Yes, the SEC. I already pointed out that KU's new conference mates will have 6 combined titles to 3 for Kentucky's conference mates (including Texass and OU), and 33 final fours to 26.
Shiny new addition? Did I actually say anything close to that?
Give a basketball hot take
- Thread starter ThePhog08
- Start date
Yes, the SEC. I already pointed out that KU's new conference mates will have 6 combined titles to 3 for Kentucky's conference mates (including Texass and OU), and 33 final fours to 26.
Shiny new addition? Did I actually say anything close to that?
....the new SEC and new Big 12...all of them, not just the new members.
SEC: 11
Big 12: 10.
Who cares what national analysts say, they're wrong more times than not.
You think Houston is going to hide the rest of the mid majors that are coming in? I mean you have BYU, Colorado and Cincinnati… .yuck
The dynamic of both leagues is going to greatly change, but you don't seem to think it's going to effect the big12, but with 16 teams, keep in mind, KU won't have the benefit of a round robin. Wait until you have to play @ Houston and @ Arizona, but they don't have to come to Lawrence. You won't win 14 straight league titles with that scenario.
Most UK/SEC fans will agree with me.
1 SEC football title for a program like UK, would be more impressive than KU winning 14 straight big12 bball titles before Baylor and TT were any good.
Keep in mind, Alabama, LSU and UGA just won national titles, they are the top tier in the league, UK is 2 tiers below them.
And yeah, Alabama won 7 straight league titles, but here's the difference between Alabama's run and KU's run, Alabama either won a national title, or competed in the title game in all 7 of those seasons and I'm sorry, but winning the SEC in football is a whole lot tougher than winning the BIG12 in basketball especially when the BIG12 uses a round robin format.
I don't expect you to understand, hell, you probably don't think playing a round robin format is an advantage for KU, but it is a huge advantage.
I must say, you guys have an impressive ability to ramble and bicker at length about random arbitrary nonsense. The hours and effort you put into it are quite impressive.
It's like watching Judge Judy arguing with herself.
It's like watching Judge Judy arguing with herself.
But this was in context of the competition that KU/Kentucky will face going forward.
Not sure why anyone would use this as a predictor of the near future in these leagues.
Do you expect Oklahoma St and Cincinnati to be top 4 in the Big 12 next year? Is Florida going to be #2 in the SEC next year? Auburn and Alabama at the bottom?
Last edited:
No, you went ahead and dissected it again, as per usual. Always the 'some, not all of it' approach.
You're all over the place, drawing your own conclusions. I couldn't have said it any clearer than this:
There are Blueblood programs that have traditions of winning and plenty of hardware to show for it, and then there are programs that don't. Both the SEC and Big 12 will have a mix of both kinds of programs.
^^^I'm not big on trying to predict the future, but based on the achieved standing of all the programs in the 'new" versions of the SEC and Big 12, this would be a good gauge for expectations.
Not heated....Confused by the thought. I think its weird---Seems majority of the board agrees.
To answert your question---I'd rather brag about winning 5 titles in 25 years---regardless if it meant a handful of shit seasons.
99-Title
00-2nd round
01-Missed
02-Elite 8
03- SW 16
04-TITLE
05- 2nd round
06-Elite 8
07- Missed
08- 1st round
09- Final Four
10-Missed
11- TITLE
12-1st round
13- Missed
14- TITLE
15-Misssed
16-21----Not tourney: COVID in 2020.
22- 1st round
23- TITLE
5 titles
6 FF's
8 Elite 8's...
Missing the tourney sucks---but so does losing in the 1st round---or second. I would trade 8 1st round/2nd round losses for missing the tourney 9 times---while winning 5 titles. But that is just me.
Yeah, who cares what an unbiased party would say? 😆
I wouldn't want to involve any unbiased parties either if I were you.
Btw, how often are SEC homers right? Haven't you guys been predicting SEC dominance for a few years now? Don't Kentucky fans predict greatness every season?
Sure, let's defer to SEC fans over unbiased people who study the game for a living. Seems reasonable.
No shit they won't win 14 straight again. What a hot take. That was a very rare accomplishment that will probably never be duplicated in a major conference.
Colorado wins 20+ games almost every year, in a major conference. They've been to the tourney several times under Boyle and were a 5 seed two years ago.
Devilz has Cincinnati at #13 all-time. They've been down a little the last few years, but they're improving under the new coach and not long ago they were a perennial tourney team.
BYU's been in the tourney more often than not the last 20 years.
