For all the bitching that goes on about UW's style of play, MU should be so fortunate to have a style of play that leads to a rout in their first round game.
And MU desperately needs a Bruesewitz type guy who can get the big rebounds and hit a shot when needed. For some reason, Crowder has a reputation as a guy who hustles when he has been largely invisible the last half of this season, but Bruesewitz deserves the reputation. That guy busts his ass all the time.
Forget the switchable nonsense. Give me traditional. And a top-notch PG.
Kid's a ginger...honestly? Let's go recruit some gingers?! On St. Patty's day I will respect your wishes, but tomorrow I will strongly disagree
Then become a Wisconsin fan, and stop posting dumb comments on this board. UCONN did alright, maybe we should play more like them, but not like Louisville because they lost. If your going to recommend MU play like WI based on Wisconsin's success in the NCAA tournament you are going to lose that argument every time. Wisconsin hasn't exactly over-achieved in the tourney under Bo.
Quote from: willie wampum on March 17, 2011, 08:32:19 PM
For all the bitching that goes on about UW's style of play, MU should be so fortunate to have a style of play that leads to a rout in their first round game.
And MU desperately needs a Bruesewitz type guy who can get the big rebounds and hit a shot when needed. For some reason, Crowder has a reputation as a guy who hustles when he has been largely invisible the last half of this season, but Bruesewitz deserves the reputation. That guy busts his ass all the time.
Forget the switchable nonsense. Give me traditional. And a top-notch PG.
What the f does the Wisconsin game have to do with ours?
(http://i861.photobucket.com/albums/ab180/rimewind/Do-not-feed-the-troll.png)
quit touching yourself at night to bo ryan you hippie
Gingers don't play college basketball...
There's nothing wrong with wanting MU to be on a par with Wisconsin.
And it's concerning how far MU is falling below their success level.
He is still a ginger..
well #1. We arent falling behind them at all. They play in the big ten.
2. Our history blows there history away.
3. Compare past stats and we have more final fours, more championships, more tournament appearences, more elite eights, more wins, and overall better championship.
4. Our alumni is so much better than theirs.
Quote from: avid1010 on March 17, 2011, 08:37:59 PM
Then become a Wisconsin fan, and stop posting dumb comments on this board. UCONN did alright, maybe we should play more like them, but not like Louisville because they lost. If your going to recommend MU play like WI based on Wisconsin's success in the NCAA tournament you are going to lose that argument every time. Wisconsin hasn't exactly over-achieved in the tourney under Bo.
Be more like UCONN?
Sure, how about starting with taking Lamb, who wanted to come to MU. Instead, MU has Vander "can't shoot" Blue, and another nondescript freshman in Jones.
I'd LOVE it if MU had freshmen like UCONN.
First willie, your team played the 13th seed tonight, while ours plays the 6th seed. I am guessing even you could notice the difference, but then again, maybe not.
You might have found it exciting to see 3 shot clock violations and multiple shots at the 35 second clock buzzer - after passes ad nauseum. And that was from the winning team, your Badgers. Frankly, it bores me to watch them play. I enjoyed the movie Hoosiers, but I would hate to watch that team play today, well I just did with Wisconsin.
Quote from: willie wampum on March 17, 2011, 08:43:47 PM
There's nothing wrong with wanting MU to be on a par with Wisconsin.
And it's concerning how far MU is falling below their success level.
You statement implies that Wisconsin is some middling team that we have fallen behind.
You could argue UNC has fallen behind them.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25077.0
Give the Badgers credit as their are maybe three or four teams in all of basketball that are better (Duke, Kansas, Pitt)
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 17, 2011, 08:57:20 PM
You statement implies that Wisconsin is some middling team that we have fallen behind.
You could argue UNC has fallen behind them.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25077.0
Give the Badgers credit as their are maybe three or four teams in all of basketball that are better (Duke, Kansas, Pitt)
I should have said far behind them. The size of the gap in the two programs is what's troubling.
wisconsin is not in the class of UNC,DUKE or Kansas....
All of those teams have won national championships in the last 10 years....
they are not in the elite class... michigan state and uconn you can say are in the realm, but not wisconsin...
6 straight NCAA tournaments is not falling behind expectations. Go post on the Badger board.
