Sporting News writer Mike DeCourcy recently started a mini Twitter war with his followers and college basketball fans in general the other day with his rankings for the Top 10 coaching jobs in college basketball. According to DeCourcy, the most important factors to consider were access to talent, tradition, support from the community and campus, facilities.
And what didn't matter to DeCourcy: recent success.
I happen to think that DeCourcy is one of the best college basketball writers in the country. But I also think his rankings are flawed. Not do I think he did a horrible job picking the teams, but I also think a lot of his placements are off.
Why? Well, for starters I don't think you can just ignore recent success when considering the best jobs. There are reasons that some schools are successful and some aren't. and it isn't always just because of who the head coach is. A lot of the factors DeCourcy mentions in fact go hand in hand with recent success, so to eliminate it completely seems a bit like someone cutting off their nose to spite their face.
And I also think DeCourcy focused a little too much on local talent. While nobody would claim they would rather be in a talent free area of the country, the fact of the matter is that recruiting is so nationalized now among the big programs and kids do so much traveling in middle and high school that it's becoming ever more rare for staying at the local school to become a huge factor in the recruiting process now.
So based upon that, I've created my own rankings of the best jobs in college basketball. And since I work 66 percent harder than most people do, I'm giving you the top 15 jobs.