Jack’s Blog

College kids storming the floor after a huge win (”huge” being relative at different universities) has become as much a part of campus life as homecoming.  Hey, why not?  Coaches and athletics administrators implore students to attend games and be loud!  “We especially need help tonight against our rivals, State U, who’s #1 in our league/in the country.”

So they follow orders, support the players and, often, really make a difference.  Maybe a little one but in a close game, all the squad needs is a point or two.  Maybe the team gets a bucket because of a hustle play by a player not known for going all-out.  Or maybe one of their guys shortarms, better yet, airballs a free throw into a crowd of waving, screaming, stomping students.

The game progresses and as the scoreboard hits 0:00 with the home team - the major underdog - ahead!  For all their hard work and sweat, the players celebrate on the court.  Why would anyone expect the students to act any differently?  Let them loose!  Where the professional game and the college game differ is the players are being mobbed by their classmates.  

Naturally, the problem is for the safety of the group of visitors.  Mike Krzyzewski (whose team has been on the receiving end of more floor rushes than anyone else) has expressed concern for his players’ safety.  One idea is to, in the waning seconds, escort the losing club and have security make sure the remaining players on the floor get off safely.  In the past this hasn’t been an issue.  Like in the past boarding an airplane wasn’t an issue.

Just as a very small number of people seem to have ruined it for the overwhelming majority, we now have issues at basketball games.  These “sore winners” feel it necessary to verbally abuse the visitors at exactly a time that all they want to do is get into their locker room with their own people.  Of course, there’s a chance tempers would flare and the situation escalate.  Or the perpetrator, perhaps fortified with liquid courage and feeling the “strength in numbers” behind him, might just act beyond foolish and cause an incident.  Even if Mike’s proposal to guard the visiting team were put into effect, there would be no accounting for the game in which the outcome was decided by a last second shot - a make by the home squad or a miss by the favored visitors.

I’ve been involved with quite a few such “storming the Bastille” situations - on both sides.  At Fresno State we beat Tulsa in the finals of the WAC tournament (which was held on Fresno State’s home floor) to punch our dance card to the NCAAs.  At that time, Bill Self’s team had lost four games - three of them to us, this one by the largest margin - three.  During the regular season, we’d won at Tulsa by one and in Fresno by two.  Terrence Roberson hit his only three-pointer of the game on our last possession with the score tied, we got a stop and . . . batten down the hatches!  After addressing our guys in the locker room, Jerry Tarkanian went into theirs (the only time he ever entered an opponent’s locker room after a game) and said, “I only wish I could get our guys to play as hard as you guys do.”  He capped off the tribute with his trademark, “You’re the best.”

One year I was an assistant at USC, we had a magical run, finishing in the top 10 in the nation.  In the (then) Pac-10, we’d beaten UCLA both times and entered the final game (this was prior to a Pac-10 conference tournament) 14-3 in league play.  The Bruins were 15-2, meaning we’d gotten no help from anybody.  In order to win the championship, we needed to beat Arizona at home and then watch and hope Arizona State could defeat UCLA later that day.

We were down by one with seconds to play and ran a play for Harold Miner, our All-American.  Of course, the Wildcats weren’t going to let him score.  They doubled him, leaving our point guard open.  He took a 15-footer - and missed.  Our do-it-all combo guard, Rodney Chatman, picked up the rebound on the baseline about eight feet from the basket.  Because there was so little time, he simply flipped the ball at the basket.  Later (no replays for referees back then), ESPN’s cameras showed the ball had left the tips of his fingers with 0:00.1 tick left.  Good basket.  Game over.  Trojans win.

Our head coach, George Raveling, didn’t wait for the students to storm the floor.  He sprinted across the floor and dove into the student section!  UCLA beat ASU a couple hours later to dampen our parade but I’ll never forget George’s - and the students’ - reactions.

