly, schools have ebb and flow, you can't land the best recruits every year for many many reasons.
    Also sometimes a scandal will cause recruits to look elsewhere, mismanagement of the program can cause even the best of programs to fall on hard times.

    Furthermore, most storied program really are the responsibility of one coach, once that coach leaves it is potential that that program falls off and has trouble regaining. I will speak to basketball because its what I know more about. UCLA is basically a program that rests on John Wooden(yes I understand other coaches also had success there but not to the level of Wooden, he built the program), Roberto Noche is the reason that IU is as respected as it is, and viewed as a blue blood program. Tom Izzo built MSU(yes I realize his predecessor also had success, Heathcote won a championship with Magic, but that's not why the program is considered a blue blood now, its the 16 years of Izzo). I am sure there are more examples but that's just a few.

    I guess my tangential point is programs are built by big names, and that's why you think they're blue bloods. Here's a quiz, what basketball team has the most big ten titles in basketball? Do you think its IU? Do you think its MSU? How about OSU? Those are all not the right answer, its Purdue. Purdue also holds a 112-84 series advantage versus IU. Purdue also has a winning record against every other school in the Big Ten.

    Why isn't Purdue considered a blue blood? Because they didn't have a coach with that cachet(Gene Keady just isn't big enough in the minds of the general public). That's just one example, but there are many others. What you think is the storied programs, are usually just programs with one good coach who made you think of them that way is my point.

    The same can be said for football, but to a smaller degree because it takes way more players to field a competitive football team, but the same principals above apply.
    Last edited by Shaudius; 11-26-11 at 08:30 PM.

  3. #3
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaudius View Post
    One word: parity
    What do schools like Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, and North Carolina do have top 10 teams??? They battle the same issues as other programs but are always good.

  4. #4
    Powderguy
    Powderguy's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-18-09
    Posts: 6,939
    Betpoints: 54

    All the schools they used to crush back in the day are all improving and are on equal playing fields in terms of talent, PARITY

  5. #5
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Quote Originally Posted by Powderguy View Post
    All the schools they used to crush back in the day are all improving and are on equal playing fields in terms of talent, PARITY
    Do you think there is an overall bigger % of elite athletes making it possible for more schools to recruit higher end talent?

  6. #6
    Powderguy
    Powderguy's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-18-09
    Posts: 6,939
    Betpoints: 54

    Quote Originally Posted by Djstucky View Post

    Do you think there is an overall bigger % of elite athletes making it possible for more schools to recruit higher end talent?
    Yes...Over the past 20 years I'd say the training programs have gotten more efficient and productive thus producing more elite to upper echelon athletes for schools to choose from.

  7. #7
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Quote Originally Posted by Powderguy View Post
    Yes...Over the past 20 years I'd say the training programs have gotten more efficient and productive thus producing more elite to upper echelon athletes for schools to choose from.
    I totally agree...also some of these programs have brought in coaches that are completely different from what they were for many decades prior. This hasn't always worked out so well...

  8. #8
    Shaudius
    Shaudius's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-21-10
    Posts: 1,112
    Betpoints: 702

    Quote Originally Posted by Djstucky View Post
    What do schools like Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, and North Carolina do have top 10 teams??? They battle the same issues as other programs but are always good.
    Short memory. UK was terrible for many years before Coach Cal got there. coach K is basically responsible for 90% of Duke's blue blood status(over 30 years), Vic Bubas and Bill Foster had success too, but not nearly to the level that would make the program be considered elite to be elite. Dean Smith is largely responsible for UNC. Kansas is about the only program you can really trace to more than one coach, and really it was mostly created to prominence due to two facts, Phog Allen was amazing in the early days of the game, and the creator of the game coached there.

