Haters, wanna challenge our Conference?
-
@jaybate-1.0 the Russians have been hacking the tourney since the Cold War.
-
I’m sure it is all tied together somehow with the space time continuum, Amelia Earhart, the moon landing, and the color of undies I select to wear on tournament game days
-
@cragarhawk I assume the last item is variable, depending both on your initial choice and on the progress of the game.
-
@mayjay usually don’t change them mid game… but I’d be willing to try that out if everyone thinks it may help. Or hell. I’d even go commando for wins
-
@cragarhawk We will take your word for it, but you being willing to do that will definitely help counteract that Debie Downer accusation!
-
Bottom line here all conspiracy theories… Cough bu(!$#!T aside. Is whether you value regular season success over post season success. The lil10 is constantly heralded as the top or one of the top conferences nearly every year. Alot of noncon early season wins. Upper RPI teams. And trading blows throughout a grueling round robin conference schedule. If you value all of that then you probably believe the numbers on paper and the idea that it’s the best. I don’t see anyone arguing that fact that the conference as a whole underperforms in the tourney. For whatever the reason is. If you value March success though. You don’t hold the conference in a high regard. And whether anyone really wants to admit it or not or even cares… The national perception will definitely be decided in the madness. No question
-
So you’re saying that the SEC is a tougher conference than the Big 12?
-
@mayjay ah. The old “deb downer” thing huh… lol. I guess I’ll take that
. I call it being realistic. But I have found it’s easier to label a realistic individual a negative one than to admit that some (not all) of the things they say are correct.
-
@DoubleDD I don’t think I said that. How about you? What’s your perception? Do you think what I said means I believe the SEC is better?
-
Maybe the issue should not be worded as “best” conference since there are so few finalists. Maybe a better description should be that the conference, as a whole, is the toughest, top to bottom, to play in during the regular season.
“Best” implies predictability from the rankings.
“Toughest” just means it is a bitch to go through.
-
Its was an honest question. I wasn’t trying to do some slight of hand. You made the comment that the tournament is what decides what a conference is.
Maybe it’s true but I have a hard time accepting that. As if UK were to win the championship, the SEC would garner another feather in the cap.
That is why I loath this topic. Was the Pac the best conference in the nation, when UCLA was winning all those Championships?
You see where I’m going with this?
-
@mayjay ppl used to talk about the Big10 as the kinda what I think you’re saying. The toughest to navigate. Back when it had the round robin format that we have now. In that respect I’d have to think this conference is very possibly the toughest.
-
The real issue, like you said @HighEliteMajor, is Self’s performance in the tournament. Outside of 2014, you really cant say injuries are the reason. For some reason, like in 2010 and 2011, Self’s teams lose a game where they look nothing like how they played during the season. Turnovers are also an issue, such as last year against Nova (six more than they did) and at the end of the game against Michigan. I dont really think much about the 2014 and 2015 teams because those teams were very young and had a horde of issues, so I normally focus on Self’s experienced teams.
To anyone who has actually WATCHED the games, it is clear that the refs have not caused a single KU loss in the tournament - there have always been things that our guys could have done better.
At times, I think Jaybate doesnt even watch the non KU tournament games or else he would see that, oddly enough, sometimes teams just play better than a higher seeded team. Take UConn in 2014, for example. I rewatched segments from their run and was reminded at how smart they played and how well they shot the ball. Did the refs or tournament committee rig the rims so that UConn could shoot better? No.
Nova is also another great example of a team playing great defense and making good decisions. Couple those with hot shooting and you have a title contender. How did the refs help Nova shoot well? The obvious (and correct) answer is: they didnt. They just played better than the other six teams they played.
Now, Jaybate brings up locations, teams and seedings. Lets take a quick look at UConn. 10 seed St. Joes, 2 seed Nova, 3 seed Iowa State, 4 seed Michigan State (which by the way was a fully healthy team at the end of the year and many thought they were much better than a 4), 1 overall seed Florida, and 8 seed Kentucky, a team with multiple 1st round picks that finally adjusted to D1 ball. Thats absolutely brutal.
