Illinois v. Ohio St.
 

TV announcers should be fined every time that they criticize the officials and are incorrect about the rule.

Steve Lavin has made a big deal about Ohio St.'s Evan Turner retrieving his own airball. He stated that OSU caught a break as it should have been a travel. :(

Stick to coaching, Steve.

Not only that, he made a big deal of "that's the way it goes when you're on the road" or something like that. As if, Ohio St only got that call because the game is in Columbus.

the basket interference vs goal-tending was just a horrible. I would rather listen to two chimps lip sync some back street boys.

Here's a photo I took of them in concert. They were great!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...p.knuckels.jpg

Lavin is not knowledgeable. He like many coaches doesn't know the rules.

Not to mention, he couldn't acheive anything greater than mediocrity with arguably the best basketball program in the west.

He was about as equally knowledgable about coaching as he is with the rules. That's why he's now sitting behind a mike, making stoopid statements.

You need to review Lavin's tournament runs if you think that he didn't achieve "anything greater than mediocrity." Sure, he may have disappointed by UCLA standards, but there probably aren't more than ten or twelve coaches who wouldn't have traded their Lavin-years with Lavin's Lavin-years.

Ben Howland is so impressed with Lavin's years he decided to have a Gary Cunningham season instead.

Nice strawman. No one ever argued that Lavin was as successful as Howland has been. But since we're playing, here's what Lavin did at UCLA. What a horrible coach.


From Wiki: Steve Lavin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Season Team Overall Conference Standing Postseason
Steve Lavin (1996–2003)
1996–97 UCLA 24–8 15–3 1 NCAA Elite Eight
1997–98 UCLA 24–9 12–6 3 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
1998–99 UCLA 22–9 12–6 3 NCAA Round of 64
1999–00 UCLA 21–12 10–8 4 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2000–01 UCLA 23–9 14–4 3 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2001–02 UCLA 21–12 11–7 6 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2002–03 UCLA 10–19 6–12 6
UCLA: 145–78 81–48
Total: 145–78

"During Lavin’s tenure as head coach, the Bruins qualified for six consecutive NCAA Tournaments (1997-2002). During this period, Lavin became one of two coaches (along with Duke’s Mike Krzyzewski) to have led his team to five NCAA Sweet 16s in six seasons. Lavin’s record in the first and second rounds of the NCAA tournament is 10-1. Lavin’s winning percentage (90.9%) in the first two rounds, is second only to Dean Smith in NCAA Tournament history"

Don't confuse being a great recruiter with being a great coach.

There's a heckuva difference.

The really great coaches do both. Sometimes, a great coach gets to follow a great recruiter. Works well for a season or three.

Thanks so much for the sage advice.

I'm interested to get your thoughts on Howland and Roy Williams after the seasons those two great coaches have had.

So where is Lavin coaching this year?

What?

Oh, never mind. I'm sure he prefers having Disney sign his paychecks.

I'm not interested in either.

You honestly think he's working for ESPN because he can't get a good coaching job?

That's absurd on so many levels.

Really? Is ESPN paying him what he'd get coaching? I'm sure he's paid well, but I doubt it's 7 figures.

So money ain't it.

Do you think he just wanted to quit coaching? That's the only plausible explanation I can think of aside from the theory that no one wants him.

Looks like he was UCLA's version of Tom Davis. Did great with the recruits he inherited, but plateaued after that. That makes him good, not great.

Now, this is just a surface examination of a coach who's had one head coaching job.

So the only thing you've ever thought about when considering a job offer is the salary? No considerations at all to quality of life? Lavin probably gets a not-too-shabby six figures to talk about basketball. No recruiting necessary, no boosters to deal with, no sleepless nights wondering what might have been if you'd defended the final out-of-bounds play differently. Presuming he has a family, which job do you think they would prefer he work?

A. Please point to where I argued that he wanted to quit coaching. He knows he was fired. You know he was fired. I know he was fired. Who are you arguing with here?

B. I can name five coaches in the most prestigious basketball conference in the country who couldn't carry Lavin's water. So, um, no, "because no one wants him" doesn't come close to explaining things. You think no one would want Steve Mariucci to be their coach? You think Hubie Brown's been calling NBA games forever because he couldn't get hired? Geez.

Again, who are you arguing with? No one in this thread has written that Lavin was "great" as a coach. I weighed in when people made the leap from Steve Lavin, misinformed officiating analyst, to Steve Lavin, weak basketball coach. And he did things well for long enough that you can't just dismiss him as someone who was only able to succeed with someone else's recruits.

Your examination is indeed surface-level.

Has this become the Steve Lavin Fan Club forum? :confused:

Isn't Mr. Duke a regular in the forum come March Madness time?

This leads well into my response below:

I didn't mean to imply he left UCLA willingly. I simply meant that there are really three choices.
1. He can't find a job.
2. He chose to remain with ESPN and not coach. "Leave coaching" was meant more generally, as in not actively looking for a job.
3. Somewhere in the middle.

Most likely, it's somewhere in the middle. He could get a job, but has no desire to coach a mid-major or below.

Again, who are you arguing with? No one in this thread has written that Lavin was "great" as a coach. I weighed in when people made the leap from Steve Lavin, misinformed officiating analyst, to Steve Lavin, weak basketball coach. And he did things well for long enough that you can't just dismiss him as someone who was only able to succeed with someone else's recruits.

Your examination is indeed surface-level.[/QUOTE]


Yes, it was. You may be right, perhaps his experience with UCLA soured him to the whole coaching thing. Maybe he decided the stability of ESPN is worth living comfortably rather than being financially independent.

It's an internet discussion regarding the quality of a coach who held a top job for a short time and then moved on to a different (but related) profession. Everything is surface-level, including the defense.

ummmmm.... why do you care? You have your opinion they have theirs. Let it go, but my opinion is that you care what their opinion is way too much.

I care much less about perceptions of Steve Lavin than I do about sloppy discourse.

As to your opinion, it's well-argued.

You cut me so deep....

He's also a regular when anyone at any time makes fun of his sainted Coach K or his beloved Dookies.:D

That's part of the medical procedure used to fix a sloppy discourse.:eek:

And I was hoping I could use that to get a medical marijuana card.