dougthonus wrote:Do you think Donovan is not good or do you think just this single point doesn't have that much merit?
Sure, I agree you can argue about how much to weigh his HOF election in this equation. I certainly think it has some merit and isn't of zero value, but how much merit is definitely up for debate. It's also why I added the other points and didn't rely on this single point.
I actually think Donovan's Florida tenure says more about coaching than a lot of HOF college coaches. Prior to Donovan: 1 elite 8 appearance, under Donovan, 7 elite 8s (5 in the final 4, 1 runner up, 2 titles), after Donovan, 2 elite 8s (1 final four). Florida hasn't generally been a basketball powerhouse outside of Donovan. It's not like he got the Duke, Kentucky, or NC job and just got a parade of elite recruits every year.
That said, I agree, it's still college, and college is a different animal.
Also, in his first college HC gig, he turned around Marshall. They were 9-18 the year before him and they won the regular season title in the Southern conference in his first year. I've yet to see him leave a team in worse shape than when he found it.
Coaching isn't like evaluating players, where everyone more/less agrees where each player ranks and the value of having that player on your team. It's much more subjective. Some people here swear by Tom Thibodeau even though 3 organizations fired him for the same reason. It is what it is. If someone doesn't like Billy Donovan, then that's fine. But, if we're sitting here acting like he can't coach and that he's holding the team back from something, then there's just too much evidence that suggests otherwise.
We talk about how unheard of it is for a coach to still be here after 6 seasons with 1 playoff appearance in 5 years. I think it's unheard of for a coach to still have locker room, organization and ownership buy-in from after 1 playoff appearance in 5 years.
