I keep hearing that everyone's "gone."

And, yes, the seniors are "gone." And the NBA lottery guys are "gone."

But, correct me if I'm wrong, when a player puts their name in the portal, they aren't "gone". They are saying that they are open to consider another opportunity. Quite frankly, unless you've got a multi-year NIL deal (do these even exist?), it seems like a prudent thing to do.

Yes, it means the staff has to deal with uncertainty and they have to recruit as though players may leave... but presumably they have a relationship and know guys' motivations and whether guys are getting serious offers.

We would all like loyalty to the program, but that's as bygone as the days when companies didn't do layoffs and eliminate jobs on an annual basis.

Am I misunderstanding the situation?

@BShark said in Bill Self:

Yeah they don't care about football at all. KU finally invested there.

Yep.. I don't think UConn's approach is right for KU. But this does illustrate yet another way the playing field in college sports is uneven.

UConn has been hot and cold this year. But Michigan has blown teams away — very good teams — starting in November and December. If prior performance is any indicator, Michigan should win this game by 12-20 points.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7165839/2026/04/02/uconn-women-men-march-madness-financial-nil-comparison/?smtyp=cur&smid=bsky-nytimes

Worth a read about how UConn's finances are doled out to men's vs women's basketball and basketball vs football. Less of a surprise that they are in the FF after reading this.

Maybe possible to isolate factors for a formula...

1. Shots that win (the team was behind or tied) the national championship at or near the buzzer (~3 sec or less)
2. Shots that force any OT in the national championship
3. Shots that win the Regional Finals at or near the buzzer
4. Shots that force any OT in the Regional Finals
5. Shots by underdogs that win NCAA Tournament games at or near the buzzer
   etc...

Some context should also be considered to rank within those categories -- For instance,

1. What kind of shot (3pt, 2pt, free throw?) and how far? (logo? beyond midcourt?)
2. Size of the deficit overcome
3. How little time the winning team led in the game.
4. How many lead changes
5. How high was the probability of winning for the losing team during the game and especially at the end of the game.
6. Number of OTs
   etc....

Given that UConn was 19 down, there were only 2 lead changes and they led less than a minute (~50 seconds), made this game all the more sensational.

Duke's probability of winning peaked at 98.7% with about 1:30 left in the first half. It was 95.3% with 5:03 left in the game. And it was 89.6% with 6 seconds left, when the turnover was committed.

While the UConn win was one for the ages, I think fantastic finishes in a National Championship have to be considered greater than fantastic finishes in lesser games.

The silver lining on Rosario is that he might be more affordable to keep given there is less tape on him. His lack of court time makes it a bit more difficult for another team to throw bags of money at him.

If we kept Flory and Rosario, it would be amazing given the talent that is coming in. I have a good feeling about Luke Barnett -- under the radar but excellent and committed early and has been steadfast. Might be exactly what the team culture needs.

Certainly not out of the realm of possibility that the delay has something to do with the status of Self and the KU program.

Great for Mullins. Storybook finish for yet another freshmen and a kid who seems legitimately good. And, man, Karaban has a golden touch. This time, he didn't take the game winning shot-- he made the game-winning assist.

My beef isn't with the UConn players. It's with Hurley. He's fine when he wins, but he's impetuous when he loses.

I have this sinking feeling that, while most of us are focusing on old grudges against Duke, there has been a shift and UConn has become the real bully.

8 final fours - all since 1999, 6 national titles with a chance to get their 7th.

That's an awful lot for such a small town as Storrs, CT where there's just nothing else going on... except for a little sports network down the road in Bristol.

My 2cents... but if I'd been Foster's parent, I would have strongly discouraged him from playing. There are injuries that are unrecoverable. I don't know the nature of his injury other than a fracture that was repaired with surgery... But I have a niece who was a track star in high school in Maryland... Winning state races as a Freshman. By the end of Junior year she was done. Overtraining on a foot injury led to bone death in her foot and that was that.

We all saw how long it took Embiid to come back from his foot injuries.

For Foster, it might be a mixed blessing that Duke's season is over and he can let his foot recover without pressure or guilt.

Sorry, I threw up in my mouth on that shot. If UConn wins a third championship in 4 years, I'm going to stop following college basketball. I don't want to think about how insufferable their fans are going to be. YUCK. Almost no team is less deserving of a miracle shot than UConn.

Go Illinois.

Apparently not much to say here.

