Hubert Davis Catch-all

[NYCBlueBlood]

Who would I personally choose? Leaving aside the candidates I assume are not going to leave their current schools (Tommy Lloyd, Dusty May, Matt Painter, Todd Golden, who has the personal baggage anyway, Hurley, who I don't personally like anyway) and the ones who I think are probably too old at this point to start a new job (Mark few, Kelvin Sampson) TJ Otzelberger would be at the top of my list. If Ryan Odom has another great year at UVA he would be an intriguing candidate too. Nate Oats would also be on that list as a solid candidate, though I know some people dislike his style of play (I don't really care about that, though I don't entirely love his personality).

Next tier down, Fred Hoiberg, Grant McCasland, and Mark Byington would also be worth consideration. Brad Underwood is maybe on the cusp of being in the "too old" group, and I don't know much about him, but his results at Illinois could make him worthy of consideration.

No one is a sure thing. But that's how my own wish list would look.

I see TJ Otzelberger come up a lot. I'm always a bit surprised. I think he's a good coach, but is he really that different from HD? In his 5 seasons at Iowa State he's won 70.3% of his games, 58.7% of his conference games, finishing on average 4th in conference. Yes he's been to 2 Sweet 16s, but one of those was off a 22-23 (7-11 in conference, finishing 6th).

Honestly, I can't think of many coaches with a more similar record to HD's. 70.2% overall, 69.4% in conference, and just a bit better than 4th on average in conference.

 

[Peppers49]

In comparing Hubert’s five years to others, I’m going to break it up into individual seasons and compare to seasons over the past 40 years under other coaches.

2022: This was a pretty unique season that’s hard to compare. We had a bit of a rough start and then came on strong at the end for a very strong finish. It wasn’t as good overall as 1997, a year we started out rough and then got things going to win 16 straight on the way to the Final Four. And it was better than 2000, when we weren’t totally sure of whether we’d make the NCAAT as of Selection Sunday but went on to make an unexpected Final Four run. While I cannot come up with one season to compare, I’ll say it was kind of like if 1997 and 2000 had a baby.

2023: The season that comes closest might be 2010. High expectations at the beginning after a strong finish the previous season, but failed to make the NCAAT. 2023 was a little better relatively speaking, but expectations were a little higher. We also didn’t have all the injuries the 2010 team had. 2003 also comes to mind, but preseason expectations weren’t nearly as high after 2002 and knowing we would rely on a lot of freshmen at a time that wasn’t the norm. The young talent we had that we expected to return also gave us optimism for the future. So 2010 it is.

2024: A few seasons come to mind, but this most reminded me of 2019. Very similar records, ACC regular season champions, lost in the ACCT championship, lost in the Sweet 16, and both were very good teams but with little room for error.

2025: The closest I can come up with here is 2021. A bubble team that lost in the round of 64. If I were to combine two seasons, it might be like 2000’s regular season with 1999’s NCAAT. But I’ll stick with 2021.

I’ll wait until after the NCAAT to judge this season and compare it to others.

So thus far Hubert has given us seasons comparable to 1997 and 2000’s baby, 2010, 2019, and 2021.

Despite the disappointing finish with the ACCT debacle against State and tough loss to Bama, 2024 is the template for success in this new era of the sport. We will never be able to stack talent and experience through HS recruiting like Dean and then Roy did, but I still think UNC has the ability to recruit and retain a few “core” players for every team like Bacot and Davis, then supplement them with some combination of one and dones + transfers that fit specific needs.

I realize that’s easier said than done. Just feel like since 2024 the staff is stuck in a cycle where they’re forced to go “all in” trying to completely overhaul the roster and just haven’t hit on the high school recruits that are multi year college players.

 

[Heelsandeers]

I see TJ Otzelberger come up a lot. I'm always a bit surprised. I think he's a good coach, but is he really that different from HD? In his 5 seasons at Iowa State he's won 70.3% of his games, 58.7% of his conference games, finishing on average 4th in conference. Yes he's been to 2 Sweet 16s, but one of those was off a 22-23 (7-11 in conference, finishing 6th).

Honestly, I can't think of many coaches with a more similar record to HD's. 70.2% overall, 69.4% in conference, and just a bit better than 4th on average in conference.

Yeah, main criticism there is lack of post-season success

He's won at the same rate as HD, though I would say vs better competition, and with fewer resources

Not sure of his offensive pedigree but sign me up for some team defense and ball pressure

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

 

[duluoz]

IMO, if we run HD out of town, it can only be for a slam dunk hire... otherwise this program really blows up and we're lucky to replace that person with somebody half as good as HD.