Now Nova. 15 seed UNC Asheville, 7 seed Iowa (a team that had been in the top ten for a portion of the season), 3 seed Miami (another top ten team), 1 overall seed Kansas (ranked number one at the start of the tourney), 2 seed OU, and 1 seed UNC. So, Nova had to beat three teams that had been ranked number one at some point in the year - THREE!! Again, that’s a brutal path to the title.
Hope that puts everything in perspective - locations dont matter, seedings dont matter and the refs dont matter. Its all about how you play.
-
@DoubleDD ya I get it. But I didn’t say my perception was that that makes the SEC better. And I’m not asking you to have that perception either. I’m saying the national perspective will come from March success. One team winning the championship in my mind doesn’t get that done. In the same manner that if KU wins the NC this year but no other team say makes it past the first weekend. I’m not gonna believe the big12 is the best conference. Some are talking about success over an extended period. I don’t think it’s a bad barometer. If you look at total FF’s and total NC’s in say the last 15 years or 20 years or you name it. I think you could make a case that the SEC has been as good or better in March definitely. ACC has been… without question. Big east… without question. But again. If you aren’t a person who values tourney success over other stats and things. Then that part isn’t what matters to you. And isnt going to change your perception
-
@cragarhawk I think the various analyticals only measure that, too. But the media totals 'em all up and changes it to “best” which leads to these threads for way toooooo much fun.
Most successful is the term I suggest for deciding who does best in the tournament. Bill Walton doesn’t care though, as to him the Pac will always be the “conference of champions.”
-
@mayjay I guess it’s okay to expect him to be a lil biased. I mean I’m KU biased. There’s no question. If I was an official I’d be labeled the biggest KU Homer in history… Lol.
-
I can respect that. Yet I pose the question. What if your league has a lot of good teams just not great, say versus a league that has 2 or 3 great teams and the rest of the league sucks?
You mention the ACC as I did too. Yet outside of Duke and UNC who is great and who is good. Now remember I’m talking before conference realignment. Yes the ACC has had a few one hit wonders. Wake Forest and Maryland. Yet besides a few miracles when the star line up right. The ACC used to be just Duke and UNC. Again I know conference realignment has changed some previous thoughts when it come to this topic.
-
@DoubleDD I think if “you name the conference” has alot of good teams. That will show in the post season in most cases. Maybe not into the last weekend. Cause that does largely take a great team. I mean I’d say right now if I’m objectively grading the BIG12. I’m saying 1 obvious great team. 4 fairly equally good teams. And then 5 really not very good teams. Although I actually give TTU a lil advantage over the other 4. Now having said that. Depending on matchups etc. There’s 4 teams in the conference that I think possibly could make a deep run. Possibly. But not probably. And I doubt more than 1 or 2 will. At this moment I can say about the same thing for the ACC. Except that I think they have more quality teams. But also have alot more teams period. So that makes a difference also.
-
And even if the Ruskies haven’t been hacking the tourney, the MSM would disseminate fake news from the Deep State that they were, right?
-
Good point. My only rebuttal is that a good team that makes the tournament will face a good team. I know in KU land nothing short of a final four means a failed season. Yet I’m starting to believe it takes a pretty special team to make it to that final weekend.
A good team versus a good team is a 50/50 chance. Pounding on that point a little further is that a lot of if not most of the time a good team from a power conference is really playing a true road game As the fans cheer for the team from a lesser conference.
Something to think about anyways.
-
@DoubleDD there’s no question it takes a special team to make that run. I mean just use KU as your reasoning on that. 13 straight conference titles. And in that time 1 NC. 1 runner up. 2 FF’s. Now. If youre on the outside looking in that doesn’t sound too bad. But those of us who have followed all along as KU diehards or atleast some of us… think it could be better. 2010, 2011, 2013, 2016. Unfortunately we’ve just had alot of special teams that didnt get that far. To this day I’m waiting to wake up one morning from the nightmare that is the fact that Sherron and the 2010 hawks didn’t win the NC. I would’ve bet about anything on that team. And Sherrons will to not be defeated. And some other years that were just plain way too early exits. Idk what the reason is. Is it luck? Or lack there of? Is it that we don’t have a formidable rival in our conference or two… that also frequently make deep runs… idk. Personally I think if Coach stays here awhile the numbers will improve. Cause coaches grow and improve over time as well and Self has shown us he’s that guy.