    So in summary:

    UK - fell on hard times very recently, paid a lot of money to have program regain prominence.
    Duke - Memory makes it seem like they've had a longer storied success than they really have since Coach K has been there forever.
    UNC - The coach basically just before the current guy made the program and Roy Williams managed to not **** up the ship. By hiring a coach from KU who was a proven commodity in Roy, UNC managed to take the success of the coach who built the program and continue it.
    Kansas - Only consistent program for any period of time that can't be traced to just one coach, it was Phog Allen followed by Ted Owens, then Larry Brown then Roy Williams.
    Last edited by Shaudius; 11-26-11 at 08:53 PM.

  9. #9
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Kentucky won the national title twice in the 90's and was the runner up in 97...their program goes back way way before coach cal...They rank 2nd in national championships, 1st in tourny appearances, 14 final fours 4th all time, and the only school to have 4 different coaches will national championship wins, they also lead all time in sweet 16 and elite 8 games...This program wasn't built by ANYTHING coach cal has done...although he's a good coach...

  10. #10
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Duke is coach K that is for sure...

  11. #11
    ttwarrior1
    ttwarrior1's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 06-23-09
    Posts: 28,299
    Betpoints: 9617

    uh he is talking about why does one team never beat one certain team

  12. #12
    InTheDrink
    Drinker of the Year
    InTheDrink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-23-09
    Posts: 23,983
    Betpoints: 527

    basketball and football cant be compared in terms of parity

    in hoops one or two players make all the difference and mid-major/non traditional powers who recruit lesser players stand a better chance because their players stay for four years

    in football it's a constantly shifting balance of power....oklahoma had some down years before stoops got there and now they're back...texas has slid back and forth....florida the same...alabama was down just four or five years ago....what does it all come down to? not just head coaches but entire coaching staffs who are great coaches but more important are great recruits....look at lsu and bama...all 5 stars all over the field

    college football only has moderately more parity than it did 20 years ago
    Points Awarded:

    Djstucky gave InTheDrink 1 SBR Point(s) for this post.


  13. #13
    InTheDrink
    Drinker of the Year
    InTheDrink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-23-09
    Posts: 23,983
    Betpoints: 527

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwarrior1 View Post
    uh he is talking about why does one team never beat one certain team
    goddamn you really are THAT stupid huh?

  14. #14
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    You are correct inthedrink...some of these schools have down years but generally speaking they bounce back and are the best or one of the best teams year in and year out. I just don't understand why some of these programs can't seem to do the same...notre dame football for instance...I would think this program would be top 10 almost every year if not every year...I am not picking on ND as they are just one example...
    Last edited by Djstucky; 11-26-11 at 09:35 PM.

  15. #15
    InTheDrink
    Drinker of the Year
    InTheDrink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-23-09
    Posts: 23,983
    Betpoints: 527

    i think it's just bad hires....and in nd's case their academic standards dont help

    look at their hire of o'leary....they have these high standards and they couldnt do a proper background check of the guy before giving him the job? kelly might not end up being a bad hire but i mean common this should be the #1 job in college football...stud coaches should be racing to take the job all things $ being equal....probably a lot of reasons for tht not happening

  16. #16
    Shaudius
    Shaudius's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-21-10
    Posts: 1,112
    Betpoints: 702

    Quote Originally Posted by Djstucky View Post
    Kentucky won the national title twice in the 90's and was the runner up in 97...their program goes back way way before coach cal...They rank 2nd in national championships, 1st in tourny appearances, 14 final fours 4th all time, and the only school to have 4 different coaches will national championship wins, they also lead all time in sweet 16 and elite 8 games...This program wasn't built by ANYTHING coach cal has done...although he's a good coach...
    I wasn't saying UK doesn't have history, I was giving an example of how you are wrong that supposedly blue blood teams are consistently in the top 10 or are always good, UK had almost a decade of mediocrity as recently as 3 years ago. My point about UK was not about one coach, but my point was that one coach can bring a program to prominence(and more often than not is responsible for it coming to prominence in the first place). Thus disproving your point that certain teams are always good.

