Is Tennessee basketball a top 10 job?

Nowhere near it. Maybe Top 25 purely because of resources

I think if you surveyed current coaches, we’d land in the top 10-15. The program’s been among the most consistent in the country since Bruce got here 20 years ago.

The simple answer is NO. And not close, frankly. However, I would say that Tenn has moved up into the top 25, maybe top 20, primarily due to excellent resources.

Top 25 for sure but not a top 10 imo. It’s a great job though and hopefully we get a great guy when Barnes retires

865Vawl said:

I say not but top 25 for sure. Thoughts?

Definitely top 25. Based on prestige, there are absolutely 10 jobs that are better, but I doubt there are more than 8 that set up better to win it all than Tennessee right now. I think there are a few programs (Duke, KY, ect) that are all in on basketball to an extent more than others and devoting more $ to it that what I am talking about with 8. After that there’s probably 20-40 schools with similar level of commitment and we are towards the top of that heap.

Hard Data said:

The simple answer is NO. And not close, frankly. However, I would say that Tenn has moved up into the top 25, maybe top 20, primarily due to excellent resources.

This is a great question. Who are the top 10-15 and what's the criteria? I don't think Tennessee is a top-10 job, but better than top 20.

I think top 15 Duke UNC Kansas Kentucky UCONN Michigan Michigan State Purdue Arizona UCLA Florida Villanova those 1are clearly better. after that? Tennessee is as good as any, meaning that if you are a good coach, you can win big there. We are basically 30 years into being a top 20 program. Green went to tourney all 4 years. The Buzz years sucked but that was only 4 years. Pearl was 6 for 6. Even Cuonzo made a Sweet 16 run and we all know what Barnes has done. similar place to Louisville, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Alabama, Virginia, Texas, Syracuse in the pecking order. Some of those have a better history, but really only under 1 (maybe a 2nd coach) but otherwise a lot of meh… kind of like Tennessee. there are schools with more ancient history basketball success, but they aren’t better jobs now. I am looking at you Georgetown, St John’s, NC State, Georgia Tech, Maryland.

Duke UNC UCLA Michigan Michigan state Kansas Kentucky Uconn Arizona I’m trying to think of others that belong. I’m not sure Indiana is as good a job as it used to be. Florida likely belongs I guess. I think Tn just a good a job as Arkansas. We have a big arena and nice resources. Purdue? Wisconsin?

NIL has completely changed how all of these are evaluated. Outside of the obvious blue bloods…this list is more dynamic than ever. This absolutely could be a top 10 job year to year.

Brent_Hubbs said:

This is a great question. Who are the top 10-15 and what's the criteria? I don't think Tennessee is a top-10 job, but better than top 20.

Exactly. What are the criteria and who is the competition?

What's the criteria for this, ease of success? Then NO, UT isn't that. It's a top 20 job if that's the criteria.

Volfan1720 said:

I think top 15 Duke UNC Kansas Kentucky UCONN Michigan Michigan State Purdue Arizona UCLA Florida Villanova those 1are clearly better. after that? Tennessee is as good as any, meaning that if you are a good coach, you can win big there. We are basically 30 years into being a top 20 program. Green went to tourney all 4 years. The Buzz years sucked but that was only 4 years. Pearl was 6 for 6. Even Cuonzo made a Sweet 16 run and we all know what Barnes has done. similar place to Louisville, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Alabama, Virginia, Texas, Syracuse in the pecking order. Some of those have a better history, but really only under 1 (maybe a 2nd coach) but otherwise a lot of meh… kind of like Tennessee. there are schools with more ancient history basketball success, but they aren’t better jobs now. I am looking at you Georgetown, St John’s, NC State, Georgia Tech, Maryland.

UCLA is interesting considering they tried to hire TNs sitting head coach and didn’t. History is obviously there but currently I don’t know that it’s a great job. Villanova doesn’t belong there either. I’d put Louisville and Illinois on that list considering their resources, brand and talent area (Illinois). Indiana is Nebraska football at this point.

Brent_Hubbs said:

This is a great question. Who are the top 10-15 and what's the criteria? I don't think Tennessee is a top-10 job, but better than top 20.

Criteria would be the perception, by the coaches (coaching community), relative to one another. And even then, coaches will weigh things differently. Thus, we could only guess how they might perceive the Tenn HC gig with White as AD compared to, say, Louisville with Heird as AD. Or better yet, Texas Tech gig with Kirby Hocutt and their money. We could just list the usual blue bloods to get us thru the top 10. After that, it becomes both challenging and interesting.

WM Vol said:

Duke UNC UCLA Michigan Michigan state Kansas Kentucky Uconn Arizona I’m trying to think of others that belong. I’m not sure Indiana is as good a job as it used to be. Florida likely belongs I guess. I think Tn just a good a job as Arkansas. We have a big arena and nice resources. Purdue? Wisconsin?

