I guess it depends on how you define "one and done" teams. Personally, I don't consider teams that play with a mix of freshman to seniors, with maybe a single one-and-done player to be a "one and done" team. I believe that was generally the makeup of Mizzouri, Bama, LSU, and NC St. For example, yes, Arizona started and relied heavily on Deandre Ayton, but they also started two seniors, a junior, and a sophomore. Are they considered a "one and done" team? If so, I bet we would find that something like 12 of the lat 15 NCAA champions were "one and done" teams.
Now, of the teams that usually start multiple one-and-dones, the main three over the last few years have been Duke, Kansas, and UK. All are still in it this year and have had more than their fair share of success over the last decade. UNC and Arizona might be next on the list in terms of percentage of one and dones. Both are out this year, but it has certainly worked out well for UNC the last few years.
Bottom line is that there is certainly no single way to win the title, but getting multiple one and dones has been a strategy that has seemed to lead to a disproportionate amount of success.
Personally, I would love Tech to get old and stay old, with a rotating string of one/two and done type players. After all, the last time we actually won a tourney game was the single year with Favors.
I just want us to build a real, competitive roster. I don't care about get old/stay old. Just put a competitive roster out there.
Don't restrict yourself by eschewing going after perceived 1-and-done guys in the guise of, "Bwah, I just wanna lose 'til all our guys are juniors and seniors and have it all figured out."
There's more than one path to success but every path to success requires high-level talent. If we have to take a 1-and-done guy (*gasp* or 2?) to do it, so freaking be it.