Quote from: willie wampum on March 17, 2011, 09:04:03 PM
I should have said far behind them. The size of the gap in the two programs is what's troubling.
Your statement is as ridiculous as saying it is troubling that we are falling behind Duke. Why do the borders of the state of Wisconsin matter? They are not even in our conference.. Besides Vander, who on their roster seriously considered MU? Who on our roster seriously considered UW? Basketball wise they are as relevant to us as Duke. They only matter to you because you live in Wisconsin.
As an MU fan, I look at UW and have reason to be encouraged.
Between 1947 and 1998 (51 years) they went to the NCAA exactly once. 23 times they finished 8, 9 or 10 in the B10. They were arguably the worst program in the B10 for half a century.
Now they have been the NCAA 12 consecutive times. They have been ranked in the top 10 5 of the last 8 years (KenPom).
If a basketball backwater with lousy weather can become an elite team. Why can't a team with a good reputation from Milwaukee?
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 17, 2011, 09:09:18 PM
6 straight NCAA tournaments is not falling behind expectations. Go post on the Badger board.
12-6, 11-7 and this year 9-9 in the BE. That is not a good trend line.
I vow to follow this rule anytime Willie posts, and I hope others will as well....not to mention I'll use that ignore button.
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 17, 2011, 08:39:25 PM
(http://i861.photobucket.com/albums/ab180/rimewind/Do-not-feed-the-troll.png)
Quote from: [Mu]EngiNerd on March 17, 2011, 09:05:11 PM
wisconsin is not in the class of UNC,DUKE or Kansas....
All of those teams have won national championships in the last 10 years....
they are not in the elite class... michigan state and uconn you can say are in the realm, but not wisconsin...
Read this before you post again
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25077.0
there is a distinct difference between those programs and wisconsin.
If they had won a national championship in the last 10 years with any of those teams i just mentioned then you can say that, but since they haven't you cannot compare them.
congrats they win a lot of games, but when it comes down to it how many championships do they have none... great teams take home the title so don't put them in the category of the supreme elite...
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 17, 2011, 09:13:57 PM
Your statement is as ridiculous as saying it is troubling that we are falling behind Duke. Why do the borders of the state of Wisconsin matter? They are not even in our conference.. Besides Vander, who on their roster seriously considered MU? Who on our roster seriously considered UW? Basketball wise they are as relevant to us as Duke. They only matter to you because you live in Wisconsin.
As an MU fan, I look at UW and have reason to be encouraged.
Between 1947 and 1998 (51 years) they went to the NCAA exactly once. 23 times they finished 8, 9 or 10 in the B10. They were arguably the worst program in the B10 for half a century.
Now they have been the NCAA 12 consecutive times. They have been ranked in the top 10 5 of the last 8 years (KenPom).
If a basketball backwater with lousy weather can become an elite team. Why can't a team with a good reputation from Milwaukee?
UW is the main rival of MU. It's annoying to be in their shadow.
And I think MU is going downhill next season. I'm not sold on Blue and think he's a role player. If he's a "miss" (and I think he is), that really sets MU back, as he was expected to be the big time recruit MU was looking for. Wilson has supposedly been good in practice, but he's not a great shooter and wasn't good at all in his first year of college bball at Oregon. I don't see where the scoring slack from losing Butler will come from. And while I like Cadougan, his shot is weak, he can't go to his left and his ball handling needs improvement.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 17, 2011, 09:14:57 PM
Read this before you post again
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25077.0
You were wrong then and you're wrong now. Just because UW has finished higher a few times in Ken Pom doesn't mean they are even close to UNC's level. UNC has 2 national titles over that period while Duke and Kansas both have 1. I don't think even the biggest UW homer wouldn't trade UW's last 10 years for any of those other programs'.
If you make the field goal posts very narrow (only use KenPom), then UW might make a few more extra points; but if you use standard size field goal posts those 3 programs are kicking 50 yard field goals regularly while UW struggles to make them from 30.
first use of the ignore button and it goes tooo....
Willy wampum
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 17, 2011, 08:57:20 PMYou statement implies that Wisconsin is some middling team that we have fallen behind.
