Dean Smith: A Fan's Notes

A coach and his devotees


The kids here still respect the college Dean.
Zeke Smith

I'm sure it was possible to live in the Chapel Hill area between the late 1960s and the late 1990s without basketball being a part of your life. I just don't think I ever met anyone who managed to do it. I've never been anybody's idea of a serious sports fan, but as a boy I watched or listened to the vast majority of the Tar Heels' basketball games throughout the early and mid '80s, not really getting out of the habit until I shipped off to live without a TV in a college dorm several states away. And even then I paid attention when I could, cheering against my own school when it played UNC in the 1993 NCAA finals. Michigan may have been my alma mater, but North Carolina was the place that had taught me to appreciate the game.

So I grew up admiring Dean Smith, the legendary Carolina coach who died this weekend after a long illness. Others have written capably about Smith's immense skills and about the strong role he played in the lives of his players. I can speak only for the fans, be they casual or committed, who had the good fortune to be living in the backyard of a great basketball program. I remember the moments you'd expect a Tar Heel of that era to remember, like Michael Jordan shooting the winning basket in the 1982 NCAA tournament, and I remember stuff that feels hopelessly obscure, like Smith's habit of putting the beloved benchwarmer Timo Makkonen on the court when the Heels had a comfortable lead. (Sending him in was a nice thing to do, but it also gave Carolina fans a fine way to taunt the other team. "Tiiiiiiiiimo," the crowd would chant, elongating his name in a way that said, We can't lose this now; send the big Finn into the game. "Tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimo," they'd shout, declaring the win so firmly in the bag that they were comfortable seeing Makkonen take Sam Perkins' place. Only now, three decades later, does it occur to me to wonder how Mr. Makkonen felt about this.) And I'm hardly the only person carrying those memories around. If you grew up in that part of the country while Dean Smith reigned, your memories of Smith's teams are probably woven tightly with your memories of your childhood. We weren't a part of the players' lives, but they were a part of ours.

Since I'm writing this remembrance for a political website, I ought to mention Smith's activist side, though I hate to think what wars the subject will set off down in the comment thread. I picture one of you pointing to Smith's efforts for civil rights as an example of leadership by moral suasion rather than coercion. Then, I imagine with dread, someone will counter that Smith was only in a position to strike his blows against discrimination because of his role at a public university and in the NCAA, twin pillars of government. Then someone else will say no, the NCAA is a private association. Before you know it, everyone will be debating whether student-athletes should be paid, and the only guy talking about Smith will be some troll trying to tell us libertarians don't believe in teamwork.

Still: It bears mentioning. Smith was a liberal. He did his part for desegregation in the '50s and '60s, and he later recorded radio ads for the nuclear freeze movement and campaigned against the death penalty. ("You're a murderer," he famously told the governor. "The death penalty makes all of us murderers.") It's safe to say he was to the left of a lot of his fans. Hell, it's safe to say he was to the left of a lot of his colleagues. (Bill Cobey, probably the most conservative man ever elected to represent me in the U.S. House, served as Carolina's athletic director before he went to D.C.) Here's a table from a fan survey conducted in late 2000 and early 2001—a few years after Smith stepped down as coach, but close enough to figure things hadn't changed much since Smith was in charge:

Thad Williamson

(I got those numbers from Thad Williamson's More Than a Game: Why North Carolina Basketball Means So Much to So Many. I've known Thad since kindergarten, so I'm biased here, but if you want to read just one book on UNC's fan culture, read his.)

Did conservative fans grumble when Smith endorsed a nuclear freeze? Sure, some did. But I suspect that if you polled them on who they admired more, Smith or Duke's Republican coach Mike Krzyzewski, approximately zero would pick Coach K. That might be because they appreciated everything Smith had done for their favorite team. It might be because, ideology aside, they knew Smith was a fundamentally good man. Or maybe it's just that some things transcend mere partisan politics, and one of those things is Duke.