About three weeks prior to that thriller, we traveled to Pullman, our (George’s and my) old stompin’ grounds, he being the head coach there for 11 years and me being a graduate assistant and earning my master’s from Washington State.  We were neck-and-neck with UCLA for first place in the league.  WSU shot the lights out and beat us.  And their student body stormed the floor.  As we headed back to the locker room, George turned to me and said:

“I can’t believe it, Jack.  A team storming the court after beating USC in basketball.  We’ve finally arrived.”

Each Tuesday night at 6:00 (PST) The Jerry Tarkanian Show airs on 1430 ESPN radio (Fresno) and during the second segment, there’s an interview with someone prominent in college hoops (usually a coach of a national power but we’ve also had Bob Knight, Billy Packer and Dick Vitale).  Every year, Jerry has had his former (national championship) point guard, Greg Anthony, discuss the upcoming NCAA Tournament.  This year, however, Greg’s star has shown so brightly that his current employer, CBS Sports, wouldn’t allow him to do an interview with his former coach.

So, as a last minute replacement for last night’s Tark Show, Jerry’s guest was former head coach at UTEP, Texas A&M and Kentucky, Billy Gillespie.  Billy Clyde had some truly interesting things to say about his coaching experiences and, unlike most radio talk shows, none of it was negative or bitter.

Gillespie spoke about how he had always loved coaching and when he first started, when he thought about how much money he’d make, figured he’d probably pull down $30-40,000 a year.  This was fine with him because he enjoyed the relationship with the players, the challenge of preparing a team to beat an opponent and, simply, the game itself.

He talked about his days as Bill Self’s assistant at Tulsa.  Self, as any basketball fan knows, is the highly successful coach at Kansas.  What most fans don’t realize is on his Tulsa staff were three guys who would wind up becoming Division I head coaches themselves.  Gillespie, Norm Roberts (St. John’s) and John Phillips (who eventually became the coach at Tulsa).  Each of those guys were pink-slipped, the latter two from their first head coaching gig, although both were considered good coaches, just ones who didn’t win enough.  The same could be said for Gillespie who drew the wrath of the Wildcat faithful after being named the SEC Coach-of-the-Year after his first campaign in Lexington and won 22 games his second season there.

Gillespie talked about the frenzy that exists all the time on UK’s campus and how Tark tried to talk him out of the Kentucky job, telling him, “You were great at UTEP and you’ve done wonderful things at A&M but that will always be a football school.  If you blow your nose at Kentucky, everybody will hear about it.”  In all, the UK job can - and has - swallow up a coach.

I recall when I was an assistant at Tennessee all the nasty things the fans there would say about (then head coach) Joe B. Hall - and he won a national championship!  “Yeah,” their fans would say to those who made that remark, “but he’s only won one.”

Although pressure like this is greater at UK, don’t for a minute think other big-time schools don’t have unrealistic expectations for their coaches.  In football, it may be even worse.  With pressure like this, can anyone wonder why so much rule breaking goes on in college athletics?  A future blog will be devoted to “cheating” on the intercollegiate level.

What I heard, although Billy Gillespie never said it, was the purity of coaching, i.e. the fun, has been removed from coaching and in its place are a whole lot of dollars.  Is this better?  As the saying goes:

“Money isn’t everything, but it beats the hell out of whatever comes in second.”   

Last night marked the final Jerry Tarkanian Show for the 2009-10 season.  As usual, he and I differed on a few games as far as why the winners won (or losers lost) and what strategies were used.  Since he was a head coach and I wasn’t, and his was the longer career, his opinions dominate the show - which is why the show is named the way it is.  Our disagreements are minor, since my job is to facilitate the show and elicit opinions and stories from a coaching legend.

Some of what we discussed was: “Didn’t K-State’s players look tired against Butler?”  Jerry simply can’t believe that a kid who plays a game on Thursday, albeit one of the most stressful, hard fought, double overtime contests in NCAA history, could be tired on Saturday - with all that’s on the line.  He told me I was listening too much to the TV commentators, but he finally said that the Wildcats might have had heavy legs.  On each of those points, I agreed.  Closure on why Kansas State, one of the most talented teams, bowed out of the tourney was reached.

