Virginia's Tony Bennett Wins AP Coach Of The Year

[shadow force]

Virginia coach Tony Bennett was named The Associated Press men’s college basketball coach of the year on Thursday after the Cavaliers’ historic regular season.

While this year’s team will, no doubt, be remembered for its unprecedented loss in the NCAA tournament — becoming the first No. 1 seed to be upset by a No. 16 seed, UMBC in this case — Virginia finished at 31-3, which is a program record for single-season wins. It was also 20-1 in the ACC and was at the top of the AP poll for the final five weeks of the regular season.

Bennett earned 50 of 65 of the votes, and it’s important to note that these votes are cast before the NCAA tournament starts each year. Tennessee coach Rick Barnes was second, while Ohio State’s first-year coach Chris Holtmann was third.

 

[sword9mm]

good for him.

he'll still be remembered by the 1st 16 beating a 1 in the tourney.

remember; nothing matters until march.

 

[MikeMcCammon]

Kind of meaningless to vote for coach of the year before the NCAA even starts.

 

[nccardfan]

Kind of meaningless to vote for coach of the year before the NCAA even starts.

You mean like the Heisman?

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

LMFAO

 

[MikeMcCammon]

You mean like the Heisman?

Not really the same thing. How do you call a guy the best coach in the country after he becomes the first number 1 seed to lose to a 16? Bennett obviously had a great year but its like when Ray Meyer got coach of the year while losing in the first round with his top ranked team and Denny Crum getting no consideration in spite of all his post season accomplishments.

 

[cardfan17]

Coach of the year, LOL. Good one.

Does That make Ryan Odom coach of the millenium?

 

[CardX]

Kind of meaningless to vote for coach of the year before the NCAA even starts.

Not really. Post season means end of the regular season. Coaches are judged during the reg.

 

[MikeMcCammon]

Not really. Post season means end of the regular season. Coaches are judged during the reg.

That is why it is meaningless. A great coach develops a team throughout the year to be at its best in the tournament. Judging coaches by how their teams perform in December and January and not March is meaningless.

 

[CardX]

That is why it is meaningless. A great coach develops a team throughout the year to be at its best in the tournament. Judging coaches by how their teams perform in December and January and not March is meaningless.

A team's performance is not judged in December and January. It's judged for nearly 5 months. That's a pretty big window. TB deserved it. One game at a bad time shouldn't negate an entire season.

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

Do they count the post-season Tournaments, or is it just regular season?

If Kansas wins the NCAA Tournament they'll have played 40 games. 3 games in the Big 12 Tourney, and 6 NCAA games. So, if this is strictly a regular season award, 22% of Kansas games weren't evaluated for the award. That's a significant percentage. If the Big 12 Tourney games are evaluated, then it's 15%, still significant.

 

[zipp]

Bennett's the best coach in college basketball year in and out when talent is equal. That's true coaching ability, and I think a postseason award like this is entirely justified.

More and more every year, what happens in the NCAA is a crapshoot. And I've said this many times. It proves almost nothing...

 

[nccardfan]

Not really the same thing. How do you call a guy the best coach in the country after he becomes the first number 1 seed to lose to a 16? Bennett obviously had a great year but its like when Ray Meyer got coach of the year while losing in the first round with his top ranked team and Denny Crum getting no consideration in spite of all his post season accomplishments.

I’ll tell you why. Virginia wasn’t even top 25 preseason. Ended up being No.1 for a good part of the season. Weren’t ranked top 8 in ACC preseason. They won their 3rd? outright regular season championship. Outperformed the Dookies and the Heels with all their Mac boys. Enough said.

 

[MikeMcCammon]

I’ll tell you why. Virginia wasn’t even top 25 preseason. Ended up being No.1 for a good part of the season. Weren’t ranked top 8 in ACC preseason. They won their 3rd? outright regular season championship. Outperformed the Dookies and the Heels with all their Mac boys. Enough said.

Bennett has a style that so far accomplishes nothing in the NCAA. Doesn't matter if he goes undefeated every year in the regular season. If your team never lives up to reasonable expectations and always underachieves in the NCAA what does it matter? Is he a good coach? Yeah but a great coach does not flame out every year in the NCAA.