Been saying this very thing for months. There are no slam dunks, and everyone here knows that.

But yet I’m assured, by the people who demand change and feel entitled to it, that all we need is a thorough search, and that’s all it would take to improve on HD’s projected results.

I’ve been saying I’d respect that position a lot more if they’d just come out and say “Carolina Way be damned, we need more wins…” but these deluded people think they can have the Carolina Way, outside of the Carolina family, AND have all the wins that have slipped away from HD and then some, choosing from among the many who will be beating down the door for a shot at the gig. Maybe don’t even need a thorough search — according to most of these posters, countless options will be lined up already.

The lack of foresight for what a mess this could become is astonishing. To them, this is as bad as it gets.

 

[Peppers49]

I see TJ Otzelberger come up a lot. I'm always a bit surprised. I think he's a good coach, but is he really that different from HD? In his 5 seasons at Iowa State he's won 70.3% of his games, 58.7% of his conference games, finishing on average 4th in conference. Yes he's been to 2 Sweet 16s, but one of those was off a 22-23 (7-11 in conference, finishing 6th).

Honestly, I can't think of many coaches with a more similar record to HD's. 70.2% overall, 69.4% in conference, and just a bit better than 4th on average in conference.

I’m not sure Otzelberger would be the best fit for a program like UNC, but Iowa State seems like an extremely difficult place to win. Probably not even close to UNC in terms of NIL, and the Big 12 has been noticeably better than the ACC during his tenure there.

 

[donbosco]

Almost every coaching hire is a question mark to some extent. The Roy Williams-esque "elite legacy who basically feels duty-bound to take your job" hire is not a realistic standard and may never happen again for UNC or anywhere. There is no hire we can make that I guarantee will make us elite immediately. There is no hire we can make that I can guarantee will be better than Hubert Davis at UNC. But especially at a school that considers itself a blue blood, you simply have to keep trying to get an elite coach, even if you are not always successful. UK fans may not have been happy in the short term when they pushed out Tubby Smith (a coach with a better track record of consistent success than HD) and got Billy Gillespie, but after Cal followed Gillespie I bet very few of them would go back and undo the original decision.

There is, and will be, no guarantee. But if our goal is to remain an elite program, we either keep trying to hire an elite coach, or we accept no longer being a blue blood.

Which are Blue Bloods?

One seeds are dook, Arizona, Michigan, FL, The likely twos are Iowa State, UConn, Michigan State, and Houston. Threes are Illinois, Alabama, Nebraska, and Gonzaga.

 

[Calheel]

I see TJ Otzelberger come up a lot. I'm always a bit surprised. I think he's a good coach, but is he really that different from HD? In his 5 seasons at Iowa State he's won 70.3% of his games, 58.7% of his conference games, finishing on average 4th in conference. Yes he's been to 2 Sweet 16s, but one of those was off a 22-23 (7-11 in conference, finishing 6th).

Honestly, I can't think of many coaches with a more similar record to HD's. 70.2% overall, 69.4% in conference, and just a bit better than 4th on average in conference.

If you are equaling UNC for five years at Iowa frickin State, you are a good coach.

You always have to consider the resources available to a program when judging that coach’s results.

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

I’m not sure Otzelberger would be the best fit for a program like UNC, but Iowa State seems like an extremely difficult place to win. Probably not even close to UNC in terms of NIL, and the Big 12 has been noticeably better than the ACC during his tenure there.

I do agree that the same results at Iowa State is more impressive than getting them at UNC... but it's hardly the kind of awe inspiring results I'd expect given the amount of frothing at the mouth I see over substantially similar results from HD being completely unacceptable. The number of posts I see saying that HD is terrible, can't coach, completely inept... but people fawning over Otzelberger. It's weird.

Right now in this moment, I think he's a slightly better coach than HD. Firing HD for him makes no sense to me. If the argument is that UNC deserves better than HD... then we need to find better. But all the names I hear as replacements are some combination of A) too old, B) almost definitely will not leave their current job for UNC, C)complete assholes, D) have little or no track record at a P5 school.

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

If you are equaling UNC for five years at Iowa frickin State, you are a good coach.

You always have to consider the resources available to a program when judging that coach’s results.

Sure, he's a good coach. Can he be elite at a better school? I don't know. Maybe.

ETA

If we hire Otzelberger I'll do the exact same thing I did when HD was hired... cross my fingers and hope for the best... hopefully to a better result.