Well, I bought tickets at the last moment to the regional finals in San Jose and watched Purdue and Arizona go after each other.

I was mostly neutral on them; it was really just a college basketball fan deciding to go get a taste of that elite eight energy.

It did not disappoint. Crowd was maybe 65-35 for Arizona, but the arena got extremely loud as Arizona pulled away in the second half. Kudos to Arizona fans -- Attendance was listed at just over 14,000, but they got the place rockin' where it reminded me of AFH.

I've been to other NCAA tourney games, but there's usually a split between the various fan bases such that it can't get that loud.

Anyway... now there's one post here.... And its neither about Badgers or likable teams... lol

Per CBS research: 2026 is the first year since 1954 that the Sweet Sixteen did not include at least one of the following: Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, or UCLA.

So, yeah... It feels a little different.

@kjayhawks2.0 said in Bill Self:

Haha a good one but the last time it happened, it worked out good for all parties involved.

True, but I will note it took more than 20 years before that was evident.

In the years that followed, I mostly recall wondering: "Why couldn't Roy do that when he was here?" I especially had that thought when he won a championship... all three times.

Ignorant/Stupid question: Is it not allowed to establish a buyout on a player's contract so if another program wants a player, they not only have to pay the athlete, but also have to pay a buyout to the program?

For example, the buyout could be $500k if they leave after 1 year and $1m if after 2 years. Some sort of structure so the program gets some compensation for the investment it puts into the athlete that is simply transported to the other program... Right now, only the player gets compensated.

@nuleafjhawk The first two aren't happening. And because you grouped them together, I'm now worried the third won't either.

@kjayhawks2.0 As I look back at that list of NCAA tournaments, there have been seeding issues and matchup issues almost every year.

The tournament committee seems to target certain programs with potential matchups that are dramatic because of former coaching ties, regional proximity, player ties, or stylistic differences. It's not just us. But it's also not every program.

It's one of those things I just don't understand.. but it does seem like there's an eternal axe to grind somewhere in deep the NCAA.

Was he hired while still in the Pac12? That also might make the restriction more dubious as this is not the same conference as was intended when he signed.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/48298106/ncaa-tournament-kansas-kentucky-north-carolina-coaching-struggles

Maybe one last point: Expectations color a lot of how we interpret things. NCAA seedings set expectations.

Tourney Losses:
2026: KU #4 - St Johns #5
2025: KU #7 - Arkansas #10
2024: KU #4 - Gonzaga #5
2023: KU #1 - Arkansas #8
2022
2021: KU #3 - USC #6
2020:
2019: KU #4 - Auburn #5
2018: KU #1 - Villanova #1 (Final Four)
2017: KU #1 - Oregon #3
2016: KU #1 - Villanova #2
2015: KU #2 - Wichita State #7
2014: KU #2 - Stanford #10

Two years that performance matched (or exceeded) seed: 2018 and 2022.

Every other loss is an upset according to seed.

Some losses are what I would call a "tossup": 4-5 (2026, 2024, 2019), as is the 1-2 (2016). A "tossup" loss is disappointing, but the game was more of a coin flip. I try to manage expectations a bit with these.

The rest of the losses have increased disparity between seeds. Those upsets, combined with consistency of landing on the wrong side of nearly every matchup for more than a decade, makes it feel like we suck in the tourney.

And yes, let me be clear, this shows a history of underachieving. But there are a couple of big successes.

My point is that perhaps the handful of tossups NEVER going our way, makes this hurt more. Losing to a lower seed almost every year for more than a decade magnifies the sense of under-achieving.

---

PS: keep in mind that "exceeding" expectations means you are beating a team with a higher seed. The higher the seed, the fewer the opportunities... and it's impossible when you are a #1 seed. You can only "meet" expectations in that case (unless you win the natty.)

The system design is such that higher-seeded teams are less likely to exceed expectations and, therefore, more likely to be disappointed.

@benshawks08 Exactly.

Let me posit that, while "a win is a win," not all losses are equal.

"Heartbreaks" — aka a loss in a one possession game — are actually "better" than blowouts.

Blowouts (USC, Gonzaga, Auburn.. etc.) show lack of heart, or lack of preparation, or a gross mismatch. etc. Whatever it is, blowouts indicate something dysfunctional.

With a little time to allow the emotion to seep out, I can appreciate what it took to be in the position to win it. It doesn't take the sting totally away from the loss, but the comeback showed a lot of heart.