NEXT: Clarence Thomas Attacks the Supreme Court's 'Increasingly Cavalier Attitude Toward the States' on Gay Marriage

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Don’t give a fuck.

      1. maybe he gives something less than a fuck. Perhaps he gives a kiss.

        1. He obviously doesn’t believe in teamwork.

    1. Who? Sumthin, sumthin sportsball.

  2. Smith’s efforts for civil rights were an example of leadership by moral suasion rather than coercion.

    1. Yes, but Smith was only in a position to strike his blows against discrimination because of his role at a public university and in the NCAA, twin pillars of government.

      1. Look, isn’t it about time we acknowledge that college athletes should be compensated for the services they provide?

        1. This is why I love this place 😉


            1. out of tune, but still a piano

            2. don’t exaggerate. it’s a key-tar at most.

              1. don’t exaggerate. it’s a key-tar at most.


            3. A pianist without a piano is nothing.

              1. that sounds an awful lot like union talk, some guy…

            4. Walker, you totally did not anticipate where John would take this thread, did you?

              1. How was he supposed to predict that John would make up some metric that actually disproves his theory and continue arguing for it?

                1. you forgot “arbitrary” as a descriptor.

                2. No RBS. I made a metric witch proved my theory. My contention is that Smith was a fine coach but inferior to other coaches considering the talent he had. I never said he couldn’t coach. So the fact that he went to a lot of final fours and won a lot of ACC titles is consistent with that. But he didn’t win as much as other coaches who had objectively less talent.,

                  Are the voices in your head that stand in for me just that pleasant to hear?

        2. Libertarians don’t believe in teamwork.

      2. and? Smith knew he had a pulpit and chose to use it, not to coerce others but to persuade them. And he ate his own dog food; signing Charlie Scott in the late 60s did not endear him to all fans.

        1. Now we know who didn’t RTFA.

          1. question applies to Jesse, too.

            1. question applies to Jesse, too.

              The only question I see there is “And?” It seems a little…undeveloped.

              I admire Dean Smith’s efforts against segregation.

        2. Yesterday I heard a story about Smith taking one of the black members of his church (or maybe a coach?) to some restaurant in Chapel Hill that was refusing to serve black customers and daring them to kick him out.

  3. Dean Smith (thanks to his liberal leanings) was the perfect coach to surpass the hopelessly racist Adolf Rupp in wins.

  4. No coach ever did less with more talent. There was a time in the early 1990s you could have dominated the NBA with a starting five consisting entirely of North Carolina players. You could have had

    PG Kenny Smith (he was a good PG who was started for two Rockets title teams)
    SG Micheal Jordan (he was at the height of his powers)
    SF James Worthy (HOFer and still an All Star as late as 94)
    PF Sam Perkins (near HOFer and still an All Star in the 90s)
    C Brad Daugherty (consistent all star whose career hadn’t yet been shortened by injury)

    Not even the great Wooden at his height could have put out an NBA starting lineup of former players like that. Yet, Smith only one two national titles with all of that talent. Contrast the talent Smith had to what Bob Knight, who won three titles including on undefeated season, had. No comparison. Bob Knight only coached on player, Isiah Thomas, who could even start for that team. Even the Polish rodent at Duke has never had that much talent but still has won more.

    Smith was by all accounts a great human being and a great coach. It is, however, puzzling why he didn’t win more.

    1. the other teams got to play too, you know.

    2. one reason was Lew Alcindor, and that discounts that in Wooden’s day the entire tournament was the size of a modern regional.

      For a time, too, the ACC’s entry into the national was the conference tournament champion.

      1. But other coaches have achieved more success than Smith in the age of bigger tournaments. Bob Knight won three titles all after at large teams were allowed in the tournament. Coach K has won all of his after the team was expanded to 64.