None of these are worldbeaters, and no one's made them out to be, but I'm not sure why you're pretending like they're Pepperdine. Well, actually I know why. You're being a disingenuous troll so you can WIN THE INTERNETZ! Just keep bludgeoning me with illogical foolishness and eventually I'll surrender!!
I'm confused as to why you think people judge conference strength by the strength of the bottom feeders. Has anyone done that, ever?
You can talk shit on every program, like Kentucky fans love to do, but keep in mind that we're comparing to a league full of teams that haven't done shit EVER, much less recently. Even the SEC's winners flame out early every year. Not a single non-Kentucky SEC champ from the last decade made it past the Sweet 16. That's almost an impressive feat actually.
But that's my whole point.....is it your top priority to have something to brag about to anonymous dudes online, or to consistently enjoy the product? Sports are entertainment. We're not trying to win the Revolutionary War here. I want to be consistently entertained and engaged. Not to be miserable for a decade, just to have the opportunity to crawl out of hiding for a few weeks to talk shit like UConn fans a few months back.
Apparently you think what I'm saying is silly, and I can see why you'd think that, but it's just as easy to argue that it's silly to want to suffer through a bunch of down years and 1 tourney win in 8 seasons just to be able to talk shit to KYJeff years down the road. 😆
But like I said, if I were allowed to edit the history books today to replace two titles with five....yeah, of course I'd do it.
So you think that 11 titles, 8 by one team, tells us that the SEC is overall a stronger conference? Does it matter that 81% of the teams have never won one?
One thing I can guarantee you is that any national analyst who wants to predict the short term future of these leagues is not going to care in the slightest about ancient history. They're going to look at their history under the current coach, recent trends, and recruiting.
You’re saying I'm talking shit sbout these other programs, but I talk more shit about my own program. But are you seriously trying to prop up Colorado and say that they're good because they won 20 games in a shit conference and made a few tournament appearances? Come on man, do better.
You think nobody compares conferences by bottom feeders? Seriously? During the B12/SEC challenge, that’s exactly what all the analysts said.
Man, I hope you aren't this argumentative with the wife or boyfriend. Have you ever actually given credit to anyone else or any league besides the BIG12? Seems like you ignorantly argue to the death.
No way! And I'll bet that you guys are right and the rest of the world is wrong too. Brought to you by the people who think the NCAA is out to get them, SEC refs hate them, and Hagans was flashing fake bills. That fanbase is definitely who I'd turn to for a rational, unbiased take.
Comparing winning one or two postseason games to winning 6 is definitely apples/apples.
Again....Alabama won a higher percentage of SEC outright titles in that decade than Self's percentage of outright Big 12 titles. You said that dominance of a league indicates a weak league. Did you not? Sorry, chief. Can't have it both ways.
Now you're telling me that not only does it not indicate weakness in this case, it actually means that they're collectively a God-like unstoppable force. You're certainly consistent.
You understand that Kentucky is going to benefit from their conference setup as often as they won't, right? That it balances out? Really struggling to see how this could be perceived as a huge advantage. I'd love to see you find an unbiased third party to agree with this take.
Not to mention that, as the top dog in the conference, with no one else close as a program (right?), that setup should work in Kentucky's favor. They're the team with all the talent, particularly before the last couple years. They should be able to beat just about any SEC team home or away. But for many SEC teams, their only shot is to get Kentucky at home in front of a hostile crowd.
Literally almost every conference game for KU last year was quad 1. They played twice as many quad 1 games as Kentucky. Imagine playing a top 15 team on Saturday, then turning around and playing a top 10 team on the road on Monday night, then another ranked team a few days later. You can't afford an off night, or to experiment with lineups or get bench players minutes for development. KU had freshmen that probably could have contributed a lot by the end of last season if they'd had more opportunities to get in the game. And players like Dajuan Harris were fatigued due to playing huge minutes.
A round robin gives KU no advantage over fellow Big 12 teams. They're all playing the same schedule. Kentucky, however, does get an advantage at times. Funny that you haven't mentioned that. You seem to think that the system only works against them.
Fyi, Self had already won a bunch of Big 12 titles before the change to a round robin.
Last edited:
Didn't call them "good." They're average. Houston and Arizona are good.
No one judges the strength of a league by its bottom feeders. If the top of the league isn't strong, it makes no difference if the bottom-feeders are better than another league's. And if the top of the Big 12 is stronger with these additions, and there are more ranked teams and tourney teams than before, no one is going to downgrade the league because they added a few mediocre programs. That makes zero sense.
Some serious projection here. 😆
Yeah I can be argumentative when people start shit and then bombard me with take after take of disingenuous or delusional bullshit.
