[2006alum]

d4cohn, I don't think Johnson deserves much credit at all. His first year, he used Monty's personnel to get to the first round, then we lost. Then the following year we receded further and floundered in the NIT - our first failure to make the Tournament in 15 years. And I refuse to give Johnson credit for the Lopii, who were recruited and committed under Montgomery. The two years they were on campus, we made the tournament twice, losing in the first round their frosh year before reaching the Sweet Sixteen their sophomore year (where we were blown to bits by Texas). If you can't at least get a team with two top-15 lottery picks to at least the Sweet Sixteen, then you shouldn't be coaching at all. So basically, Johnson should get credit for bringing us Landry Fields - who all things considered should have been developed further while he was at Stanford than he did, given the underlying talent - and that's it. 

Sorry, but in my hierarchy of recent coaches, it's Monty > > > > > > Dawkins > > Johnson. Dawkins at least had the ability to recruit. Johnson was neither a good coach nor a good recruiter, and when he bounced, he left us with an exceptionally bare cupboard that took Dawkins 2-3 seasons to refill. Unfortunately, by the time Dawkins was finally axed, he did too, which is why we're all having to wait 3-4 seasons to see what Haase is capable of. 

And BC: Yes, yes, yes. That Shaw has largely been able to maintain Harbaugh's turnaround is itself an extraordinary accomplishment. I think folks around here have real short memories about how quickly programs can go south after a coaching change. Shaw consolidated our gains and made them sustainable in a way that I think, quite frankly, Harbaugh would never have been able to do, and he's done it now for 8 seasons. He deserves far more praise than he receives around these parts.

[2006alum]

d4cohn, I don't think Johnson deserves much credit at all. His first year, he used Monty's personnel to get to the first round, then we lost. Then the following year we receded further and floundered in the NIT - our first failure to make the Tournament in 15 years. And I refuse to give Johnson credit for the Lopii, who were recruited and committed under Montgomery. The two years they were on campus, we made the tournament twice, losing in the first round their frosh year before reaching the Sweet Sixteen their sophomore year (where we were blown to bits by Texas). If you can't at least get a team with two top-15 lottery picks to at least the Sweet Sixteen, then you shouldn't be coaching at all. So basically, Johnson should get credit for bringing us Landry Fields - who all things considered should have been developed further while he was at Stanford than he did, given the underlying talent - and that's it. 

Sorry, but in my hierarchy of recent coaches, it's Monty > > > > > > Dawkins > > Johnson. Dawkins at least had the ability to recruit. Johnson was neither a good coach nor a good recruiter, and when he bounced, he left us with an exceptionally bare cupboard that took Dawkins 2-3 seasons to refill. Unfortunately, by the time Dawkins was finally axed, he did too, which is why we're all having to wait 3-4 seasons to see what Haase is capable of. 

And BC: Yes, yes, yes. That Shaw has largely been able to maintain Harbaugh's turnaround is itself an extraordinary accomplishment. I think folks around here have real short memories about how quickly programs can go south after a coaching change. Shaw consolidated our gains and made them sustainable in a way that I think, quite frankly, Harbaugh would never have been able to do, and he's done it now for 8 seasons. He deserves far more praise than he receives around these parts.