Pat Summitt is a name that should go down in the hall-of-famers as one of the best coaches. Period. She clearly has a track record of excellence, both on and off the court. Her players played well under her and spoke highly of her character. There are not many coaches that have that kind of high regard for their entire career. Take Joe Paterno for example. He WAS hailed as a great coach, until several incidents surfaced toward the end of his career, and then he wasn't.
If we truly lived in a society with gender equality, Pat Summitt would probably have just a great of a success whether she coached female or male athletes. There are so many coaches who are tossed out of their roles for scandals or inappropriate conduct. She is clearly an example that all coaches should strive to be more like.
She was even better than some of her male counterparts. Sure, there were many that were better, but there far more that were not as good as she was. Her legacy will live on as the most famous female basketball coach in all of the history of the collegiate sport.
I dislike the wording of this question. Pat Summit was a good basketball coach. What does it matter how she looks compared to a male in the same job position? Besides, just because a coach is male doesn't make him a good coach. There are plenty of male coaches who are bad at their jobs.
Yes, Pat Summitt was just as good of a basketball coach as any male coach is. She led her team to 1,098 victories and to 18 National Championships, something that very few male coaches can claim. She received little attention or coverage simply because she was a woman coaching a woman's basketball team.