Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'College Basketball Board' started by BasketBallJunkie-UK, Mar 18, 2020.
FWIW Sam Vecenie on The Athletic has Dotson going 30 on his mock draft from yesterday.
Of course that's your opinion. But when your opinion is not matched by any unbiased parties, that's called homerism.
Not sure what ancient history even has to do with the current state of the leagues, but I know you like to make random shifts in an attempt to "win," so I'll play along.
Pulled up a list of champions from the NCAA site. Not taking the time to look up every final four from every team in each league, but this at least gives me the champs and runners-up. Most important, right? Excluding KU and Kentucky, the Big 12 has twice as many champs/runners-up as the SEC, 9 to 4.
Dude I acknowledge that it’s gonna be diff for every player. I could lob back Jordan Nworas frosh to soph improvement and how it’s hand down better than his soph-junior season which are basically the same. It proves nothing. Let me reinterare no one wants to banter with you about Iowa, bc no one cares about Iowa outside the big 10. Yall are not liked y’all are not hated y’all are just there.
Start a thread about Iowa and go nuts, mention every players complete medical history going back thru high school so maybe we can figure out why y’all are so injury prone.
We were talking about Montgomery for UK. UK doesn’t do jrs. I can only think of a few that ever stayed 3-4 years during cals tenure. We’d literally have to try and use Darius miller and John hoods stats to coorelate.
Big 12 is the better league but I would argue that in having more teams the sec usually has more garbage teams, and the difference between the two conferences is at the bottom not at the top. Like u said uk/ku cancel each other out then a random team makes the final four every year or three. No real continuity from the second tier, will be interesting if Pearl or Barnes or strong a$& offer wade can get there and maintain, as well as beard and drew.
, if you say so. but it is changing now. with the most talent on paper since Lute's BT Championship and FF teams, even better than Dr. Toms teams that reached the Elite 8 and Sweet 16's,
9-0 in the NCAAT 1st RND with 6 of the 2nd rnd losses coming to the eventual NCAAT Championship. keep telling yourself Iowa is just there.
I think you're allowing last year to influence your opinion of the SEC too much. It was definitely much better than the norm. I don't remember the exact stat, but I think the SEC has literally had two top 10 teams other than Kentucky in the last 10 to 12 yrs (14 Florida and last year's Tennessee).
The Big 12 has averaged more than 1 top 10 team per year (not including KU) over that span.
I'd say the SEC has a better argument for depth than strength at the top. They generally have a bunch of halfway decent teams, but rarely any major challengers to Kentucky. Those Florida teams were outliers.
All things Iowa are located in the B1G thread. Don’t spread the virus.
McCabe doing anything for you?
you were doing this long before the lull
you constantly try to downplay the accomplishments other bluebloods
you come off as very envious and jealous of the success that other bluebloods have
Fair assessment I was looking at the leagues going forward, not the past, which would make my point pretty irrelevant to the topic. Sec was pretty trash a few of those years. And I agree, while they count, Florida hasn’t done much without billy D And what may stand the time as the best recruiting class ever bc they won bk to bk titles.
Wow, this is rich, you calling me a homer. Everyone on this board knows you're the biggest homer on the board.
KU first and BIG12 second.
I guess we're all a little homerish, but you take it to another level.
And yet you can never name an irrational take.
Meanwhile, you’ve got two in this thread alone. Kentucky > Baylor and SEC > Big 12.
Ask a third party if you need homer confirmation.
You would be better at this message board thing if you could recognize when someone is trying to get your goat.
You're wound too tight. Loosen up.
Look at the top 10 teams 2020 recruiting. Notice the SEC teams. The SEC is gradually getting stronger.
So is everybody who gets in any sort of debate on here wound too tight? It's almost like turning this into a ghost town is encouraged.
Lots of people get into debates, but you always take it to another level. You're in multiple back-and-forth's on here every day and 99% of them are you shoving KU, Bill Self or the BIG12 is someone’s face.
IDK, maybe you don't realize it, but you're the biggest homer I have ever debated with. You're even worse than dragonhawk.
The only way to end it is to compliment KU, Self or the BIG12, even that doesn't work sometimes.
Actually, I just responded to something I didn't agree with. I don't agree that Duke has been consistently peaking at the end of the year. Facts don't back it up. You don't seem to have a problem with your fans piling on UNC (or Duke or KU, for that matter).
