🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Just some tidbits for the haters. - -one's who question the legit of our conference, can't dent facts. - -numbers don't lie.

Every team in the Big 12 has EITHER been ranked or received votes in the top 25 this year.
how tough is this league? - -70% of the games have been decided by 10 pts or less.
The Avg win margin of the league is 7.9 for the year - - nothing easy.
Toughness? - -Only conference every team among the top 76 BPI.
.797 Non Con % - - best in Nation
Non Con Toughness ? - -Big 12 has .575 win % -versus ACC, Big East , Big 10 , Pac 12 , Sec , the 8th straight year of 500 vs Nations top conferences.
Big 12 - -102-26 Non Con - - - 17 of those losses by single digits- - -4 in OT.
Big 12 has the most semi finalists for Neismith -- in the Nation 3
now - -ANY QUESTIONS? - -the only thing I WILL say, now we ( the big 12 ) has to go out and prove ourselves in the NCAA'S - -make that sit down and shut up statement. - - ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

There's a lot of reasons the conference has been so tough.

I think it starts with the 10 team format of the round robin schedule.
Every other major conference besides the Big East see a lot of unbalanced scheduling. I think it creates a competitiveness edge when every team must go home/away.

No other team has a Bill Self. The other 9 teams are competitive enough with each other because they don't routinely get enough top talent to overcome how good of a coach Bill Self really is.

@jayballer54 said:

Just some tidbits for the haters. - -one's who question the legit of our conference, can't dent facts. - -numbers don't lie.

Every team in the Big 12 has EITHER been ranked or received votes in the top 25 this year.
how tough is this league? - -70% of the games have been decided by 10 pts or less.
The Avg win margin of the league is 7.9 for the year - - nothing easy.
Toughness? - -Only conference every team among the top 76 BPI.
.797 Non Con % - - best in Nation
Non Con Toughness ? - -Big 12 has .575 win % -versus ACC, Big East , Big 10 , Pac 12 , Sec , the 8th straight year of 500 vs Nations top conferences.
Big 12 - -102-26 Non Con - - - 17 of those losses by single digits- - -4 in OT.
Big 12 has the most semi finalists for Neismith -- in the Nation 3
now - -ANY QUESTIONS? - -the only thing I WILL say, now we ( the big 12 ) has to go out and prove ourselves in the NCAA'S - -make that sit down and shut up statement. - - ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

Speaking of facts....each year some dumba$$ posts this exact same post only to see BIG 12 shit its pants during the tourney followed by a landslide of posts from everyone here about how they knew to begin with big 12 was weak, etc, etc.

As always, KU is the saving grace and for reason this season, is making all the other big 12 teams look a lot better.

The reason folks challenge our conference is because this conference regularly fails to produce Final Four teams and National Champions. No team in our conference has won a national championship other than Kansas since the 64 tourney format started in the 80s, and we've only won two of those (counting when we were the Big 8 and the SWC was in existence).

The perception is that we secure our conference strength by playing each other, and we don't "prove it" in the NCAA tourney.

Until the Big 12 starts getting to multiple final fours, and winning national titles at a reasonable rate, it really isn't "hating" -- I believe it's just a reality we just need to accept.

It's the only "shut up statement" that will get us past the skepticism.

Although last year wasn't bad...an elite 8 and a FF team......even though they got blown out.

@elpoyo So you calling me a dum ass - umm also I wouldn't exactly say some of our frequent early exits would be what you wanna call saving grace. - - - ALL teams best show up and solidify this league - I dunno, that's just what one dum ass shit has to say roflmfao - -. - - -don't really feel like a dum ass -don't look like a dum ass but hey thanks for the enlightment - -I feel so much better ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@HighEliteMajor that sounds good - -only thing is like is pointed out in the thread - -winning Non Con of .797 and has the winning pct of the power Conferences - -where we really fail is in the Tourney - -who is on a roll at the time - -one bad game you out. - -Agree we just have to do better in the tourney - Even us KU we will never shed that over rated theory till we get past the Northern Illinois , Bradley , Bucknell and so, on and so on. - - Other then Kentucky - -possibly duke how many other teams have won National titles as you say a " reasonable rate " ? their is non - -or better yet what is a reasonable rate? -pretty hard to win on a regular basis hell if you win a National title once every five years should be considered really good. - -just to many factors play a role. - -it's the eatly exits that kill us as a league - -as you saw I said it's time for us to do better -that WILL be the shut up and sit down statement. - - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@jayballer54

Northern Iowa, not Northern Illinois. The Huskies haven't sniffed the tourney in quite a while.

