Competing at the highest level

[jerry weinstein]

Bart, 
   
  Do you consider UC a mid-major in basketball? I don't. And I don't consider any conference that includes UC, Louisville, Memphis, DePaul and Marquette to be a mid-major basketball conference. As I said previously, I'd put the old CUSA in a special category, one notch below the big power conferences, but clearly above the rest in terms of the prestige of its upper tier programs. 
   
  I agree that power conference affiliation is an advantage, but in basketball it's overblown. In football it makes a huge difference, because of bowl affiliations and limited opportunities for national tv exposure. It's much more democratic in basketball, where everyone plays each other in the NCAA and where there are so many more national tv opportunities. There are many non-BCS schools with rich basketball traditions, as opposed to football.
   
  I believe the coach is more important than the conference in recruiting and winning. In answer to your question, I don't know if any non BCS coach was more successful than Huggs from 97 to 05. Many of the programs I'd look at were in CUSA, and they all went through dry spells and coaching changes (which worked to our benefit).
   
  I've always acknowledged Huggs' remarkable success. I've attributed it more to his toughness and monstrous will to win than to his recruiting. Recruiting is a very difficult enterprise, and I didn't mean to make it sound otherwise. But I can't simply assume that recruiting deficiencies were a result of CUSA, when it was usually just a matter of having competent guard play, and when there were other factors involved. It's because Huggs was so successful that his recruiting could've been better, and it will always be frustrating to me that we were so close, but unable to capitalize on our success.