To say some of the shit you're saying and then label me the huge homer? Give me a break, man. Name one irrational, delusional thing I've said. Even in the UConn debate, I admitted that I'd trade if I could edit the history books. People were just misrepresenting my take.
The fact that you didn't want to involve the opinions of third party analysts says it all. You know that no one outside of SEC country is going to agree with half this stuff.
What did I say that wasn't true? They have greatly underachieve relstive to their talent. UK is in thst same boat. Does that mean I hate UK too?
What has Arizona done that makes them such a great addition? Remember, we've been talking recent success, not what they did in 1997.
Hmm, you seem to be getting upset and condescending for some reason.
I don't know what you want, I have shit on UK and Calipari and complimented Self and KU, yet you want more.
I'm sorry it upsets you that my opinion is that a 3rd tier SEC FB program winning the SEC over a bunch of programs that are miles ahead of them, is more impressive than KU winning the BIG12 14 straight years over programs that they are superior to… .in a round robin format.
Again, what I am saying here is KU is THAT good of a bb program and UK is that bad at fb.
So I'm complimenting KU and shitting on UK, but that's not good enough for you. Weird.
Dude, the fact that you think you're not a massive homer, is crazy to me. Even when I shit on UK and praise KU, you want more. You protect KU and the BIG12's honor to the death and you're getting all butthurt becasue my opinions don't align with yours. Never once did I say my opinions were fact, but through your posts, I can see the hair on the back of your neck standing straight up like a pissed off dog.
I compliment KU and Self, but you hurl insults at UK, saying shit like Hagans was flashing fake money (FYI, it was someone elses money), but I never once brought up the idiots KU has had get busted doing stupid shit and there's been a lot of them.
I totally get it....BUT....it's the offseason and a ghost town right now. Take out this silly exchange and there would be about 1 post/hr on here. I never understand people calling for even less traffic on a board with none. Somebody say something....ANYthing! 😆
Ahhh.....this whole time you've actually just been trying to compliment KU? My fault. I don't know how I got it misconstrued.
"No one gives a shit about conference titles"
Why should anybody be impressed with KU's winning streak
I mean, if 1 school wins the conference 14 straight years, but then that school goes on to get upset in the NCAAT 4 times by mid majors, well, maybe the league simply wasn't very good.
Hmm, maybe it's because Arizona was playing in a tougher conference than Tx and Oklahoma.
KU wouldn't have fared any better than Kentucky in the SEC
As for "shitting on UK".....that's a laugh. You're not shitting on UK. You're mega-hyping the SEC. You expect me to believe that you think UK is currently a terrible program? A team that's won double digit games twice recently, in a league that, according to you, is 1000x better than any conference in any sport? Those opinions can't co-exist, dude. 😆
And the fact that you think you're not a massive homer is hilarious to me. Especially when you immediately follow that comment with "FYI, it was someone elses money." 🤣
If by homer, you mean someone who will defend his program, sure, I qualify. And you sure as hell qualify. But my definition of "massive homer" is someone who has irrational and delusional takes. And I'm still waiting for you to tell me which of my takes are delusional. That KU's streak is impressive and the Big 12 isn't a bad league? That Arizona and Houston are good programs? That one SEC football title isn't more impressive than winning 20 straight in the Big 12? Whoa, how delusional!
Meanwhile, you've had about 10 takes in this thread alone that are outright delusional, and any non-UK/SEC fan would side with me. And you know it too, hence "UK/SEC fans would agree with me...who cares what national analysts think."
Well, for starters, you said that Oklahoma and Texas are better programs currently and historically. Which literally no one else would agree with. And the one person who chimed in strongly disagreed.
Arizona's been in the tourney almost as consistently as KU has the last 40 years. They've missed the tourney 3 freaking times since the early 80s, outside of the year they were ineligible. They have several final fours in that span, a title, and a ton of Elite 8s and Sweet 16s.
The only negative thing you can really say about Arizona is that they haven't been to the final four in awhile and they got bounced in the 1st round last year. Even if they've underachieved at times, how does that equate to not being a good addition? Trying to follow the logic. No one has underachieved more than Kentucky the last decade or so. Does that mean Kentucky wouldn't be a good addition to a conference?
So what's the % breakdown in titles won by the 'new' Big 12?
Titles that have been won are in the books, regardless of the conference the teams come from that won them.
UK doesn't have to apologize for the rest of the SEC. They've earned their place as the crown jewel of the conference.
The amount of typing you'll do here to keep spinning, deflecting, dissecting, timeframing, etc is astounding. The hate boner you have for UK hoops is blatantly obvious.
