Poll: When Does The Modern Era Begin?

When Does The Modern Era For College Basketball Begin?


  • Total voters
    63

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I thought the purpose of the poll is about the game and when it became the modern version that it is today. The tournament, as great as it is, isn't the game. It's an event.
There is no rule that says you have to be Smart to post on this board and thus the stupid answers.
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
There is no rule that says you have to be Smart to post on this board and thus the stupid answers.
Ah, yeah....it's so dumb to have the opinion that the modern era started when they implemented the modern tourney format.

All but 9 of the voters in this poll should be forced to go back to elementary school like Billy Madison.
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
Btw, it's probably a good thing that you don't have to be a Smart to post here. I don't think anyone wants to read a board that only includes posts by Marcus Smart and Shaka.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdbearde and della

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
Ah, yeah....it's so dumb to have the opinion that the modern era started when they implemented the modern tourney format.

All but 9 of the voters in this poll should be forced to go back to elementary school like Billy Madison.
A tourney format does not effect the game, only changes in the game effect the game and thus create a modern era. Just because one has a consensus of dumb does not change the fact of it being dumb. It just means you have a party of dummies.

Your point doesn't even make sense using your faulty logic in the fact moving to 68 teams should be the most modern version if the tourney is the deciding factor. That is in fact the most modern form of the tourney.

Finally, I like you EF and don't really care. Furthermore, I want you to know I'll stand beside you and support your/their right to be wrong. 🙂
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
A tourney format does not effect the game, only changes in the game effect the game and thus create a modern era. Just because one has a consensus of dumb does not change the fact of it being dumb. It just means you have a party of dummies.

Your point doesn't even make sense using your faulty logic in the fact moving to 68 teams should be the most modern version if the tourney is the deciding factor. That is in fact the most modern form of the tourney.

Finally, I like you EF and don't really care. Furthermore, I want you to know I'll stand beside you and support your/their right to be wrong. 🙂
I like you too. All in good fun. Having said that...😆

The question was when did the modern era of the sport begin. Not which of these events most revolutionized the game. Even if it were the second one, I don't think 87 would be a slam dunk, because the shot clock was arguably an even bigger change.

Moving to 68 teams didn't really change the format of the tourney. We just have a few play-in games now. Some people don't even consider them NCAA tourney games.
 

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I like you too. All in good fun. Having said that...😆

The question was when did the modern era of the sport begin. Not which of these events most revolutionized the game. Even if it were the second one, I don't think 87 would be a slam dunk, because the shot clock was arguably an even bigger change.

Moving to 68 teams didn't really change the format of the tourney. We just have a few play-in games now. Some people don't even consider them NCAA tourney games.
How you can score is the most dramatic and meaningful event of change and I don't see how it is even debatable.

Moving to 64 teams basically means only the few teams that make a deep run will have to play only one more game. It has no effect of the vast majority of CBB in the tourney and none in the regular season. However, the 3 pt shot has effect of on every game through out the season for every team.

I hope the people that support the notion of 64 teams have excellent dexterity and balance because they are standing on very shaky ground and need it. 🙂
 

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
I like you too. All in good fun. Having said that...😆

The question was when did the modern era of the sport begin. Not which of these events most revolutionized the game. Even if it were the second one, I don't think 87 would be a slam dunk, because the shot clock was arguably an even bigger change.

Moving to 68 teams didn't really change the format of the tourney. We just have a few play-in games now. Some people don't even consider them NCAA tourney games.
Easy bud, don't be flirting with my girl. 💪 🤣🤣
 

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
How you can score is the most dramatic and meaningful event of change and I don't see how it is even debatable.

Moving to 64 teams basically means only the few teams that make a deep run will have to play only one more game. It has no effect of the vast majority of CBB in the tourney and none in the regular season. However, the 3 pt shot has effect of on every game through out the season for every team.

I hope the people that support the notion of 64 teams have excellent dexterity and balance because they are standing on very shaky ground and need it. 🙂

You really think that a line that awards teams one extra point changed the game more than the shot clock? The NBA may have become extinct without the shot clock.

Imagine how different the game would be if you could hold the ball as long as you wanted to. Teams with lesser talent that manage to get a lead could hold the ball and refuse to shoot, forcing the other team to foul. And in those days, every foul was a shooting foul, so it turned the game into a free throw shooting contest.

Dean Smith's UNC played a game in Cameron in the late 70s, and he ran his famous four corners offense to try to force Duke out of their zone. Duke wouldn't budge. After Duke scored the game's first bucket, UNC held the ball for 11 minutes. The halftime score was 7-0.

