Bobby Knight

[Eye]

I probably have a different take on Rupp than most because of an interview I did with John Green a few years ago. He was UCLA's best player on their '62 Final Four team. Obviously he knew I was recording the nearly hour-long interview in advance. Before I even had a chance to take the recorder out of my bag, he went out of his way to mention that Rupp was not racist, but that circumstances of where he was coaching made it nearly impossible for him to do the things he wanted to do. I have no way to confirm that, but I also know it's also stood with me for 2 1/2 years that a big-time college basketball player went out of his way to say that so someone would know that when it had nothing to do with the interview that was forthcoming.

[Uncle Rico]

Cancelling Adolph Rupp!  Sad!

Also, K over Knight 10 out of 10 times.

[JWags85]

Is Knight on the college basketball coaching Mount Rushmore? Easy to get it down to 5, Knight, Krzyzewski, Rupp, Smith, Wooden. Hard to get it down to 4.

Maybe a hot take, but I'll take Knight over Dean Smith.  I think you can argue prime Knight over Rupp pretty comfortably too.  Results wise, Rupp after integration was basically Mark Few.

[Uncle Rico]

Maybe a hot take, but I'll take Knight over Dean Smith.  I think you can argue prime Knight over Rupp pretty comfortably too.  Results wise, Rupp after integration was basically Mark Few.

I’d take Knight over Smith 10 out of 10.  Before the expansion of the tournament, which would have been a tougher league to win?  Big Ten or ACC?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Maybe a hot take, but I'll take Knight over Dean Smith. 

I would definitely agree with you here.  Knight upset UNC in the '81 Final, but also upset him in the Sweet 16 in 1984. That '84 Tarheel team was absolutely loaded as defending champions - undefeated in the ACC than year and probably the only team that was going to have a chance against Georgetown.

Of course IU then lost the E8 game against #7 seed Virginia...

[Uncle Rico]

I would definitely agree with you here.  Knight upset UNC in the '81 Final, but also upset him in the Sweet 16 in 1984. That '84 Tarheel team was absolutely loaded as defending champions - undefeated in the ACC than year and probably the only team that was going to have a chance against Georgetown.

Of course IU then lost the E8 game against #7 seed Virginia...

Tourney is a crapshoot

[MuggsyB]

I would definitely agree with you here.  Knight upset UNC in the '81 Final, but also upset him in the Sweet 16 in 1984. That '84 Tarheel team was absolutely loaded as defending champions - undefeated in the ACC than year and probably the only team that was going to have a chance against Georgetown.

Of course IU then lost the E8 game against #7 seed Virginia...

How could they be defending champions when NC State won it in 1983?

[Pakuni]

I've got Dean, and it's not particularly close.
Better winning percentage, twice as many Final Fours, more conference titles (17 to 11).
You can argue that Dean had more talent, and you'd be right. But recruiting talent is kind of a huge part of a coach's job.
Lastly, Dean remained a great coach to the end ... three Finals Fours in his last five seasons, including a championship. Knight faded into mediocrity ... zero FFs, zero conference titles, one Sweet 16 in his final 12 years of coaching.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

How could they be defending champions when NC State won it in 1983?

Ah. You are correct.  UNC won in '82.

[Uncle Rico]

I've got Dean, and it's not particularly close.
Better winning percentage, twice as many Final Fours, more conference titles (17 to 11).
You can argue that Dean had more talent, and you'd be right. But recruiting talent is kind of a huge part of a coach's job.
Lastly, Dean remained a great coach to the end ... three Finals Fours in his last five seasons, including a championship. Knight faded into mediocrity ... zero FFs, zero conference titles, one Sweet 16 in his final 12 years of coaching.

And he was a far better person, fwiw

[MU82]

Duke's back-to-back championship teams of 1991 and 1992 had one future NBA All-Star -- Grant Hill -- and he was more of a role player than star as a frosh and soph at Duke, averaging 11.2 points in 1991 (fifth on the team) and 14.0 points in 1992 (third on the team).

Laettner and Hurley were great college players, and Thomas Hill, Brian Davis and Antonio Lang were good college players. K needed them all to win those titles.

Knight had plenty of players who were outstanding in college, players that every other coach at the time would have killed (or at least choked Neil Reed) to have, even if they didn't go on to be NBA All-Stars. Benson, Buckner, May, Wilkerson, Alford, Daryl Thomas, Tolbert, Wittman, Woodson, and so on and so on.