        So that excuse doesn’t wash. It makes Wooden’s ten titles a bit less impressive than if they were done now. But it doesn’t excuse Smith for not winning more.

        I would also point out that Smith didn’t go to as many final fours as the coaches I mention. This despite real bias in the selection process that year after year put Carolina regionals so week people referred to them as “Carolina invitationals”

        You are right that it is a lot harder to win a title today than it was in Wooden’s time. Going to the final four today is about like winning a title back then. Even by that standard, Smith’s record is disappointing. He had a terrible habit of losing in the Sweet 16.

      2. and that discounts that in Wooden’s day the entire tournament was the size of a modern regional.

        This is the main reason why no one will ever match Wooden’s numbers. The game was so different back then. There were fewer teams and nowhere near the parity you see today.

        Also, winning a championship is an outlier for any team in any season. No matter how good you are you have to win 6 straight games to get there. Your last two games are probably going to be 50-50 opportunities, give or take. Just look at the Vegas odds on any overall 1 seed in any given year and you won’t be surprised that even great coaches can only get about 1 championship per decade.

        1. To expand on my previous comment. I’m saying that Coach K, Bob Knight and Dean Smith are all great coaches. The difference in the number of championships they each achieved is probably more due to luck than anything else. If you really want to compare them by numbers you should look at numbers with statistical significance like overall winning percentage.

        2. That is why I think you have to judge coaches by conferences championships and final four appearances rather than strictly by NCAA titles now. It takes a huge amount of luck to win a title. Conferences championships are a measure of a team throughout the year and getting to the final four is a measure of how good of seed you have and how well you are playing in the tournament and is thus a better overall indicator than winning the title.

          1. It takes a huge amount of luck to win a title.

            Mario Chalmers and Bill Self agree:


            1. That wasn’t luck. That was a typical Calipari team missing free throws and making mistakes and handing the game to the less talented but better coached and better fundamental team.

              Kansas didn’t get lucky to have Memphis miss its free throws and let them back in the game. That was who Memphis was. KU just took advantage of it.

              1. That fucking game broke my heart. But as a true Memphis State fan, I knew it was coming.

                All tournament they sucked at free throws. Of course they were going to blow it down the line.

                And I should say that missing free throws is something that can be laid right on Calipari. Fuck make everyone shoot 100 free throws at the end of practice and make the bottom 25% run extra and it corrects itself in no time.

                1. Pope,

                  As a Kansas fan who suffered through Roy Williams always failing in the biggest moment, I totally can sympathize. KU was just due that night I think.

          2. Smith-

            11 Final Fours
            17 Regular season ACC titles
            13 ACC Tournament titles

            1. He was a great coach. It is just others were better.

          3. Then why are you complaining about Dean Smith not doing enough with the players he had? He’s got the same number of final fours and ACC championships as Coach K.

          4. then by your own measure, John, Dean deserves all the accolades flowing his way. Again, the ACC used to recognize the conference tourney winner as the year’s conference champion which is why his record reflects both regular-season and tournament titles.

            Carolina was the ACC gold standard for a long time, contending with Lefty Driesel’s Maryland squads, the David Thompson years at NC State and a couple of Valvano outliers, Ralph Sampson at UVA, and of course, the long-term success of Duke.

            Roy Williams has two nattys, same as Dean. Not sure many folks will put the two on the same level just yet.

            1. He deserves to be called a great coach. No question. He does not however deserve to be considered the equal of Knight or Wooden or as much as I can’t stand him, Krzyzewski.

              1. I think that is ridiculous, like ranking quarterbacks based solely on winning Super Bowls. Smith lost finals to the Alcindor team, in Al McGuire’s swan song, and to a pretty good Indiana team.

                He never got a Butler in the title game, like K did and he was gone before the one and done era began. Again, your own calculus of conference titles and final fours refutes the argument you are making here.

