MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: ChicosBailBonds on October 31, 2013, 11:50:02 PM
-
Personally, I think its crap but I know some of you buy into this. I actually believe the regular season matters, conference championships matter, etc.
But for those of you who don't care about that, who would be fine with going 0-28 but winning the conference tournament and going to the NCAA tournament where the season starts, here is a ranking of the "team of the century" which is based on one thing only....NCAA tournament wins. The END ALL, BE ALL for some.
MU is 22nd with 13 wins.
http://johngasaway.com/2013/10/29/kansas-is-your-team-of-the-century-so-far/
-
That top 10 looks completely legit. If I had to name the top 10 programs in the country in no particular order, those would be the teams.
Conference championships dont mean as much as they used to, especially in the BE.
-
That top 10 looks completely legit. If I had to name the top 10 programs in the country in no particular order, those would be the teams.
Conference championships dont mean as much as they used to, especially in the BE.
To many fans they still do. For others, it doesn't. To each their own I suppose. Doing something for an entire season, home and away, constant grind is an accomplishment. What MU did last year, that is a big accomplishment. What FGCU did in the tournament, getting hot at the right time is nice, glamorous, etc, but we seem to reward teams on what they did over a few games and not the long haul. Makes you wonder if some teams are just better off coasting a bit, do well enough to get in the tournament, get a decent seed but not try to win the conference title. That's a shame, but I'm sure some thing that way.
-
To many fans they still do. For others, it doesn't. To each their own I suppose. Doing something for an entire season, home and away, constant grind is an accomplishment. What MU did last year, that is a big accomplishment. What FGCU did in the tournament, getting hot at the right time is nice, glamorous, etc, but we seem to reward teams on what they did over a few games and not the long haul. Makes you wonder if some teams are just better off coasting a bit, do well enough to get in the tournament, get a decent seed but not try to win the conference title. That's a shame, but I'm sure some thing that way.
Unbalanced schedules make conference championships somewhat meaningless to me. We played Syracuse at home and beat them with an unbelievable performance from Gardner. Then we looked clueless on a neutral court. What if we played Su at the Carrier Dome last year during th regular season instead of the BC? Same outcome? What if we played them twice?
-
Personally, I think its crap but I know some of you buy into this. I actually believe the regular season matters, conference championships matter, etc.
But for those of you who don't care about that, who would be fine with going 0-28 but winning the conference tournament and going to the NCAA tournament where the season starts, here is a ranking of the "team of the century" which is based on one thing only....NCAA tournament wins. The END ALL, BE ALL for some.
MU is 22nd with 13 wins.
http://johngasaway.com/2013/10/29/kansas-is-your-team-of-the-century-so-far/
Rock Chalk Jayhawk!
Thank God for Buzz Williams, though. Imagine how shameful Marquette's ranking if we had to rely solely on the March performance of The Bronzed Beast! We'd be tied with Kent State for 57th place
-
IMO, no asterisks, just don't count wins before the round of 64. I mean beating up on a crap team that won the conference tournament for its crappy conference that's not good enough to get an autobid to the round of 64 should not be considered the same as a round of 64 and beyond win.
One thing you've got to like about this way of evaluating programs is that it penalizes teams for losing to lower ranked teams when the pressure is on, rewards teams for beating a higher ranked team when the pressure is on, and to get to the top you have to pile up tournament wins which means you kept winning as the competition continued to grow. For that reason, the list results are probably most valid at the top, with the validity dropping off as one goes further down it.
Georgetown fans would prefer Chicos' evaluation, though.
-
Wisconsin 20, MU 13? Let's get 'er done!
-
Providence is the only Big East team without a win. DePaul has one win.
-
Unbalanced schedules make conference championships somewhat meaningless to me. We played Syracuse at home and beat them with an unbelievable performance from Gardner. Then we looked clueless on a neutral court. What if we played Su at the Carrier Dome last year during th regular season instead of the BC? Same outcome? What if we played them twice?
Dead on. Unbalanced schedules, teams playing on short rest, top coaches and teams trying to peak in March not January or February - lots of reasons why the NCAA tournament, not the regular season, is the ultimate measure of success. In every sport that I can think of, high school, college or professional, what matters most is the post season. In college hockey or baseball the ultimate is advancing to and winning the Frozen Four or the College World Series. In basketball, it's the Final Four and the National Championship. The regular seasons are to qualify for the tournaments. and to the extent that you are successful, your path to the titles are made easier (making it less of a crapshoot). You get the best refs and no one has to play on short rest. Want to complain that it's "one game"? Most conference champions are decided by one game - at least in the tournament the one game is played under the fairest of conditions.
-
All the recent success could make you think MU would be higher, but we had a pretty dry run there post FF and pre-Buzz. You have to think with the influx of talent we should slowly climb up that list in the next few years.
