Huggins is VERY Overrated
- Thread starter Doc Tydon
- Start date
As disappointed as I can be with Huggs I would never say that he is overrated. His success over the years speaks for itself.
But alongside of the success ....
But alongside of the success ....
7 dance appearances in 9 years! 3 sweet 16 appearances, one final four, only bounced twice in first round. We were picked to finish 6th in the conference this year. We finished second, and got beat by a tough 1st round draw. Huggins does it his way....it doesn't always produce, but his consistent winning is undeniable!!!! Stop being an emotional little d-bag!!!! Sound like a child! There will be s statue of Huggins outside the Coliseum someday!
Maybe getting picked to finish sixth tells a little about what his peers think of his coaching.
Has he not been successful everywhere he has coached???? I guess being in the top 10 in career wins is no big deal????
I agree with your point that his peers are very poor at judging coaching talent.
This info usually produces bad behavior. Let's hope not though.
Last edited:
Well .... his two most significant coaching stints are at Cincy and WVU. In both places he has had teams that went belly-up in the NCAAs. As I have said elsewhere ... losing is not the issue, it's how they lost.
Even Gale Catlet beat a more highly regarded Huggs coached Cincy team in the NCAAs.
So....,.what is your answer know it all???? Who do you want in there????? Do you just want to sit at your computer and tell everyone that Huggins is horrible and everyone should know that by now? I mean, say something that has weight, or shut the &@"%# up! Taking this loss is tough enough without jag offs like you bashing our coach. Huggins played here! Born in Morgantown, and WANTED to be here to coach. Since arriving 9 yrs ago....he taken us to 7 dances, the sweet 16 three times, and the final four once! That means only 4 years since coming HOME, he has fallen short of the second round in the NCAA. I'm happy he's here. JB was good, but he didn't want to be here. Catlet never produced anywhere close to this.....shut up, please!
Catlett made the tournament 8 of 23 years
Beilien 2 of 5, Huggs 7 of 9 including a run to the final 4. If you think wvu will do better than this current run when Huggs retires, you are crazy. Losing sucks especially in the tournament, but look at the big picture. This is an amazing run for wvu hoops even with a couple of first round losses.
Beilien 2 of 5, Huggs 7 of 9 including a run to the final 4. If you think wvu will do better than this current run when Huggs retires, you are crazy. Losing sucks especially in the tournament, but look at the big picture. This is an amazing run for wvu hoops even with a couple of first round losses.
Huggins has the distinction as the coach with the most all time NCAA wins without making a championship game. He is one of only 3 coaches with at least 20 tournament wins and no appearance in a championship game. The other two are John Chaney and Rick Barnes. In his career Huggins has made the NCAA or NIT 24 times. He has only made it past the first week 8 of those times even though he has taken highly seeded teams many times, especially at Cincinnati.
He's a good coach, which is obvious by his overall win percentage, but he's not a great tournament coach where you have to adjust and game plan quickly against unfamiliar opponents.
He's a good coach, which is obvious by his overall win percentage, but he's not a great tournament coach where you have to adjust and game plan quickly against unfamiliar opponents.
wanna talk about actual overrated? Calipari. Give Huggins those type of recruiting classes and see what happens. If Huggins was landing elite top 10 recruiting classes year in, year out...............then sure. But he does not.
Recruiting is part of coaching.
A huge part.
No what-ifs.....it just is...
A huge part.
No what-ifs.....it just is...
You do realize that WVU is not going to get the same recruits that a UK or Duke or Kansas gets, right? Or do you think that is Huggs fault, too? Huggins has done pretty damn good with the guys he's gotten to come in thus far.
I do realize that fact.
You do realize that some of those places are only special destinations because a basketball coach made them become it..._right ?
Huggs ain't one of those guys.
why not? If Calipari were coaching in Morgantown, we'd have classes that talented.
I'd love to get in a battle of wits with the OP, but it wouldn't be a fair fight.