Tark has always maintained in order for a player and team to play to their potential, they must be physically, mentally and emotionally ready every game.  I heard him say this after every practice once the season began, for each of the seven years I spent as Fresno State’s Director of Basketball Operations.  We both agreed that St. Mary’s failed miserably on each of the final two requirements.

Although Jerry and Tom Izzo are great friends (Izzo has been a guest on the show each of the five years I’ve been the host), Jerry maintained this year he has been the luckiest coach in the tournament, pointing out that he easily could have (and maybe should have) lost the New Mexico State game, the Maryland game and the Tennessee game.  Because of that - and Kailin Lucas not playing - he predicts Michigan State’s run comes to an end on Saturday.

Another point on which we disagreed - and once, again, due to my observing him for seven seasons, I knew we would - was Kentucky’s continuing to shoot three-pointers against West Virginia.  I thought, possibly due to my lack of head coaching experience on that level, that it would have been wiser for UK to ease up the outside assault and try to get the ball to Cousins closer to the hoop.  In Jerry’s system, he always showed complete confidence in his shooters and felt the poor shooting by the ‘Cats would eventually turn around - because they had good shooters.  Note: one season at FSU, we beat Tulsa, coached by Bill Self, by three points in the WAC Tournament final when Terrance Roberson hit a three for the game’s final points.  It was the only three Terrance hit all night.  Tulsa lost four games that season and three of them were to Fresno - by one, two and three.  Tark has some credibility in the area of giving shooters confidence.

He also mentioned that the WVU-UK game was so incredibly strange (the Mountaineers didn’t make a two-point goal in the first half, yet were leading at halftime) because at the beginning of the game West Virginia couldn’t even make a pass without Kentucky deflecting or stealing it, then during the late stages of the game, UK didn’t pressure WVU (who was without their lead guard).

As far as his picks, I’ve mentioned he believes Butler will eliminate Michigan State (actually, he said he thought Ohio State, Maryland or Tennessee would have had a better chance - and in his opinion - would have beaten Butler, although he raved about the Bulldogs’ defense) .  In the other semi-final, he thinks West Virginia ought to win but has a feeling Duke will - talk about hedging - but when pressed, he said he’d go with Duke.  However, in the final, Tark’s pick for the national champion is . . . the winner of the Duke-West Virginia game, i.e. he picks Duke, but if WVU beats them, he likes the Mountaineers to beat Butler.

Doing this show has been a lot of fun for me.  I do my homework, which means I have plenty of filler if his stories are shorter than anticipated, but for the most part I just try to engage him in what he does second best - telling stories.  Getting kids to play hard and as a team was his forte and for that, he’s a legend.  And as the prolific author, Jim Harrison, said:

“Some people hear their own inner voices with great clearness.  And they live by what they hear.  Some people become crazy . . . or they become legend.”     Â

Every Wednesday night during the college basketball season, I host The Jerry Tarkanian Show, live at the Red Zone Sports Grill on the local ESPN radio station in Fresno (1430AM).  The hour show (6:00-7:00pm) is comprised of four segments, the first of which is me asking Jerry about the happenings of the past week.  The final two segments talk about his past week’s picks and how (& why) he did (third segment) and the big games to be played the following week and his selections (final segment). 

The second segment is a pre-recorded interview that he tapes at the studio.  I defy anyone to show me a Rolodex as comprehensive as Tark’s.  So far this year, here’s a partial list of the coaches we’ve had: John Calipari, Bill Self, Rick Barnes, Bob Huggins, Rick Majerus and Lorenzo Romar.  There have also been interviews with members of the media: Bob Knight (who ever thought he’d be in that category), Billy Packer and Greg Anthony (a particular favorite of Coach Tark’s because Greg was the point guard on his 1990 National Championship team) as well as others “in the game,” such as Gavin Maloof (one of the owners of the Sacramento Kings) and Mark Warkentien (GM of the Denver Nuggets - and a former assistant to Jerry at UNLV).  This is the fifth or sixth year I’ve been the host and I can’t think of anyone whom he wanted on the show he hasn’t gotten.