                1. Wareagle,

                  He is the head coach. The reason why it is ridiculous to rank QBs based on Super Bowls alone is because they don’t control the entire team. Head coaches do. They recruit the players and they coach them. So they are judged by wins and losses and post season success.

                  Smith consistently lost in the tournament to better coaches who had less talent. The 77 title game is a great example. That NC team had every bit the depth as the Marquette team and had by far and away the best player on the floor (Phil Ford who was one of the best college PGs ever and was one of the best PGs in the NBA until he got on coke). Yet, McGuire beat him. In 1981, Smith lost to Knight despite having James Worthy and Sam Perkins. He lost to Knight again in 84.

              2. So with all your typos, you actually get “Krzyzewski” right?

                You’re the best.

                1. LOL. Oh my God, dude.

                2. Copy-Paste. Had to be.

                  1. No it wasn’t copy and paste. I just like to torture you guys. Of course I was going to get Krzyzewski right. I knew you people were dying to see how I would fuck it up. Sometimes you have to leave the audience wanting more.

    3. This. Smith was the only man in the world who could hold Michael Jordan to under 20 points a game.

      His biggest and most enduring legacy in college basketball will be singlehandedly forcing the game to adopt the shot clock because of his unsportsmanlike “four corners”, run out the clock stalling tactics that he would always employ, sometimes for the last ten freaking minutes of the game.

      1. It was a legal practice. Expecting someone to not take advantage of a legal practice is expecting someone to arbitrarily handicap themselves, which isn’t conducive to a competitive environment. In other words, the rules define what is sportsmanlike.

        People didn’t like it so they changed the rules. There was nothing “unsportsmanlike” about it. The game is better because of Dean Smith’s understanding of the rules.

    4. Yeah, look at the roster of the ’84 Hoosiers team that beat UNC. Not a great NBA roster, but some very fine college players.

      1. Their best player was Steve Alford and their second best was Uwe Blabb. Carolina had Micheal Jordan, Sam Perkins, Kenny Smith and Brad Dougherty plus Steve Hale and Matt Dougherty who were good college players. Bob Knight is not as nice of a guy as Smith, but he was ten times the floor coach than Smith ever was.

        1. If there’s one year he really should have won but didn’t, it’s that one. The 1984 Tar Heels were one of the best teams he ever fielded. Arguably even better than the ’82 team that won the championship.

        2. I know. I love college bball. I was born a Buckeye, raised in Chapel Hill, and then moved to Indiana. I’ve had the good fortune of having Bobby Knight scream profanity at me during a layup drill at my high school basketball camp (led by Sam Alford, Steve’s dad).

          1. Knight comes out to where my family lives to hunt a lot. I have never met him but know people who have. They all love him and say he is exactly like you would expect him to be. There is apparently no difference between the public and private persona of Bob Knight.

            1. Did Knight go all Dick Cheney on you?

    5. I agree that Smith should have won more, but fuck if the ACC wasn’t a brutal league. Don’t forget that Maryland, Virginia, Wake Forest, Duke, and even NC State were very good programs making runs at National Championships during Smith’s tenure.

      And also UCLA, Indiana, Michigan, Syracuse, Georgetown, etc…

      It’s fucking hard to win a Nat Champ.

      1. College basketball peaked in the 1980s. That was when it got huge and was no longer about three or four really good teams every year like it was in the 1960s and it was before players started going pro early. Even the best players stayed three years and often four.

        Can you imagine what college basketball would have been like in the last 20 years if guys like Kobe Bryant and Labron James had gone to college for three years? What kind of an epic college player would a 21 year old Labron James have been?

        1. College ball would be just like the NBA if those guys were forced to stick around. It would suck. I much prefer watching good team ball, than watching a series of one-on-one matchups.

          1. I don’t think so. If they had to stay four years, they would have to listen to their coaches rather than kill time for a year waiting for the draft.

            And they play less team ball in the NCAA now than they ever did. The top teams are nothing but traveling AAU teams of players auditioning for the next year. They know they are only going to be there for a year so they don’t care if they win and have no reason to listen to their coaches.

