ADVERTISEMENT

Would Geno Auriemma be successful in the mens game?

Obliviax

Obliviax

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2001
126,151
87,571
1
Watched a little of the game last night and some of his interviews. And wondered if his abilities would translate to the men's game. UConn looks like they are playing against Jr. HS teams. They are SOOO much better than every other woman's team out there. They crushed Maryland and it could have been worse. They two best players in the entire tournament both play for UConn. Sooner of later, he's got to get bored and be interested in a brighter stage.
 
in any event, sort of a wuss for at least not trying it...

would have/would have had plenty of opportunities to do so - and make tons of dough trying... he's proved what he can do on the lady's side and could always go back if it didn't work out.
 
He says he would be just as successful in the men's game during

interviews, which garners the collective eye roll of the talking heads when they discuss it. He gets the top players every year and works them hard. Since there's less athleticism in the women's game, talent will beat all the other variables every time (except once this year, I guess).
 
Would Geno Auriemma be successful in the mens game?

The principles he teaches are sound and he's a stickler for detail in drilling them. The one thing that stands out about UConn is how they share the ball. Recruiting
would be more challenging. I'm sure he would be successful though. Obviously, it's highly unlikely that he'd be nearly as successful in light of the overall men's talent pool.

They two best players in the entire tournament both play for UConn.

I was reading a Hartford Courant article which stated that the "second best player" (Tuck) has often been the best player in practice, according to Auriemma. Apparently, she is a very bad match-up for most teams. She was injured all of last season and UConn didn't even need her to win the championship. That's how good the program is.


 
Depends how you define success. His teams would no doubt be among the most prepared of any they'd play, but the men's game isn't about fundamentals and the talent pool is so much more vast that they wouldn't be able to blow other teams out especially in the post season. Plus he'd have to deal with coaching freshmen-led teams (assuming he'd be recruiting the best of the best 1-&-done/NBA-bound talent) which could dilute how much he's able to coach on any given team.
 
He would probably be successful, but not have consistent National Championship teams like he has had. I personally don't care for him as he is extremely arrogant. I would love to see him try at the men's level just to watch him cringe when he would lose. His gig has been the ability to recruit the very best players from a limited talent pool because he coaches them well and UConn has been on top for so long. It is easy to keep winning if you have the best players, so challenge yourself to see if you could succeed at a higher level. If that doesn't interest him, he is just on a very long ego trip that will last as long as he wants it to before he decides to retire.
 
Auriemma and the now-retired Pat Summit can really coach the game. Strategies and fundamentals they could coach as well as the most respected men's CBB coaches. The question would be how well could each recruit in the men's game. It would be very problematic for a female coach like Summit. Auriemma could successfully recruit men's BB players over time, but never at the level of elite success he enjoys at UConn. There's too much parity in men's CBB.
 
I think the bottom line is who knows? There are serious issues he would have to overcome without the built in advantages he has now. First, in the women's game there's pretty much UConn and Tennessee- then everyone else. The "stars" tend to gravitate to UConn (especially after Summitt left at Tennessee) which means he picks from the best recruits each year. Yes some other programs have been good but it's very lopsided in the women's game verses the men's game. He would have to recruit against much better coaches with many other programs that have just as great if not better tradition than his team. Second, the level of competition would increase astronomically. Both in terms of depth of talent on each team he plays plus depth of talent among teams....... unlike in the women's game.

I'm not saying he's not a good coach or would not have success. It's just that comparing the landscape of the women's game and the landscape of the men's game is night and day.
 
Why? because we would want to see him in a brighter stage?.....

Some people just find their spot and are content with that. Joe was that way at PSU. Russ is that way with the girls volleyball team. Should he try to find a brighter stage somewhere? I understand what you are saying, and it is a great discussion-piece but I just don't understand what is wrong with finding that comfortable scenario and being the best at it. IMHO, the girls game is more pure than the boys game. I coached high school girls soccer and boys soccer, and I honestly preferred the girls side. Loved the different personalities, etc, and had to really play better as a team. Boys is just faster and more physical, and a few strong players could dominate the game moreso.

If I am a college coach, I would hate the way the game is changing with the elite players. Duke could literally lose 2 or 3 freshman to the NBA. You hardly had enough time to get to know/develop/mentor the kids, and poof they are gone and you are replacing them with 2-3 new studs.

Again, it is all dependent on what some wants. Geno comes across as very arrogant, and I am not a fan of his, but it seems like the kids like (at least respect him), and he demands near-perfections out of his teams. Against Texas they were up by 40 points and he was letting a player know that he was not happy with what they did on the court.

I just don't think he would have any interest in making that switch, although I believe he could be very successful, but just not year in and year out like he can on the girl's side.
 