Wednesday night’s guest was Mike Krzyzewski, coach of the Duke Blue Devils and the Gold Medal winning coach of our Olympic team.  The exchange between the two mentors was fascinating.  Coaches open up to Jerry, mainly because they realize he has no agenda and, as he’s been called on innumerable occasions, he is a coach’s coach.  He’s not into criticizing coaches as much as studying and learning from them.  What are they doing - and why - who else in their league/the country do they have the most trouble coaching against - the exact questions the basketball fan would ask if given the chance.

In the interview, Mike divulged that his current team is made up of an eight-man rotation, with six of the eight being “bigs.”  This fact means he’s coaching differently than he has in over a decade, e.g. no press - or even half court pick up.  The rest of the conversation was just as interesting, not the normal “coachspeak” that most interviews tend to be.

Following the discussion between Mike and Jerry, I mentioned that there have been a number of upsets recently (last week, the numbers 1, 2 and 3 teams were all beaten).  My observation was that the winners seemed to play harder in those games than they had all year.  Plus, most upsets seem to be by the home team.  My point was that the truly great teams play hard every night, not just on a special occasion, i.e. they are consistent.

The question I posed to Tark was, since his teams’ trademark was they played hard all the time, was, What’s the key to maintaining that constant effort?  We had discussed earlier how, at the end of the season, most coaches cut the time of their practices down dramatically - from three hours + at the beginning of the year to, maybe, an hour and fifteen minutes, or no longer than an hour and a half.  Many people think the reason is to save the legs of the players - which is true, to a point.  Jerry added a vital component to his practice philosophy and why he thought his guys always played hard.

“No matter how long - or short - our practices were, we always went 100%.  We may have shortened the practice time, but NEVER the intensity.”Â

It seems as though college basketball’s 2009-10 season is void of true marquis teams we’ve seen in past years.  Teams play great, look like title contenders, but then fall mightily to also-rans.  Examples: Texas (in the midst of a serious slide after becoming #1 for the first time in the school’s history - basketball, not football . . . or baseball . . . or track . . . hey, maybe it was too much to handle), Villanova, Syracuse, Purdue (although they’re coming on strong as of late), Tennessee (possibly the hottest and coldest team in the nation - during the same week), Georgetown, Duke, Michigan State, Kansas State and the list goes on.

Two schools have distanced themselves from the rest of the country and even if someone’s dyslexic they could figure out at least one of them.  Right now, the initials of this year’s (highly) probable national champion are the same, but the jury’s out as to which order they’ll go on the trophy.  Kansas, aka KU, has a phenomenal team, a blend of youth and experience - both talented - but their mirror image (in more ways than UK) is as good, if not better.

Their pulling away from the field has been displayed by one of the most difficult tasks in college hoops - winning, in the league, on the road.  While the others have faltered in hostile arenas, the Jayhawks and Wildcats have stood strong.  KU’s lone loss was at Tennessee, a depleted team due to suspensions, but one that, prior to losing three key players, got embarrassed in Los Angeles by a “nothing-to-play-for” bunch of scrappy USC Trojans.  UK lost at USC as well, but it was a group of Southern Gamecocks, led by a tiny, yet apparently, unguardable player who, upon first blush, wouldn’t exactly strike fear in the hearts of big-time basketball players.

