I have viewed John Calipari as the poster boy for many of the shortcomings in the college game that more and more folks seem willing to acknowledge.
The guy is a bull shite artist. I've seen it mentioned here that some folks get tired of people using one-liners on this forum; yet, John Calipari has been the king of hyperbolic one-liners and bull spit to the fan base since the day he took the job.
The symptoms you see at UK and elsewhere in men's college basketball---John Calipari is firmly entrenched as having championed the causes that led to those symptoms.
Based on those I hear from outside of this forum, there are a lot more folks who grew tired of John Calipari's act years ago than one gets wind of here.
I do have a question, and I'm not trying to be coy:
I see many posts saying that John Calipari has "earned" the right to try to turn it around, or he "deserves" it. From my viewpoint, I'm at a loss as to what he's done to have "earned" or "deserve" a right to continue to cause damage to the University and the men's basketball program?
He's won a lot of games. He won a national championship while coaching at UK (4 other coaches have done that at UK). I understand that, but hasn't he been paid very well to do just that?
Isn't that why he's been the highest paid coach in the game of college basketball? When a person is paid very well to produce, when they do produce, that was all part of the expectations that were set for the job in the first place. That was part of the bargain.
When they don't produce to the level of expectations, and have even been causing damage to the brand, is it not reasonable to say: that's it, enough is enough.
What has John Calipari done for the University of Kentucky that he hasn't been compensated very well for already?
I view John Calipari as part of the problem, not as part of the solution. I'm completely fine that others do not share my point of view.