@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.