Both “K’s” have bounced back nicely and have stood firm against their competition, much of it formidable, if not up to the usual level for their respective conferences.  At this moment, Kansas might have the edge due to more experienced leadership, but when the tournament rolls around a month from now, Kentucky’s guys will have gained plenty of basketball maturity.  Each coach has not only been to the biggest game, but they did so against each other (Bill Self at KU and John Calipari at Memphis) in a game that couldn’t have been closer.  No doubt, Bill thanks his lucky stars every time he thinks of his championship, while Cal beats himself up over what could have been.

Naturally, college basketball, as unpredictable as it always seems to be, may not come down to the symmetrical UK-KU match up in the Finals.  But it would be some game if it did.  Although it would lose something in suspense knowing now that would be the last game on Monday night, I have to admit I can’t think of a game that would be more appropriate.

While attempting to stay out of the trouble, I’ll paraphrase a statement Bob Knight made to Connie Chung (actually was sandbagged by the mood Chung had set off camera, according to people who were there) about the inevitability of a Jayhawk-Wildcat national championship match up: 

“If this game’s inevitable, relax and enjoy it.”

I’ve been hosting The Jerry Tarkanian Show for something like six years now and, although I’ve known Jerry since we met in 1974 when he brought his two sons to our basketball camp at Washington State - and worked for him during his entire seven-year tenure at Fresno State, the guy still continues to amaze me.  Don’t think I don’t know he has his detractors - many loud, public and vehement regarding his coaching career.

They number many, fans and media alike, but there’s usually one thing most of them have in common.  They don’t know him.  A great majority have never even met him.  It’s just that their “sense of moral outrage” skyrockets whenever his name is brought up.

For those who do know him, whether quite well or just casually, the percentage who genuinely like him is overwhelming.  He has absolutely sensational people skills.  But not only that (which anyone could say about a friend of theirs), he has the respect of the coaching fraternity.  He is truly a coach’s coach, in that he has a firm grasp on the trials and tribulations coaches go through.  He has thorough knowledge of how difficult a profession coaching is - and how hard it is to win (what you’re ultimately judged by, independent of what some talk show hosts pontificate) - and keep winning.  At an extremely high level.  Year after year.  in his case, decade after decade.

Possibly, that’s why he has the most extensive Rolodex of any coach I know.  At close to 80 years of age, Jerry Tarkanian can’t do much for a college coach.  Unless you’re talking about sound advice regarding game planning, recruiting or avoiding/bouncing back from the pitfalls that coaches inevitably face.  Yet they all welcome his call.

The show is divided into four segments, the second of which is a pre-recorded interview between Jerry and someone prominent in the coaching or basketball industry.  This year, we’ve switched the local ESPN station (1430AM) after having been with Fox Sports.  The show runs throughout the college basketball season.  So far this year, Tark has interviewed Gavin Maloof (the Kings are also a major sponsor), Bob Knight and John Calipari (how many guys can turn that double play?), Roy Williams, Bill Self and last night, to show he has a sense for “who’s hot news now,” Kevin O’Neill.

When Jerry thanked Knight at the end of the interview for being on the show because, “I know you don’t really like doing these, Bobby” (Knight has been on the show each of the years Tark’s done it), Bob said (as only he can), “Tark, there aren’t that many people I like.”  The “younger” coaches (Self, O’Neill, Howland, Izzo, Williams, et al) gush with genuine admiration regarding how they wish they could get their teams to play as hard as Jerry continually got his teams to play.  Self, an annual guest as well, never fails to tell about the season his Tulsa team lost only four regular season games - and three of them were to Fresno State!  Sincere compliments from your peers is a sign of success in your chosen profession.

Last year, near the end of the season, I remarked to Jerry that I had done some research and we had every coach who was in the top 10 in the country at one time or another as a guest on the show - with one exception.  That was Jim Calhoun.  Jerry said to me:

“Oh, I had Jim a couple weeks ago.  After we finished the interview, the guy in the studio told me he forgot to push the (record) button.”      Â

The New York Yankees won this year’s World Series and did it with help from everybody in their organization (with the possible exception of George Costanza).  Included in that group are Alex Rodriguez and Joe Girardi, probably the two most popular pinatas in the Big Apple, if not the entire sports nation.