And also you are spot on about the road game thing. No question. I was actually in Omaha when Mizzou went down to Norfolk state in 2012 as the 2 seed. Whole building was against them. It was good time
-
@et al
Hypothesis: Conference post season performance has been largely explained by asymmetry in OAD and 5-star stacking, seeding asymmetry, and whistle asymmetry.
Boom!
Outta da park!.
Frozen hypothetical rope!!
-
Who believes Cal and Coach K would equal Self’s record with this KU roster, if they were coaching it?
Any one that does I’ve got diamond mines under STRONG HALL to make you a deal on.
-
Nothing wrong with the B12 POST SEASON record the last ten years that several long and medium stacks plus some seeding and whistle asymmetry wouldn’t cure.
Any one doubt that and I ve got some MSM news about Trump that’s real to sell you!
Howling!!!
-
@jaybate-1.0 said:
Who believes Cal and Coach K would equal Self’s record with this KU roster, if they were coaching it?
Any one that does I’ve got diamond mines under STRONG HALL to make you a deal on.
This right here.
Every season I look at the roster and I honestly make a prediction based on many years of watching basketball. (I’ve been a KU fan sine 1986 when I was 12.) Almost every season coach Self he has me raising my expectations around this time. It’s his ability to maximize the “talent” the team has. Then when the tournament comes the team almost always meet the expectations I had in preseason. Of course then you hear the media and fans say “what is wrong with Kansas?”. Why do they underachieve in the tournament? Again Self MAXIMIZES our talent. Seriously would coach K or Cal roll into an NCAA tournament with a Brady Morningstar or Tyrel Reed STARTING? If they did the media would cut them slack and say its a down year for them. Currently Duke has NINE McDonald’s All Americans on their roster…NINE! If Duke makes a run to the final four the media will make a huge deal that K is the best ever. If they don’t make it you wont hear much when in reality it would be an epic failure. Self’s regular season titles at all conferences he has coached in proves what my point is, that he maximizes the talent he has. Now if he could somehow land recruiting classes similar to Duke and UK…
-
@jaybate-1.0 said:
Who believes Cal and Coach K would equal Self’s record with this KU roster, if they were coaching it?
Any one that does I’ve got diamond mines under STRONG HALL to make you a deal on.
I do think Coach K could. Definitely not this year’s Coach K that was dealing with his own personal health issues, but a Coach K that wasn’t distracted by any health issues I think would have a decent shot at equaling a 27-3 mark through 30 games. I don’t think the losses would necessarily be the same, but I think a healthy Coach K would have a shot at a 27-3 record with KU’s roster and schedule this year.
Not a chance with Cal. UK has a more talented roster top to bottom, a softer schedule than KU has had and has still lost 5 games this year.
-
@mayjay I don’t use Duke and UConn as my “guiding stars.” It’s a discussion of tournament success. By your post, it is obvious that you wish to characterize the description of other programs somehow finding a way to win national titles as anti-KU, furthered by your concluding sentence that you “would still rather be a Jayhawk.” Implying that I would not.
This is the classic misdirection I’ve seen in such discussions dating way back to kusports.com.
No one is saying they’d rather be anything but a Jayhawk. Again, its a discussion on the NCAA tournament success. That stuff turns a thoughtful discussion into one that degenerates. It’s a purposeful comment, one intended to insult those that have the audacity to question our tournament failures at least somewhat objectively.
I’ve asked this question before. From 1999, would you rather have UConn’s Tournament resume or KU’s?
There is absolutely no reasonable person on the face of this planet that could say KU. None. No reasonable person would turn their nose at four NCAA Tournament Championships. None.
Again, the phrase is “NCAA Tournament Resume” from 1999 through now. Not “program”, or “history”, or “Conference titles”, or whatever. NCAA Tournament Resume.
But I’m sure a few would say KU anyway. They have in the past. Valuing, for example, some consecutive tourney appearance streak over real results.
Last time I asked the question, I got some indignant KU responses that said something to the effect of “You keep urging UConn and Duke as your guiding stars. I would still rather be a Jayhawk.”
