The Official Bob Huggins Thread

[MDW79]

And with all the "bad Luck" MDW is talking about, I think it isn't as much as a given as many people think it was.

And, I don't want to go back and find it, but to you MDW, I don't think Purdue is a contender at all for a championship.

That's cool, I'm not sure they are either, just randomly threw them out there.

Who are your contenders this year? And then, who are your favorites out of them?

If you don't mind, write em out. I'd be curious to see how they're defined in quantity.

 

[TheLivingLegend]

Dude, can you get off your man crush's jock for one second?

Goin got UC in the Big East, not Huggins. It's a bit ridiculous how little you actually know.

This is not even remotely true. I dont mind Mick Cronin, Im not sold hes the answer. I have respect for Bob Huggins, while I understand he made ridiculous mistakes.

The UC basketball program was the reason UC is in the Big East, the same UC basketball program that Huggins rebuilt.

 

[Kingsley Court]

Off the top of my head I would go:
OSU, Duke, Texas, Kansas,, Pitt, and possible Uconn and a stretch of Syracuse and Villinova. Of those I think OSU, Duke and Kansas, Pitt would be favorites.

It is still early though, and I will have a more clear idea when the conference season is up.

I don't think BYU and San Diego State are contenders this year. I could possibly see them in sweet 16/elite 8. Would be stunned with a final four appearence though.


This is all talk for another thread, I don't want to get going on teams this year, I would rather do that in another thread and save this one for Huggins talk.

 

[bearcat jeff]

That's cool, I'm not sure they are either, just randomly threw them out there.

Who are your contenders this year? And then, who are your favorites out of them?

If you don't mind, write em out. I'd be curious to see how they're defined in quantity.

Teams I really like:

Texas
Kansas
Duke
Ohio State By far the best team right now
Pitt

 

[MDW79]

And King Court, what was not a given as many people say it was? The 00 winning the title? I don't think anyone would say it was a given, but that was certainly the most likely result, prior to the injury. I guess will never know, but they were legit.

And btw, this is all in good fun, but....

How in the hell would an X fan, that was probably 11 at the time (I only say that b/c your friends with GReat1, not blasting your age but I think it is a curious statement here) know jack shit about how good UC was in 99?

Did you go back and watch tape on them? I don't get into arguments with Eggs fans about Jumpin Jamal Walker's pro prospects at the time. Why? Cuz I wasn't a fan of Eggs, and it was like 1989, I barely knew what a press was. Gimme a break. D

 

[Kingsley Court]

And King Court, what was not a given as many people say it was? The 00 winning the title? I don't think anyone would say it was a given, but that was certainly the most likely result, prior to the injury. I guess will never know, but they were legit.

And btw, how in the hell would an X fan, that was probably 11 at the time (I only say that b/c your friends with GReat1, not blasting your age but I think it is a curious statement here) know jack shit about how good UC was in 99?

Did you go back and watch tape on them? Seriously, if not, then quit talking like you know. I don't get into arguments with Eggs fans about Jumpin Jamal Walker's pro prospects at the time. Why? Cuz I wasn't a fan of Eggs, and it was like 1989, I barely knew what a press was. Gimme a break.

I'm not really trying to get into an argument about that team, but you kind of answered it your self. You said I don't think anyone would say it was a given, but follow it with "it was certainly the most likely result."

I suppose we could get into the most likely thing happening isn't always a given, but I think it's hard to say a championship is the most likely result for any team.

 

[MDW79]

Off the top of my head I would go:
OSU, Duke, Texas, Kansas,, Pitt, and possible Uconn and a stretch of Syracuse and Villinova. Of those I think OSU, Duke and Kansas, Pitt would be favorites.

It is still early though, and I will have a more clear idea when the conference season is up.

I don't think BYU and San Diego State are contenders this year. I could possibly see them in sweet 16/elite 8. Would be stunned with a final four appearence though.


This is all talk for another thread, I don't want to get going on teams this year, I would rather do that in another thread and save this one for Huggins talk.

I agree on SDS and BYU. Fwiw, the reason I asked was only to see how many teams you defined as contenders. I had agreed with Great1's statement that UC had produced a contender every 4 years, if not more so. There's no right anwser, I'm just curious if some think there's 2 teams in contention or 16.

