In a poll by 100 coaches.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...high-major-coaches-who-dont-break-ncaa-rules/
https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...high-major-coaches-who-dont-break-ncaa-rules/
College BB's "cleanest" coaches...
- Thread starter recruitsreadtheseboards
- Start date
Interesting. All have done well too so it's doable.
Kinda dents a narrative around here recently that I believed. I'm sure it helps to step over the line but seems it's not a necessity for some.
Kinda dents a narrative around here recently that I believed. I'm sure it helps to step over the line but seems it's not a necessity for some.
It was only a narrative from those who are looking for an excuse.
Izzo aside, seems to be comprised mostly of coaches who you think of as being more system or fit based.
Almost impossible to out-talent the elite programs without cheating but you can still beat them with guys who develop, mature, and play well together.
I think Dixon got too greedy with star chasing and that was pretty much the beginning of the end for him.
The polled coaches must have lost to him....Boeheim/Wright (neither on the list), etc. I find it interesting that a couple are now in high-pressure jobs.
No. I think the Khem Birch stuff, and maybe a couple of others (Slice related) showed we were willing to be like most everyone else. I am surprised that Izzo was on the list. Not that I think he is overly dirty, but Mich State is known for having the ability to extend itself when needed.
I think generally Jamie was clean (too clean). Look, I can't get all morally outraged and cries of "justice for all" on "cheating" in college basketball. Now, some crap like the Louisville shit and grade fixing, that is another level.
Seems like the list was more of the best recruiters who play honest. I am sure that list is not inclusive of all and every NCAA coach. I knew someone would post something about Dixon (I thought he was gone). Didn't think it would be Bob, but neither was I surprised it was him.
You don't?
Funny, you have stated over and over again what a "clean" recruiter Dixon was.
Yet in a survey of his peers he wasn't even mentioned. I find that very telling.
You also have suggested that him playing it "clean" often cost him recruits yet these guys seem to get them.
It's hardly a scientific survey.
Anyway ... I know what I know, but it really doesn't matter anymore when it comes to Pitt.
Guys, let's please not be like our political board (or any political board) and be so divisive. I think it was a fair question. I also wonder about the validity of the poll. Did "great recruiter" enter into it, which we all agree Jamie wasn't so maybe that is why he didn't make the list. Or was maybe an incident like Khem Birch and having Slice around enough to not bring Jamie to mind. Or maybe just because Pitt went off the radar and TCU has been off the radar that he just is getting some reputation back.
It's not scientific, but I'd bet if anyone knows who is cheating, it's probably the other coaches.
He didn't get at least 5 votes because they are bigger names or bigger programs...
Is what it tells me.
The bottom 3 on the list tied with 5 votes. That means that there are any number of coaches who got either 4 or 3 votes. The difference between those groups - 5 votes versus 3/4 votes - is insignificant, considering that there were over 100 votes.
Illinois played in the title game under him .
It's a bigger program and he's a bigger name.
Try harder to obsess over dixon
I think this it. It's a list of successful recruiter coaches that it would surprise people to know aren't likely as sleazy as assumed.
The first caveat (success) is important, in that there are probably loads more purist and angelic coaches, but (whether attributed to excessive cleanliness or not), aren't successful. So don't come to mind for this list.
Jamie was clean. Even if there were no improprieties with Birch/Skerry (which there probably were), that raised red flags in the coaching community I'm sure as did Slice/NYC. I know fans of other programs thought we were cheating during the glory days when we came from nothing and started signing good NYC players.
Who is being divisive? He said it was "fairly telling" and I asked why. To me, it did not tell anything at all. As someone else said, he needed 5 votes and didn't get them. Does the 11th cleanest coach in the country not get to be considered "clean"? Or what if he's 30th? Who cares? Being on this list or not really says very little about the situation. And beyond that, he isn't our coach anymore.
Stallings isn't on the list either. Does that mean he's some scoundrel? If recruiting to Vandy was so limited, as we've heard, then I would think he'd be on this list too.
I'd feel really bad if we had a coach who was considered "dirty" - but was still unable to win even when he cheated.
Similar threads