I was going to post what the others have. Regular season wins haven't amounted to much for our league.

@wissox ya your right. I'm sorry, it's my old age lol. Ya your right, that's exactly why I said we ( this league has to make a statement, get past this opening weekend make a run. - No reason if we are as good as we think no reason why Ku, WV< Baylor , & Iowa State not all get to the 2nd weekend at least - -got to stand up. - -The team I really think will be the 1st to slip might surprise, but I think could very easily be Baylor - -not playing that well, although their win against WV was bog for them. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

The Big 12 regularly produces a lot of very solid teams and generally avoids having any outright terrible teams. Once TCU stepped up, the Big 12 hasn't had an outright awful team in the conference. Even Texas and Oklahoma, the bottom 2 in the conference this year, can punch with the middle tier teams in other conferences.

The problem is that at the top, there's Kansas and no one else. Baylor this year, but generally, it's KU and a bunch of 4-6 seeds in the tourney. That means that if KU underperforms, it's highly possible the Big 12 doesn't have a team go past the Sweet 16 because the conference is full of solid but not great teams.

The Big 12 hasn't had a lot of teams rise to the level of national contender, which limits the greatness of the conference. Blake Griffin's last OU team, that Frank Martin KSU team, last year's Sooners, this year's Baylor team, the DJ Augustin led Texas squad, TJ Ford's Longhorns, some of those Kelvin Sampson OU teams, Eddie Sutton's last couple of OSU teams and that's probably about it. We're talking about maybe a dozen non-KU title contenders from the conference in the last 15-20 years, and less than 5 in the last 6 or 7 years.

That's why it's important that Smart succeed at Texas, and that Drew figures it out at Baylor (I think he has), and that K-State finds a competent coach, and ISU remains solid, etc. The Big 12 needs to have other strong title contenders, not just a bunch of solid teams that can crack the top 25 at some point.

@jayballer54

Don't take @elpoyo personal. He/she represents a different perspective on Kansas and the Big 12 basketball. You can say it is negative. But, to be honest, I'm glad someone has the guts to come into our love den and smash the coffee table. @elpoyo will challenge you to the far edge of discomfort. It can be very challenging to spar with such a person. But just push a positive approach and brush off the insults. Consider yourself vetted!

@jayballer54

Are "haters" part of the Deep State overthrowing our country, or are they Deep State lackeys embedded into sports media to color revolution-ize the greatest game ever invented, or are they just hemorrhoid sufferers?

😇

@justanotherfan

Very good post.

I think Drew has made a big leap forward. He has faced quite a few challenges this season, but he has kept his guys playing to a certain level. He still has a ways to go, but you can now see him possibly getting there.

I don't think we can talk about the Big 12 without mentioning HuggyBear. He is also improving on his tactical ball. He has finally figured out that he needs to have a respectable half court offense if he hopes to win more games every year. There is a limit to how much he can win without more weapons. And even with all of his depth, it is hard for his team to stay healthy through March. He might be able to go at least 10 deep on his squad, but he still has to count on a handful of players to be the real playmakers that makes their season go positive. His only limit is he coaches at WVU, and it is hard to get top tier talent at that school.

FAN ALERT: OU is going to be good... very good... and soon! I think next year they will be back on the winning side... and if Lon can keep his guys together and healthy, 2 years from now they are going to be lethal! Perhaps the best team he has had in the Big 12!

Shaka? He represents the unknown. I believe he has the 14th best recruit class coming in next year. If he can't do anything with that talent, he should be gone. Since Texas has done so much to control our conference, including being a major factor why many of our original schools left, I believe we all should have a say in if he stays or goes. So far, if I judge him today I say he goes. He had plenty of talent to have a more respectable team in our league this year, and if Rick Barnes was still in his shoes, Texas would have been near the top of our conference.

Shaka's mantra of "aggressive chaos" just looks like chaos. But... we will see what happens next year, when he has additional uber talent on his squad. I just see him pretty much exactly like I see Marshall at WSU. Both are capable as long as they stay at a mid-major and sell the "we get no respect" chip. Texas is not a school to run that type of program. Texas fans don't see themselves as a charity case.