Of course Huggins Is NOT overrated. Any unbiased, outside expert would tell you that. You don't get into the top 10 all-time in coaching without being damn good. This season was Huggins' best coaching job at WVU. Discussion over. Unequivocally.
Of course Huggins Is NOT overrated. Any unbiased, outside expert would tell you that. You don't get into the top 10 all-time in coaching without being damn good. This season was Huggins' best coaching job at WVU. Discussion over. Unequivocally.
CFE... I love you man....
...but I know that you understand coaching at the college level is more than what happens during games.
Maybe.....and we would probably exit in the 2nd round like he did with his 5-6 NBA prospects like he did this year.....so what is the difference? Huggins gets more out of HIS recruits than Calipari out of his.
So you don't think that the national media has something to do with that? When youngsters turn on the TV, it's all about UK, Kansas, Duke, UNC, etc etc etc. WVU beats a top 10 team, and we just HOPE that we make the highlights before the first commercial break on SportsCenter. These kids don't know much about the "history" of these programs unless the national media indoctrinates it in to them over and over and over and over again. Statements like "if you want to get ready for the NBA, going to Duke/UNC/UK/KU will get you ready". Really? So when there are only about 60 guys that will go to the NBA, and only about 50% of those will actually make it, should the national media be pushing this over getting an education, learning the game, and becoming a GOOD MAN????? I think Huggs teaches that to these players.
Then you have the connections to the AAU circuit that these coaches, like Calipari, have. It may not be revealed for some time, but there are some back alley deals going down and I would be SHOCKED if it doesn't get revealed shortly after his retirement.
Take a breath, everyone. It was a disappointing loss. I really thought we had a chance to make some noise. It didn't happen. The sun came up and we move on. It was a tough match-up. We were sloppy with the ball all season and it ended up having a high cost. Is that about coaching? Not really. Huggs talked about with the media all season...do you think he never mentioned it to the team? That's just who they are as players. Gotta take the good with the bad. Because they did a lot of things very well. I wish we could shoot better because that cures many ills. I think that is something that can be addressed with personnel. However, that personnel has to match what the philosophy is. I think that's a rare cat.
If you think that having Calipari at coach changes the dynamics of everything...I think you're wrong. I think we would have different players,but I don't know for sure that much changes. Don't discount the history and excellence at UK. They've been good for a long time with different coaches. Sure, they've had some issues, but some good teams, too.
In the end, just take a breath.
If you think that having Calipari at coach changes the dynamics of everything...I think you're wrong. I think we would have different players,but I don't know for sure that much changes. Don't discount the history and excellence at UK. They've been good for a long time with different coaches. Sure, they've had some issues, but some good teams, too.
In the end, just take a breath.
Those Buffalo Bills that lost four Super Bowls in a row have to be the worst football team ever...
Your passive-aggressive shots at everything on here isn't fooling anybody. We know you were being serious, or you wouldn't keep backing it up in this thread.
At Cincinnati Huggins got players like Kenyon Martin, Demar Johnson ect. At K State he got players like Michael Beasley, Bill Walker ect. At WVU he got Devin Ebanks. You would think a coach like Huggins would be able to get 1 All American in a recruiting class. I don't buy the notion that Huggins can't get players like that at WVU. I'm not saying he should be able to get a class full of 4 and 5 star players. But he should be able to get at least 1 a year. If not maybe he should try and hire some assistants who can.
NumberONEboy...................you ain't bonafide. You failed on your first shot. That's all she wrote for you!
Calipari is dirty and always has been..these players are getting $$$..his newest recruit "Bam" from NC..it was down to UNC and Duke..then he pledges to Kentucky..ha..
Calipari is the biggest cheater in all of sports..He had Memphis and UMass both placed on probation and yet he still gets hired by Kentucky..those players are getting money..the best player in NC "Bam" commited to KY, but is was down to UNC or Duke..KY rolled out the green carpet.
HA! I'm sure 99% of the coaches out there would trade their record for any failures and multiple successes Huggins has had over the years. How myopic to focus on his few failures compared to an overwhelming winning record and a couple final fours.