Which, of course, missed the point then, as it does now.
-
@HighEliteMajor said:
I am not convinced of a vast conspiracy to screw the Big 12. Seemed to me that we have had many well paved paths that we’ve managed to screw up.
I would also say, generally, that the best players do not come for the hard streets of the inner city. That is, most of these kids are at prep schools and have already ventured away from their home towns. Different age right now.
Really, though, any efforts to explain catastrophic failures, or to make excuses for a long term epidemic is a losing proposition.
2011 comes to mind immediately. That is one that still really stings for me. Title was completely there for the taking. I firmly believe KU was the best team that year. C’est la vie.
-
@jaybate-1.0 Come on 'Bate - I know you can do better than that. I’m counting on you. You have a fascinating hypothesis that KU’s and the B12’s underperformance is the result of whistle and seeding asymmetry. You may well be on to something. But, don’t give us verbiage - give us some facts. I’m sure the truth - the data - is out there to support your hypothesis. Do some spade work - go find it - I’m counting on you!!!
I’m sure the evidence will show that during the tournament (in contrast to the non-conference season, of course), KU and B12 teams have consistently had fewer free throw attempts than their opponents - esp. when those opponents are from the Eastern time zone or wear a certain shoe brand. I’ll bet you will find that KU and B12 have consistently had to travel further to tournament sites than teams in other conferences - their hotels have probably been further away from the arena, as well - contributing to tire legs and poor shooting percentages from deep. I’m sure you can do a regression analysis to show that the B12 teams have been consistently under-seeded relative to their statistical metrics meaning that they’ve had to face tougher teams. I’m highly confident that you will find that the B12’s poor W-L in the tournament is indeed highly asymmetric - they have a winning record against small TV market teams, but a losing record against major TV market teams - esp. those in the Eastern time zone.
I realize my explanation of inferior talent - based on NBA performance - is sadly lame and is as much a symptom as it is cause. You definitely have the more compelling hypothesis - so I’m counting on you to find the data that supports - I know it’s out there - go find it 'Bate!!! You can do this…
-
@DCHawker said:
@jaybate-1.0 Come on 'Bate - I know you can do better than that. I’m counting on you. You have a fascinating hypothesis that KU’s and the B12’s underperformance is the result of whistle and seeding asymmetry. You may well be on to something. But, don’t give us verbiage - give us some facts. I’m sure the truth - the data - is out there to support your hypothesis. Do some spade work - go find it - I’m counting on you!!!
I’m sure the evidence will show that during the tournament (in contrast to the non-conference season, of course), KU and B12 teams have consistently had fewer free throw attempts than their opponents - esp. when those opponents are from the Eastern time zone or wear a certain shoe brand. I’ll bet you will find that KU and B12 have consistently had to travel further to tournament sites than teams in other conferences - their hotels have probably been further away from the arena, as well - contributing to tire legs and poor shooting percentages from deep. I’m sure you can do a regression analysis to show that the B12 teams have been consistently under-seeded relative to their statistical metrics meaning that they’ve had to face tougher teams. I’m highly confident that you will find that the B12’s poor W-L in the tournament is indeed highly asymmetric - they have a winning record against small TV market teams, but a losing record against major TV market teams - esp. those in the Eastern time zone.
I realize my explanation of inferior talent - based on NBA performance - is sadly lame and is as much a symptom as it is cause. You definitely have the more compelling hypothesis - so I’m counting on you to find the data that supports - I know it’s out there - go find it 'Bate!!! You can do this…
+10000
-
@HighEliteMajor The question you ask–pretending results can be isolated from reality of the programs that got them–is as ridiculous an exercise in fantasy as my granddaughter asking, “Would you like me better as a werewolf, or as a vampire?” The choice cannot be made isolated from the program. Of course people would rather have more titles than one.
Since the question you ask is meaningless in the real world, I repeat that in the actual world of comparing programs, I am happy to be a Jayhawk. History and victories and losses to boot. Because that is called taking the good from the bad.
Welcome back. I see you have decided to bring back the snide again. Oh, yay.