For us to challenge for the NC we need NC contenders in our conference that we're playing against. I don't know what happened in the FF with OU last year. We know that was not the team that we played twice in the regular season. Playing regularly against good teams, who want to give us their best shot, is good for us, but it really hasn't led to post season success for us.

When we won in 2008, our league had regularly been much tougher. Texas was a regular top 10 type team. OSU was, ISU was. Not sure you can say that in the last half decade.

@justanotherfan you make very solid points. - -couldn't agree more. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@drgnslayr ya first time I ever seen it respond on here, the way they came off was kinda like - - BUT I feel ya, got where your coming from. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@jaybate-1.0 LMAO, well I think maybe a little of ALL the above you mentioned. -- I know I would miss them like one hemorrhoid misses another lol - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@jayballer54 National titles since 1990? We know the big names - Duke 5, UConn 4, UK 3, UNC 3.

The topic you raised is by conference. ACC, Big East, SEC, and even Pac 12 have better NCAA title resumes in that time frame. The Big 10 also has more final fours than the Big 12.

The Big 12 hasn't had another school in the title games since OU in 1988.

The Big 12, once March begins -- where it really counts -- is the worst of the power 5 conferences.

@elpoyo So yeah they may poop in their britches, but that's only the one's that get in the dance. Some poor asses like the bovine brothers at ksu or jackass breeders at misery don't even make the NIT so they can just crap all over the place without any clothes at all, then scoot like dogs. Tell us elpoyo, which of those do you really root for... and hiding behind the keyboard is not only not fair, it's just plain chicken poop...

@globaljaybird that's a lot of💩

@drgnslayr He or She? That's it, El Poyo is my ex-wife. A version of SNL's "Debbie Downer". Hitting all of the right buttons. Odds are that at least 3 of the #1 seeds will lose in the Tournament, maybe all four. I'm sure there are @elpoyo's on each of the fan sites to let the other's know what homer's they are.

@wissox So what is the answer? Should KU join another conference? Is that the problem? I've tried not to show my happiness with having a coach like Self. I've tried to ignore the Conference streaks. I've tried to be negative about our chances. @elpoyo needs to tell us what we need to do to win. We know our problems, what are the solutions, If I agree that the Big 12 sucks, will we win?

@wrwlumpy

The problem isn't the conference.

I don't have the solution either, we'd probably have more titles already if the solution was so easy.

But if I'm being realistic I think the issue is two fold. We need our Coach to step up as he does in the regular season. And we need the players to step up and seize the moment.

I don't know why Self is a master of the regular season but in the tournament things go differently. Last year is a prime example of that in the Elite 8. Why did Perry Ellis only get 4 points against Villanova? Why did Wayne Selden's 3 point shot look like he had never practiced before. Why didn't Self make adjustments to figure out how to effectively beat Villanova's defense. Realistically our coach was out-coached, our players were simply out-played. It happens, it's happened a lot.

I think this fan-base has an itch it needs to scratch.

08 was amazing, 12 was great even in defeat but we want more.

But we've had some really good teams that haven't done their job, or suffered some injuries that left the team less then whole. And finally Self as the coach is ultimately responsible for how the season ends so he must continue to try and find ways to step up.

Hopefully this is the year where the coaching and the players seize the moment and deliver!

@BeddieKU23 are you saying coach owes you a national championship?

@HighEliteMajor said:

National titles since 1990? We know the big names - Duke 5, UConn 4, UK 3, UNC 3.

Glad you brought these up.

I've been needing a Memory Hole Pump Out...

Duke 5: one with an obviously hopelessly impossible without Deep Basketball forces long stack that even Bo Ryan called Rent-a-players; that leaves 4; one with the pioneering introduction of XTReme Cheap Shotting vs. Butler in which refs appeared to completely favor Dook by not so much allowing the cheap shotting but appearing to enable it; that leaves 3 and one of those had a player that was reputedly playing for expensive jewelry; that leaves 2 and I bet anyone with a better memory than mine can whittle away at least one, or maybe e both of the remaining "championships." Next.

UConn 4: Calhoun won the last two having to quit after each one and hide behind cardiac problems to avoid reputed recruiting death penalties; that leaves 2 and both of those reputedly involved rosters that never earned a sheep skin and heavy recruiting investigations; that leaves zero. Next.

UK 3: Oh, shit, why even both beating this corrupt dead, horse. ZERO. Next.