At some point, don't we need to disclose where we think Huggins is rated as a coach before we label him over, under or appropriately rated.
Some things are not ratings, but simply objective numbers. Number of wins would be a prime example. I don't think many people that coaches should be rated based on total number of career wins. Obviously, longevity is a factor and to an extent a large number of wins means little more than the person coached a long time. Now, obviously one needs to be permitted to coach a long time, so not many bad coaches will climb near the top of total wins lists, but it also has a lot to do when people first became head coaches. Huggins and Beilein were young, for example, and are not necessarily now better coaches than people who were assistants for a long time before becoming head coaches and thus have fewer wins at similar ages. They also aren't necessarily better than people who are simply younger than them and so have fewer wins. (or former coaches who retired aafter coaching for fewer years).
Winning percentage, while a better measure, is far from perfect. As some have alluded to above not all positions provide equal chances for success so that differentials in WP don't correspond to relative coaching ability. That also goes for conference titles, tournament success, etc. there are a handful of schools with large built-in advantages, a much larger number with built-in disadvantages and a lot in the middle. (And, even at those in the middle, timing is important. For example, it was a LOT easier to take over at WVU in 2007 than it was in 2002 so meaningfully comparing Beilein and Huggins at WVU requires more than looking at records).
In sum, if you are arguing Huggins is the 3rd best active coach because he's third on the total win list, you will need to defend that against charges of overrating. If you have him very near the top because of winning percentage, without allowing for the advantage he had coaching Cincinnati in relatively weak leagues for a lot of years you could also be accused of overrating.
If, on the other hand you don't have him in the upper echelon because he has only been to 2 final fours and no national titles, you are open to accusations of underrating because he's never been at a school where that was less than a herculean task. You would also be dismissing sustained success across a large number of conferences and a long period of time and changing rules, officiating differences and styles of play.
I'd personally say, he's at least in the top 20.
Some things are not ratings, but simply objective numbers. Number of wins would be a prime example. I don't think many people that coaches should be rated based on total number of career wins. Obviously, longevity is a factor and to an extent a large number of wins means little more than the person coached a long time. Now, obviously one needs to be permitted to coach a long time, so not many bad coaches will climb near the top of total wins lists, but it also has a lot to do when people first became head coaches. Huggins and Beilein were young, for example, and are not necessarily now better coaches than people who were assistants for a long time before becoming head coaches and thus have fewer wins at similar ages. They also aren't necessarily better than people who are simply younger than them and so have fewer wins. (or former coaches who retired aafter coaching for fewer years).
Winning percentage, while a better measure, is far from perfect. As some have alluded to above not all positions provide equal chances for success so that differentials in WP don't correspond to relative coaching ability. That also goes for conference titles, tournament success, etc. there are a handful of schools with large built-in advantages, a much larger number with built-in disadvantages and a lot in the middle. (And, even at those in the middle, timing is important. For example, it was a LOT easier to take over at WVU in 2007 than it was in 2002 so meaningfully comparing Beilein and Huggins at WVU requires more than looking at records).
In sum, if you are arguing Huggins is the 3rd best active coach because he's third on the total win list, you will need to defend that against charges of overrating. If you have him very near the top because of winning percentage, without allowing for the advantage he had coaching Cincinnati in relatively weak leagues for a lot of years you could also be accused of overrating.
If, on the other hand you don't have him in the upper echelon because he has only been to 2 final fours and no national titles, you are open to accusations of underrating because he's never been at a school where that was less than a herculean task. You would also be dismissing sustained success across a large number of conferences and a long period of time and changing rules, officiating differences and styles of play.
I'd personally say, he's at least in the top 20.
So Calipari is a liar and has instituted the 'pay to play' system at Kentucky. You joking. Right? If this is true............the NCAA should be notified immediately because it ain't right that all of the other coaches are honest and don't pay their players to play. I know that most all coaches refuse to pay the players because the money would come from their check. Dadgumit!
Similar threads