 

[zipp]

Bennett has a style that so far accomplishes nothing in the NCAA. Doesn't matter if he goes undefeated every year in the regular season. If your team never lives up to reasonable expectations and always underachieves in the NCAA what does it matter? Is he a good coach? Yeah but a great coach does not flame out every year in the NCAA.

How do you know Mack does?...

 

[gocards1987]

How do you know Mack does?...

Because he was successful in the tourney as much as you think Xavier would be.

 

[gocards1987]

Bennett's the best coach in college basketball year in and out when talent is equal. That's true coaching ability, and I think a postseason award like this is entirely justified.

More and more every year, what happens in the NCAA is a crapshoot. And I've said this many times. It proves almost nothing...

With Bennett the talent will never be equal though. Recruiting is a part of coaching. If you can't get good enough players to implement your plan it doesn't matter how good it is its still a waste. Bennett may be a great coach but he wouldn't last long here with the combo of the boring style and poor postseason results. If were hired here I don't think his recruiting gets that much better. He should have had better players than UMBC so the lack of talent isn't really an excuse for the loss.

 

[nccardfan]

Because he was successful in the tourney as much as you think Xavier would be.

What???? They were a No.1 seed and lost to a 9 seed, who we beat 2 out 3 times...

 

[MikeMcCammon]

What???? They were a No.1 seed and lost to a 9 seed, who we beat 2 out 3 times...

Regardless of seeding I would say Xavier lost to a team that was probably more talented and hitting their peak at the right time. One reason Mack wants to come here is to hopefully be able to recruit at a higher level then he could at Xavier.

 

[nccardfan]

Regardless of seeding I would say Xavier lost to a team that was probably more talented and hitting their peak at the right time. One reason Mack wants to come here is to hopefully be able to recruit at a higher level then he could at Xavier.

One reason? How about 4 million reasons?

 

[zipp]

With Bennett the talent will never be equal though. Recruiting is a part of coaching. If you can't get good enough players to implement your plan it doesn't matter how good it is its still a waste...

...One reason Mack wants to come here is to hopefully be able to recruit at a higher level then he could at Xavier.

These two statements are inconsistent... If Mack can get better talent here, so can Bennett. Recruits are attracted to U of L more than programs like UVA and Xavier...

 

[MikeMcCammon]

These two statements are inconsistent... If Mack can get better talent here, so can Bennett. Recruits are attracted to U of L more than programs like UVA and Xavier...

Keep trying. Bennett runs a system that is based on not having spectacular talent. If he ran the same system with top drawer talent it would not really create a significantly better team. That type of slow down and discipline only frustrates talented players. Bennett is in a good situation now and should stay there.

 

[zipp]

Keep trying. Bennett runs a system that is based on not having spectacular talent. If he ran the same system with top drawer talent it would not really create a significantly better team...

Yeah, you're a little short on your facts about a system attracting (or not) talent...

The same stuff has been said about coaches and systems for time eternal. The 85 Nova team played slow-down ball to win the NCAA championship. That roster had two 1st-round draft picks, one 2nd-round pick, and five draft picks overall.

And the team Nova beat in 85--Georgetown under John Thompson--played a similar style that emphasized defense. You want me to go down the list of marquee Georgetown players from the 80s and 90s, starting with Patrick Ewing and Allen Iverson?

If you win the majority of your games with a marquee program in a conference like the ACC, players will want to play for you. It's that simple...

 

[MikeMcCammon]

Yeah, you're a little short on your facts about a system attracting (or not) talent...

The same stuff has been said about coaches and systems for time eternal. The 85 Nova team played slow-down ball to win the NCAA championship. That roster had two 1st-round draft picks, one 2nd-round pick, and five draft picks overall.

And the team Nova beat in 85--Georgetown under John Thompson--played a similar style that emphasized defense. You want me to go down the list of marquee Georgetown players from the 80s and 90s, starting with Patrick Ewing and Allen Iverson?

If you win the majority of your games with a marquee program in a conference like the ACC, players will want to play for you. It's that simple...

You are drifting far far away from the subject which is Bennett. The reality is his system plus more talent is still a team that won't likely do well in the post season. In fact, his system with more talent would just allow lesser teams to stay in the game. He is a good coach but not a good fit for us.

 

[zipp]

You are drifting far far away from the subject which is Bennett. The reality is his system plus more talent is still a team that won't likely do well in the post season. In fact, his system with more talent would just allow lesser teams to stay in the game. He is a good coach but not a good fit for us.

