That is wrong.
They were both picked next to last or last first year. Zo finished second in the SEC. and went to the NIT. Barnes was picked next to last or last and finished 12th.
"Martin took over a depleted roster with low expectations. After the departure of
Tobias Harris following his freshman season, the Volunteers were picked to finish near the bottom of the SEC in 2011-12 . . . Martin took a team that had lost their top three—and seven of their top ten—contributors from the previous season to a second-place finish in the SEC "
Second year. Zo finished 4th and the best returning player sat out the year. Barnes finished 9th. Zo went to the NIT. Barnes no postseason.
Third year. Neither one ranked preseason. Zo won 21 games and finished one missed call from the Elite Eight. Third year Barnes won 26 but lost earlier in the tourney.
Barnes has and had just as much or more talent than Zo. We have more future NBA players and at least two possible first rounders now. Those teams had 0 first rounders and one regular NBA player.
They were young the first couple years. Its funny that people see that for Barnes but not Zo. For some reason people think Zo should have had his players playing like Sr and JR as freshmen but don't hold Barnes to that standard.
The rankings and wins can't be debated. There for anyone to see.
And I guess you forgot that Barnes lost to Chattanooga in YEAR TWO. Lost to George Washington and GT the year before. It happens to all coaches.
Just stop. Zo did just as well as Barnes the first three years. We didn't see year four. He recruited Stokes. The others did zero before he came. He also had Jaylen Brown on the way here. You should stop with the revisionist bs. Barnes inherited Admiral, five star Hubbs, and JC AA Punter.
Punter was the PG. No need to lie. You are twisting enough facts as it is.
Barnes is the best coach we have had by far. Zo did match or exceed what Barnes was praised for the first couple of years though. Its stupid.