Sorry, I shouldn’t be short. I at least owe you a proper response.

1) No disagreement on the fanbase overall, but if that’s a generalization anywhere, it’s here, where at least four front page authors live and die with the basketball team.

2) That you are a true-and-true fan who goes to the games and cares about the team automatically makes us allies. Thanks for giving this program the support it deserves.

3) You wrote: “:I would describe the Texas program as a top 10 program due to consistent recruiting and defense.”

My reply: The consistent recruiting is a big part of it, no question. But your desire to cast Rick’s Texas teams as defense-elite, offensively-lagging ball clubs is just factually wrong. In fact, you’ve got it backwards: In 2008, Texas had the nation’s #3 offense and #36 defense. In 2007, Texas finished with the #5 offense and #62 offense. In 2006, Texas finished with the #4 offense and #10 defense. Nor do I need numbers to remind me: last year, Texas’ DJ Augustin-led offense was damn strong, but we spent a good chunk of our time here at BON wringing our hands about the defensive problems the team faced with two sub-6 starting guards. In 2007, DJ and KD teamed up for one amazing offensive show, but again, we spent a lot of time worrying about the team not being able to get it together on defense. In 2006, Aldridge, Tucker, and Gibson anchored a very strong defensive ball club, but they were at least as good offensively.

The fact is, Rick Barnes has had high-elite offenses more often than he’s had high-elite defenses. What you’re really doing in your comment is taking Rick’s inability to make offensively strong this year’s particular set of players, combining it with the common misperception about him being a defense-only guru, and drawing a false conclusion. To be fair, you’re hardly alone: The other variation of this argument that I often hear is, “Rick Barnes can only have a great offense when he has a strong point guard!” Probably true, but it’s like saying an offensive coordinator sucks every time he doesn’t have a good quarterback. When you get down to it, every coach is going to struggle to have a great offense when he lacks a true point guard.

4) You wrote: “Although top 10, they will not be able to put together 6 NCAA wins (this year or another). Texas’s NBA style offense (lack of college style ball movement) helps recruit the best players but will not allow Texas to play consistent on offense like a Duke or a Kansas.”

Funny you mention Duke and Kansas, as they’re the only other two teams in the nation to join Texas as Sweet 16 participants in 5 of the last 7 seasons.

Another funny thing about Duke… in 2007 they struggled to get it going on offense. But how could that be?!? If we’re to believe your theory, Kansas and Duke don’t thrive on offense for many of the same reasons as does Texas — they do so because they have a true ball-movement system. Well, Coach K didn’t do anything differently in 2007, but Duke… well, they just weren’t a very good offensive team. They made the same cuts, looked for the same passes, and tried to get the same shots. The trouble was, though, that they had a mediocre sophomore point guard in Greg Paulus, right after they’d lost Kevin Durant and DJ Augustin J.J. Reddick and Shelden Williams to the pros.

The truth is, even the best recruiting schools in the country have years in which the personnel turnover is all wrong, leaving the roster less than ideal for offense, or defense, or without a point guard, or whatever it is. It happens at Duke. It happens at Texas, and unless you want to advocate for Rick Barnes shying away from players who may just be so talented that they leave for the NBA lottery, then you’ll have to accept that there will be some less-than-great years mixed in with the most exciting ones.

Next: the issue doesn’t begin and end with that point about roster turnover. You also suggest that Texas’ “NBA style offense” is good for recruting kids to Austin, but will. not. ever. work. to. achieve. big. prizes. This is another unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as fact that led me to object to your comment in the first place. I’ll keep this rebuttal simple: Your memory is awfully short, IUTex, because in 2008 the Memphis Tigers were one Mario Chalmers miracle three pointer away from doing precisely what it is that you say cannot work in the college game. Credit to KU for that amazing win, but Memphis was in control of that game throughout and easily could have won it — I don’t think it’s a stretch to say they should have, given their big, late lead. In any case, there’s no meaningful difference between what John Calipari and Rick Barnes are doing, from the elite kids they’re able to attract to play for them, to the dribble-drive offenses that you apparently disdain. Suit yourself, but I’m 100% comfortable with Rick Barnes’ program direction.

4) You wrote: “Barnes is great and has built a first class program…..with limitations. That is all the Texas fans care about. Based on all the talent that has moved through the program, the fans at a Kentucky, NC, Kansas would be restless without a title or at least two Final Four appearances….of course their fans show up for all the games in November.”