-
This thread is going in circles and becoming repetitive and confrontational.
Perhaps this would be a good time to end it and move on to newer and more productive threads.
-
The B12 is easily the most competitive and entertaining IMO. The teams are very evenly matched, but that doesn’t make us a great league. If we want to be up with the ACC, we have to perform in the NCAAs. That’s just the way it is. I think we are only getting 5 this year so hopefully we can have 3 or 4 make it outta the first weekend.
-
@HighEliteMajor said:
I’ve asked this question before. From 1999, would you rather have UConn’s Tournament resume or KU’s?
There is absolutely no reasonable person on the face of this planet that could say KU. None. No reasonable person would turn their nose at four NCAA Tournament Championships. None.
You’re a much smarter person than I, but I’m going to walk straight into the lion’s den anyway.
I guess I’m going to earn the label of “unreasonable” with this post because I don’t see how it’s fair to include failures within the context of the tourney as part of a team’s resume, but conveniently leave out the failure to even make the tourney as also being part of a team’s resume.
The fact is UConn missed the tourney in 2001, 2007, 2010, 2013 and 2015. By your argument it seems like you’re postulating that they didn’t fail in those years because they didn’t participate in the tourney. It’s a lot like Homer Simpson saying the way to avoid failure is to not try. Somehow, I think if we missed the tourney at just under a 30% clip for the past 20 years that would be completely unacceptable for most fans (certainly the ones on Buckets) and would certainly create endless topics of discussion on this board.
Of course we have had some bad endings in the tournament, but it’s a direct correlation to the number of consecutive times we’ve been in the tournament. It’s a numbers game. The more times you play, the more times you will fail. It’s inevitable. I just don’t think you can say UCONN’s four championships look better in retrospect because of the winning percentage they have when making the tournament, especially if we are in agreement that winning takes some skill and some luck and some overcoming any asymmetry that exists in seeding. The fact is, they still missed the tourney 5 times in that span.
I certainly understand the argument for trading conference championships for national championships (and it’s something I would be willing to do BTW), but to make the case that reasonable KU fans would trade missing the tourney entirely at a regular clip for an extra ring or two doesn’t hold water with me. Unless I was grossly misinformed by Aesop in my youth, slow and steady wins the race and its just a matter of time until we close the gap in the race for rings due to the consistency of this program, something that you seem too quick to dismiss.
Blast away, my man.
-
@DCHawker said:
I know you can do better than that. I’m counting on you.
C’mon, I never need to do better than that with you. You know that.
-
Posted this a bit ago in a different thread, but seems worthy to toss in this conversation as well.
-
@kjayhawks It is losing the first weekend (often to lower seeded teams) that has killed the B12’s tournament record. Major conference comparisons over the past 3 years according to CBSSports (recognizing it may be fake data and with no commentary on the causes):
ACC - 42-18 B10 - 30-20 SEC - 21-11 P12 - 20-17 BE - 16-14 B12 - 20-21
More teams in than any other conference during that time, but only one with a losing record. And, way below expected wins based on seed.
Last year the B12 was 9-7 – let’s hope we can improve on that this year…
-
@DCHawker I don’t think location/seeding was the culprit. do you think is was that we’ve(b-12) have been overrated or not prepared?
-
@autohawk Well, the only reasonable explanation is a lot of butterfly wings in China.
-
@tis4tim it’s true that the more times you play in the tournament the more you lose, but we also haven’t won more because of playing in it over twenty consecutive years. That’s the heart of the issue. Me, I prefer final fours and titles over participation awards. Roy didn’t make the tourney in 2010 after winning the title, but that is something I would be ok with. Why? Because titles are hard to come by and you always take titles when you can get them. Some prefer the participation award I guess and put more emphasis on the regular season. Personally, I think tourney runs are way more exciting than the Big 12 race.
-
@HighEliteMajor I think people don’t understand that we have one title in almost thirty years - one. I think Self is the one to lead KU to more tourney success but he needs to figure out how to prevent his teams from playing their worst in the tournament ala 2010 and 2011.
-
@autohawk said:
@DCHawker I don’t think location/seeding was the culprit. do you think is was that we’ve(b-12) have been overrated or not prepared?