A few years later an unranked Notre Dame team ran a stall against #4 Kentucky which took the game to OT.

Did you know that Tennessee was involved in the lowest scoring basketball game in NCAA history? 11-6. 😂
 

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
You really think that a line that awards teams one extra point changed the game more than the shot clock? The NBA may have become extinct without the shot clock.

Imagine how different the game would be if you could hold the ball as long as you wanted to. Teams with lesser talent that manage to get a lead could hold the ball and refuse to shoot, forcing the other team to foul. And in those days, every foul was a shooting foul, so it turned the game into a free throw shooting contest.

Dean Smith's UNC played a game in Cameron in the late 70s, and he ran his famous four corners offense to try to force Duke out of their zone. Duke wouldn't budge. After Duke scored the game's first bucket, UNC held the ball for 11 minutes. The halftime score was 7-0.

A few years later an unranked Notre Dame team ran a stall against #4 Kentucky which took the game to OT.

Did you know that Tennessee was involved in the lowest scoring basketball game in NCAA history? 11-6. 😂
You have a good point!
 

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
You really think that a line that awards teams one extra point changed the game more than the shot clock? The NBA may have become extinct without the shot clock.

Imagine how different the game would be if you could hold the ball as long as you wanted to. Teams with lesser talent that manage to get a lead could hold the ball and refuse to shoot, forcing the other team to foul. And in those days, every foul was a shooting foul, so it turned the game into a free throw shooting contest.

Dean Smith's UNC played a game in Cameron in the late 70s, and he ran his famous four corners offense to try to force Duke out of their zone. Duke wouldn't budge. After Duke scored the game's first bucket, UNC held the ball for 11 minutes. The halftime score was 7-0.

A few years later an unranked Notre Dame team ran a stall against #4 Kentucky which took the game to OT.

Did you know that Tennessee was involved in the lowest scoring basketball game in NCAA history? 11-6. 😂
The shot clock has changed more than once and it wasn't earth shattering either time. So, which time would be considered monumental? 3 pt shots effect who you recruit and strategy and will stand the test of time as it is a more fundamental change.

If UT was involved in a record scoring game back in the day, I'm sure they won it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdbearde

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
The shot clock has changed more than once and it wasn't earth shattering either time. So, which time would be considered monumental? 3 pt shots effect who you recruit and strategy and will stand the test of time as it is a more fundamental change.

If UT was involved in a record scoring game back in the day, I'm sure they won it.
There was NO shot clock before ‘86.

Hence, UNC holding the ball for 11 minutes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdbearde

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
The shot clock has changed more than once and it wasn't earth shattering either time. So, which time would be considered monumental? 3 pt shots effect who you recruit and strategy and will stand the test of time as it is a more fundamental change.

If UT was involved in a record scoring game back in the day, I'm sure they won it.
I love the 3 point shot, but stop and think about the shot clock that he brought up, wow what a difference that made. 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: ExitFlagger

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I love the 3 point shot, but stop and think about the shot clock that he brought up, wow what a difference that made. 🤔
The shot clock first changed in the 80's to 45 sec and then to 35 and now to a 30 sec clock. It speeds up the game, but doesn't alter it. 3 pt shots alter the game.

Altering the game brings on a new era.
 

rdgtr

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2003
912
738
113
Probably 1979 when Larry Bird(Indiana St) and Earvin "Magic" Johnson(Mich. St) played for the national championship. This soon led to the rise of the NBA while the NCAA Tournament flourished with great players like Akeem Olajawon, Michael Jordan, Ralph Sampson, Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, Sam Bowie and later Christain Lattener, FAB-5 of Michigan, etc.
 

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
The shot clock first changed in the 80's to 45 sec and then to 35 and now to a 30 sec clock. It speeds up the game, but doesn't alter it. 3 pt shots alter the game.

Altering the game brings on a new era.
I agree with the 3 point shot, but what I took from @ExitFlagger was the introduction of the shot clock, and it changed the game as big or bigger than the 3 point shot, so in my opinion, you both have a great point.
 

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I agree with the 3 point shot, but what I took from @ExitFlagger was the introduction of the shot clock, and it changed the game as big or bigger than the 3 point shot, so in my opinion, you both have a great point.
CD, you're either with me or agin me. Flagger knows I'm right he is just arguing cause that is what he does.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cdbearde

ExitFlagger

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
10,753
7,135
113
Team
Kansas
CD, you're either with me or agin me. Flagger knows I'm right he is just arguing cause that is what he does.