A-Rod finally buried his past postseason woes and Girardi, possibly the most criticized manager ever - who won it all, can now go to bed knowing, whether or not he was leading the highest paid, most talented baseball team in history, that no one else could have done any better than he did. 

Critics, from the broadcasters and color commentators to the journalists (both electronic and print) to the average schmuck on the street (if there’s any way for a schmuck to be average) have to now find another player and manager (or coach, depending on the sport) to berate for doing well (even great) but not winning the Big One.

The first guy I ever heard wear this crown (since my background is in college hoops) was Dean Smith who made numerous trips to the Final Four before finally winning one.  Wilt wore the player’s version for a while until he finally got one (even though there’s never been an athlete who’s caused so many rules changes in his game).  Count John Elway and Brett Favre in that group too.  Throw in Kevin Garnett too - a guy who might just win another one this year.

The title of “Best Coach to Never Have Won The Big One” (until each of them did) is a pretty exclusive group - considering that each of the following is a member.  It’s not bad company to keep: Tony LaRussa (started managing in 1979, hailed as a genius, yet didn’t win a World Championship until ten years later, Jim Leyland (started in 1986, won a title in 1997), Bill Cowher (went from 1992 until 2005 before he won a Super Bowl and retired a year later - it probably took a year for it to sink in that he’d actually won one).  Let’s also not forget Joe Torre, who, believe it or not, was in jeopardy of having the crown named after him for a while. 

On the college basketball level: Mike Krzyzewski, Rick Pitino, Gary Williams, Jim Boeheim, Roy Williams and Bill Self are all members, one succeeding the other once his predecessor took home a National Championship.

The moral of this story comes from a recorded postgame tirade (unbeknownst to him) by Tommy Lasorda after losing a game and having his strategy questioned by sportswriters:

“This (bleepin’) job’s not that (bleepin’) easy!” Â

When it’s comes down to filling out brackets, it’s been said that it doesn’t matter whom you ask - winning the office pool is basically a matter of luck anyway.  There’s much to be said for that kind of logic - to a point.  And that point is, the farther the tournament moves along, the more experience and knowledge of the college game become a factor.

When 32 pairs of games are in the original mix, especially when every year, at least one #12 seed beats a #5, as well as all the other “upsets from out of nowhere” happen, flipping a coin is probably as good - in the first round.  As the tournament progresses, I can see someone with knowledge of only mascots or team colors, who had picked Siena, a #9, over Ohio State a #8, using the same logic, but really fighting the odds, by picking Siena over #1 Louisville.  They might look like a genius in the first round and a fool in the second.  Same with #11 Dayton over #6 West Virginia (a team that, pardon the “impossible” term, overachieved all season, under the guidance of unrelenting taskmaster, but fabulous coach, Bob Huggins) - looking like a wizard, as opposed to picking the Flyers in the next round vs. #3 Kansas, a team with another great coach, Bill Self, but a team with better players.

When this year’s tournament got to the Sweet Sixteen, the “chalk” was on the money in 14 out of the 16 games.  Those people who had picked #3 Syracuse over #2 Oklahoma and/or #12 Arizona over #1 Louisville probably got burned by other upsets they predicted (a strategy that might have worked in tournaments past, but not this year). 

You get the idea.  So, … when it gets down to UConn (Tark had Memphis in the bracket he filled out prior to the tourney) vs. Michigan State (a team he did have) and Villanova (he picked either Duke or Pitt, I can’t recall) vs. North Carolina (a team he, as pretty much everyone else also had), it was time to put him on the spot (during his radio show) and ask him which way he was going - and why.