You don't know that, you're speculating. Any system with more talent has an advantage over the same system with less. THAT makes sense.

If you're arguing otherwise, you'll need something more than what you think...

 

[MikeMcCammon]

Any system with more talent has an advantage over the same system with less. THAT makes sense.

Not if you restrain that talent with a tightly controlled system.

 

[zipp]

Not if you restrain that talent with a tightly controlled system.

That doesn't make sense. Nothing intuitive, just your opinion...

 

[MikeMcCammon]

That doesn't make sense. Nothing intuitive, just your opinion...

It makes sense to me. Handcuff high powered talent with a slow methodical style and it is no longer high powered talent.

 

[gocards1987]

These two statements are inconsistent... If Mack can get better talent here, so can Bennett. Recruits are attracted to U of L more than programs like UVA and Xavier...

Not really. As other posters replied, Bennett's system isn't attractive to top talent and it restricts guys with its rigidness. Its effective but I agree that it allows lesser talented teams to stay in games. The biggest need for Bennett't teams is that guys buy into the style of play vs just being the most talented. I also think that Uva is higher on the totem pole than Xavier. Uva has a bigger budget and Acc affiliation already. Xavier is a small school attempt to climb the ladder. I think that players that overlooked Mack at Xavier won't do so at Louisville and I'm not sure that is true for Bennett.

 

[gocards1987]

You don't know that, you're speculating. Any system with more talent has an advantage over the same system with less. THAT makes sense.

If you're arguing otherwise, you'll need something more than what you think...

Thats true but I do think that slow down systems with superior talent lessens possessions and allows lesser talented teams which also usually have less depth to stay in games they otherwise wouldn't. Florida Gulf Coast's win over Gtown a few years ago was a great example of this imo. Gtown was down big until the game got late and they had to come out of their slow down Princeton offense. They started to press and up the pass and Gtown immediately came roaring back in the game but it was too late at that point. I also think it was why ND struggled so much when they used the burn offense. It frustrated talented teams but gave weaker teams a breather.

 

[zipp]

Not really. As other posters replied, Bennett's system isn't attractive to top talent and it restricts guys with its rigidness. Its effective but I agree that it allows lesser talented teams to stay in games. The biggest need for Bennett't teams is that guys buy into the style of play vs just being the most talented. I also think that Uva is higher on the totem pole than Xavier. Uva has a bigger budget and Acc affiliation already. Xavier is a small school attempt to climb the ladder. I think that players that overlooked Mack at Xavier won't do so at Louisville and I'm not sure that is true for Bennett.

Well, I think the system-discouraging-talent argument is bull$hit, and there are many examples telling you so. Why, for example, wouldn't a big, slower low-post player who projects for the NBA not want to play for UVA?

You also need to examine admission standards at UVA and Xavier to base the comparison you're trying to make. It's a complicated decision for a player to make--where to attend college--and you're trying to oversimplify it...

 

[zipp]

Here are the college entrance standards at UVA and Xavier:

Acceptance: UVA-30%, Xavier-73%
Entrance GPA: UVA-4.23, Xavier-3.52
SAT: UVA-1,410, Xavier-1,180
ACT: UVA-30, Xavier-25

BOOM!!

UVA Link
Xavier Link

 

[gocards1987]

Well, I think the system-discouraging-talent argument is bull$hit, and there are many examples telling you so. Why, for example, wouldn't a big, slower low-post player who projects for the NBA not want to play for UVA?

You also need to examine admission standards at UVA and Xavier to base the comparison you're trying to make. It's a complicated decision for a player to make--where to attend college--and you're trying to oversimplify it...

The examples you gave were all from over 20 years ago. The game has changed since then. The true back to the basket big men are disappearing so big man is disappearing. Would Marvin Bagley be shooting 3s 20 years ago?

What do Uva and Xavier's admission standard have to do with anything? Athletes for the big money sports have loosened requirements compared to the rest of the students at all schools. There are a few examples like Stanford where they have much higher standards than the Ncaa but even theirs are lowered compared to the rest of the students.

 

[zipp]

The examples you gave were all from over 20 years ago. The game has changed since then. The true back to the basket big men are disappearing so big man is disappearing. Would Marvin Bagley be shooting 3s 20 years ago?