His coaching ability is schewed because the top 10 women players are

light years ahead in talent over the rest of any given recruiting class. And U Conn always gets 2-3 of the top ten recruits . It's almost like having an NBA team play a high school all star team when U Conn plays most women's teams. That being said, he wouldn't have the talent advantage that he has had in the women's game. At this time in his career, I think he would have a tough adjustment in the men's game , to playing 2 out of 3 games against teams with near equal talent and having to grovel to get super star players.
 
Right. And even at Kentucky, the mens top players leave early

for the NBA. So the top, top men's players never really mature into 22 year old experienced and physically mature college players. Whereas in the womens college game even the top players usually stay 4 years, an even bigger advantage since UCon can start an upper classperson lineup, experienced and of top talent. There will never be a situation in the men's college game that rivals what he has at UCon now, with a roster full of top 10 players (a couple in each year of school) because the top players are 1 (or 2) and done.
 
So you are calling Russ a wuss?? nfm

nfm
 
Would Wooten be good coaching in the women's game! Of course, good coaches are good coaches.
 
Re: in any event, sort of a wuss for at least not trying it...

Originally posted by shak66_psu:in any event, sort of a wuss for at least not trying it...[/URL]
would have/would have had plenty of opportunities to do so - and make tons of dough trying... he's proved what he can do on the lady's side and could always go back if it didn't work out.
Click to expand...
Originally posted by Jerademan74:
It is easy to keep winning if you have the best players, so challenge yourself to see if you could succeed at a higher level. If that doesn't interest him, he is just on a very long ego trip that will last as long as he wants it to before he decides to retire.
Click to expand...


Then I suppose you consider Paterno to be a sort of a wuss and unwilling to challenge himself.


What is impressive about Geno isn't that he gets the top talent, but that he gets the top talent to buy into and execute his system.

I think his biggest challenge if he were to take a crack at coaching a men's program would be the fact that he would have to rebuild his entire network of recruiting contacts from scratch.
 
Re: in any event, sort of a wuss for at least not trying it...

What is impressive about Geno isn't that he gets the top
talent, but that he gets the top talent to buy into and execute his
system.

So true. They share the rock like no other team.


This post was edited on 4/6 6:19 PM by mn78psu83
 
He would be a successful coach at an Ivy League school or service academy.
 
If he RECRUITS the way he does on the women's side of things...........then YES he would be as successful.
 
I do not understand the comment about Joe and Rose. Men VBall is dying unfortunately and really very little for Rose to go over to as he is at about the pinnacle of VBall coaching in the US. JoePa was at the pinnacle of college success. Nobody is saying Geno should move to the pro grame.

Geno has proven he is the best women's coach out there, no questions asked. At some point, you wonder why he doesn't give it a go at the men's game. I am sure some decent school would give him a shot.
 
Originally posted by Cletus11:
I do not understand the comment about Joe and Rose. Men VBall is dying unfortunately and really very little for Rose to go over to as he is at about the pinnacle of VBall coaching in the US. JoePa was at the pinnacle of college success. Nobody is saying Geno should move to the pro grame.

Geno has proven he is the best women's coach out there, no questions asked. At some point, you wonder why he doesn't give it a go at the men's game. I am sure some decent school would give him a shot.
Click to expand...
Why didn't Joe ever give it a shot in the NFL? Was it because he was a wuss and afraid to challenge himself? Or perhaps he enjoyed his job, was content with his finances and didn't give two shakes about what we thought he should do?

I just find it strange that people are calling Geno out for not going to the Men's game for reasons they would never dare accuse Paterno of. Why is that?


This post was edited on 4/7 4:25 PM by manatree
 
I do not remember Joe trashing the NFL and saying how bad it was like Geno has done with men's BBall. Also, the difference in 'respect' for elite college football and the NFL is nowhere near what it is for men's versus women's BBall.

Being considered a legacy college football coach is probably a 9 out of 10 with being a legendary pro coach is a 10 out of 10. Being a legendary WOMEN's BBall coach is like being a 4 our of 10 as that is all the higher you can get being a women's coach.

If whenever Geno was asked about the men's game he didn't give some negative type comment, then probably less would be said.
 
The funny thing is that much of what Geno criticizes the men's game about is what many of the fans criticize the men's game about. Much like when the press would ask Bobby Knight about the NBA.. How many times are reporters going to ask Geno about coaching the men's game? Do they honestly expect him to ever answer any differently?

Do I think Geno is a pompous ass? Yes. But he's still a great coach. Maybe he doesn't care that a great women's coach is only a 4 out of 10 on some imaginary scale.
This post was edited on 4/7 6:11 PM by manatree
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back