Is Roy>Dean?
- Thread starter mjrocks23
- Start date
Maybe not legacy or impact on the program. But body of work and success its hard to argue
9 FFs and 3 championships for Roy
11 FFs and 2 championships for Dean
It's heresy to say it, but Roy is closing in. One more championship and he'll pass Dean in my eyes - purely in terms of coaching greatness. I doubt Roy will ever touch Dean in terms of legacy and impact.
11 FFs and 2 championships for Dean
It's heresy to say it, but Roy is closing in. One more championship and he'll pass Dean in my eyes - purely in terms of coaching greatness. I doubt Roy will ever touch Dean in terms of legacy and impact.
It's comparing apples to oranges. Dean broke racial barriers with Charlie Scott. He forced the invention of the shot clock with his Four Corners offense. Legacy and impact on society and the game, it's gotta be Dean. BUT, Roy's on court success is approaching the Dean Smith level.
Yup.
Also important to note, Roy is building on Deans legacy and body of work
To answer the OP's question . . No, he is not. I luvs me some Roy, but, Dean was a master . .
Plus, ask Roy, he will tell you in a heartbeat, Dean was the GOAT in college basketball.
I love Roy and what he’s been able to accomplish but it’s not just about the numbers of FF’s and natty’s, which are both impressive.
It’s like trying to pick which one of your kids you love best. LOL. I’m sure we all love our kids equally but the first usually holds a special place in your heart since they were first. That’s how I feel about Dean & Roy.
It’s like trying to pick which one of your kids you love best. LOL. I’m sure we all love our kids equally but the first usually holds a special place in your heart since they were first. That’s how I feel about Dean & Roy.
Last edited:
It’s not as simple as saying 3>2 therefore Roy’s better.
For 1/3 of Deans career, he had to win the ACC Tournament to get in. If that rule is still in place, Roy’s got 0. Also, dean coached when there was a professional team in la.
Roy has a better resume but he’s not better.
For 1/3 of Deans career, he had to win the ACC Tournament to get in. If that rule is still in place, Roy’s got 0. Also, dean coached when there was a professional team in la.
Roy has a better resume but he’s not better.
As far as I'm concerned, they're 1A and 1B as the greatest coaches of all time. No need to compare them in my eyes.
Roy was asked about Dean by Jim Nance at the trophy presentation last season. His response: "I don't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as him". That may be the PC thing to say in that situation, but I think he truly meant it.
NO way. Dean was coaching when ONE team from the Acc made it to the dance. The tourney winner. Comparing final fours and natty titles when he had that is not comparable. How many teams of Roy’s title winners won the acc tourney as well? In some of deans era they would have never got the chance. Roy is one hell of a coach though wouldn’t want anyone else. Dean was the GOAT end of story.
I agree with what many people (including Max Kellerman) have said:
“greater” and “better” are not the same thing (in sports)
Jesse Owens was “greater”, but Usain Bolt was “better”. Maybe the conversation about Dean and Roy should take that angle.
“greater” and “better” are not the same thing (in sports)
Jesse Owens was “greater”, but Usain Bolt was “better”. Maybe the conversation about Dean and Roy should take that angle.
Last edited:
Just doing a little research here...
Between the mid 60’s to the mid 70’s - from the time that Dean’s teams were starting to roll, until the NCAA expanded to include at-large teams - Carolina only had 4 teams that missed the NCAA tourney and ended up in the NIT (70, 71, 73, 74).
Even if those four teams were invited to the dance, there is probably an extra FF on Dean’s list of accomplishments, but it would’ve been tough to win another natty during that UCLA (er.... Sam Gilbert) era.
So, Dean was denied some of the opportunities to get to the tourney that he would get if coaching today, but back then you had to play one less game to get to the Final Four.
Between the mid 60’s to the mid 70’s - from the time that Dean’s teams were starting to roll, until the NCAA expanded to include at-large teams - Carolina only had 4 teams that missed the NCAA tourney and ended up in the NIT (70, 71, 73, 74).
Even if those four teams were invited to the dance, there is probably an extra FF on Dean’s list of accomplishments, but it would’ve been tough to win another natty during that UCLA (er.... Sam Gilbert) era.
So, Dean was denied some of the opportunities to get to the tourney that he would get if coaching today, but back then you had to play one less game to get to the Final Four.
Roy needs to get more credit for saving the program. He's also won national championships in completely different eras of the game. In 2005, guys stayed longer. Think about that final 4. Louisville, Michigan State, Illinois and us were all junior and senior dominated rosters.
2009 was a transitional period for the sport.
Last year, Roy wins a title in a complete one-and-done era.
I'm not sure this will happen because the program isn't a one-and-done program really... but if Roy adds another championship with a roster mostly made up of one-and-done players, then (IMO) it without question makes him the best coach in UNC history.
I think it's Roy, but admittedly it was before my time when Dean was at his peak.
2009 was a transitional period for the sport.
Last year, Roy wins a title in a complete one-and-done era.