 

[Kingsley Court]

I agree on SDS and BYU. Fwiw, the reason I asked was only to see how many teams you defined as contenders. I had agreed with Great1's statement that UC had produced a contender every 4 years, if not more so. There's no right anwser, I'm just curious if some think there's 2 teams in contention or 16.

Yeah I know, I just thought I would say who I thought were contenders, I didn't take it as a slight or anything.

I think there are certainly more than 2 contenders every year. I also think that is based upon "luck of the draw." As you have mentioned, UC did get some bad draws in the past.

 

[MDW79]

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/uc/2011/01/27/huggins-returning-to-cincy-still-special/

I'll be anxious to read the story tomorrow.

 

[SlamJam]

Teams I really like:

Texas
Kansas
Duke
Ohio State By far the best team right now
Pitt

I agree with these- though I think its- Duke/OSU, then Kansas and then a pretty wide margin between kansas/Pitt and Texas. (I know Texas won at Kansas, but Kansas was dominating, up 12 at half, until a bench player for Texas scored 20+ to win--just think it was one of those games.) This being in terms of comfort of picking them to win it all. Just not as comfortable having Texas or Pitt win it all like I am with Duke, OSU and Kansas

Also- to win the NCAA championship you have to be lucky.

 

[JasonS]

Teams I really like:

Texas
Kansas
Duke
Ohio State By far the best team right now
Pitt

I am not sold on Duke unless they get Kyrie Irving back and the last thing I heard was that he may not be back the rest of the year and would go pro anyway. Duke has really struggled shooting the ball lately and besides Nolan Smith, they can't take anyone off the dribble and they can't pound it inside. Jump shooting teams don't win National Championships in March. You have to be able to get easy buckets in the tourney and last year Duke did a great job of that. This year's team has been unable to do that so far. If Kyrie Irving comes back they immediately become big time contenders again in my mind.

I like OSU's team. I hate OSU but I like the team they have. They are good. I still think the Big 11 is overrated and I think OSU will choke a game away in the tournament to a lesser team.

I think right now, based on how everyone is playing, Texas and OSU are the two most dangerous teams. Kansas is right there too.

 

[ralph1950]

This is not even remotely true. I dont mind Mick Cronin, Im not sold hes the answer. I have respect for Bob Huggins, while I understand he made ridiculous mistakes.

The UC basketball program was the reason UC is in the Big East, the same UC basketball program that Huggins rebuilt.

You are soooooooooooooooooooooo wrong TLL. UC basketball had zilch to do with UC getting in the Big East, the Big East did not need any more basketball teams, the Big East needed football teams to replace the 3 they lost. What got UC in the Big East vs another school with a football team was the terrific presentation about UC made by President Nancy Zimpher. The 3 Presidents on the expansion committtee and former Commissioner Mike Tranghese have all publically stated that it was Nancy Zimpher who got UC in The Big East.

 

[MDW79]

You are soooooooooooooooooooooo wrong TLL. UC basketball had zilch to do with UC getting in the Big East, the Big East did not need any more basketball teams, the Big East needed football teams to replace the 3 they lost. What got UC in the Big East vs another school with a football team was the terrific presentation about UC made by President Nancy Zimpher. The 3 Presidents on the expansion committtee and former Commissioner Mike Tranghese have all publically stated that it was Nancy Zimpher who got UC in The Big East.

That was all but finalized before she even got here. In fact, WELL before she even got here.

And basketball had everything to do with it. If it didn't, they would have snagged another football team, a better football program. (Southern Miss?) Getting into the BE was a direct result of the success of basketball program, and the campaigning of Bob Goin, and the school officials around him.

To say Nancy had a major role in it, couldn't be further from the truth. That's a flat out lie, and you know it.

 

[Ryno99]

UC is not a powerhouse right now. They were when Bob Huggins coached here.

Yeah but Bob's not here, and Mick is getting them back where they need to be, no one in the country would have this team back to powerhouse status yet from where they were 6 years ago. What does Bob have to do with that? It's apples and oranges. No comparison whatsoever.

You sure you and Ralph aren't father and son? There is something very similar about your styles. lol

 

[Who Dey Time]

UC is not a powerhouse right now. They were when Bob Huggins coached here.