His pick in the first game was Michigan State, and not because of the site (Detroit - although he didn’t discount that, by any means), but because he felt that when the Spartans had the ball, Tom Izzo liked to run a play every time down the floor (unless they were breaking).  Even though this brand of coaching flew in the face of the Tarkanian style, Jerry said he felt MSU executed (how many coaches use that word?) their man-to-man offense better than anyone in the country and he thought, although UConn played solid, half court man-to-man defense, that Michigan State ran their offense better than UConn defended.  Naturally, being so close to Detroit would energize Izzo’s guys, especially at the defensive end. 

Tark is also a great admirer of Hasheem Thabeet, but felt whether UConn played man or zone, that Goran Suton could face up from 15′ and beyond and cause Jim Calhoun’s guys problems.  This is what I’m referring to when I talk about hoops savvy.  Guys who’ve coached, especially those who’ve been there, i.e. the Final Four, have experienced something the rest of us haven’t.  And when you take into account the guys who have been there multiple times, e.g. not only Tark, but Bob Knight, you can’t tell me that the familiarity doesn’t give them an advantage in understanding the feelings players and coaches have.  Doesn’t common sense tell us that the next time Jay Wright leads a team to the Final Four (and, rest assured, that will happen), he will have a whole different perspective on how to prepare and what it’s generally all about?

Tark was one of those who annointed UNC as number one right from the start of the season and, if not the first, was among the first to claim they’d go undefeated.  He’d say, over and over, “How can a team that won 36 games last year and got to the Final Four, have everybody back, and have the number one recruiting class in the nation, not be picked to win it all?  Plus Roy Williams is a great, great coach.  They shouldn’t lose!”  

I’d keep reminding him how difficult it was to go undefeated.  His 1991 team was coming off the National Championship and went undefeated, reaching the Final Four, only to be beaten by Duke (79-77), a team they had destroyed by thirty in the Championship Game the year before.  He said he understood, but just had never seen a team with such a collection of talent, coached by a Hall-of-Famer, play as well as they had played (into December).

When I asked him to pick a winner between Michigan State and Carolina, he thought for a while, but said he couldn’t see how the Spartans could overcome that much talent.  He really wanted to go with his heart (he’s very close to both coaches - in fact, we had all of the Final Four coaches on the show this past year, and MSU winning it would have been such a great story), but in the end, he picked the Heels.  Why?  It really didn’t matter, there was nothing riding on his pick, the show was on a radio station in Fresno - it wasn’t like a national audience was going to think Tark missed it.  It’s just that, coaches are so competitive, they want to win - even if it means nothing.

For the record (and mainly because I thought UConn might win), I asked him, “What if UConn beats Michigan State, who wins it all then?”  His answer was, “North Carolina.”  I didn’t think there needed to be much discussion about that selection, but then I asked, just to cover all bases, what if Villanova upsets UNC, who wins ‘Nova or UConn - and I think he said Villanova.  The reason my recollection is hazy is because he stunned me on the next, and last, combination.

How about a Michigan State-Villanova final?  Who do you have?  He closed his eyes tightly and shook his head.  I could almost see him thinking of his four trips to the Final Four and how he could feel his stomach churning and the gears grinding, before he looked up and said, “Villanova.” 

Never did I expect that answer!  As much as he had hoped for a storybook ending, he gave what his experiences had told him.  Call me a sap (I’ve been called much worse), but I really believe that had any of those combinations happened, Tark would have nailed each of them.

Why do I believe this?  My late friend and mentor, John Savage, used to say that some people were a mile wide and an inch deep and that others were an inch wide and a mile deep - and he had never met Jerry Tarkanian - the poster boy for the “inch wide, mile deep” club.  He knows basketball - everything about it, and not too much about anything else.  Nor does he want to.  But there’s an old Yiddish saying that also describes people - and in this case, it’s the reason I think so much of Jerry’s insight into basketball:

“All of us are crazy good in one way or another.” 