  17. #17
    Shaudius
    Shaudius's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-21-10
    Posts: 1,112
    Betpoints: 702

    Quote Originally Posted by Djstucky View Post
    You are correct inthedrink...some of these schools have down years but generally speaking they bounce back and are the best or one of the best teams year in and year out. I just don't understand why some of these programs can't seem to do the same...notre dame football for instance...I would think this program would be top 10 almost every year if not every year...I am not picking on ND as they are just one example...
    They are willing to pay for coaches that bring the best players. The teams that are generally considered blue bloods have done so by having one coach for decades and decades who has built the program to prominence(UK and KU in basketball being exceptions).

    Notre Dame football hasn't been able to find that coach that can bring the spark back to their program. A lot of this has to do with high expectations not allowing coaches time to build a program. University of Michigan football is suffering from the same phenomena(but look at what Brady Hoke was able to do with all of Rich Rod's players).
    Points Awarded:

    Djstucky gave Shaudius 1 SBR Point(s) for this post.


  18. #18
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    I see what you are saying but if you take the entire history of let's say a Kentucky they may have a year here a year there or even a few years where they aren't great. Ultimately because of tradition, amongst other things they always reach the elite level again rather quickly. This is true with many college sport powerhouses but isn't the case with others.

  19. #19
    Shaudius
    Shaudius's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-21-10
    Posts: 1,112
    Betpoints: 702

    Quote Originally Posted by Djstucky View Post
    I see what you are saying but if you take the entire history of let's say a Kentucky they may have a year here a year there or even a few years where they aren't great. Ultimately because of tradition, amongst other things they always reach the elite level again rather quickly. This is true with many college sport powerhouses but isn't the case with others.
    I think its only the case because our institutional memory isn't that long. I think it ultimately comes down to money, and the ability to lure top coaches with proven records and ability to recruit away from smaller programs.

    I am reminded of this quotation by Norm Ornstein, "Winning comes to those who look like winners." Reputation is what makes a successful program. A lot of a school's reputation is built through the coach, the rest is built through program history. UK had the history, but they didn't have the coach that they wanted in the 2000s. Tubby Smith by all accounts was a very good basketball coach, but UK has built up such high standards in their head that a drought of that many years without a final four was unacceptable. They ran him out on a rail basically, and hired someone who was bad for the program. They paid their way back into what they think is preeminence through Coach Cal.

    Other programs can't spend like UK and don't have the history to fall back on, so they settle for a few years here and there of success. Or they can't get a coach to stick because they have built up such high standards in their head of how good their program should be. Thats ultimately the issue, to be successful year in and year out you need to spend spend spend, have the right coach and give him time to work.

  20. #20
    InTheDrink
    Drinker of the Year
    InTheDrink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-23-09
    Posts: 23,983
    Betpoints: 527

    in most cases you can look at the alumni donors of a school and figure out who's gonna win

    bammer backers werent going to put up with losing so the $$ came pouring in to make saban happen

    coaches make the difference and the schools that have the scratch to get the best coaches generally will

    that's why most power schools slide a little and then come back....and others like a BC will just be a flash in the pan here and there
    Points Awarded:

    Djstucky gave InTheDrink 1 SBR Point(s) for this post.

    Nomination(s):
    This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: MadTiger

  21. #21
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Very good post shaudius and inthedrink...good stuff

  22. #22
    InTheDrink
    Drinker of the Year
    InTheDrink's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-23-09
    Posts: 23,983
    Betpoints: 527



    the best is when you have a school like mississippi and they try to throw their hat in the ring by wooing "big name" houston nutt

    how'd that turn out

  23. #23
    Djstucky
    Djstucky's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-27-11
    Posts: 2,993
    Betpoints: 454

    Quote Originally Posted by InTheDrink View Post

    the best is when you have a school like mississippi and they try to throw their hat in the ring by wooing "big name" houston nutt

    how'd that turn out
    That has gone over like a lead balloon...amazing how shit backfires...

Top