Well, as reflected in this thread, there a various theories regarding the B12’s poor performance relative to other major conferences and especially with regard to seed expectations. As I’ve noted elsewhere, I think it is primarily a function of a talent gap - breadth and depth of NBA-level talent - although that begs the question of why that talent deficit might exist.
From KU’s perspective, as opposed to the entire conference, I think part of the issue is that for 3 months, I don’t think KU gets the opportunities and challenges of matching up against as many other Final Four/E8 caliber teams as is the case year in and year out with the top of the ACC (Duke-UNC-Louisville plus even UVA, Syracuse, FSU and Notre Dame) with very different styles.
With regard to the conference as a whole, I do think we are “overrated” from the standpoint of the benefits gained from having no really bad teams in the conference and for the most part avoiding bad losses during the non-conference schedule - which results in high SOS and RPI. But, that SHOULD cut the other way - if B12 are getting higher seeds than is probably warranted (which I think is the case), then B12 teams should be facing even weaker, lower seeded teams. The problem is that we’ve had several 2-5 seeded teams not get out of the first weekend - losing to lower seeded opponents.
Since B12 teams do have the worst tournament W-L record over the past 3 years of the major conferences, and an even worse record relative to seed expectation, I guess one could argue that almost definitionally we have been overrated.
But, again the reasons for the poor performance will continue to be debated. I lean more to talent and butterfly wings than some of the other more fanciful stuff postulated, but everyone is entitled to their own delusions…
-
@mayjay i had heard that the European Peacock are flying all over China, so with their color being close to the KU colors, the future could be great for the Hawk nation!
-
@mayjay I’m sorry, but your comment doesn’t make sense to me. Are you suggesting that you can’t answer the question?
You’ve said you are a lawyer. I 'm sure in the courtroom that you have insisted that a party just answer the question posed. Many times just a yes or no may be the instruction. That’s easy here. The other attorney, then, can redirect and permit them to give their explanation.
That’s all this is. Just wanting an honest answer the question. Your example of vampire or werewolf has no application, and you know that (being a lawyer). It is irrelevant.
The question is whether you would rather have UConn’s NCAA tourney resume, or KU’s ,from 1999 through the present? It requires nothing further.
Or, perhaps another way, to get around this manufactured impediment – assuming you get everything that is KU – the program, the coach, the arena, the historic significance, the fans, etc – would you simply swap with UConn our NCAA tourney resume from 1999 - the present?
The question can be answered in a vacuum, or isolated from the program, as you mentioned.
In a trial, you might ask a witness, “Do you drop the anvil off the roof?” That’s easy, answer it. It doesn’t matter if you were on the roof, or not. Whether it was a nice house, or not. Or whether folks were watching. Or how long you’d been at your job. It’s yes or no. The clarification and explanation can come later.
But you avoid the question because you know the answer, and it doesn’t fit with you narrative. The question being irrelevant to the real world? It is a simple question that allows you to work backwards in your assessment of our programs achievements.
You say you want the good with the bad? So, with that logic, you would not change the VCU loss into a national title, because the VCU loss is now who we are? I doubt that.
Do you have an answer to the question?
@tis4tim I can accept your point of view. In my little tunnel vision of a world on this topic, I may view it as unreasonable. Meaning I can’t fathom it. But we all value different things, which is very hard for me, again, to fathom when we’re talking national titles. You really wouldn’t sacrifice some NCAA tourney appearances for a nice shiny NCAA title ring? Or multiple title rings? Come on – they’re really shiny and look good in graphics on TV when comparing to other blue bloods. And as @HawkChamp mentioned, we have just one in nearly 30 years.
@StLJhawk - Great visual.
@DCHawker Great info.
Check and check mate.
-
You are asking a specific question for which there is no specific answer, it is a matter of what your preference is…kind of …Red Pill or Blue Pill. All I offer is a choice…sounds familiar?
A few weeks ago I was visiting with a UConn fan and he said, I wish UConn was more like KU. At UConn we enjoy the Title for while and then spend the next few years in between living vicariously through our memories and talking about how to get rid of our coach and get one that will get us conference titles and to the NCAA consistently.