-
Unbalanced schedules make conference championships somewhat meaningless to me. We played Syracuse at home and beat them with an unbelievable performance from Gardner. Then we looked clueless on a neutral court. What if we played Su at the Carrier Dome last year during th regular season instead of the BC? Same outcome? What if we played them twice?
And what if we had played Louisville twice?
I think conference titles mean something. They aren't entirely meaningless...but orders of magnitude less meaningful than NCAA tournament performance.
-
To many fans they still do. For others, it doesn't. To each their own I suppose. Doing something for an entire season, home and away, constant grind is an accomplishment. What MU did last year, that is a big accomplishment. What FGCU did in the tournament, getting hot at the right time is nice, glamorous, etc, but we seem to reward teams on what they did over a few games and not the long haul. Makes you wonder if some teams are just better off coasting a bit, do well enough to get in the tournament, get a decent seed but not try to win the conference title. That's a shame, but I'm sure some thing that way.
FGCU? Who the frack is FGCU? Aren't you on record as saying almost nobody remembers teams that go to the Sweet 16? Except when they do, of course.
-
And what if we had played Louisville twice?
I think conference titles mean something. They aren't entirely meaningless...but orders of magnitude less meaningful than NCAA tournament performance.
Agree. If they count, the game aren't meaningless. But just as the preconference games of November and December mean less than the conference games, so the conference games mean less than the NCAA tournament games. Only someone arguing for argument's sake would disagree.
-
Thanks, Coach Crean, for your 5 wins in 8 years. Thanks, Buzz, for your 8 wins in 5 years.
-
My general thoughts on importance (from most prestige added to least)
National Champions
National Runner Up
Making the Final Four
Making the Elite Eight
Winning the Conference Tournament (assuming you play in a high major conference)
Making the Sweet 16
Winning the Conference Regular Season
Making the Round of 32
Making the Tournament
-
My general thoughts on importance (from most prestige added to least)
National Champions
National Runner Up
Making the Final Four
Making the Elite Eight
Winning the Conference Tournament (assuming you play in a high major conference)
Making the Sweet 16
Winning the Conference Regular Season
Making the Round of 32
Making the Tournament
For major programs, winning the conference regular season title means more than winning the conference tourney. For many major programs, the conf tourney is almost a hassle.
-
For major programs, winning the conference regular season title means more than winning the conference tourney. For many major programs, the conf tourney is almost a hassle.
True, but those who win the tournament are the ones who get to raise the conference champions banner
-
Thanks, Coach Crean, for your 5 wins in 8 years. Thanks, Buzz, for your 8 wins in 5 years.
Here are the standings since Buzz took over:
1.Kansas 13
1.Duke 13
1.Louisville 13
1.Kentucky 13
1.Syracuse 13
1.N Carolina 13
1.Michigan St13
8.Ohio St 11
8.Butler 11
10.UCONN 10
11.Florida 9
12.MARQUETTE 8
13-300 Who cares?
Not blueblood, but the best 5 year stretch of basketball at MU since the 70s. Nice goin', Buzz.
-
Unbalanced schedules make conference championships somewhat meaningless to me. We played Syracuse at home and beat them with an unbelievable performance from Gardner. Then we looked clueless on a neutral court. What if we played Su at the Carrier Dome last year during th regular season instead of the BC? Same outcome? What if we played them twice?
If we played SU at the Carrier Dome instead of the BC? We probably lose, but we also probably instead play Cincy or Louisville at home and win. If we played the Orange twice? Then we probably only play Georgetown once, and likely would have gotten that at home, which we won.
It's unbalanced, but it still mostly tends to balance out.
-
True, but those who win the tournament are the ones who get to raise the conference champions banner
Huh? Teams who win regular season titles raise banners too. Teams can raise banners for anything that they want.
(http://s3.hubimg.com/u/7733762_f520.jpg)
In fact, it looks like Chicos tried to buy this one for $275, but came up short. (Check the bid history)
http://auctions.cbssports.com/auctiondisplay.cfm/auctionnbr/57833 (http://auctions.cbssports.com/auctiondisplay.cfm/auctionnbr/57833)
-
wisconsin is higher than MU? Suspect at best...
-
FGCU? Who the frack is FGCU? Aren't you on record as saying almost nobody remembers teams that go to the Sweet 16? Except when they do, of course.
When it is a team out of nowhere, yes...Cinderellas get noticed. Do you think anyone remembers if Syracuse or Duke or UNC made the Sweet 16 in the last 5 years? Nope. Cinderellas, yes, because they are Cinderellas. Power programs, you just expect them to be there unless they get knocked off by a Lehigh or whatever.
Not hard, really isn't hard. Pure common sense...I know it's in you somewhere
-
True, but those who win the tournament are the ones who get to raise the conference champions banner
Banners for regular season champions and conference tournament champions
-
Wisconsin being rated higher than MU is NOT suspect. No NCAA tourney appearances for MU in 99-00, 00-01, 03-04, 04-05. Wiscy has gone every year and Bo usually wins until he faces a higher seed.... Ergo, more tourney wins for the Badgers.