You could argue UNC has fallen behind them.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25077.0
Give the Badgers credit as their are maybe three or four teams in all of basketball that are better (Duke, Kansas, Pitt)
And that argument is stupid. In the past 10 years, Wisconsin has one Elite 8 and two Sweet 16s. And you think you can compare that to North Carolina? Hell, they backed into that Elite 8 as a 6-seed, beating 11-seed Northern Iowa, 14-seed Bucknell, and 10-seed NC State.
Meanwhile, UNC has won 2 championships in the past 6 years.
National championships. And there are far more than "maybe three or four teams" that are better.
- UNC has 2 titles, 3 Final Fours, and 4 Elite 8s in the past decade
- Duke has 2 titles, 1 Elite 8, and 5 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Kansas has 1 title, 1 runner-up, 1 Final Four in the past decade
- UConn has 1 title, 2 Final Fours, and 2 Elite 8s in the past decade
- Syracuse has 1 title and 3 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Michigan State has 1 runner-up, 3 Final Fours, and 1 Elite 8 in the past decade
- UCLA has 1 runner-up and 2 Final Fours in the past decade
- Texas has 1 Final Four, 2 Elite 8s, and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Louisville has 1 Final Four and 2 Elite 8s in the past decade
- Villanova has 1 Final Four, 1 Elite 8, and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Kentucky has 3 Elite 8s and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Florida has 2 titles in the past decade
- Butler has 1 runner-up and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Memphis has 1 runner-up, 2 Elite 8s, and 1 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Georgetown has 1 Final Four and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- Maryland has 1 title, 1 Final Four, and 1 Sweet 16 in the past decade
- Illinois has 1 runner-up, 1 Elite 8, and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
- West Virginia has 1 Final Four, 1 Elite 8, and 2 Sweet 16s in the past decade
.
Listen, Wisconsin is a good program. But they aren't one of the top 5 in the nation. They aren't one of the top 10. They probably aren't even one of the top 15. They're in the 15-25 range. Good, but not even remotely elite. Can we please stop painting them like they're a step under Duke and on par with UNC? It's simply nonsense.
Quote from: [Mu]EngiNerd on March 17, 2011, 09:20:34 PM
there is a distinct difference between those programs and wisconsin.
If they had won a national championship in the last 10 years with any of those teams i just mentioned then you can say that, but since they haven't you cannot compare them.
congrats they win a lot of games, but when it comes down to it how many championships do they have none... great teams take home the title so don't put them in the category of the supreme elite...
So UCLA and Kentucky are not elite teams because they have not won a NC in the last 10 years.
But Maryland and Florida are elite teams.
What you arguing is the the regular season is nothing but practice and everybody should only be judged by how they do in March on Neutral courts.
Regular season UW has done better than UNC. That was the standard for making my statement.
Kansas St. will beat UW. Watch, listen, and see. Belmont is garbage.
losers always wine about their best, winner go home and F*ck the prom queen.
It all about the titles. Nothing less nothing more.
No one can tell you who the runner ups in any of these games are or how many games then won in the regular season.
Look at the patriots they won 18 striaght games and lost to the giants in the super bowl... people barely talk about that season, but they will never stop talking about the patriots 3 other championships....
Quote from: [Mu]EngiNerd on March 17, 2011, 09:46:04 PM
losers always wine about their best, winner go home and F*ck the prom queen.
It all about the titles. Nothing less nothing more.
No one can tell you who the runner ups in any of these games are or how many games then won in the regular season.
Look at the patriots they won 18 striaght games and lost to the giants in the super bowl... people barely talk about that season, but they will never stop talking about the patriots 3 other championships....
Then say it ... Maryland and Florida are elite programs while UCLA and Kentucky are not.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 17, 2011, 09:47:56 PMThen say it ... Maryland and Florida are elite programs while UCLA and Kentucky are not.
Maryland is not elite any more. They were at the turn of the century, but I guarantee you any Bucky fan would giddily swap their tournament history over the past decade with Maryland's. Honestly, they'd probably swap their tournament history over the past 50 years with Maryland's past decade.
UCLA, Kentucky, and Florida are all elite and in a class above Wisconsin.
willie wampum: making willie warrior look positive since 2/15/11.
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 17, 2011, 09:51:57 PM
Maryland is not elite any more. They were at the turn of the century, but I guarantee you any Bucky fan would giddily swap their tournament history over the past decade with Maryland's. Honestly, they'd probably swap their tournament history over the past 50 years with Maryland's past decade.