In short, it depends on whether you want to follow a team that is consistently good and wins conference titles and and occasional National Tilte and keeps you happy the great majority of the time except for a couple of week in March, or one that elates you a couple of weeks in March every 4 or 5 years and then you don’t necessarily suffer but not necessarily enjoy the rest of the time either.
You are trying to have people say that having UConn record is better because that is your personal preference but not everybody necessarily agrees with you and there is no right or wrong answer. Frankly, I prefer the first, i.e. KU, but then it is my opinion and again, it cannot be right or wrong since it is just an opinion, i.e. my own personal preference.
-
@HighEliteMajor I see I confused you. My sentence, “Of course people would rather have more titles than one” mst have been opaque because I didn’t key it in to your resume envy of UConn or Duke.
PTSD from last year is starting to kick in. I refuse to enter your alternate universe of alternative facts any longer.
-
@HighEliteMajor Even with the narrower question - KU’s or UConn’s tournament resume only since 1999 - like @jayhawkfantoo I would have to hedge. Would I prefer 4 titles rather than 1? Of course. But, I do like the fact that we are in the tournament with a high seed and the potential to win it all every year. We have high expectations, not just to get to a Final Four, but win it all in most years. That’s a high class problem, as they say. Missing the tournament altogether 5 times and having zero expectation of advancing past the first weekend in others; not sure I find that particularly enticing.
Having said that, the conventional wisdom, which I mostly ascribe to, is that national championships matter most when “ranking” programs over the arc of basketball history. Does anyone think Arizona is one of the top all time programs because they previously held the longest appearance streak? No. Does UCLA’s 13 consecutive conference titles compare in any way, shape or form to the 11 national titles? No. What 3 additional titles would do or would have done is significantly elevate KU in the court of public opinion/conventional wisdom. More titles than Duke and UNC, more than UConn and Indiana. Behind only UK and UCLA - and much more historical significance overall than the latter.
Personally, I would rather not have to trade. One more title is big - two more would be huge. Let’s go get 'em…
-
@mayjay The question was regarding UConn’s tourney resume vs. KU’s, to include the fact that UConn missed the tourney a few years; not just titles. You didn’t confuse me at all. I do read what is written. Others find it very easy to honestly address the simple question. What is pretty obvious is that when things get a little uncomfortable, you start with insults, as opposed to the alternative choice of not responding. “Guiding star/rather be a Jayhawk fan”, “Snide”, “PTSD”, and further insults regarding “alternative facts.” But that’s how the “offended” roll these days. So, according to you – I’m not really a KU fan, I insulted you with an improper tone in my post, I have a mental disorder, and I lie. Nice look. You do not like to be challenged. Too bad.
@JayHawkFanToo I know you would rather have a tourney record that has one NCAA title instead of four, because it is KU’s, and that you value the NCAA tourney consistency vs. the titles. I think you were one that answered the simple question when it came up in a past season, just as you did here. It is completely a value judgment, as you say.
But on a small point, an opinion is different than a preference. You could have the opinion that Bill Self is a bad coach. That would be incorrect. Facts can refute opinions. You could have a preference to Bruce Weber as a coach over Bill Self (or vice versa). That is the irrefutable thing I think you are referring to, much like the preference to KU’s tourney resume over UConn’s (or vice versa).
-
You really don’t have to choose. If you like Uconn so much go to UconnBuckets.com and bragg on them. If all you care about are championships you can even root for their womens team, they haven’t lost a game in years.
Personally I’m a KU fan. I don’t give a rats ass about any other teams failures or successes. KU’s consistency gives me a great season to watch with the possibility of a national championship every year. If KU was only good every few years I wouldn’t be disappointed as often in March as I’d expect the losses. But I’d rather be in the hunt every year.
-
You two crack me up!
Appearance of Entertainment Values in Seeding–reported comments by UCinn HC Mick Cronin and SIU HC Barry Hinson.
Appearance of Recruiting Asymmetry-reported comments of Louisville HC Rick Pitino
Appearance of Recruiting Asymmetry and Whistle Asymmetry in Tourney–Reported comments of UW HC Bo Ryan
Go FIND the links!!!
Next.
Howling!