What are the limitations? I’m asking seriously. The more specific, the better. Because I’ll be honest with you — from my perspective these two things seem to be true: (1) I think the way Rick Barnes has recruited and run this program has both made the program elite and given himself as fair a chance as you can hope for to achieve the highest successes. (2) I think Rick Barnes has been a little bit unlucky in the timing of the talent turnover, and that one could fairly argue that three times he has — through no fault of his own — just missed out on having a consensus #1 team to start the year.

The two points are related. First, I just want to note that Rick’s doing it the right way. He’s bringing A+ talent to Austin on a consistent basis, hires strong assistant coaches, schedules well, and has consistently been a Sweet 16+ guy. Again, only Duke and Kansas join Texas as S16 participants in 5 of the last 7 years. That established, the single biggest factor for Texas not having more than one Final Four appearance during Barnes’ tenure has been crappy luck with roster turnover:

Prior to the 2003-04 season — TJ Ford hurts his neck in a pick up game and is pretty much forced to abandon his intention to return. If he had come back, Texas was returning its entire roster from the Final Four, would have been preseason #1, and seems as strong a bet as you can imagine to get back there.

Prior to the 2006-07 season — After losing in the Elite Eight in overtime as sophomores, Lamarcus Aldridge (a lottery lock) and Daniel Gibson decide to turn pro. Had they returned, they would have opened the season #1 playing alongside Rick Barnes’ best recruiting class to date: KD, Augustin, Damion James, and J-Mason. Instead, Barnes had to start all over.

Prior to the 2007-08 season — Though he loved his teammates, loved Rick Barnes, loved Austin, and truly wanted to come back, Kevin Durant also knew that if he went pro he could achieve one of his goals of allowing his mother and father to stop working. As the locked-in #2 pick, he had no real choice, and off he went. Had KD returned, he and Augustin would have been the cover boys for the Final Four favorite — and likely preseason #1-ranked — Longhorns. Instead, the KD-less Longhorns put together a great season and make another Elite Eight run, before succumbing to the bigger, older, better-luck-with-four-year-talent Memphis Tigers.

And you know what, while we’re here? We’re not having this conversation right now if DJ Augustin doesn’t depart after his sophomore season. And Texas is a legit Final Four contender. It’s been an unfortunate series of poorly timed departures, and to criticize Rick Barnes for not yet winning his big enchilada is in part to say that he’s recruiting too well. Which… no thanks. Rick’s got the right program strategy in place, and he’s in great position to reach more Final Fours and — when the returning talent all aligns — claim his own national championship.

Keep that in mind before you unfairly cap Rick Barnes’ ceiling. Keep also in mind that the ’08 Jayhawks that won it all did so mostly with juniors and seniors, in a year when everyone was returning from the previous season. Or if you prefer the team that looked best all year and all tournament, keep in mind that in 2008 John Calipari got to welcome his freshman phenom (Derrick Rose) with a complete roster full of experienced talent — Douglas-Roberts (Jr), Anderson (Jr), Dozier (Jr), Dorsey (Sr).

Lest you think I’m cherry picking, we can go back another year. 2007. Florida, national champs. With… who? Oh, right: a roster of returning national champions. How did they win the year before? When their three elite freshmen (Brewer, Green, and Horford), along with Lee Humphrey, all returned for Joakim Noah’s freshman season. And yes, if you’re wondering, the 2005 Tar Heel national champs were their own version of the same story: Sean May (Jr), Rashad McCants (Jr), Raymond Felton (Jr), Jawad Williams (Sr), and Jackie Manuel (Sr) all came back as freshman Marvin Williams slid in.

That’s just how it goes. You need to recruit well, but you also need a little luck and have a few years when your future NBA players wind up staying on campus, thereby overlapping their time in the program. So far, Rick’s hasn’t had a whole lot of luck in that regard… And for all his weaknesses as a coach (like everyone else he certainly has his fair share), he’s not only achieving consistent success as one of the Top 5-10 programs in the nation, but the single biggest factor keeping him from the biggest of big prizes has been some unfortunate timing with roster turnover. In my book, when that’s the single biggest obstacle a coach is facing that’s keeping him from the top prize, he’s more than just doing damn well — it’s only a matter of time before it’s his year with the tastiest returning roster stew.

And I’ll stop now. I originally objected to your comment because I found it to be both factually wrong and built on faulty premises. For all of the above reasons.

Hook ’em