UCLA, Kentucky, and Florida are all elite and in a class above Wisconsin.
If you look at the last 50 years, Wisconsin doesn't have much of a tournament history.
Am I confused or did I make a mistake thinking
teams played the season to get a national championship or make a deep run in the NCAA tourney
or
consistently get him pomroy ratings every year...
I might get flamed for this, but since i'm not a Marquette alum, i'm actually a fan of Wisconsin sports, including their basketball, football, and hockey programs. I just like MU basketball a bit more because i live here in Milwaukee. So except for when the two teams play, i cheer for Wisconsin to win, just as i do for all the sports teams in the state.
When i look at the two basketball programs, Bo Ryan definitely has had more success since he took over compared to Marquette, but i don't think the gap is as sizable as the numbers indicate.
Except for the last few years as the Big Ten improved with the addition of quality coaches in Matta at OSU and Painter at Purdue, the Big East has been a better conference and for the first 4-5 years of Ryan's tenure, the Big East was significantly better. I highly doubt that any of Ryan's Big Ten conference winning teams could have won a Big East title. Maybe Ryan's Elite 8 team with Tucker and Harris could have. Maybe. For a number of years, all of Purdue, OSU, Michigan, and Minnesota were down as programs until coaching changes have gotten them better of late.
It's also easier to finish top 3-5 in that conference compared to the Big East given that in most years, the Big Ten has had fewer quality teams. The 3rd or 4th place team in the Big Ten during many of Ryan's years at UW may have finished 5th or 6th in the Big East, especially early in his tenure.
Many won't agree, but for me at least as a fan of both programs, unless either one wins the conference title, i don't care that much if say UW finishes 3rd or 5th and if MU finishes 5th or 8th so long as they make the big dance. Sure it can make the NCAA Tournament chances easier with a better seed, but once you get past the first round, no games are easy. Just get there at least and Marquette has made it 6 straight years, that's far from easy to do given how many programs haven't.
Quote from: [Mu]EngiNerd on March 17, 2011, 10:17:04 PM
Am I confused or did I make a mistake thinking
teams played the season to get a national championship or make a deep run in the NCAA tourney
or
consistently get him pomroy ratings every year...
Looking only at NCAA results is a fine way, then you come to the conclusion that Florida is an elite team. You agree with this?
Yes Flordia has been an elite team in the past 10 years...
Since 2000
2 national championships
1 final 4 appearance
3 conference championships
3 regular season championships...
that is elite
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 18, 2011, 06:26:57 AMLooking only at NCAA results is a fine way, then you come to the conclusion that Florida is an elite team. You agree with this?
I think that elite is just as much about impression as it is results. UCLA, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, those are schools that capture the eye as well as the scoreline. They're the type of programs that kids around the country dream of playing for. Florida is that type of program. They have had a top 25 recruiting class in each of the past 4 years according to ESPN. By comparison, UW has had zero top 25 recruiting classes in that time.
Bo gets results, but he doesn't leave a lasting impression. He's not nearly as good a coach in March as he is in January and February. My guess is that he's figured out the Big Ten. Kudos to him, but if he ever wants Wisconsin to be elite (and I'm not convinced he cares) he has to figure out how to do it at this time of year. Being able to play in a manner that convinces the computers is nice and all, but at the end of the year, to be elite, you need results that catch the attention of the nation. Wisconsin hasn't done that once in the past decade. A single Elite 8 does not even remotely make them elite, especially when you consider how they got that Elite 8.
They are consistently good, I'll give you that. And for some, that's enough. Personally, I'd rather shoot for the stars and have a hope of reaching them than simply know you can safely catch a flight to Columbus and call it a season.
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 18, 2011, 08:12:33 AM
I think that elite is just as much about impression as it is results. UCLA, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, those are schools that capture the eye as well as the scoreline. They're the type of programs that kids around the country dream of playing for. Florida is that type of program. They have had a top 25 recruiting class in each of the past 4 years according to ESPN. By comparison, UW has had zero top 25 recruiting classes in that time.