UNC: Como se dice Easygate? It is not clear that UNC would have even been able to field a team some of those seasons had they had to go to class and take real tests. ZERO. Next.

These are not the big names any more.

These are the FAKE big names.

These are recent equivalent to the Rupp Kentucky point shaving teams.

They aren't even relevant to talking about D1 basketball really.

They have just been AAU teams on Steroids allowed to play long exhibition seasons with D1 teams.

There is no more similarity regarding the apparent "rules of the game" between the recent title stealing AAU on Steroid teams--Duke, UConn, UK and UNC--have been playing under and KU than saying KU and them wear shorts and shoot at ten foot baskets on the same size floor. Similarities stop there and everyone knows it, or has not been "woke."

Next. :smiley:

@HighEliteMajor Sad, but true. In fact, the B12's performance is even more distressing than that. As you note, the ACC, Big East, SEC and Pac 12 all have multiple titles since 1990 (and each with multiple teams winning). 5 teams have more titles than the entire B12 conference during that span - the 4 you note plus Florida. The lowly B10 matches us with just one national title during that time frame. However, in contrast to the B12, where KU is the ONLY team that has reached a championship game during that time, the B10 had 6 runner-ups in addition to the one titleist - with 5 different teams - Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Illinois and Ohio State.

The B12 is a VERY solid conference from top to bottom - the worst teams in the B12 this year are better than the bottom teams in other conferences. And, that has arguably been true for the past couple of years (esp. now with the influx of coaching talent). But we don't come close to matching the top tier talent of the other power conferences year in and year out.

The argument that the tournament is a crap-shoot is a cop-out excuse. Over 25+ years, there is a lot of data and the randomness factor falls away. Sure, the very best team doesn't win every year - but one of the very best does with rare exception (perhaps excluding the 2 recent UConn champs and maybe Arizona in '97 (but they had real NBA talent).

The bottom line is that of the power conferences, the B12 has the fewest titles (tied), the worst W-L record (by far), the fewest different teams in the title game and Final Four. Performance has been especially poor over the past decade (last year was one of the best in many years). It's not hating - but there is no reason to sugar coat it either. Unless and until the conference wins the big one, and with someone other than just KU (fine with that ONLY if they don't beat us to get there), the overrated label will stick....

@DCHawker said:

The bottom line is that of the power conferences, the B12 has the fewest titles (tied), the worst W-L record (by far), the fewest different teams in the title game and Final Four. Performance has been especially poor over the past decade (last year was one of the best in many years).

But this only makes sense, since the B12 appears to face the most asymmetry in seeding and whistles every season. It would only make sense for the B12 to do better than it has done, if it faced no apparent asymmetry in seeding and whistles.

I really don't think this is rocket science.

It keeps going on year and after year.

It happens whether the B12 has great coaches, and lots of talent, or only good coaches and less talent.

Don't you see? If things were not being driven by entertainment values and there were apparent seeding and whistle symmetry, we would expect the B12 to do at least as well as the other conferences.

I just don't see any other logical explanation for the phenomenon.

You don't seriously think the B12 has an inferiority complex, or some kind of chaotic "strange tendency" that makes them under perform relatively to the other power conferences, do you?

I mean, think about it. All of the B12 teams recruit all over the country, same as the other Power Five conference programs do. All the top programs in all the Power Five Conferences get players from all over the country. There would be no reason for the recurring phenomenon of the B12 doing worse that the other conferences over a long period if seeding and whistles were symmetric. Its not like it used to be when teams depended heavily on local talent that the population concentrations favored teams in big cities and densely populated regions. Self and staff can go out recruiting on a private jet every day anywhere in the country. Now they don't even have to bother with finding the top talent because the top 100 is sorted out for them every season. They are televised everywhere all the time, so there is no huge edge there either in terms of making your brand known.

It just has to be something like seeding and whistle asymmetry, Petroshoeco-Agency dynamics, or something else as yet unknown, that is biasing the outcomes as they are. Its been going on too long to be random. And the Big 12 has had too many runs of fine coaches and good talent for the tendency of the outcomes observed to occur.

Something appears to be biasing the outcomes.

@jaybate-1.0 By your reasoning, the Atlanta Braves must have been the victims of assymetric umpiring during their run of Division titles with a woeful record in the post-season and only 1 WS championship.

Statistical aberrations occur.

