On Utah's dynasty

[Goatnapper'96]

I believe Utah has a very solid historical hoops program. It is laughable to believe it is a top 15 program, in my opinion at least. But it is a very solid regional program with occasional runs of regional dominance. Majerus' run was almost as impressive as Lavell's, just not as long.

I believe that Utah can have a good program and perhaps the best one in the MWC if they get a good coach. They have resources and a national reputation. However, I think UNLV beat them to the punch for that good coach. Perhaps the U can find another and compete with the Rebels. In the end what I believe gives UNLV a better chance to stay regionally dominant is a better natural recruiting base. A solid UNLV program will get the best kids from Vegas, and I think that will provide more good hoopsters than the die hard Ute kids (both LDS Utes and non-LDS kids) from Utah.

However, things change with BCS money that impacts hoops. The lack of exposure with the mtn and the mediocrity to flat out bad play for 5-6 years, save the Bogut year to the sweet 16 will be difficult to reverse. UNLV is facing a similar challenge. I am not convinced that the circumstances during Jack Gardner are the same as now and it will be important for the new coach to recognize that and find a new niche.

The fall to this year, while sudden over the past two years, has been building for some time. Similar to BYU football dominance starting to wane in the 90's, Utah hoops has not been a dominant program since Andre Miller graduated. I agree that Rick had his issues towards the end and I also agree that Giacolletti is not a great coach. I think Giac, similar to Crowton is almost as much a victim of circumstance as he is being a poor HC. Similar to Crowton he needs to go because there is power in change. He might be a better HC than he is showing, but the probability that he is good is not very high and the net benefits of a change in leadership outweigh the negative ramifications of turnover. I am not convinced that the Utah job is as attractive as Ute fans make it out to be. UNLV is solid and I am beginning to believe BYU is going to be more competitive than Cleveland could make them. I still think maintaining AF as competitive is near to impossible. I just don't see Utah as having immense advantages that make dominating in the MWC so easy. Historically, haven't most Utah good HCs been relatively unknown before getting to Utah? I don't think the names Ute fans have been throwing out will come to Utah. But Hill has found diamonds in the rough before and perhaps he could again.

Finally, the concept of dynasty is somewhat humorous to me from one perspective. While I admit that Utah has a better historical hoops program the net Ute lead in the head to head matchup indicate more parity than the programs realize. Historically, Utah does not have a head to head dynastical advantage over BYU. In fact, I believe that the recent domination, from BYU ending the long Ute streak in the MWC tourney in 2000 until last years MWC tourney win, is really strange because I believe of the 6 years in question (2000-2001 through 2005-2006) BYU actually had a better team 4 of those years. Despite this, the record over that period was 10-4 for Utah.

In other words, going forward Utah will improve and be competitive with BYU and perhaps have more years with NCAA appearances and or wins, but if Ute fans think what they will see the sweet 16 more frequently than perhaps once a decade, I think they are missing reality. The Ute future is probably similar to what Big Rick brought the last 4 years he was the Ute HC.