Bo gets results, but he doesn't leave a lasting impression. He's not nearly as good a coach in March as he is in January and February. My guess is that he's figured out the Big Ten. Kudos to him, but if he ever wants Wisconsin to be elite (and I'm not convinced he cares) he has to figure out how to do it at this time of year. Being able to play in a manner that convinces the computers is nice and all, but at the end of the year, to be elite, you need results that catch the attention of the nation. Wisconsin hasn't done that once in the past decade. A single Elite 8 does not even remotely make them elite, especially when you consider how they got that Elite 8.
They are consistently good, I'll give you that. And for some, that's enough. Personally, I'd rather shoot for the stars and have a hope of reaching them than simply know you can safely catch a flight to Columbus and call it a season.
Wisconsin is a perfect place for Bo Ryan. It has become a football-first school and the basketball team had been so bad for so long, that there is not tremendous pressure to win, particularly in March. As long as UW is competitive in the Big Ten then fans, boosters and alums are content. Wisconsin's goal is seemingly to win the Big Ten. The goal of the elite programs is to win the National Championship.
I dont mean to stir the pot about wisconsin because this thread is seemingly pointless. High tempo vs low tempo. But Wisconsin probably loses in the championship game 4 years ago if not wins it had brian butch not got injured.
elite teams have the depth and injury isn't an excuse...
dominic james?
Quote from: Mu2323 on March 18, 2011, 09:22:23 AMdominic james?
Where did anyone say we were elite? Did James' injury cost us a potential run at the Final Four? Sure, I'll agree to that. But we haven't gotten back to elite yet. We were elite in the 70s. Maybe even early 80s, with the hangover of Al. But one Final Four with Wade didn't make us elite. It got us back into the conversation of being a good team, but we're not elite either.
I'm not saying whether Marquette or Wisconsin is better. They have more overall success in the past decade, no doubt, but calling them elite is just silly. And frankly, even though I would say UW has been better than us, we're a lot closer to elite than they are. Bo's system simply won't afford them that status ever.
Quote from: [Mu]EngiNerd on March 18, 2011, 07:48:08 AM
Yes Flordia has been an elite team in the past 10 years...
Since 2000
2 national championships
1 final 4 appearance
3 conference championships
3 regular season championships...
that is elite
So the SEC only has one elite team ... Florida. Kentucky is not elite?
There are too many willies posting on this board.
Any games tonight?
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 18, 2011, 09:34:57 AM
Where did anyone say we were elite? Did James' injury cost us a potential run at the Final Four? Sure, I'll agree to that. But we haven't gotten back to elite yet. We were elite in the 70s. Maybe even early 80s, with the hangover of Al. But one Final Four with Wade didn't make us elite. It got us back into the conversation of being a good team, but we're not elite either.
I'm not saying whether Marquette or Wisconsin is better. They have more overall success in the past decade, no doubt, but calling them elite is just silly. And frankly, even though I would say UW has been better than us, we're a lot closer to elite than they are. Bo's system simply won't afford them that status ever.
The comment he was responding to said "elite teams have the depth and injury isn't an excuse... "
It depends upon your definition of teams/programs. Elite teams can be viewed as one season, versus elite programs.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 18, 2011, 09:52:03 AMSo the SEC only has one elite team ... Florida. Kentucky is not elite?
Seriously, Another, what are you on about? You're usually pretty rational, but trying to defend UW as an elite program has you trying to dissect every post in here and trying to find ways to put UW over. Where did he say Kentucky wasn't elite? Why are you putting words in people's mouths?
Wisconsin is good. I'd even say very good. But they are not elite. They do not have a national profile befitting an elite basketball school. They do not recruit at an elite level. Why do you feel it is so necessary that they people think they are elite?
Quote from: El Duderino on March 17, 2011, 11:51:14 PM
Except for the last few years as the Big Ten improved with the addition of quality coaches in Matta at OSU and Painter at Purdue, the Big East has been a better conference and for the first 4-5 years of Ryan's tenure, the Big East was significantly better.
The Big East has been better since its expansion, is better now, and will continue to be a better basketball conference than is the Big Tweleven. The bottom of the Big East drags down the entire conference, which closes the gap between the Big East and every other conference or results in the Big East being ranked lower than another conference.
(Not saying to trim the fat in the Big East.)
There is no way Wisconsin can be an elite team. Their NCAA record under Bo Ryan is dismal.
Early in any coaches career, you can be excited by conference championships, but you need deep runs in the tourny, especially when you continually receive higher seeds.