@jaybate-1.0 There has been asymmetry in seeding - B12 teams apparently have routinely been over-seeded - the conference has consistently under-performed its seed expectations. The selection committee appears to have bought in to the regular season conference rankings and rewarded B12 teams with high seeds - which, disappointingly, they fail to live up to.

Perhaps there is a simpler explanation for the bias - lack of top tier and depth of talent. Just one data point, but I believe there have been just 4 B12 players that have made an all-NBA team over the past decade (that includes 1st, 2nd and 3rd team) - Durant, Griffin, Aldridge and Pierce (and the latter was about a decade ago). Maybe Wiggs, Embid and Jackson can change that, but hasn't happened yet. UK has at least 5 itself. But that suggests that Self at least has done a lot more with lesser talent - although still the best breadth and depth of talent in the B12 - I believe KU has the 4th most 1st round draft choices over the past several years.

@DCHawker I appreciate your effort, but wouldnt your "explanation" require a vastly greater array of assumptions and statistical improbabilities and complexity as precondition than my hypothesis of simple entertainment values driving seeding and whistle asymmetry against B12 team's chances for success? My hypothesis is so very simple . and elegant. Yours requires such improbable underlying randomness on a consistent basis producing a recurrent pattern over a long period! It's just hard for me to believe that randomness in the face of such variation and.complexity can produce the bias of outcomes you attribute to the B12.

@jaybate-1.0 Actually, his explanation is very simple and very elegant. It is a given that a disproportionate number of basketball players come from urban centers where the AAU programs, public and private school competitiveness, and media exposure tend to reinforce the desirability of conferences NOT located in the hinterlands.

In other words, it is freakin' hard to get kids who grew up in a city to move to the farm belt!

@mayjay you sound like Walton, KU is plodding farmers.

@jaybate-1.0 said:

@DCHawker I appreciate your effort, but wouldnt your "explanation" require a vastly greater array of assumptions and statistical improbabilities and complexity as precondition than my hypothesis of simple entertainment values driving seeding and whistle asymmetry against B12 team's chances for success? My hypothesis is so very simple . and elegant. Yours requires such improbable underlying randomness on a consistent basis producing a recurrent pattern over a long period! It's just hard for me to believe that randomness in the face of such variation and.complexity can produce the bias of outcomes you attribute to the B12.

Seems that we've been down this path before.... :smirk: An "elegant" hypotheses supported by..... nada, zip, zilch - with another hypothesis supported by at least a modicum of facts. You've challenged me in the past - will do the same to you. Analyze the facts - give some data to support your hypothesis - anything.... Foul discrepancies in games that B12 teams have lost in the tournament. Shoeco comparisons in those games. TV market size comparisons of the two teams.... anything. I bet it is out there - go get it!!!

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.

I don't root for any conference teams unless it helps KU. I spend two months hoping Baylor loses every game, and now I'm supposed to root for them so i can brag to my buddies about the Big 12? No thanks.

@HighEliteMajor And Just like I mentioned BEFORE when you responded, I said responding to your reasonable rate. -- I stated what is a reasonable rate? - You respond since 1990. and give your schools, as I stated once about every five years should/would be reasonable a it's really hard other then DUKE which you mentioned with five U con - -4 that's like one every not even one every five - -UK only 3 - -Unc only 3 in that span that's not even really close to one in every five - -so just like I said. so that point is pretty invalid - - that's not even one every five year period - -It is just not that easy, cause your mentioning National titles, hell even Duke not averaging one in every five years like I mentioned. So then with me saying one in every five, evidentally you not liking that rate - -but yet all the schools all the conferences you stated not even averaging one in every five National titles since 1990- -what is a reasonable rate to you? - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

2013 NCAA tournament match ups eliminate complete tournament engineering to me. Yes, we played North Carolina who was an 8 seed. Villanova was the 9 seed and Kansas and Villanova did not have a lot of history together, especially compared to 2 other 9 seeds, Missouri and Wichita St. Why would the NCAA avoid a potential KU-Missouri match up during Missouri's first year out of the Big 12? Why would they actively avoid a WSU game people have wanted to see for awhile?

Put either one of those two teams as a 9 seed against UNC and we were guaranteed a highly publicized 2nd round game no matter what instead of a 50/50 shot at one.

@DCHawker

First, kinda sensy, eh? You're wheeling out the old "you got nothing" cliche, when if I had nothing, you would have no reason to respond. Right? I even concede you have "something." It just appears too implausible for me to be persuaded.