Even great coaches need great players.

[lawdog77]

Duke's back-to-back championship teams of 1991 and 1992 had one future NBA All-Star -- Grant Hill -- and he was more of a role player than star as a frosh and soph at Duke, averaging 11.2 points in 1991 (fifth on the team) and 14.0 points in 1992 (third on the team).

Laettner and Hurley were great college players, and Thomas Hill, Brian Davis and Antonio Lang were good college players. K needed them all to win those titles.

Knight had plenty of players who were outstanding in college, players that every other coach at the time would have killed (or at least choked Neil Reed) to have, even if they didn't go on to be NBA All-Stars. Benson, Buckner, May, Wilkerson, Alford, Daryl Thomas, Tolbert, Wittman, Woodson, and so on and so on.

Even great coaches need great players.

Yep, Calbert Cheaney and Alan Henderson had pretty good NBA careers as well.

[Pakuni]

Duke's back-to-back championship teams of 1991 and 1992 had one future NBA All-Star -- Grant Hill -- and he was more of a role player than star as a frosh and soph at Duke, averaging 11.2 points in 1991 (fifth on the team) and 14.0 points in 1992 (third on the team).

Laettner and Hurley were great college players, and Thomas Hill, Brian Davis and Antonio Lang were good college players. K needed them all to win those titles.

Knight had plenty of players who were outstanding in college, players that every other coach at the time would have killed (or at least choked Neil Reed) to have, even if they didn't go on to be NBA All-Stars. Benson, Buckner, May, Wilkerson, Alford, Daryl Thomas, Tolbert, Wittman, Woodson, and so on and so on.

Even great coaches need great players.

Depending on your views on Knight, you can look at it one of two ways:
- Knight had tons of success with players who didn't go on to stellar NBA careers.
- Knight routinely recruited highly ranked high school players and failed to develop them into high-level NBA players.

Knight didn't have the talent of some of his peers (Dean, Coach K, John Thompson), but he wasn't bringing scrubs to IU either. Between 1977 and 2000, IU landed 21 McDonald's AAs. Not too bad.

[lawdog77]

Depending on your views on Knight, you can look at it one of two ways:
- Knight had tons of success with players who didn't go on to stellar NBA careers.
- Knight routinely recruited highly ranked high school players and failed to develop them into high-level NBA players.

Knight didn't have the talent of some of his peers (Dean, Coach K, John Thompson), but he wasn't bringing scrubs to IU either. Between 1977 and 2000, IU landed 21 McDonald's AAs. Not too bad.

His job wasn't to develop them into NBA players. The game has changed since then. A guy who runs that kind of offense, and has that kind of personality wouldn't be getting near as many McD AA. The players have more leverage now.

[MU82]

Depending on your views on Knight, you can look at it one of two ways:
- Knight had tons of success with players who didn't go on to stellar NBA careers.
- Knight routinely recruited highly ranked high school players and failed to develop them into high-level NBA players.

Knight didn't have the talent of some of his peers (Dean, Coach K, John Thompson), but he wasn't bringing scrubs to IU either. Between 1977 and 2000, IU landed 21 McDonald's AAs. Not too bad.

Knight successfully recruited very good to great talent until his last 7-8 years at Indiana, and he was a great coach who knew how to produce great teams and great results from that talent. When more great players decided they could have great college careers without being bullied by Bobby, the talent was lesser, and so was the winning.

We see every single year lots of players who are outstanding in college but aren't NBA-star material. We've had a lot of them at Marquette. Hell, Al had a lot of them at Marquette -- I don't remember seeing Thompson, Lackey, Meminger, Lee and Ellis on many NBA All-Star teams.

I know you're not saying any different from all that, Pak.

[Lennys Tap]

Maybe a hot take, but I'll take Knight over Dean Smith.  I think you can argue prime Knight over Rupp pretty comfortably too.  Results wise, Rupp after integration was basically Mark Few.

100%

[muhoosier260]

It's wild to me how many people are  calling him 'complicated', national press, people on Facebook, and here as well. I suppose if you agree with that sentiment and repeat it enough, others might start believing it. The guy was a jagoff, a crybaby, and a bully, full stop. He only had himself to blame for his lack of self control, leading to his inability to replicate his big stage success later in his career, as players got wise and didn't want to play for such a guy.

[JWags85]

His job wasn't to develop them into NBA players. The game has changed since then. A guy who runs that kind of offense, and has that kind of personality wouldn't be getting near as many McD AA. The players have more leverage now.

I think that is a big part of the difference in the end of career for Knight and Dean Smith.  Dean Smith had the cache of coaching the best basketball player of all time who became the biggest athlete brand in history and elevated UNC stature with it.  Knight on the other hand had vocal critics, both justified and overzealous, calling into question any number of things about him as a coach.

I don’t think Knight tremendously lost his touch as a coach while Smith didn’t (his coaching at TTU was actually pretty remarkable considering how bad it was in Lubbock.  First S16 in a decade and 2004 was just the second time winning a tourney game in 30 years). I just think the marketing around them and their programs fundamentally changed for a number of reasons.  While Knight obviously bears a fair amount of responsibility for his IU shine decreasing later on, some of it was beyond just his abilities as a coach/recruiter.  On a similar plane, some of the huge boost in appeal and marketing for UNC that Dean Smith benefitted from was not of his doing and beyond just his coaching, unless we’re giving Dean credit for Jordan brand and it’s cache

[MuggsyB]

I mean if you're looking at pure basketball coaching within the lines I think most would slot Knight ahead of Smith.  But when you consider the totality of the job which includes recruiting, relationships, community respect, etc, Dean certainly would be the choice.  I have never heard a single negative opinion of Dean Smith other than he should have won more titles with his talent.  It's hard to cut down the nets and there is some luck involved for sure. 

[MuggsyB]

On a side note Al McGuire is grossly underrated as an all-time great coach and I'm not just saying this because I am biased.  I've seen some if these lists, they're absurd/inexcusable.

[tower912]

I would rank Smith ahead of Knight.   On the court and off.

[Pakuni]

I think that is a big part of the difference in the end of career for Knight and Dean Smith.  Dean Smith had the cache of coaching the best basketball player of all time who became the biggest athlete brand in history and elevated UNC stature with it.  Knight on the other hand had vocal critics, both justified and overzealous, calling into question any number of things about him as a coach.

I don’t think Knight tremendously lost his touch as a coach while Smith didn’t (his coaching at TTU was actually pretty remarkable considering how bad it was in Lubbock.  First S16 in a decade and 2004 was just the second time winning a tourney game in 30 years). I just think the marketing around them and their programs fundamentally changed for a number of reasons.  While Knight obviously bears a fair amount of responsibility for his IU shine decreasing later on, some of it was beyond just his abilities as a coach/recruiter.  On a similar plane, some of the huge boost in appeal and marketing for UNC that Dean Smith benefitted from was not of his doing and beyond just his coaching, unless we’re giving Dean credit for Jordan brand and it’s cache

I think you may be underrating just how good UNC was before MJ came along.
In the 15 seasons pre-Jordan, UNC went to six Final Fours and  and three title games. They produced eight all-Americans and future NBA all stars like Bob McAdoo, Bobby Jones, James Worthy and Charlie Scott.
MJ obviously added luster to the brand, but they were an elite program long before he was on the scene. I don't think it's fair to suggest Dean in part owes his late-career success to MJ's brand.

[MuggsyB]

I would rank Smith ahead of Knight.   On the court and off.

Al said he fked up at the Omni going into "The Four Corners" against the Warriors. 

[Uncle Rico]

It's wild to me how many people are  calling him 'complicated', national press, people on Facebook, and here as well. I suppose if you agree with that sentiment and repeat it enough, others might start believing it. The guy was a jagoff, a crybaby, and a bully, full stop. He only had himself to blame for his lack of self control, leading to his inability to replicate his big stage success later in his career, as players got wise and didn't want to play for such a guy.

I think that’s fair

[Pakuni]

It's wild to me how many people are  calling him 'complicated', national press, people on Facebook, and here as well. I suppose if you agree with that sentiment and repeat it enough, others might start believing it. The guy was a jagoff, a crybaby, and a bully, full stop. He only had himself to blame for his lack of self control, leading to his inability to replicate his big stage success later in his career, as players got wise and didn't want to play for such a guy.

Complicated is euphemistic way of calling a dead person an a-hole.