 

[Icky Mettle]

I’m not sure I necessarily agree that getting the same results at Iowa State is as impressive as at UNC. Iowa State doesn’t have the target in its back that UNC does. I’ve always believed that if you took some of UNC’s worst teams over the past 25 years, and pit them in entirely different uniforms of some other team (e.g., Clemson, Virginia Tech, Boston College, etc), they would have more wins. Other teams wouldn’t be gunning for them the same way. UNC has historically had to take every team’s best shot (generally speaking). Most other teams, including Iowa State, not so much.

 

[rodoheel]

Been saying this very thing for months. There are no slam dunks, and everyone here knows that.

But yet I’m assured, by the people who demand change and feel entitled to it, that all we need is a thorough search, and that’s all it would take to improve on HD’s projected results.

I’ve been saying I’d respect that position a lot more if they’d just come out and say “Carolina Way be damned, we need more wins…” but these deluded people think they can have the Carolina Way, outside of the Carolina family, AND have all the wins that have slipped away from HD and then some, choosing from among the many who will be beating down the door for a shot at the gig. Maybe don’t even need a thorough search — according to most of these posters, countless options will be lined up already.

The lack of foresight for what a mess this could become is astonishing. To them, this is as bad as it gets.

I know you are speaking in generalities, but I think this is pretty unfair blanket criticism of those who are unsure about Hubert or want to make a move. I have never seen anyone say a new hire will guarantee better results; I have just said exactly the opposite in another post. I have never said, or seen anyone say, "it can't get any worse than this." (We all know it can - see 8-20.) The people who want to make a change aren't necessarily ignorant of the downside of a new hire. They just are willing to take the risk in exchange for the potential reward of a better hire. Everyone is going to weigh that risk differently, and just because someone weighs that risk different than you doesn't mean they are ignoring it.

The question is simply whether we want UNC to remain an elite program. Your preference appears to be that we prioritize your conception of the "Carolina Way" (which apparently includes only hiring within the family) over being an elite program. That is fine; it's your preference. But my personal opinion is that almost nobody would give a shit about the "Carolina Way" if it didn't also accompany the elite results we've had with Dean and Roy. Few people would worship Dean if he had the coaching record of JIm Larranaga. Dean's integrity, and Roy's integrity, are praised because of the perception that integrity is rare among highly successful coaches. But you need the integrity and the success together to make it something special. Integrity without success is laudable but not inspiring to all that many people.

I can't speak for others but I'm not suggesting UNC entirely abandon any sense of values in exchange for winning. I'm just suggesting that winning is one of values of UNC basketball, and that I do not believe that minimizing winning at the expense of integrity, "family," or other values is a viable path forward to keeping Carolina basketball special.

 

[rodoheel]

I’m not sure I necessarily agree that getting the same results at Iowa State is as impressive as at UNC. Iowa State doesn’t have the target in its back that UNC does. I’ve always believed that if you took some of UNC’s worst teams over the past 25 years, and pit them in entirely different uniforms of some other team (e.g., Clemson, Virginia Tech, Boston College, etc), they would have more wins. Other teams wouldn’t be gunning for them the same way. UNC has historically had to take every team’s best shot (generally speaking). Most other teams, including Iowa State, not so much.

I think the idea of a "target on UNC's back" that makes others play better against us and always give us their "best shot" compared to other teams is an entirely self-serving, self-soothing myth. I'm never seen anyone offer anything other than anecdotal evidence in support of it. There may well be players who are inspired to play better when they look up at Jordan's jersey in the rafters, or see the iconic uniforms, but I suspect there are others who play worse because they are anxious or intimidated by the same things.

 

[donbosco]

Which are Blue Bloods?

One seeds are dook, Arizona, Michigan, FL, The likely twos are Iowa State, UConn, Michigan State, and Houston. Threes are Illinois, Alabama, Nebraska, and Gonzaga.

dook and Michigan? Michigan State?

 

[finesse]

I know you are speaking in generalities, but I think this is pretty unfair blanket criticism of those who are unsure about Hubert or want to make a move. I have never seen anyone say a new hire will guarantee better results; I have just said exactly the opposite in another post. I have never said, or seen anyone say, "it can't get any worse than this." (We all know it can - see 8-20.) The people who want to make a change aren't necessarily ignorant of the downside of a new hire. They just are willing to take the risk in exchange for the potential reward of a better hire. Everyone is going to weigh that risk differently, and just because someone weighs that risk different than you doesn't mean they are ignoring it.