Second, you appear upset that I called into question the meaning of the very thing you appeared to feel quite justified in thinking; that the B12 has underperformed and it's its own fault. You appear to imply it could have done better, but some how failed. ✔right?

But then here I came along suggesting maybe it did about the way it would be expected given the topo of the playing field. Grrrrrrrr. Dissonance. Double grrrrrrrrrr.

Then the cliche "you got nuthin'."

I can see why you might get annoyed. It must have felt pretty good to judge the B12 leaders and coaches and players as just not having been up to your sense of snuff. ✔ right? You hated to say it, but they just have been significantly worse than the 4 other conferences that you had to do your duty, like you had to with me having nothing, right?

But like I said; then I unintentionally turned your explanation upside down. What if the Big 12 folks did good, but the playing field were a leeeeeeetle unlevel?

Then boom! "You got nuthin', bate 1.0." Ooooh the predictability of it gives me goose bumps.

Third, you also give me some weird feelings; like you appear to be rejecting my hypothesis to distract from the apparent inelegance and apparent implausibility of your "explanation". Your "explanation" seems vaguely like: an elephant can hang from a daisy; i.e., a conference of highly paid professionals can underperform 4 others over a long period on a level playing field. 😄 Creative and metaphysically possible, I grant you, but does it really elegantly, plausibly, validly and with high probability explain why one of five power conferences would violate the statistical tendency of a random walk of conference performance in the long run without biasing in the context? Hmmmmm, I just can't quite buy your explanation as a fitting explanation. But I am magnanimous by comparison: You GOT SUMTHIN'. 🤓

Nevertheless, I apologize for annoying you.

Have a nice day and we'll find a fitting answer to the mystery of the under performing conference sooner or later.

Rock Chalk!

@Texas-Hawk-10

I do NOT hypothesize complete tournament engineering.

I hypothesize legal partial tournament engineering based on legal entertainment values.

Absolutely illegal conspiracy free.

@Blown recently posted an interesting Mick Cronin take. It appeared reminiscient of our former KU STAFFER now at maybe SIU?

@mayjay

Actually it doesn't appear to me to be.

@Crimsonorblue22 said:

@mayjay you sound like Walton, KU is plodding farmers.

Not my impression after living there, but most of the country hasn't lived there. Why would urban kids growing into adulthood and hoping for excitement want to move to Ames (school ranking lower than over 2,000 other schools out of 2,400 rated for diversity), Waco (to a restrictive religious school, no less), Manhattan (let's drive to Junction City!), Lubbock (middle of nowhere, someone said?), Morgantown (coal country), and "Stoollwater"? TCU at least has Fort Worth/Dallas to offer, and KU has Lawrence with KC nearby. Norman is near O City, which might be fun to a bb player wanting to follow the NBA. But what else besides tornadoes? Austin offers the fun of living in a capital city in a football crazed state that is busy trying to beat Kansas and most of the South in a race backwards to the past.

Drought, dust, country music, flat land.... In the entire geography encompassed by the Big 12, there are two NFL teams, two baseball teams, and two NBA teams within an hours driving time of any of the 10 campuses (3 if you include San Antonio at 80 miles from UT). Compare that with the urban attractions of the Big 10, Big East, Pac 12 or whatever the hell it is by now, or even the ACC.

Kids who grow up in the Midwest may implicitly recognize the region's attractiveness, but it is not always apparent to visitors craving the type of things they grew up around in big cities. So, when coaches recruit well in the Big 12, they are overcoming huge assumptions kids can bring with them.

I love Big 12 country, but I grew up there.

@HighEliteMajor said:

That is, most of these kids are at prep schools and have already ventured away from their home towns. Different age right now.

True, but living as a 16-19 yr old at a prep school is vastly different from looking at up to 4 years as an adult in relative isolation, culturally and geographically.

IMO Isn't the thread question "Who has the strongest conference?" And you could answer that based on either one season, or over multiple seasons (if multiple, how many years? 5? 10? 27?) I would like to know that out of curiosity and KU/B12 pride. Then the $64,000 question is "How do we DEFINE the "strongest conference?" NCs? FFs? SW16s? Tourney Bids? Season's ending mix of Final Rankings, BPI, RPI, SOS, SOR, yadda, yadda, yadda? Note: NC and FF appearances alone do not a strongest conference make!