Is that your honest takeaway? Don’t go full AuHoosier on us.🤣

There is no right or wrong in subjective matters like this. However, saying that the shot clock didn’t alter the game is objectively wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
CD, you're either with me or agin me. Flagger knows I'm right he is just arguing cause that is what he does.
I am always with young lady, I have told you what I think about you, I know you hate UK, but that's because you are true UT fan and that is cool. But the shot clock can not be ignored in this discussion. Just my opinion young lady.
And Falagger, don't flirt her again!!!!!
 

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
Is that your honest takeaway? Don’t go full AuHoosier on us.🤣

There is no right or wrong in subjective matters like this. However, saying that the shot clock didn’t alter the game is objectively wrong.
My honest takeaway is the modern age was ushered in with the 3 pt shot. Your position that is shifting as sand in the desert of shot clock to which has changed 3 separate times did not bring on the new age either time they changed it.

Btw, don't you go all Bert on us. 😁
 

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I am always with young lady, I have told you what I think about you, I know you hate UK, but that's because you are true UT fan and that is cool. But the shot clock can not be ignored in this discussion. Just my opinion young lady.
And Falagger, don't flirt her again!!!!!
If you truly were to understand me, you would know I don't hate UK. I have never described Cal in any terms that were not complimentary.

I do like mixing it up with rivals, though. I do hate bama and filthy little bammers.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cdbearde

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
My honest takeaway is the modern age was ushered in with the 3 pt shot. Your position that is shifting as sand in the desert of shot clock to which has changed 3 separate times did not bring on the new age either time they changed it.

Btw, don't you go all Bert on us. 😁
I think I may have this, maybe not, but della maybe you are to young to remember the lack of a shot clock, and flagger is doing research and finding facts?
 

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
If you truly were to understand me, you would know I don't hate UK. I have never described Cal in any terms that were not complimentary.

I do like mixing it up with rivals, though. I do hate bama and filthy little bammers.
You are good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
If you truly were to understand me, you would know I don't hate UK. I have never described Cal in any terms that were not complimentary.

I do like mixing it up with rivals, though. I do hate bama and filthy little bammers.
Young lady, you are my buddy!!! I promise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: della

della

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
40,873
21,102
113
Team
Tennessee
I think I may have this, maybe not, but della maybe you are to young to remember the lack of a shot clock, and flagger is doing research and finding facts?
My age has nothing to do with my knowledge. We both know of Gen Washington crossing the Delaware, but neither of were around for it. I will admit to augmenting my knowledge with data from the web. I pointed out that the NCAA has changed the shot clock as often as bammers change their socks.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cdbearde

cdbearde

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
3,087
6,109
113
My age has nothing to do with my knowledge. We both know of Gen Washington crossing the Delaware, but neither of were around for it. I will admit to augmenting my knowledge with data from the web. I pointed out that the NCAA has changed the shot clock as often as bammers change their socks.
You go girl! 😎 Awesome!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: della

bignish

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2016
2,739
2,570
113
Team
Duke
For the record I voted 85. Common sense to me. I guess my issue is people want to belittle titles won before x year or y year, and I have a hard time with that. Because If all you had to do was win your conference and win 3 tournament games, more schools should have titles from the 40s and 50s, right?

Many are quick to point out that winning a title today is so much harder than 70 years ago, but there’s no hardware in their trophy cases to back that argument up. Unless you are saying a program like Kansas is light years better now than they were back in the day. That isn’t a shot at Kansas, either. I think they are the perfect example for my argument.
Huh? The older titles were easier to win for the powerhouses back then. UK, KU, Indiana and UCLA were the big dogs back then.

You'd much rather be a powerhouse back back in the 40's-70's since if you were the conference champ, all you had to do was win 3 games in the tournament and you were a National Champion.

The "golden age" of Duke and UNC happened to be in the 1980s and beyond. Both these programs would likely have twice as many titles if they were the dominant programs in the earlier decades given how it was easier to win the chip.

NCAA championships are still championships at the end of the day but context matters. The stretch that Wooden went on in the 1960s and 70s would never happen in the modern era.
 

bignish

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2016
2,739
2,570
113
Team
Duke
Regarding your first paragraph, I'm just making the point that those three schools you named, even if they weren't what they are now, were still the cream of the crop of college basketball. Still a leg up on other schools and the competition. If they weren't, we wouldn't talk about them as blue bloods. So I think its a very valid point to make that they didn't win maybe as much as they should in the so called "easier era".
I can't speak for KU or UNC but Duke definitely wasn't considered "the cream of the crop" before 1980 at all so its false to say they underachieved or something by not winning any titles during that era.