"As for "shitting on UK".....that's a laugh. You're not shitting on UK. You're mega-hyping the SEC. You expect me to believe that you think UK is currently a terrible program? A team that's won double digit games twice recently, in a league that, according to you, is 1000x better than any conference in any sport? Those opinions can't co-exist, dude. 😆"
Okay, uhh, you left some things out, I didn't say UK's basketball team was bad, I said their football program was, I don't think anyone can possibly argue that point.
Yeah, UK won double digit games twice, but we didn't have to play most of the top echelon of the league, we played UGA and UT. Didn't have to play aTm, Bama, LSU or Auburn.
Are you saying I never complimented Self and KU? Are you saying I haven’t shit on UK and Cal?
Guess I'm not surprised you focused on the things that are sticking in your craw. You need to drop the homer stuff, my opinions mean way too much to you.
Was I supposed to say something different about the cash Hagans was flashing? It was someone elses money, what do you want me to do, lie? It’s not like he attacked someone with a chair during a game and I denied it. This is a weird hill to die on.
I don't know what else to tell you, you are probably the biggest homer on this board, I mean, you're trying to say the BIG12 is going to be better by saying things like "colorado won 20 games and made the ncaat" to act like they are somehow an upgrade over Oklahoma and Texas.
I have, on several occassions, put UK, Cal and the SEC down, so trying to say I'm a homer, is nothing short of laughable.
Okay, you win, Kansas is the best program ever, Bread titles are awesome, Bill Self > John Wooden, the BIG12 is just better, regardless of who they lose and bring in, Exit Flagger has a bigger pickle than KYJeff1, ummmmmm, you have a nicer car and your BF is hotter than my wife.
Will that do it for ya?
I don't hate Kentucky. I get annoyed by Rafters-type delusional fans and their hypocrisy/constant bashing of all other programs. Big difference. I've also never liked Calipari much (which many Kentucky fans agree with now that he's not producing).
You're the one doing illogical acrobatics to spin it in your favor. Anyone could see that. If an ESPN writer wrote an article today, predicting how the next few years will play out for the Big 12/SEC, do you actually think they're going to base their takes on all-time stats and title counts, rather than current coaches/recent success? You can't seriously believe this.
Not sure how you got the idea I was talking about the basketball team, especially since the very next sentence was "A team that's won double digit games twice recently, in a league that, according to you, is 1000x better than any conference in any sport?
So you think Kentucky's football program is currently bad? How can you be bad and win 10 games multiple times in the greatest super conference anyone has ever seen?
That's part of the point. It isn't the gauntlet that the homers make it out to be. And beating a team like Georgia is tough, but not some insurmountable task for a decent team. Hell, a shitty Missouri team had them on the ropes last year. And Kentucky only plays Alabama a few times per decade.
All it really comes down to is that Kentucky would have to pull off a fairly minor upset or two. Not a 16 seed vs a 1 type of upset....more like a 5 seed over a 1.
You actually don't see how that is homerism? 🤣
Lord, I can only imagine if a KU player were flashing stacks of bills on snapchat and we claimed it was "someone else's."
Since you're calling it a fact that it was someone else's money (that he was keeping in his "shoeboxx"), where's your proof?
LOL. Still waiting for just one example of all these supposedly delusional takes of mine. Buehler...?
Btw, I never said that Colorado was an upgrade over Oklahoma and Texas. I said they're an average program.
Maybe the problem here is reading comprehension...
Last edited:
That's the second time you've made a "boyfriend" comment, along with several other personal attacks. Pretty easy to see who's triggered here. 😂
I'm not saying UK is "bad" right now, but when compared to the top shelf teams in the SEC, they aren't nearly good enough.
However, last year, they probably had the worst offensive line in all of cfb. They lost at home to Vandy and South Carolina (yuck).
They will be better this year, but they are nowhere close to being in UGA, LSU, aTm or Bama's league. They just aren't. UK waited 4 decades too late to decide to take football seriously.
No, it wouldn't take "a" upset, it would take 3 or 4 upsets. Remember, you don't win the SEC by just beating the opponents on your regular season schedule, no, you have to then play the winner from the west. So you most likely have to go through UGA, UT, one of the top teams in the west, then beat Bama/LSU in the SECT game. That’s much harder than a 16 beating, because it's not just 1 game and there are 3, 4 or 5 SEC teams that are in the top 10 most years.