I'm not sure this will happen because the program isn't a one-and-done program really... but if Roy adds another championship with a roster mostly made up of one-and-done players, then (IMO) it without question makes him the best coach in UNC history.
I think it's Roy, but admittedly it was before my time when Dean was at his peak.
It really comes down to that. If you were watching the Heels when Dean was coaching, you’re probably gonna feel differently than someone who’s only seen Roy at the helm. It’s understandable. Either way, we’ve been blessed as Heels fans to claim two of the greatest of all time as our own.
Last edited:
I have ad the pleasure of watching both St their peak. Dean is the better innovator. He also was recognized as one of the coaches who forced racial change. Both he and Roy desperately love their players. But the legacy of the dean of basketball is unmatched by even wooden. Who was know for his ponsey scheme like pyramid of success. Dean better, and longer lasting legacy. Roy has built his own, but it doesn't match Dean's.
It's Dean. And I am sure the first person to tell you that would be Roy. Dean built the program nationally to where they more selected players than recruited them. Even Matt left enough talent he recruited to win a national championship. Matt didn't draw them, the UNC legacy drew them. And that was built by Dean. Watch Roy coach. Other than a few wrinkles he copied Dean's ways all the way down the line. He learned from the best, and was smart enough to keep the system in place. But that being said, once he is done I think Roy will even be shocked at how close to being thought of in the same light as Dean as he will be. Appreciate it while he is still here folks. You never know what we may have to go through once he walks away. I think that was proven when Dean left. Dean left Gut with a ton of talent but he couldn't win it. Matt was just a total mess. And I doubt Roy would have come back if not for Dean basically insisting on it.
Dean finished no lower than third in the ACC for 33 of his 36 years...no lower than 2nd for 20 of them. Let that sink in and you understand that the conversation is over.
Are we only supposed to consider Roy’s years at UNC? In total Roy has been coaching for 30 years. It took him 17 seasons to get his first natty; Dean took 21.
You're missing the big picture. There's much more to it than just winning a tournament.
Easy answer Dean.
I love Roy to pieces, but if I was given 2 options of who would coach the last 5 minutes for the Tar Heels... the honorable Coach Dean E. Smith.
I love Roy to pieces, but if I was given 2 options of who would coach the last 5 minutes for the Tar Heels... the honorable Coach Dean E. Smith.
Umm, you also have to remember that for many years, the ONLY way to get into the NCAA tournament was to win your conference tournament. It wasn't until they expanded and allowed at large bids that we saw teams win a significant number of tournament games. When you factor that in, Dean's NCAA tournament win total is that much more impressive. Comparing the two can never be accurately done since they coached in different eras with different criteria against different levels of competition.
None of this takes away from Roy. Roy is one of the greatest coaches ever grace the sidelines. He learned from the best, Dean Smith. Many things have been mentioned here that bear repeating: Dean changed the game multiple times. Racial inclusion, the shot clock, etc. His switching defenses, how he attacked zone defenses, etc. are still used by Roy. He used it last night to beat dook.
I think you also have to consider that Roy also feels he pales in comparison to Dean. The ultimate measure of a coach is how his players, assistants and other coaches and players feel about him. Dean is and always will be recognized for everything he did for the sport and he is widely considered to be the best by many different people, UNC folks and others.
I can appreciate the sentiment behind this thread, but this is not a comparison any of us can make. Why not just relish in the fact we have been blessed to have 2 of the all time greatest coaches to ever walk the sidelines as our coaches.
None of this takes away from Roy. Roy is one of the greatest coaches ever grace the sidelines. He learned from the best, Dean Smith. Many things have been mentioned here that bear repeating: Dean changed the game multiple times. Racial inclusion, the shot clock, etc. His switching defenses, how he attacked zone defenses, etc. are still used by Roy. He used it last night to beat dook.
I think you also have to consider that Roy also feels he pales in comparison to Dean. The ultimate measure of a coach is how his players, assistants and other coaches and players feel about him. Dean is and always will be recognized for everything he did for the sport and he is widely considered to be the best by many different people, UNC folks and others.
I can appreciate the sentiment behind this thread, but this is not a comparison any of us can make. Why not just relish in the fact we have been blessed to have 2 of the all time greatest coaches to ever walk the sidelines as our coaches.
My earliest memories of Tar Heel basketball are of Dean working his magic. Words do not do Dean E. Smith justice and could never describe how we feel about him. I am not one to get excited over seeing or meeting someone famous but Coach Smith would have been the exception , I have revered him my whole life and consider him larger than life. Roy Williams is as close a copy of the great coach Smith as you probably will find. Roy loves the university , the players , the state and has brought us a great deal of pride and happiness and 3 Nattys.
The Truth is IMO we are Blessed to have had Coach Smith and I wish he had coached another 5 yrs. We are blessed to have Coach Williams and I hope he coaches another 10 years ! And I don't know that we can find anyone near the level of either Coach Smith or Coach Williams in the future as each is one in a million.
The Truth is IMO we are Blessed to have had Coach Smith and I wish he had coached another 5 yrs. We are blessed to have Coach Williams and I hope he coaches another 10 years ! And I don't know that we can find anyone near the level of either Coach Smith or Coach Williams in the future as each is one in a million.
