UK Fans Trash Barnes

I didn't click on the link, but I'd be bitter too if Barnes turned down my school and my school instead chose Billy Gillespie.
 
Not an overwhelming response against Barnes, but I'm really not sure why the hate's there from so many of them.

I think there's been a general overestimation of Texas' talent level in past years that may be why people seem to think we've underperformed. In the Final Four year, we had TJ, and the rest of the lineup was quite frankly solid but not spectacular. The Durant season was pretty similar - a lot of inexperience and role players surrounding a standout.

I think there have been a couple of seasons where I honestly thought we underperformed in the tournament, but for the most part, I think we've pretty well played to the level of our talent.
 
It got confusing there in the middle, which KU/UK they meant would beat Barnes.

Very strange thread IMO
In fact did Barnes publically turn kentucky down?
 
I believe he turned them down when they hired Billy Boy and then he said "I have no interest in Kentucky" after the job became open last year to just squash any and all talk about going there.
 
Fans of a team with Calipari as the coach talking about the quality of another team's coach is pretty damn funny.
 
lnghrn005
Thanks I forgot he said anything publically.
I guess this will be settled on the court.

mars
good and funny point
 
Barnes gets a bad reputation because he didn't go final four with durant. what people don't realize is that team was ENTIRELY new that year. Tucker, Aldridge, and Gibson all left. We started 4 frosh and 1 sophomore i believe it was James, Augistin, Durant, Mason, and Abrams starting that year.
 
I know a lot of UK fans. The older ones don't understand the World Wide Wes stuff and deny that there is anything wrong with Calipari's recruiting. The younger ones do understand and think that it is worth it if UK can win the national title. I have nothing against UK but I hope they go on probation quickly with their current coach.
 
I never said Ohio State started 4 freshman I said they played 4 freshman. Conley 31.6 minute per game, Oden 28.9 mpg, Cook 19.7mpg, Lighty 16.3. That is a lot of minutes for TRUE freshman to play on a team that made it to the Championship. I think that is impressive & shows that you can win by playing freshman. The starters were ok but none sniffed the NBA either(Ron Lewis, Butler, Ivan Harris). I still think "youth" is a excuse for the Durant & DJ team. I think they should have gone deeper then the 2nd round. I don't think that Ohio State team was much better then we were.
 
My point is the Ohio State team was led by freshman & did quite well. I think Texas should have done better then a 2nd round loss with freshman that were = or greater then Ohio States. Ohio States 3 out of their top 4 scorers were freshman oden 15.4, Lewis 12.7 Conley 11.3, Cook 9.8. In their 29 games they were led in scoring by a freshman 28 out of 39 times. Oden 14, Cook 7, Conley 7. In their 39 games they were led by a freshman in rebounding 31 out of 39. oden 25, Cook 4, Conley 2. That is a team that was led by freshman quite a bit, not "much' different then our team. Difference is they went to the Finals & we got beat in the 2nd round by a ok USC team. My point is is could be done being led by some talented freshman. I can understand people that wonder why we did not go deeper in the tourney with a once in a lifetime player like Durant. I do.
 
The Ohio State team you are talking about is a lot more like this Texas team, in terms of integrating talented freshmen, than the Durant team.

Just because players aren't NBA players doesn't mean they were taking up space in the starting lineup. IIRC, you had two seniors and a junior starting with Oden and Conley. That is a world away from starting four freshmen and a sophomore who had never started. Plus, that Ohio State team went nine deep, where Texas used six regularly and a seventh based on the situation.

If you can't see the difference between those teams, I can't help you.
 
OK, you can't see the difference.

We are talking about building a team here. The Texas team that season had basically nothing coming back but potential. It was well-known potential, but potential. Barnes had to teach these players everything, offense, defense (an ongoing project) plus how to play together. It wasn't that way with Ohio State. Matta had a four-year guy and two three-year guys in the starting lineup.

Now, it didn't take a genius to give the ball to Augustin and throw the ball to Durant (although you can't do it every play, like Bill Simmons thought). It also didn't take a genius to defer to Conley and Oden.

However, the other guys you are talking about came off the bench. Barnes had Connor Atchley, Matt Hill, Dexter Pittman 1.0, J.D. Lewis and Craig Winder to pick from. Who would you choose?

Bottom line is that Hill, Pittman, Lewis and Winder combined, played about as much as Daequan Cook, and Lighty played a little less. Barnes had one great and a couple of really good freshmen, but the guys he was bringing off the bench (and even one of the starters) were prospects. If Ohio State hadn't had Lewis, Butler and Harris, they would have started Cook and Lighty. Then what?

Barnes did a fine job with that team. No team with as little returning experience had received such a high seed. The team that got bounced from the tournament was worn down, out of gas because of the lack of depth, and got defensed by Tim Floyd, an excellent defensive coach. Even if Texas had won, it wasn't going to the Final Four.

Why exactly do you think Barnes underachieved?
 
Never said they were exact copy just similiar it is not absolute just my opinion. I see that both were young & both had 3 out of their top 4 scorers as freshman. I think that is interesting and the base of my "opinion". While you feel the opinion has 0 base that is fine. That is your "opinion" and does not make it absolute.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Back
Top