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 18, 2011, 10:02:58 AM
Seriously, Another, what are you on about? You're usually pretty rational, but trying to defend UW as an elite program has you trying to dissect every post in here and trying to find ways to put UW over. Where did he say Kentucky wasn't elite? Why are you putting words in people's mouths?
Ok, let me try this ...
Willie (echoing Chicos and others) like to take shots at MU by saying we are behind UW. The implication is UW is some non-descript middling kind of basketball program and if MU is worse than that, we are in deep trouble.
What I originally posted was, according to KenPom, UW has been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. Even UNC has not been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. So,
BY THIS MEASURE, UW has been better than UNC.
UW has been to the NCAA 12 straight years. Only Kansas (22), Duke (16) and Michigan State (14) have longer streaks.
So, to take a shot at MU that UW is better fails to appreciate how good they have been in recent years. By these measures not many programs have been better.
For MU to have been better than UW in recent years, we would have to been an elite program.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on March 18, 2011, 09:03:49 AM
Wisconsin is a perfect place for Bo Ryan. It has become a football-first school and the basketball team had been so bad for so long, that there is not tremendous pressure to win, particularly in March. As long as UW is competitive in the Big Ten then fans, boosters and alums are content. Wisconsin's goal is seemingly to win the Big Ten. The goal of the elite programs is to win the National Championship.
I by and large agree with this, but I have heard more rumblings the past couple of years. Losing to Cornell stung. If they lose to KSU by being "out-athleted," there are going to be even more grumblings. If you read the boards after they lost out on JPT, there was a great deal of hand-wringing that for as good as a coach as Bo is, they have basically topped out because Bo can't get enough talent to Wisconsin.
I tell you though, Bo's teams do all the little things right. Dude can coach.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 18, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Ok, let me try this ...
Willie (echoing Chicos and others) like to take shots at MU by saying we are behind UW. The implication is UW is some non-descript middling kind of basketball program and if MU is worse than that, we are in deep trouble.
What I originally posted was, according to KenPom, UW has been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. Even UNC has not been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. So, BY THIS MEASURE, UW has been better than UNC.
UW has been to the NCAA 12 straight years. Only Kansas (22), Duke (16) and Michigan State (14) have longer streaks.
So, to take a shot at MU that UW is better fails to appreciate how good they have been in recent years. By these measures not many programs have been better.
For MU to have been better than UW in recent years, we would have to been an elite program.
Interesting measurement. The problem is that its a stupid argument since program success isn't measured in Kenpom rankings. No one does that.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on March 18, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Ok, let me try this ...
Willie (echoing Chicos and others) like to take shots at MU by saying we are behind UW. The implication is UW is some non-descript middling kind of basketball program and if MU is worse than that, we are in deep trouble.
What I originally posted was, according to KenPom, UW has been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. Even UNC has not been top 10 5 of the last 8 years. So, BY THIS MEASURE, UW has been better than UNC.
UW has been to the NCAA 12 straight years. Only Kansas (22), Duke (16) and Michigan State (14) have longer streaks.
So, to take a shot at MU that UW is better fails to appreciate how good they have been in recent years. By these measures not many programs have been better.
For MU to have been better than UW in recent years, we would have to been an elite program.
Actually UW has been to the NCAA 13 straight years.
They have a winning record in those 13 years in the NCAA tournament.
I don't think they are non-descript at all, not sure why you lumped me into that argument. I believe they are a very good program. An elite program at home, but overall a very good program. That doesn't mean MU sucks, it means MU is good but hasn't been as good as UW-madison in any comparison tool I can find since 2000. Both have a Final Four, but UW-madison has multiple conference titles, a lot more NCAA appearances, a lot more NCAA wins, more overall regular season wins, more wins head to head against MU, etc, etc
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 18, 2011, 12:39:12 PM
I don't think they are non-descript at all, not sure why you lumped me into that argument.
Because when you say "MU is not as good as UW" it's often worded as a shot against MU. Something is wrong with MU that they are not as good as UW.
You do not portray it as UW has had a remarkable run.
Happy now?
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on March 18, 2011, 12:09:38 PM
Interesting measurement. The problem is that its a stupid argument since program success isn't measured in Kenpom rankings. No one does that.
So top 10 rankings at the end of the season is a stupid measurement?