I love Roy and would only trade him for one coach in history!
Roy would have exactly 0 Nattys without the Legacy, Culture, bball system,and Program that the Greatest Person who is also a Coach built! DES is the GOAT and this honorific encompasses far more than bball genius.
Those that value pure statistics over the human elements that make a coach a great man are the same ones that excuse ratty and Knight's behavior because they win! If it is a numbers game, one might want one of these putrid humans at UNC; but thank God the Family stands for far more than that!
Roy is special because most peeps that follow a legend flop miserably and he has built his own monument on the grounds the Dean hallowed! What other program can claim two such great men who also happen to be two of the greatest basketball minds of all time?
Roy would have exactly 0 Nattys without the Legacy, Culture, bball system,and Program that the Greatest Person who is also a Coach built! DES is the GOAT and this honorific encompasses far more than bball genius.
Those that value pure statistics over the human elements that make a coach a great man are the same ones that excuse ratty and Knight's behavior because they win! If it is a numbers game, one might want one of these putrid humans at UNC; but thank God the Family stands for far more than that!
Roy is special because most peeps that follow a legend flop miserably and he has built his own monument on the grounds the Dean hallowed! What other program can claim two such great men who also happen to be two of the greatest basketball minds of all time?
All of the above is true in giving all due respect to Dean. Arguably the GOAT college bb coach for all he added to the overall game, to UNC basketball and The Family and The Program. And his social impact inside and outside of basketball.
However, can it be argued that Roy has done better thand Dean somehow, someway (whether its getting his players ready to play, getting the most out of his players' talents and abilities, adjusting and adapting and fitting the play style to what sort of players he has, etc)..... in getting his teams to perform in the NCAA tourney? I know Dean accomplished A LOT of final fours, ACC regular season and ACC tourneys.
But I read today that Roy has won all 27 of his NCAA first round games (never lost at KU and UNC), and of the (8 or 9?) times that UNC was a 1 or 2 seed under Roy, he's at least met expectations (got to Elite 8 or further) EVERY DADGUM time! That is impressive!
I just think for whatever reason, some of Dean's teams underachieved in the NCAA tourney, especially given all the Final Fours, all of the 1 seed entries, all of the talent that Dean's teams had, to "only" come away with two titles.
Case in point. Compare the pure athletic talent of the Heels teams the last 3 years. Zero sure-fire NBA stars, but two title games, one title, and who knows what this year will bring.....and finding a way to win the title in Illinois in 2005 against a more talented team, in a pure home game for them.....
...compared to coming up empty in instances where Dean had Stackhouse / Wallace; Carter/ Jamison, for 2+ years each, and zero titles to show for it, in those years.
I'd say Roy has performed better as an NCAA coach than Dean. Don't hate me for it. Just giving Roy his due.
However, can it be argued that Roy has done better thand Dean somehow, someway (whether its getting his players ready to play, getting the most out of his players' talents and abilities, adjusting and adapting and fitting the play style to what sort of players he has, etc)..... in getting his teams to perform in the NCAA tourney? I know Dean accomplished A LOT of final fours, ACC regular season and ACC tourneys.
But I read today that Roy has won all 27 of his NCAA first round games (never lost at KU and UNC), and of the (8 or 9?) times that UNC was a 1 or 2 seed under Roy, he's at least met expectations (got to Elite 8 or further) EVERY DADGUM time! That is impressive!
I just think for whatever reason, some of Dean's teams underachieved in the NCAA tourney, especially given all the Final Fours, all of the 1 seed entries, all of the talent that Dean's teams had, to "only" come away with two titles.
Case in point. Compare the pure athletic talent of the Heels teams the last 3 years. Zero sure-fire NBA stars, but two title games, one title, and who knows what this year will bring.....and finding a way to win the title in Illinois in 2005 against a more talented team, in a pure home game for them.....
...compared to coming up empty in instances where Dean had Stackhouse / Wallace; Carter/ Jamison, for 2+ years each, and zero titles to show for it, in those years.
I'd say Roy has performed better as an NCAA coach than Dean. Don't hate me for it. Just giving Roy his due.
I was one of the first to meet Dean when he came to Chapel Hill, and have always and will always be respectful and appreciative of what he meant not only to the University but to college athletics. I do think, though, that some of his very talented teams under-achieved in tournament play, and as innovative as he was, in some ways he was the victim of his own systems at times. The Four Corners cost us some games, as did playing not to lose (the Marquette game in the NCAA's still bothers me). Doesn't take away from his greatness in the least, but he was human.
This ends the debate. Can’t really compare guys from Dean’era to now. Dean overlapped the old days to modern basketball, but never really adapted to it.
Dean saw himself as a mentor to his players first and a basketball coach second. He was loyal to a fault and cared more about personal development than on the court achievements. He didn’t always coach to win as much as he coached to make his guys better in the long run.
Dean, and Roy to an extent, was/is about the process, not the results.
Similar threads
