I was debating this with a friend and would like some opinions
- Thread starter PittPoker
- Start date
he succeeds with the players that fits what he wants to do. Are you saying that we have been recruiting MSU style players? maybe he does worse than Dixon. No different than asking how Boeheim or K would do with Pitt players. Coaches recruit players who they want. This is a debate that has nowhere to go.
This post was edited on 3/22 8:41 PM by KiwiJeff
This post was edited on 3/22 8:41 PM by KiwiJeff
It is a stupid debate.
Izzo is an excellent coach, but make no mistake-he has accomplished what he has accomplished with far better players than we have had at Pitt in the Howland-Dixon era. While MSU doesn't get Kentucky, Duke, UNC or Syracuse overall talent, Izzo does regularly get an AA or two and much higher rated players overall than Pitt gets. And he knows what to do with them.
I think he's the very best in the business, and I'd take him over JD or anyone else. but like you said, you can't have this debate. It's pointless. .
Izzo is an excellent coach, but make no mistake-he has accomplished what he has accomplished with far better players than we have had at Pitt in the Howland-Dixon era. While MSU doesn't get Kentucky, Duke, UNC or Syracuse overall talent, Izzo does regularly get an AA or two and much higher rated players overall than Pitt gets. And he knows what to do with them.
I think he's the very best in the business, and I'd take him over JD or anyone else. but like you said, you can't have this debate. It's pointless. .
Two things:
1) Michigan State has had better players overall, but I would definitely think we would have had a Final Four appearance and another Sweet 16 appearance.
2) A lot of Pitt fans again separate the fact that "talent" and "Jamie is doing the best with what he is got" with the fact that "what Jamie has got is on Jamie and no one else".
1) Michigan State has had better players overall, but I would definitely think we would have had a Final Four appearance and another Sweet 16 appearance.
2) A lot of Pitt fans again separate the fact that "talent" and "Jamie is doing the best with what he is got" with the fact that "what Jamie has got is on Jamie and no one else".
Absolutely, I agree, we use to get tałent 5, 6, 7 years ago but not anymore, and maybe quality recruits just don't like what J D has to offer or his style of coaching, it has to be all on him. Like I said in another post. He hires the assistants, he recruits the players and he coaches the team
Again,I have to agree with the others that have posted. It is just not a fair comparison. Coach Izzo and Dixon are similar in their coaching styles though. They like to have physical players and play good defense and rebound. (We seem to have gotten away from this lately).
The problem is that the talent levels are much different. Izzo is just a better recruiter and always has at least one top notch guard or point guard or both.
If somehow, however, we could assume that the rosters contained equal talent, which I don't think will ever happen, I would take Izzo as my coach, just because he has shown the ability to regularly beat higher seeded teams in the tournament on a regular basis, while we have shown a unique ability to choke to lower seeded teams on a regular basis.
The problem is that the talent levels are much different. Izzo is just a better recruiter and always has at least one top notch guard or point guard or both.
If somehow, however, we could assume that the rosters contained equal talent, which I don't think will ever happen, I would take Izzo as my coach, just because he has shown the ability to regularly beat higher seeded teams in the tournament on a regular basis, while we have shown a unique ability to choke to lower seeded teams on a regular basis.
Absolutely he would be a better coach. He hasnt always had better players and he finds ways to win in March.