The question is simply whether we want UNC to remain an elite program. Your preference appears to be that we prioritize your conception of the "Carolina Way" (which apparently includes only hiring within the family) over being an elite program. That is fine; it's your preference. But my personal opinion is that almost nobody would give a shit about the "Carolina Way" if it didn't also accompany the elite results we've had with Dean and Roy. Few people would worship Dean if he had the coaching record of JIm Larranaga. Dean's integrity, and Roy's integrity, are praised because of the perception that integrity is rare among highly successful coaches. But you need the integrity and the success together to make it something special. Integrity without success is laudable but not inspiring to all that many people.

I can't speak for others but I'm not suggesting UNC entirely abandon any sense of values in exchange for winning. I'm just suggesting that winning is one of values of UNC basketball, and that I do not believe that minimizing winning at the expense of integrity, "family," or other values is a viable path forward to keeping Carolina basketball special.

This is exactly what Dean was hired by Aycock to do and I never heard the first word from Dean or saw the first action by him to ever indicate he forgot it. As best as I can tell, Roy adopted it. I don't know how much it means to anybody these days but don't even pretend that that's not how it started.

 

[rodoheel]

Which are Blue Bloods?

One seeds are dook, Arizona, Michigan, FL, The likely twos are Iowa State, UConn, Michigan State, and Houston. Threes are Illinois, Alabama, Nebraska, and Gonzaga.

The programs most people still consider "blue bloods" are UNC, KU, UK, and Duke. None are guaranteed to maintain that distinction forever, and all but Duke are at least arguably in a bit of a down period.

The programs that I would actually consider the group of best college basketball programs right now are (in no particular order) UConn, Arizona, Duke, Purdue, Houston, Florida, Kansas, and Alabama. The first five of those are the ones I have referenced as being the most consistently successful over the last five years, though honestly Alabama may deserve to be mentioned in the same breath. KU is in danger of falling out of that top tier, pending their close to this year, as this has been a down three years by their standard. Florida arguably doesn't quite deserve to be there yet but they are the defending champs and have followed it up with another 1/2 seed year.

 

[finesse]

The programs most people still consider "blue bloods" are UNC, KU, UK, and Duke. None are guaranteed to maintain that distinction forever, and all but Duke are at least arguably in a bit of a down period.

The programs that I would actually consider the group of best college basketball programs right now are (in no particular order) UConn, Arizona, Duke, Purdue, Houston, Florida, Kansas, and Alabama. The first five of those are the ones I have referenced as being the most consistently successful over the last five years, though honestly Alabama may deserve to be mentioned in the same breath. KU is in danger of falling out of that top tier, pending their close to this year, as this has been a down three years by their standard. Florida arguably doesn't quite deserve to be there yet but they are the defending champs and have followed it up with another 1/2 seed year.

Separate the elite from the bluebloods. They are not the same.

 

[Icky Mettle]

I think the idea of a "target on UNC's back" that makes others play better against us and always give us their "best shot" compared to other teams is an entirely self-serving, self-soothing myth. I'm never seen anyone offer anything other than anecdotal evidence in support of it. There may well be players who are inspired to play better when they look up at Jordan's jersey in the rafters, or see the iconic uniforms, but I suspect there are others who play worse because they are anxious or intimidated by the same things.

I remember when Seth Greenberg complained about not making the NCAAT when he had a bubble team that beat both UNC and Duke. Dick Vitale responded (yes, I’m citing Dick Vitale, but I agree with him here), “You cannot just hang your hat on beating Duke and UNC. Those teams take every team’s best shot game in and game out and still get wins. You have to play every team the way you play Duke and UNC to be successful.”

I agree. I watch these other games (or at least used to) and the teams we play usually don’t look the same against other teams as they did against us. The arenas we visit are a lot emptier and the fans are a lot quieter than when other teams show up to play there. Those other teams don’t show up to opposing teams’ arenas and experience what we do from the home team’s crowd.

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

There is good and bad to the resources of UNC. With great resources comes great expectations. For substantially similar results, you get an atta boy and probably a contract extension at ISU. Whereas at UNC you get the angry mob drunkenly hatebombing you and trying to run you out of town.

Maybe he becomes a top 5 program from day 1 at UNC. But if he struggles even a little bit, he'd be dealing with a level of unreasonable fan he's never experienced in his life. And given he's not family, he won't get 1/10th the "leeway" that HD has had.

 

[Calheel]

Sure, he's a good coach. Can he be elite at a better school? I don't know. Maybe.

That’s always the question. Very few elite schools have hired away coaches from other elite schools. Far more likely you hire Bill Self from Illinois than Roy Williams from Kansas.