It's funny how you think beating UGA, Bama, LSU or aTm is "a fairly minor upset". That tells me you don't get it. You can't just look at UGA's close game against Mizzou last year and act like they aren't actually all that good. They won the title for the 2nd year in a row and made it look easy.
I'd feel a whole lot better if the SEC played a round robin in both sports, I bet UK could win 15 straight SEC basketball titles in that scenario. 🤣
LOL, my god, you can't even take a joke and besides that, Gay is the new straight these days, get with the program dude.
So if I say "Kansas is Gay", that’s a compliment. Trust me on this.
Georgia's been really good the last two years, but it's not like they're always at that level. They're usually a 2-5 loss team. The year before last was the first time they won a CFP game.
If Kentucky continues to build on a pair of 10-win seasons, and recruiting continues to improve (as it usually does when winning), beating the typical Georgia team would not be an insurmountable task.
Half of KU's conference titles during the streak came before there was a round robin.
Is that the reason Kentucky lost the SEC by four games last year? Because they didn't get Alabama at home? Maybe the 9-16 team would've won it too if they'd just had a round robin. I'll bet Billy Gillispie would have cleaned up if only he'd had a ROUND ROBIN!
For the life of me, I can't figure out how you think that the round robin format gives KU a huge advantage over other Big 12 teams. That's one of the most ridiculous takes I've ever seen.
Continue to mock the streak all you want, but it's something Kentucky couldn't have come CLOSE to achieving any time recently, and they haven't. Even in a weaker league. It's baffling that someone would continue to downplay and mock something that their "powerhouse" program couldn't begin to accomplish, but that's the Rafters in you talking again. They love to shit on the Big 12 (along with everyone else).
Can't take a joke? What clued you in that I was super serious? Was it the laughing emoji?
That's good to know, though, thanks. The next time I call you fudge-packing ******, just keep in mind that it's a compliment. 😂
I don’t understand how any college basketball fan can say that Arizona basketball wouldn’t be a great addition to any conference. Even though they’ve historically underperformed with their high talent level , they’re still a top eight program in the last thirty years on every list of teams I’ve seen.
I genuinely wonder if Jeff follows anything outside of SEC football/basketball....
The dude tried to argue that they're not that good because they missed the tourney three times recently. One of those was the Covid year and another was the year they were banned from the postseason. Aside from that, they've missed the tourney 3x in 40 years. 😂
Good God, so much wasted time and writings on this topic. If we're being real, UK is the All-time best hoops program in the SEC and KU is the best in the Big 12. Comparisons and what-if scenarios are a huge waste of time.
24-11, 8-4 is the whole story between the 2 programs. That's it.
24-11, 8-4 is the whole story between the 2 programs. That's it.
Thing is, it's always 3 or 4 of the top shelf SEC programs that are good in a given year. Right now, it's Alabama, Georgia and LSU with UT not far behind, but when UGA wasn't what they are now, Auburn was there, before that it was Tennessee, before that it was Florida. The league is extremely deep in football.
You have to understand, Geogia isn’t going to just fall off the top rope now, they have Kirby Smart and he appears to be heading for a Nick Saban/Alabama type dominance, the days of the Mark Richt face palms are long gone. They are collecting 5* talent 2 and 3 deep at every position.
As far as UK basketball goes, UK lost the SEC by 4 games in 22/23 because the head coach is a hard headed idiot. This is a team that went to Tennessee and Arkansas and beat both their asses, but lost at home to Georgia. They went 9-16 in 20/21 for the same reason. Lost to Saint Peters for the same reason, but also had key players injured in the backcourt. The bottom line is, John Calipari has turned into a massive narcissist that prioritizes the nba draft, that’s disgusting to me and I'm ready for him to move on.
Why do you think I'm mocking KU's streak??? Because I think it would be more impressive if UK fb won the SEC? That's mocking???? Dude, get a grip.
Round robin is an advantage, because you get each opponent at home, in the SEC, you might get Arkansas and Auburn on the road, but not at home. Tennessee might get them at home, but not on the road. In that scenario, you're at a huge disadvantage and that's not even talking about the ridiculous road environments UK has to face compared to the rest of the SEC.
You said: "Continue to mock the streak all you want, but it's something Kentucky couldn't have come CLOSE to achieving any time recently"
Well, a lot of the reason for that is the current coach runs an NBA farm system, where he has a new, young team every year and, the SEC isn’t a round robin league. If we had a veteran type culture, UK definitely could do it. Let's not act like Kansas is the only program that can do such a thing.
Again, nobody is mocking that streak, you come across seriously butthurt whenever you say that.
My God man, you just keep this shit going, are you getting paid per post?
Similar threads