Indiana UVA Texas Florida

Cecil_Cherry said:

Indiana UVA Texas Florida

I’m a uva fan family use to have season tickets. Why is it a better job than TN?

Top 5 attendance Top 5 money Top 5 facilities Top 30 expectations This is THE dream job for a smart coach. It's a perfect storm of potential (resources) without severe pressure. I told Coach Barnes and Danny White the same thing in both of their first years. They would both agree now.

JONAH RYAN said:

UCLA is interesting considering they tried to hire TNs sitting head coach and didn’t. History is obviously there but currently I don’t know that it’s a great job. Villanova doesn’t belong there either. I’d put Louisville and Illinois on that list considering their resources, brand and talent area (Illinois). Indiana is Nebraska football at this point.

UCLA is, indeed, interesting. However, when you go to 5 or 6 final fours in the last 30 years, with 3 different coaches…none of them named Wooden… I think you keep your blue blood status. That is just me. Barnes would have been a Bruin except for the buyout. He actually chose UCLA. I am glad it worked out like it did, Villanova has won 3 Natties in 40 years with 2 different coaches and plays in area where basketball is absolutely king… I think that is a better job as well. Indiana still has a ton of potential. They have plenty of money. They just haven’t been able to get the right coach. They are a lot like Bama post Bear Bryant. Too many old heads wielding power and that power is divided. Tom Crean was their Gene Stallings, only Stallings got a Natty when he had the best tr in the country and Crean got knocked out when he had , arguably the best team. The other 4 or 5 coaches have been very meh… just like Bama post Bryant. Potential is there in Indiana.

WM Vol said:

I’m a uva fan family use to have season tickets. Why is it a better job than TN?

Tremendous tradition, great arena, multiple final fours, location is great to recruit anywhere from NYC down to Charlotte. I think it’s better but not by much.

Hard Data said:

Criteria would be the perception, by the coaches (coaching community), relative to one another. And even then, coaches will weigh things differently. Thus, we could only guess how they might perceive the Tenn HC gig with White as AD compared to, say, Louisville with Heird as AD. Or better yet, Texas Tech gig with Kirby Hocutt and their money. We could just list the usual blue bloods to get us thru the top 10. After that, it becomes both challenging and interesting.

Perception involves so many things. A coach wants to know if he can win there. That is a function of recruiting because the candidate already thinks he is a prodigy. Recruiting is also multifactorial. But in these days, NIL dollars is the most important factor.

Volfan1720 said:

I think top 15 Duke UNC Kansas Kentucky UCONN Michigan Michigan State Purdue Arizona UCLA Florida Villanova those 1are clearly better. after that? Tennessee is as good as any, meaning that if you are a good coach, you can win big there. We are basically 30 years into being a top 20 program. Green went to tourney all 4 years. The Buzz years sucked but that was only 4 years. Pearl was 6 for 6. Even Cuonzo made a Sweet 16 run and we all know what Barnes has done. similar place to Louisville, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Alabama, Virginia, Texas, Syracuse in the pecking order. Some of those have a better history, but really only under 1 (maybe a 2nd coach) but otherwise a lot of meh… kind of like Tennessee. there are schools with more ancient history basketball success, but they aren’t better jobs now. I am looking at you Georgetown, St John’s, NC State, Georgia Tech, Maryland.

Why is Florida, UCLA or Villanova better jobs? Historic performance is irrelevant unless it dramatically helps you get better players now from the portal or top level guys. Do they sell more tickets?

In the SEC, it’s top 3 only behind UK and maybe FL. We have terrific resources and fans who show up even in a “down” year. I’d say we are in 12-15 range nationally. But I don’t have the effort to rank ‘em

Lawvol said:

Perception involves so many things. A coach wants to know if he can win there. That is a function of recruiting because the candidate already thinks he is a prodigy. Recruiting is also multifactorial. But in these days, NIL dollars is the most important factor.

I think this day and age, your competition matters greatly as top 10 greatest job. It makes Duke easily the best job because you are going to walk into a 1 seed almost every year based on schedule. Last year it was the SEC that was by far the best all around conference. This year it is the big 10. The top 3 of the big 12 are always going to be solid with TT having the nil dollars. But the ACC is a mess right now after Duke.

EasternShoreVol said:

In the SEC, it’s top 3 only behind UK and maybe FL. We have terrific resources and fans who show up even in a “down” year. I’d say we are in 12-15 range nationally. But I don’t have the effort to rank ‘em

I’d put arky higher in sec. Hard to find a school prioritizing hoops > football not named Kentucky

Brent_Hubbs said:

This is a great question. Who are the top 10-15 and what's the criteria? I don't think Tennessee is a top-10 job, but better than top 20.

Great point, but I recall the story where Rick called Cal asking advice on the Tennessee job, and Cal replied it was the second best in the SEC behind UK..