The last time I went to Rupp Rafters, there were 6 or 8 threads about KU on the first page. Jealousy?
Blah, blah, more nonsense, blah blah. And I'm wound too tight?
Nothing compares to the homerism of your fanbase, and you're pretty high on that list. But you'll never see it.
I'm not talking about a fanbase being homers, would anyone be surprised that a home board would be full of a bunch of homers??? Come on man, stop deflecting.
Heck, go to Louisville's home board, there are, maybe, 20 people on there and every single one is a homer, but that's what home boards are for.
But over here, you play captain-home board-man and you're relentless and it's pretty obvious that UK has touched you in your no-no place on more than 1 occasion.
Right, it's just the homeboard. Read any of Bert's posts lately? The one about UK getting "screwed" in 16 of 16 games he attended at Florida was a good one. Read any of JC's posts? Do you read your own posts?
In your world, the NCAA is out to get you at every turn (gotta love that one), every reporter is out to destroy Cal and will stop at nothing, every official is trying to screw you, Kentucky's freshmen are automatically better than proven upperclassmen, and the SEC is secretly one of the top conferences year in and year out. Because once every 5 years or so it has a top 10 team other than Kentucky.
Yeah, all those guys are almost as bad as you. I have yet to see you compliment… or NOT trash a non BIG12 team. If you have, it's rare.
Like I said, you're a bigger homer than Dragonhawk and that's saying something.
What’s his full first round?
Enlighten me. When have I talked about getting screwed by refs, or NCAA conspiracies against cash cows, or reporters who comb the streets for evidence on Bill Self, or any of the other ridiculous crap you spew?
Hint: If I post something like "KU's going to dominate you," that's tongue in cheek.
Maybe you're confused about what homerism is. Your definition seems to be anyone who talks about their team a lot and isn't a Kentucky fan. Yes, I talk about KU more than any other program. Shocking, isn't it, considering I watch every KU game and only sporadically watch other teams? Jesus, a person only has time for so much unless they're unemployed or have absolutely no other interests.
If you've never seen me take shots at a Big 12 team, I don't know what you're reading. I have zero delusions about what the Big 12 is. It's one elite program and a bunch of average programs. The Big 12 and SEC are both football conferences, but the Big 12 offers more legit challengers to KU on a yearly basis than the SEC does for Kentucky. It's just fact.
Excluding KU and Kentucky, here are the numbers from ESPN.com (only goes back to '03):
15 AP top 10 teams from the Big 12, 7 from the SEC.
27 top 15 teams vs 12.
46 ranked teams vs 28.
Are you telling me that you’d think conference B was stronger than A if you weren’t a fan of a team from that league? Ha.
The fact that Florida had a great recruiting class that won back to back titles does not mean that the SEC is consistently producing high-level competition for Kentucky. Not sure why this is such a difficult concept.
I've never hyped the Big 12 as a great league. Just better than the SEC. The SEC is not very good. Others recognize this. You? You make up theories about tourney committee conspiracies and claim that the polls are biased against the poor SEC, and zero in on flukey runs by programs like South Carolina while ignoring what a typical SEC season looks like.
Hilarious that you’d call someone else a homer.
I am a hawkeye FAN and I talk about them. didn't know I had to really talk about any other BT team.
I hope that didn't take you too long to concoct. I only read a few sentences, the delusion was too thick for me to continue.
its very hard to figure out why people include me in their posts, when I have posters on ignore.
Funny thing is, there’s no exaggeration. Those are all arguments that you’ve made.
Care to comment on the facts in the post? Probably not. You only consider details that fit your agenda.
No, I'm not going to turn this into another stupid 10 page back and forth. We've been through this bs too often, nobody ever wins and it's become quite obvious that you get off on being controversial. Go use someone else to satisfy your need for arguing.
This is more like it:
The 2010 Tournament should put to rest the idea that "lol most 5 starz but no ringz" dipsh!ts, but we see them again and again. That Duke team was a really, really good college team. They had depth, experience, and a good fit, especially once the lack of a true PG was ironed out by Scheyer (sp?). In contrast, the UK team had more "talent" (i.e. athletic/NBA potential), but the team was inexperienced, thin, and had no shooting. The conventional wisdom (by UK fans and UK detractors alike) is that UK was the better college team, which ignores everything but the "talent" (which is a misnomer) angle. UK's ceiling might have been higher, but its floor was much, much lower. See, e.g., WVU Game (4-32 3-point, 16-29 FT).