We were probably something akin to Louisville, Michigan or Florida in those 4 decades prior. We earned our Blue Blood status by having incredible sustained success in the 1980s and 1990s.

If the K era happened from 1940-1980 instead of 1981-2022, its almost a given we'd have more national titles considering we won the ACC Regular Season 13 times and the ACC Tournament 15 times.

Heck, KU has 26 Big 12 titles in the last 4 decades so they could have had a 15 national titles perhaps if their "golden age" was from 1940-1980. :)
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
8,898
11,485
113
The shot clock first changed in the 80's to 45 sec and then to 35 and now to a 30 sec clock. It speeds up the game, but doesn't alter it. 3 pt shots alter the game.

Altering the game brings on a new era.

It did alter the game significantly, though. Without a shot clock, you're not forced to do anything. If it's late in the game, teams could play stall ball.

Can I see the results now?

Results of the best teams in the modern era? I'm going to update my current all-time rankings table first. It probably won't be until the summer time.
 

dukedevilz

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2002
8,898
11,485
113
You'd much rather be a powerhouse back back in the 40's-70's since if you were the conference champ, all you had to do was win 3 games in the tournament and you were a National Champion.

3 games only lasted till 1950. Overall, yes, much easier to win titles in that time period. Regions were based off geography, and the West Region was usually on the weaker side. So, UCLA could typically coast to the Final Four.


1939-1950: 8 teams
1951-1952: 16 teams
1953-1974: 22-25 teams
1975-1978: 32 teams
1979: 40 teams
1980-1982: 48 teams
1983-1984: 52-53 teams
1985-present: 64-68 teams
 

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
5,992
3,376
113
Idk when i think about larry/magic, that sure as hell resembles basketball today, 40 years later much more than basketball 40 years previous. Where the offensive team just tried to keep the ball all game and win 2-0 if possible. 🤷‍♂️ Thats it to me. If not id have to go with 3pt line.

i def wouldnt even consider anything regarding the format of the tourney to “the modern era”. The me sayinng the modern era is talking about the way the game is actually played on the court, not how the tournament format was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: della

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
5,992
3,376
113
Ah, yeah....it's so dumb to have the opinion that the modern era started when they implemented the modern tourney format.

All but 9 of the voters in this poll should be forced to go back to elementary school like Billy Madison.
Yea but again when we talk about “modern era” at least to me, we are talking about the way the game is played, not how the tournament was set up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
5,992
3,376
113
I will stand with you that the shot clock most definitely “altered” the way the game was played. The shot clock meant teams could no longer play stall ball all game long if they got a lead. (Aka changed the way they played) Games being played in the teens and 20s as final scores. Shot clock might had changed the game more than the 3pt shot tbh, or at least the argument could be made.
 

Fighter of the Nightman

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
1,233
1,383
113
Chicago, IL
Team
Illinois
Just wanted to drop this here for fun. I am trying to have a spreadsheet of all Big Ten basketball history, but I have only completed each team's seasons back to 1980. Figured I would post the records for each since then, since it seems decently relevant!

Michigan State: .670
Purdue: .661
Illinois: .654

Indiana: .644
Ohio State: .643
Michigan: .639
Maryland: .635
Iowa: .609
Wisconsin: .603

Minnesota: .562

Nebraska: .527
Penn State: .500

Rutgers: .469

Northwestern: .404

Gotta respect someone with Northwestern season tickets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lurkeraspect84

sdave

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 16, 2005
9,841
3,312
113
Goleta
Sometime over the summer I will gather all the numbers available and use 14 or 15 metrics to calculate the greatest teams of the modern era. The obvious question, of course, is when does the modern era actually begin?

Here's a little more info on schools leaving conferences. As many know, 1975 is the first time we actually saw at-large bids in the tournament. No conference had more than 1 at-large bid, however. And 9 of the 16 at-large bids in 1975 went to independents. As the field expanded, schools were figuring it out that there was less opportunity to make the tournament if you're not aligned with a conference. In 1979, there were 68 independents. By 1980, there were only 21. Most notably, that's the year where the Big East was formed. In that same year, only 3 of the 23 at-large bids went to independents.

‘When Michigan hired John Beiien.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukedevilz