What Buzz Williams and George Karl Have in Common

[MULS1999]

While the rewards at the highest level seem extravagant, coaching basketball is a tough business. 

Some coaches are built for the long haul.  They don't get too high, they don't get too low, they keep their perspective and stay focused on their plan for sustained success.  Unfortunately, in this what-have-you-done-for-me-lately industry, many coaches of this type don't win enough soon enough and, as a result, are never given the time necessary to see their vision come to fruition -- even if what they were building and how they were building it was sound.

Other coaches, including some very successful ones, aren't builders by nature, but are very good at delivering immediate results. These coaches often demand that players buy in (or even bully them into it) rather than building and earning mutual respect over time.  For awhile, this approach can work, particularly while things are going well.  However, when things start to go south, they go south quickly.  That's what happens when trust is a one-way proposition, and when it is demanded rather than earned. 

As I watched this season, I was reminded of George Karl's final days in Milwaukee (and well, his final days in pretty every job he's ever had).  Like Buzz, George was prickly and demanding.  In his relationships, he often took more than he gave.  While he was creative in how he motivated players, he often did so through psychological and emotional manipulation.  But people can only tolerate that kind of treatment for so long.  Eventually, they see it for what it is, commitment turns to alienation, and everything goes to crap.

Despite whatever he achieved during a given tenure, this is always how things ended for Coach Karl and, I think, this is the career path Coach Buzz is destined to follow.  It doesn't mean he won't be successful; George Karl is a hall of fame caliber coach.  It's just that neither is a builder.

After a few years, Buzz's act (like Karl's) will wear thin.  He'll lose the trust of his players, his relationships with superiors will fracture and, rather than try to fix both, he'll move on to another job at which he'll likely repeat the same cycle.  Again, that approach may net him millions more dollars and even a championship, but it won't allow him ever to be the face of an institution for a decade or more. 

As I listened to what our players had to say today, it confirmed for me that there was no flashpoint event that triggered the end of the Buzz Williams era at Marquette.  There is no investigation or cover-up.  He didn't lie or cheat or commit some fireable offense. 

What happened was that the check for how he had run the program over the past few years finally came due.  And when it did, he looked around and saw the support he had squandered, the locker room he had lost, and he (probably wisely) decided to start fresh somewhere else.

He'll do it again, just you watch.

[GB Warrior]

I thought for sure you were going to go with "They're both cancerous"

[hepennypacker5000]

Awfully strong conclusions for an n of 2.

[MULS1999]

Awfully strong conclusions for an n of 2.

Oh, there are plenty of examples:  Tim Floyd, Larry Brown, Rick Adelman, Jim Harrick, Mike D'Antoni, Larry Eustacy.  Our former HC's Kevin O'Neil and Rick Majerus (R.I.P.) also fit this profile to an extent. 

[amen426]

The big differences between these comparisons when they both came to Milwaukee...

Prior Coaching Success:
Karl- Previously coached Seattle for 7 NBA seasons; Won 4 Pacific Division Titles; appeared in one NBA Finals.
Buzz- Previously coached the U of N for 1 season. Quit on team. 

Milwaukee Teams Success leading up to hire:
Karl- The Bucks had missed 7 straight playoff appearances.
Buzz- The Golden Eagles had made 3 straight NCAA Tournament appearances. The big 3 were seniors; Hayward was a Junior.

Circumstances surrounding hire:
Karl- Was hired as a highly sought after upgrade to a franchise that coveted his experience to take it to the next level. He was "the guy", and the Bucks were seen as lucky to land him.
Buzz- He was the third choice, and it was largely seen as a great opportunity for Buzz.

Success in year 1:
Karl - Made playoffs for first time in 8 years.
Buzz - Lost in round 2, similar to the prior year.

Highest Success:
Karl - Made Eastern Conference Finals. Was a Game 6 jumpshot away from the NBA Finals.
Buzz - Made Elite 8

With that being said -- George had taken a struggling franchise to successes they hadn't experienced in decades. Furthermore, Karl actually had an actual history of success prior to his time with the Bucks. The Bucks brought him in to take the young talent to the next level -- which he did. He had an ego, but he had 12+ years of NBA success prior to his demise in Milwaukee.

Buzz experienced success in his 6 years. But he inherited a good program, in a great situation. He was given a great opportunity, and quickly forgot about how lucky he was to be given that job at the time. 

It'll be interesting to see if Buzz can duplicate his success, like Karl did in Seattle, Milwaukee, and Denver. Va Tech is not Marquette.

I'm not a Buzz hater by any means. But please don't compare a 7-year college coach to the NBA's 7th most winningest coach. Karl turned mediocre teams into winners. Buzz has turned winners into winners.. And wanted to get patted on the back every year for doing so.

[77ncaachamps]

What Buzz thinks of your analysis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rIH4227l778#t=5

[MULS1999]

I'm not a Buzz hater by any means. But please don't compare a 7-year college coach to the NBA's 7th most winningest coach. Karl turned mediocre teams into winners. Buzz has turned winners into winners.. And wanted to get patted on the back every year for doing so.

I wasn't making a literal comparison between their time in Milwaukee, but there are parallels in approach and how their tenures ended.  Also, take a look at the rosters Karl inherited in Seattle and Milwaukee; both were stacked.