 Â

A coach can only do so much and unless you’re a veteran with a long-term deal or a Hall-of-Famer, you’d better have the kind of charisma that captivates everyone in a room, no matter the setting.  Former coaches John Wooden, Al McGuire, John Thompson and Bob Knight immediately come to mind.  Current coaches with that type of scent, beyond the obvious Mike Krzyzewski and Roy Williams, are Tom Izzo, Rick Pitino, Paul Hewitt, Gary Williams, John Thompson III, Bill Self and Ben Howland.

Independent of whether a coach is in this kind favorable situation is less important than what each of them, and all their other colleagues face, and that is to find a team leader -either a spokesman, like a rah-rah guy or the silent type, better known in the coaching world as the “leader by example” - the player who will outwork everybody else.  Which is better depends on the personality of the coach, but even more so, on the make up of the squad.  Are the others, especially the young bucks, impressed with a teammate chirping - be it backing up confident trash talking (if such a thing exists) or with positive support when one of the youngsters is struggling or is it the case where the best player (or at least one of the best) on the club is, far and away, the hardest worker?

Talent is, and always will be, paramount to a team’s success but leadership is, and always will be, the most important intangible to winning.  I was part of a staff where we had one of the two best leaders I’d ever been around - in both the outgoing and all-out hustle categories - and I experienced, arguably, the best season in my 30-year career as an assistant.  Then, he graduated and we made a horrendous recruiting mistake, replacing him with someone who was as close to his antithesis as possible.  The program suffered, never regaining the same heights we’d had during that magical season. 

While the newcomer wasn’t the sole reason for the downfall, the following quote sums up the problem he had with the team - and, more importantly - the coaches had with him:

“Leadership is the art of getting others to do something you’re convinced  should be done.”

Much has been made over John Calipari’s not calling a time out, both after Derrick Rose made the second of his final free throws (which was very probably his final point as a Memphis Tiger) and after Mario Chalmers hit the game-tying three-pointer.

These are two separate instances and are mutually exclusive events.  In other words, a “yes, he should have called time out” after the free throw does not necessarily mean, “yes, he should have called one” after the game was tied.  In retrospect, I imagine Cal wished he’d called one after the free throw because of his post-game comments in which he said he’d told his guys to “build a wall” if Rose made both and they were up four, but the players should foul if they were up three.  After viewing the replay of the final 10.8 seconds many times over, it was evident that the Memphis players were not attempting to foul - in fact, it looked as if they were trying not to avoid fouling.

As far as calling time out after Chalmers’ shot, there’s a little more to debate.  First of all, Memphis had to go the length of the floor in about 3 seconds.  Keep in mind that, had a time out been called, Bill Self, the Kansas coach (who had a pretty good understanding of the game himself) would have gotten a chance to huddle with his guys as well.  Momentum was clearly on the side of the Jayhawks and had Memphis turned the ball over, KU could have had a shot to win it in regulation and, chances are, their attempt would have been closer to their hoop than Memphis’ opportunity would have been to theirs, especially if Kansas had decided to apply pressure in the backcourt.  As it was, the Tigers’ Dozier had a good look and an open shot, albeit from midcourt, but to see that shot go down wouldn’t have even been in the top ten most unbelievably shots in NCAA history.  What it would have accomplished would have, but not the shot itself.

Many “arm-chair” (or “bar stool”) coaches have made the remark that Memphis should have thrown the ball deep against the KU press.  Not a bad idea, but as anyone who knows the rules is aware, had the pass gone out-of-bounds without touching a player on either team, Kansas would have been given possession under their own basket, a far more advantageous spot to attempt a play for a score than Memphis originally had.  Had that scenario unfolded and the Jayhaws had won in that manner, Cal would have faced a far more critical (and hostile) crowd following the game.

When it comes down to it - and, naturally, with the benefit of hindsight being 20/20 -certainly the first time out would have been a good idea because, in the words of many, including John Wooden:

“If you don’t have the time to do it right, when will you have the time to do it over?”¼/p>