No surprise that there are many, many statistical (and dare I say asymmetry?) factors that would reveal the answer(s), and it makes my head spin just thinking about it. I'm not a pro at this, but I still think that B12 is the strongest, and has been one of the strongest conferences overall for enough years now to shut most haters up. Rock Chalk!!

@mayjay Of course, there's always a difference. The point is that now, kids live many times far away from their homes. Gone are days when the good NYC kids go to St. Johns. It's a different age, where an east coast kid may play HS ball in Vegas. And his mom (dad of course probably isn't around) stays back at home working, and the kid lives with another family.

By this theory, all of the colleges in big cities should dominate. But, of course, they don't.

If you get a top coach, you can get players. Doesn't much matter where he goes, within reason.

All of these excuses to explain the limited issue of why the Big 12 fails to achieve in March.

Referees, tourney fixing, geography, the grassy knoll.

Look at the draw KU got in the 2010 NCAA Tournament. ↗ or in the 2011 NCAA Tournament ↗. Could you ask for anything better?

Duke and UConn took care of business. We make excuses.

@HighEliteMajor I was adressing a limited topic, which was recruiting barriers as a possible reason for the phenomenon raised by someone else of the Big 12 as a whole not producing more NBA stars, not making excuses for anything. You keep urging UConn and Duke as your guiding stars. I would still rather be a Jayhawk.

I didn't want to post to this old topic that is dragged out every year. Yet I can't resist.

SEC---Who has won a championship besides UK and Florida?

ACC---Who has won a championship besides UNC and Duke?

Pac---Who has won a championship besides UCLA?

Big 10---Who has won a championship besides Indiana?

Big 12 ---Who has won a championship besides KU?

Now I know some other teams have won in some of these conferences. Yet that isn't the point. No conference has really dominated the national championship game. Well except maybe the old Big East.

The real argument in this topic that everybody is dancing around except @HighEliteMajor. Is why hasn't KU won more National championships.

@HighEliteMajor the grassy knoll... Lmfao

@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

@cragarhawk

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.

@cragarhawk

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.

@cragarhawk

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.

@Bwag

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? 😄

@cragarhawk

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.

!final4.jpg.JPG ↗ !elite 8.jpg.JPG ↗

@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..... :wink:

@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.

@HighEliteMajor

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.

@elpoyo and @DCHawker

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!

@jaybate-1.0 said:

@elpoyo and @DCHawker

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!

Because they said it, it must be fact - proof positive - incontrovertible. Of course, they offered just about as much evidence as you do. Howling indeed, 'Bate!

I don't have to find the links because I'm aware of what they said and the context (except for Hinson - clearly one of the deans of the profession at a nationally relevant basketball powerhouse).

Cronin complains about tournament pairings/seedings being driven by ratings. Well, it is true that before a change in bracketing principles a couple of years ago there were typically a handful of one-line seed adjustments to avoid conference foes playing one another before the Sweet 16. Those bracketing principles were revised and I don't believe there have been any such seed line adjustments the past couple of years (but, I will acknowledge that I don't know that for a fact).

Ryan bitched about the refereeing immediately after the title game loss to Duke - specifically in reference to that game. While there were bad calls on both sides in that game, it was 2 key Duke players - Okafor and Winslow - that had to sit most of the first half because of foul trouble. In the same post-game interview, Ryan also said Wisconsin didn't do "rent-a-player" - he was roundly criticized at the time for sore-loser comments. I don't recall him saying anything else about "recruiting asymmetry and whistle asymmetry" in any other context, but perhaps you have read dozens of such statements by him and will provide all of those links for the assembled masses.

As to Pitino, he's your character witness about recruiting - really???? It's just rich that the coach who oversaw the Cardinal Escort Service would complain about "recruiting asymmetry". He did go on a rant once about the influence of shoe companies - I also agree that it is unfortunate - but it was pointed out to him that Louisville has always had players with different AAU/shoeco ties. And, he was subsequently quoted as saying that if you do your homework, shoe companies don't matter.

Howling, indeed, 'Bate.....

@DCHawker Thank you for still having the patience to explain. Informs the rest of us, anyway.

Golly my friends I didn't realize this thread would get heated like it has. - Maybe that's not the right choice of words maybe say I didn't think it would get this controversial, - Everyone has their opinions, me, myself I enjoy reading others opinions, ya I know I get a little/ - well ok, ok a lot thin skin over sensitive some times, I let my love for Ku possibly overshadow logic - -I hate when people talk smack on KU and that's really not good, need to keep an open mind - they do have down falls just like any OTHER School.