            1. they would have to listen to their coaches rather than kill time for a year waiting for the draft.

              I doubt it, these days, if they aren’t quite NBA ready and don’t like/want to listen to their coach they just transfer.

            2. Name one team that this applies to this year.

              Kentucky’s lottery picks came back for another year and bought into the selfless platoon system for a shot at a championship.

              UVA doesn’t have any lottery picks. They just play the best team ball anyone’s seen since Bennet’s dad coached Wisconsin.

              Dook has Okafor, who will probably go pro, but he’s seems like a good team player. He doesn’t try to force his way through double-teams. He passes out of them.

              Gonzaga… I actually don’t know much about Gonzaga, or Arizona, or Villanova which probably means they don’t match your description either.

              Scoring has been creeping down over the past several years specifically because teams are playing better defense (ie. team ball).

              1. Some guy,

                This year is a bit better than the last few. You are correct. It may be that the failure of the Kentucky teams, sans the one with Davis who might have been the best college big man since Walton, has caused teams to shy away from the AAU babies a bit. We will see.

                Overall though, the decline of high school basketball and the rise of AAU and the youth that the top players are going to the NBA has greatly reduced the quality of American basketball. Players just never learn how to play well these days. They slide through the AAU and a year of college, get drafted on potential and never really learn the game. And the NBA is a horrible place to learn how to play basketball if you don’t already know. Sure, the odd once in a generation genius like Kobe Bryant or LaBron James will do it. But most others will languish and never be what they could have been had they listened to and had better coaching before they got to the NBA.

                1. It is annoying to see players in the NBA that can’t shoot. That’s why I quit watching (also because the LAkers are the suck right now).

                  1. EDG,

                    I think they should do away with the three point line. The problem with the three point line is that it makes it pay to miss more shots. If a player hits 40% from the three point line, he will score 120 points for every 100 shots he takes. That is the same production he would get if he hit 60% shooting inside the three point line. i would rather watch someone hit 50% from the floor from two than I would watch someone brick 60% of their shots from the three point line. Yet, the math says it is better for the team to have the guy shooting the bricks. And that sucks.

                    Thanks to the three point line the mid range game is almost entirely gone from the game. Great players of the past used to have wonderful ten to fifteen foot jump shots and were often masters of bank shot, which you never see anymore. Now they either dunk, post up, or jack a three. It makes for lousy basketball.

                    1. i would rather watch someone hit 50% from the floor from two than I would watch someone brick 60% of their shots from the three point line.

                      Definitely agree there.

                2. Failure of the Kentucky teams? Since Calipari:

                  Elite Eight
                  Final Four
                  Championship (I know you said sans 2012)
                  Dumpster fire
                  Championship Game

                  1. Scotticus,

                    They had the most talented team in the country every single year. And the first year, the Wall year, I think they lost in the sweet sixteen.

                    1. Wall and Cousins lost to WV in the Elite Eight. And I just don’t see how that list translates to failure by any interpretation. Certainly not enough that other coaches would “shy away” from the model.

                    2. The reason people ‘shy away’ from the Kentucky model is because there aren’t enough elite players for more than two or maybe three teams to collect that kind of talent.

                      That’s why the top ten in the NCAA is consistently filled with teams that really don’t have great NBA talent but are well coached and play defense.

                    3. Boogie Cousins is a perfect example of the kind of AAU queen I am talking about. He is immensely gifted but has the basketball IQ of a house plant and has never matured past the 7th grade.

                      Maybe he would still be just as much of a waste of space had he been forced to play for a good high school coach and play in college for a couple of years. We will never know. It couldn’t have made him any worse.

              2. And Wisconsin has two guys who are probably going to be picked in the NBA draft, Sam Decker and Frank Kaminsky, neither of whom are going to be lottery picks.