This is not true. We were a very good program that dominated a decent, not great, league.

A powerhouse is a program that makes multiple deep runs in the tourney, wins a title, consistently recruits the very best players. UC did none of those things under Huggs. You want powerhouses during the Huggs years, think Duke, Michigan State, Connecticut.

Now I was as big of a Huggs fan as anyone and I was pissed when he was fired. I have many grreat memories because of UC basketball under his watch. But, one of the biggest problems with the program today is that people are trying to compare Mick and the program to where it was under Huggs. Two problems with that is, first, the circumstances are vastly different and, more importantly, many people are completely overstating what was achieved here.

If you are simply a Huggie-phile then you aren't going to be reasonable in the first place. But, if you take an objective view, you'll see what many others are seeing.

 

[MDW79]

This is not true. We were a very good program that dominated a decent, not great, league.

A powerhouse is a program that makes multiple deep runs in the tourney, wins a title, consistently recruits the very best players. UC did none of those things under Huggs. You want powerhouses during the Huggs years, think Duke, Michigan State, Connecticut.

Now I was as big of a Huggs fan as anyone and I was pissed when he was fired. I have many grreat memories because of UC basketball under his watch. But, one of the biggest problems with the program today is that people are trying to compare Mick and the program to where it was under Huggs. Two problems with that is, first, the circumstances are vastly different and, more importantly, many people are completely overstating what was achieved here.

If you are simply a Huggie-phile then you aren't going to be reasonable in the first place. But, if you take an objective view, you'll see what many others are seeing.

All depends in how you define powerhouse. Using your criteria, no they were not a powerhouse. But there is no exact definition for the term. It's left up for debate.

For me personally, a powerhouse is simply a team that you consistently probably don't want to match up with, over any length of time. While not a Duke or UK, UC along with Arizona, UConn, UNC (They had some down years) and a few more were the teams, that 9 times out of 10 would take you behind the woodshed and beat you down. As far as the 90's go, UC was easily one of the top 10 programs, if not top 5, 6 or 7. Anybody want to boast a two year wonder UMass? Heck UC was a much more of a powerhouse than UNLV in the 90's, using my criteria, and they went to back to back titles games. Sames goes for Mich in my mind. UC > Michigan as far overall success in the 90's. We we flat out more consistent, they were flash in the pans.

Maybe that doesn't mean powerhouse to some, cuz they had no titles, but they were certainly in Elite company. I guaranteed if your polled all the head coaches back then, on who are the top programs, almost would have had UC on their list, regardless of tourney success.

 

[SlamJam]

You are soooooooooooooooooooooo wrong TLL. UC basketball had zilch to do with UC getting in the Big East, the Big East did not need any more basketball teams, the Big East needed football teams to replace the 3 they lost. What got UC in the Big East vs another school with a football team was the terrific presentation about UC made by President Nancy Zimpher. The 3 Presidents on the expansion committtee and former Commissioner Mike Tranghese have all publically stated that it was Nancy Zimpher who got UC in The Big East.

Do you think the Success of the basketball program helped the Football program at all? If so you can say the Basketball program got UC to the Big East. To think it was only the football program is clueless

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

I root for Bob Huggins 364 days a year, only when the play UC do I want him to lose. I love everything he did and when he returns to the Shoe I will be sure to think of some of the great games he had there, like the Little game winner or the Logan v. Wagner game with Memphis. You can bet I'll be in attendance rooting like crazy for the Cincinnati Cronins.

 

[JasonS]

Do you think the Success of the basketball program helped the Football program at all? If so you can say the Basketball program got UC to the Big East. To think it was only the football program is clueless

This debate is pointless. It was a packaged deal. Football had potential and basketball added to an already excellent league.

 

[SlamJam]

This is not true. We were a very good program that dominated a decent, not great, league.

A powerhouse is a program that makes multiple deep runs in the tourney, wins a title, consistently recruits the very best players. UC did none of those things under Huggs. You want powerhouses during the Huggs years, think Duke, Michigan State, Connecticut.


.

I agree with this definition of powerhouse. To me thats exactly what a powerhouse is- recruits the best, wins titles and makes deep runs in the tournament year in year out. (not just one year of success) hence why I think these bearcats (or any bearcats really) were far from "powerhouse"