And the same debate rages on. I figured Mao's last post outlined the basic truths of the U of A/ASU debate nicely, and furthered my point. The basic framework of ASU football will make it more likely that they will be more successful, just like U of A basketball. Is it more likely that U of A football will catch up than ASU basketball? Of course, but who knows? With basketball, you really only need a couple good classes in a row to turn things around, whereas football requires much more personnel.
I think you've been pretty persistent in your insistence that U of A is a "crown jewel" of basketball, whatever the hell that means. We get it, your premise is that U of A hoops is infallible and guaranteed to be a top team forever. Let's wait until a person not named Lute does anything there. Will Miller be the answer? There is a good chance, but there have been plenty of good programs that haven't recovered after losing an icon.
Let the debate rage on...unless you are in the possession of a crystal ball, it's all mental masturbation.