                Wisconsin is 5th in the country with a 21-2 record.

                I really disagree with John on this. The best teams right now are all playing solid team ball and several of the top teams really don’t have great NBA talent.

                1. Irish,

                  This year is a good year for college basketball. Other years not so much.

                  1. Well, it was true last year too. Wisconsin made it to the final four with virtually the same kind of team.

                    Hell, Michigan State has been a consistent Final Four contender and has never had great NBA talent. Who’s the best Michigan State player currently in NBA?

                    The main determinant of NCAA success is the quality of the coach. It’s always been a good team game and I just don’t agree that it’s become too focused on the top AAU players. There’s only one team that’s really like that, and it’s Kentucky.

          2. You obviously haven’t watched much NBA recently. The best teams share the ball. The two teams most characterized by the old Isolation plays are cellar dwellers.

        2. Kobe would’ve played for Coach Krizgyouski at Duke, and LeBron would have played for Thad Motta at tOSU. Frankly, I would have liked to see that. LeBron and Greg Oden would have won that Nat Champ against Florida (featuring Al Horford and Joakin Noah).

      2. Don’t forget that Maryland, Virginia, Wake Forest, Duke, and even NC State were very good programs making runs at National Championships during Smith’s tenure.

        Oh man, really trolling the State fans here with the “even.” They won two national titles during Dean’s tenure, in ’74 and ’83, as many as Dean did.

        1. Yeah, there is always that. And unlike Dean Smith, NC State beat Wooden and beat probably Wooden’s best team. Dean Smith never beat Walton.

    6. No coach ever did less with more talent.

      If you’ve never heard of Jim Boeheim you don’t know much about college ball.

      1. He is on the list. But Boeheim won two titles just like Smith with less talent.

        Boeheim was smart enough to ride Melo Anthony to a title. Smith wouldn’t have been. He would have been limiting his shots and running the offense rather than telling him to just go out and win.

        The closest thing to Smith is his protegee Roy Williams. Roy Williams had Paul Pierce for three years and never made a final four. Like Smith he just refused to change the system and let Pierce dominate the game. Nope, better to have mediocrities like Jacques Vaugn jacking up bricks than let Pierce, who become of the great scorers of his era in the NBA, go out and dominate.

        1. Boeheim only has the one natty.

          1. He did it with less talent than Smith.

            1. Boeheim had plenty of talent. He recruited NYC for crying out loud. Dean only had one Jordan, and he and Worthy were on the floor only one year together. Pearl Washington was a sure-fire All-American in recruiting and Derrick Coleman was a top-drawer collegian turned head case.

              1. Washington would have been lucky to start at UNC. And Derrick Coleman was lazy and didn’t like playing basketball. You were not going to win much with either of those two guys.

        2. Dean Smith was the most brilliant coach of any team in any sport in the history of organized competition.

          Like many great coaches, he continued past his prime.

          Boeheim by contrast didn’t even understand the rules of the game for the first twenty years he was head coach at Syracuse. And nobody has ever had constantly recruited the most sought after talent year after year and failed to make a team out of it. Nobody.

        3. Boeheim only has one title.

          His ’80s teams were consistently super-athletic, undisciplined underachievers.

          His best coaching job was probably in ’95, when he got to the championship with a bunch of complete no-names (except for a guy who would find some fame in another sport named Donovan McNabb).

  5. I grew up in Chapel Hill in the early ’70’s, and went to many games. I even got a basketball signed by Coach Smith, Mitch Kupchak, Phil Ford, Walter Davis, Tommy LaGarde, John Kuester, and the rest of the 1974 team.

    Though a Buckeye through and through, I will always have a place in my heart for Tar Heel basketball, and Dean Smith. RIP

  6. Political belief’s survey:

    One end labeled “Very Conservative”

    The other labeled “Left-Wing Radical”

    Seems like a slanted survey. Why wouldn’t both ends be labeled similarly, eg Right-Wing Radical?