Very good point that is often overlooked by UK (and increasingly Duke) detractors.
FWIW, I get why people assume that players with better pedigrees are more likely to make a big leap than players without the pedigree. I don't know whether that trend holds true (Duncan/Leroux might have discussed this re: NBA "second draft"), but it makes intuitive sense. For EJ... I'm doubtful, but I'd love to be proved wrong.
I agree that the Big 12 has been better than the SEC (although I think it's closer than you think b/c you're relying on regular season stats that rely on depth/SOS issues). But dismissing Billy D's run at Florida as just "a great recruiting class that won back to back titles" is ridiculous. In addition to the two titles, he had:
A title game appearance.
A Final Four appearance.
At least three other Elite 8 appearance (an OT loss to Butler, a loss to 2012 UL, and loss to 2013 Michigan).
There's more, but you get the point. For a decade or so, UF was a top 10 overall program.
I agree that you can't count stars to determine expected output of a team (something that a lot of Kentucky fans still need to be reminded of).
That said, I still think that Kentucky has had more capable/productive players at the college level than any other team--other than possibly Duke--in the Calipari era. For every Skal, there's a player or two that live up to their hype.
From 2010 to 2015, I tend to agree in the aggregate (and so do the results). Since then, only the 2017 team could plausibly make that claim in a given season (and they lost on a buzzer beater in the Elite 8). Are you saying that (as an example) the 2019 team (Fr. Hagans, Fr. Herro, Fr. Quickley, So. PJ, Fr. EJ, Fr. Green, Fr. KJ, So. Richards, Sr. Travis) "had more capable/productive players at the college level than any other team?" Or 2016? Or 2018 (lol)? That's... just not plausible. See, e.g., the results.
I mean how many teams had 3 first round draft picks in last years draft. Duke and UK. Last years UK team was ridiculously talented. Plus y’all also had a bit of experience for a change with PJ and adding an all PAC-12 grad transfer in Travis.
Would u trade that roster for anyone else’s besides duke? Not a chance, so I guess ur kind of right, y’all had more “capable players” than than anyone but Duke.
Stick to 2016 it’s hard to remember who was even on the roster then lol
I'm not saying that they have the best or 2nd best roster every year. But some of the teams you mentioned had very high expectations, and for good reason, I think. There was a lot of ability on this year's and last year's team, and also 2017. 2018, I'd say, lacked the experience/talent combo needed to be a true power (although, if you remember, tons of Kentucky fans were hyping them at the end of the year as a hot team and contender).
And of the teams you mentioned, 2017 lost in the Elite 8 on a buzzer beater, 2018 "lacked the experience/talent combo" (the online opinions of lay fans are utterly meaningless, sorry), 2019 lost in OT in the Elite 8, and this year had no tournament. So the UK teams that you argue "had very high expectations" were literally seconds away from the Final Four in a Tournament that everyone, especially KU fans, has to admit has a lot of randomness. I guess I just don't see the point.
Also, your use of "a lot of ability" is synonymous with "talent." But we're talking about winning college basketball games now, not NBA games in 5 years.
Who fvcking cares? Honestly? Often it is the case that "talent" = college production. But it's a lazy argument that is increasingly crumbling in the face of one-and-done culture. Also love the "a bit of experience" bar being (i) a sophomore and (ii) a graduate transfer in his first year with the program. That just proves my point (and that team lost in OT in the Elite 8... big time failure, I guess).
I know that Florida’s achieved more than the titles. The reason I posted this is that Jeff likes to go Bill Walton and pretend it's the "conference of champions."
Florida was a really solid program under Donovan. Several final fours and some other solid runs. But even they weren't a perennial power. For every year that they were good, they had a mediocre season or two.
Add a couple good Arkansas teams from the mid-90s, a random run here and there, and that about summarizes the history of the SEC outside of Kentucky.
Like I said, both are football leagues. The Big 12 is nothing special either, but it does consistently have at least one high seed other than KU. Generally a good percentage of the league is tourney-caliber and all teams play twice. There's no one program that is as good as Florida historically, but there are several that aren't far below that level.
Baylor red shirted 2 players will be big editions to the team. They are also bringing in 3- 4 star freshman . If Tristan can return healthy Baylor will be a handful for anyone.