What do Uva and Xavier's admission standard have to do with anything? Athletes for the big money sports have loosened requirements compared to the rest of the students at all schools. There are a few examples like Stanford where they have much higher standards than the Ncaa but even theirs are lowered compared to the rest of the students.

Good stuff. So, there are no more low post big men who don't run the floor well? And none of them care about pro ball? Is that the result of genetic engineering that missed the news?

And ask Notre Dame fans if admission standards affect the caliber of athlete they recruit.

Just curious, how did you get posting privileges?

 

[gocards1987]

Good stuff. So, there are no more low post big men who don't run the floor well? And none of them care about pro ball? Is that the result of genetic engineering that missed the news?

And ask Notre Dame fans if admission standards affect the caliber of athlete they recruit.

Just curious, how did you get posting privileges?

What do you mean how did I get posting privileges? What are you doing now, throwing out posters who disagree with you?

Have you watched basketball recently? How many teams have a true dominant back to the basket post man? Its part of the reason 4 guard lineups have become popular.

ND is one of the other schools that require higher standards than the Ncaa which limits their pool. Its one of the reasons they recruit nationally for football.

 

[zipp]

...Have you watched basketball recently? How many teams have a true dominant back to the basket post man? Its part of the reaon 4 guard lineups have become popular...

Moritz Wagner could easily play for Bennett at UVA.

...ND is one of the other schools that require higher standards than the Ncaa which limits their pool. Its one of the reasons they recruit nationally for football.

Gee, I wonder if that also could apply to UVA?

What do you mean how did I get posting privileges? What are you doing now, throwing out posters who disagree with you?...

Couldn't care less about people who don't make sense. I just wonder how some people wind up here.

Timeless zipp-ism no. 206: "You don't get credibility and respect because you have a username and password."

 

[gocards1987]

Moritz Wagner could easily play for Bennett at UVA.

Gee, I wonder if that also could apply to UVA?

Couldn't care less about people who don't make sense. I just wonder how some people wind up here.

Timeless zipp-ism no. 206: "You don't get credibility and respect because you have a username and password."

Wagner could play for Bennett. Uva recruited him and he chose Michigan over them. What does that change about what I said about Bennett's style being hard to get recruits interested in? Uva is a good school but I've haven't heard much about them being especially selective when it comes to athletes also. Duke is a really good academic school but we both know that all the McDaa they are bringing in aren't all Duke caliber students otherwise.

What am I not making sense about? I disagree with you but what about what I said is confusing or not making sense. For the record I've been a poster here for awhile. I post on TOS a lot more though.

 

[zipp]

Wagner could play for Bennett. Uva recruited him and he chose Michigan over them. What does that change about what I said about Bennett's style being hard to get recruits interested in? Uva is a good school but I've haven't heard much about them being especially selective when it comes to athletes also. Duke is a really good academic school but we both know that all the McDaa they are bringing in aren't all Duke caliber students otherwise.

What am I not making sense about? I disagree with you but what about what I said is confusing or not making sense. For the record I've been a poster here for awhile. I post on TOS a lot more though.

You said UVA's style means that good players won't play for them. Obviously, you're wrong.

Admission standards also have an effect on the pool of talent a coach can recruit from. It's been that way for years and for elite "academic schools", as the Ice Man calls them.

And UVA's admission standards are higher than Xavier's, which explains some or a lot of the talent difference between UVA's and X's programs.

You've been wrong about a number of things, and that oughta be a filter for posting credentials if I had a say...

 

[nccardfan]

Does anyone consider Jay Wright a good or great coach? Why because he won a NC? I encourage anyone to compare Tony Bennett’s career at this stage with Jay Wright’s career at the same point in their career and tell me who has the better resume?

 

[gocards1987]

You said UVA's style means that good players won't play for them. Obviously, you're wrong.

Admission standards also have an effect on the pool of talent a coach can recruit from. It's been that way for years and for elite "academic schools", as the Ice Man calls them.

And UVA's admission standards are higher than Xavier's, which explains some or a lot of the talent difference between UVA's and X's programs.

You've been wrong about a number of things, and that oughta be a filter for posting credentials if I had a say...

You keep making BS statements that dont actually address what I said the insult me. Its a sign that you cant actually back up your points cause you know your opinions are idiotic.