    1. because a right-wing radical IS a left-wing radical without the pretense.

      1. *nods, satisfied with explanation*

  7. This makes me want to reread Fred Exley’s A Fan’s Notes. It’s been years.

  8. Dean Smith was the greatest coach of any sport that ever lived. I fell in love with the game of college basketball in no small part because he was coaching when I stated watching.

    1. You fell in love with the Four Corners?

      And Dean Smith is not even in the top five of college coaches let alone all sports.

      1. Fucking eh right I loved the Four Corners. It’s a thinking mans defense and very hard to execute properly.

        Back in the day a lot of other teams tried it and got burned by it. Only Bobby Knight could pull it off outside of NC.

        1. It’s a thinking mans defense

          I’ll let someone else take this one.

          1. I’ll pass

            1. Good one, RA.

  9. sports shmortz

  10. At least Timmo got in the blowout games. I remember in high school baseball, one kid warmed the bench the entire season, even when we were destroying the team that Reggie Jackson was on. Finally, last game of the year, Coach was looking for a pinch runner. I said, put in Mark. He did, and he promptly got picked off first base!

  11. Dean’s last involvement in politics really was to oppose NC creating a lottery. After that, his memory really started to go, which was quite sad.

    Not that I would ever cheer for him or anyone associated with the Tar Heels, as I’m from a North Carolinian family of long standing Duke fans. (Who pronounce it correctly, with the “y” sound that properly belongs in “tu” and “du” as much as in “few” and “mu.” Kind of sad that so many of the Yankee Carolina fans don’t even know *why* the insulting misspelling originated.)

    1. The legitimate grips people had about Smith were really not his fault. People legitimately loathed the four corners as cowardly basketball. It was. It was also totally within the rules and a sensible strategy. You can’t blame Smith for adopting it. You should blame the NCAA for not having a shot clock thirty years after the NBA had and international basketball had adopted one.

      He also got appallingly favorable treatment for referees. Again, what was Smith supposed to do? Demand fouls be called on his own team? The refs and the ACC in particular were to blame for that not Smith. And the ACC continues their long tradition of “we love and favor celebrity coaches” by according Duke the same treatment they used to give Smith and Carolina.

      1. Bullshit about the fouls, the only thing that they still do is screw over NC State (especially in the minds of their fans, but they do lead the league in apologies from John Clougherty.)

        1. You don’t think they didn’t screw people in favor of Smith? I do. Sadly, every league is like that. SEC refs fuck Kentucky opponents. Big 12 refs screw Kansas opponents. College referees are the worst. They manage to be worse than NBA refs even though half of those little bastards are on the take.

  12. I assume the pallbearers went into the Four Corners? and Smith, consequently, will never be buried unless the minister fouls someone or something.


    1. That is right. And despite having 8 pallbearers, a $500,000 hearse and a police escort, the funeral procession will still fall just short of getting him to the grave.

      1. Hehehehe!

  13. By the way, the paragraph about the comment section really was top-notch. LOL.

  14. The thing that bolsters John’s maligning Smith is the fact that both national titles came because the other teams made extra bone head plays at the end of the game.

    In 84 Georgetown threw it right to Worthy by accident and in 93 C Webb called that infamous timeout.

    Smith was a great coach, but I think he did underperform in the tourney.

    1. Also consider that the Georgetown team only had two future NBA players on it; Sleepy Floyd and Patrick Ewing. Ewing of course was an all time great but he was a Freshman that year and Floyd was only a decent NBA player. North Carolina in contrast was loaded. And the 93 Michigan team was all freshman, only one of whom Chris Webber, ever lived up to the hype. And he still needed to get a bit lucky to win those games.

  15. my buddy’s mom makes $86 an hour on the computer . She has been out of a job for 5 months but last month her check was $15207 just working on the computer for a few hours. site here…………….

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.