-
My general thoughts on importance (from most prestige added to least)
National Champions
National Runner Up
Making the Final Four
Making the Elite Eight
Winning the Conference Tournament (assuming you play in a high major conference)
Making the Sweet 16
Winning the Conference Regular Season
Making the Round of 32
Making the Tournament
You put more importance on winning a 3 day conference tournament than 3+ months winning the conference?
I look at them in terms of the goals teams set and the flow of those goals.
Win your conference
Win your conference tournament
Make the NCAA Tournament
Get to Final Four
Win the NCAA Tournament
Similar to other programs....one goal met leads to the possibility of the next goal achievement.
-
Thanks, Coach Crean, for your 5 wins in 8 years. Thanks, Buzz, for your 8 wins in 5 years.
Thanks, Coach Crean for the only Final Four in 30 years. Thanks for hiring Buzz as well, and leaving him with awesome talent to get his second head coaching gig started off way better than the first.
-
Wisconsin being rated higher than MU is NOT suspect. No NCAA tourney appearances for MU in 99-00, 00-01, 03-04, 04-05. Wiscy has gone every year and Bo usually wins until he faces a higher seed.... Ergo, more tourney wins for the Badgers.
So you're basing your conclusion on the early 2000's and thats it. Got it. Team of the Century is what i thought this article was referring to?
Edit... i see now since the 2000's, i stand corrected. Sorry boss
-
I'm not basing it on anything. The author of the story is basing it on NCAA tourney win this century. By that measure, Wisconsin is ahead 20-13.
-
Texas is higher than MU......I guess that means if Buzz goes to Texas he is going to a better program
-
No, it means that Barnes had a really nice run for a few years. Now his program has fallen on hard times.
-
Wisconsin 20, MU 13? Let's get 'er done!
In the Buzz era MU is up 8-6 in tourney wins, 1-0 in conference title wins, 3-2 in head to head matchups. Buzz > Bo.
-
Thanks, Coach Crean for the only Final Four in 30 years. Thanks for hiring Buzz as well, and leaving him with awesome talent to get his second head coaching gig started off way better than the first.
I hate playing your silly "hypocrisy game", but enough already. You excuse eight years of abject failure (one win, opponent scouted by Buzz) because the tournament is a crap shoot (all luck) yet you constantly have your head up TC's backside praising him for one (by your definition) lucky year. You can't have it both ways.
-
I would think the NCAA tournament is the ultimate unbalanced schedule. I am not going to look it up, but I guessing in the last 14 years Kansas has been a 1 seed 5 times, a 2 seed 5 times and 3 or higher 4 times. At least 10 of their 37 wins are basically give me games.
-
I would think the NCAA tournament is the ultimate unbalanced schedule. I am not going to look it up, but I guessing in the last 14 years Kansas has been a 1 seed 5 times, a 2 seed 5 times and 3 or higher 4 times. At least 10 of their 37 wins are basically give me games.
The schedule is "balanced" because everyone plays either a Thursday/Saturday or Friday/Sunday schedule and nobody plays on their home court. That said, the NCAA doesn't want a crapshoot so they seed the tournament and let the top teams play close to home against the lesser ones. Works pretty well - since 1990, 18 #1 seeds have won it all (2 #2s, 3 #3s, 1 #4) and no team seeded 5th or lower has won the title. Chalk fest, no crapshoot.
-
So, in a sense, this rating system does give teams credit for regular season success, to the extent that the regular season success gives them a better seed in the NCAA tourney (and an easier path to win some games).
-
So, in a sense, this rating system does give teams credit for regular season success, to the extent that the regular season success gives them a better seed in the NCAA tourney (and an easier path to win some games).
Exactly. They take out the "crap" but to win you still have to "shoot".
-
(http://s3.hubimg.com/u/7733762_f520.jpg)
In fact, it looks like Chicos tried to buy this one for $275, but came up short. (Check the bid history)
http://auctions.cbssports.com/auctiondisplay.cfm/auctionnbr/57833 (http://auctions.cbssports.com/auctiondisplay.cfm/auctionnbr/57833)
Jamie! Get up off your wallet and bring this vintage Creanobilia home to the OC!
You're still hosting Thanksgiving dinner, right??
-
True, but those who win the tournament are the ones who get to raise the conference champions banner
While its true tgat you can raise a banner for anything (vcu debating raising a "havoc" banner?), its nevertheless true that the Big East media guide only lists the conference tourney champs as its "previous big east champions." Thus, MU was not THE champion of the big east last year, only Louisville was.
The BE is the exception to the rule, where winning the conference tourney is much more prestigious than being the regular season champ.