I'm sorry maybe shouldn't have even posted this thread like someone else said maybe it's time for us to move on to something new lol, for me personally like I've said in other threads I post hey your entitled to your opinion just like I am mine - -BUT bottom line we all are ALL Crimson and Blue right? - -Jumpin - -Gee - -Hossa - -Fats you my boys, anyways guys just keep on, - -keepin on were AL GOOD - -ROCK CAHLK ALL DAY LONG BABY:relaxed: :see_no_evil: :hear_no_evil: :speak_no_evil: have a great day guys & gals - -ROCK CHALK

@DCHawker

Howling!

You are so comical!!!

You are so OBVIOUS.

Let's keep this up forever!!!!

I love auto foot shooters!

Did you hear about the recent research that indicates that humans are hard wired not to change their minds even in the face of hard evidence?

Were you a study subject by any chance?

OMG! OMG!

I'm laughing so hard I'm crying!

@DCHawker, you are my fav!

😂

@jaybate-1.0 Did you take writing in college and have to write a research paper?

@HawkChamp

Get up off your knees. I like you.

@jaybate-1.0 Ok so you didnt. I didnt think so because if you did your teacher would have told you how to properly construct an argument in your paper and not to use fallacies or just keep saying "I'm right and you're wrong".

@HawkChamp

Ok, stay on your knees. I still like you.

You get that's a joke, right?

Board Life is getting amusing, when u r dispensing advice on argument methodology and construction without being asked.

But a board rats gotta do what a board rats gotta do, right?

Let's do it more.

Now I will even prompt you out of collegial respect.

Post over a thousand word essay about argument construction right now to build my trust in your expertise. Don't mention me once. Just focus on persuading me with your expertise in argument construction and standardized approaches. Not one word of negativity. No negative examples. All positive how to. . No copying and pasting. At the end feel free to post the awards you've won for your advancement of the techniques of argument construction and methodology.

Ready. Set. Go.

"I’m right and you’re wrong".--@HawkChamp

I could be wrong, but I don't recall having ever said that seriously, only possibly when I was joking around and playfully mirroring the stridency of some, and I Strongly doubt I would have said it again and again; that would trespass on my posting doctrine, so...

You might try to re-search your cloud drive and see if you are being victimized by some loss of packets, or a bad sector on you hard drive, unless...you were willfully misrepresenting me?

Wow. Is this thread still going? Or did it start over? 😁

@cragarhawk nope still going lol.- - - ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@mayjay

I feel much more disinformed now.

Should i thank you for THAT!

@cragarhawk

Welcome to the high colonic of disinformation.

It's soooooooo, um, disinformitive!!!

Viva disinfo!

Leave it to our site to stay on the bleeding edge of posting!!!

Yeeeeeeee hawwwwww!!

Lots of pre March Carney displacement and dissociation venting!

@BigBad said:

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…

Way to bring it!!!! Sorry I missed your cogent assessment while addressing the silly battalion!

After 13 straight titles, and a ring the one time he had comparable material, and being arguably the most imitated coach of his generation, really, only the insouciant, or disingenuous, can come to the conclusion that the REAL explanation is Self doesn't know how to coach in the tournament.

I always imagine them texting each other after they post Self can't coach the Carney well, and writing something like: "Can you believe the morons keep taking us remotely seriously when we post Self can't coach the Carney? I mean how gullible and self loathing can they be. Thirteen straight titles and a ring without a long or medium stack and without an OAD or 5-star center or point guard?? God they are stupid. Of course we're full of shit! Are they pitiful or what?"

I kind of feel like the Deep State has been laughing at all of us loyal Americans the same way, since 9/11 and the great wealth heist since WTC VII fell in its own foot prints without being hit by anything.

But as Gandhi said, "the truth is the truth even if only one person believes it" and "the British will leave India."

Rock Chalk!!!

@jaybate-1.0 I'm good with it all. Just trying to lighten the mood.. 😊

@cragarhawk

Me too. This is a great time to be a Jayhawk fan.

Disinformation is water off a ducks back.

As demonstrated over and over it requires much more effort to stay positve than be negative. Personally I try to stay as positive as possible as negativity is contagious and generally not very constructive. All doom and gloom all the time is lazy and counter productive if you want positive outcomes.

Not directed at anyone in specific, just sayin'