Started By
Message
re: SEC basketball ranked by various criteria
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:39 am to DC RaiseHerBack
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:39 am to DC RaiseHerBack
quote:
quote: But you can't discount tourney appearances. And this. No one really cares or should care about conference titles imo.
The two went hand and hand til the late 70s.
1
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:47 am to T
quote:
The two went hand and hand til the late 70s.
Not being able to claim pre-SEC skews the stats. If you want to leave conference titles out, fine. It still leaves us at #2.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:49 am to Cheese Grits
Grits, I guess your saying Duke suck arse because their success is under K? Duke and Florida kind of mirror each other in a sense.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:53 am to DC RaiseHerBack
Arkansas actually has 30 NCAA Tournament Invitations. The school claims 30 NCAA Tourneys.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:58 am to WildcatMike
quote:
Grits, I guess your saying Duke suck arse because their success is under K? Duke and Florida kind of mirror each other in a sense.
i didn't recall him saying anyone sucked arse. duke has had way more longevity than florida. that said, i have no problem with us and florida being 2 and 3 which ever way- close enough for me.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:03 am to WildcatMike
quote:
Grits, I guess your saying Duke suck arse because their success is under K?
Personally I think Dook sucks arse because they have been cheating for ages but the NCAA looks the other way. Old rat face wins in a wimpy way and I have less respect for that. UNC playing the 4 corners back in the day and Dook flopage are things no real college basketball team worth a damn should have to resort to. If the ACC did not have it's nose so far up the backside of ESPN would we even care about the ACC?
As to the primary point, you have 2 different criteria and I tend to favor the ones who do it over time.
Group A = legacy coaches like Wooden, K, and Billy D
Group B = legacy programs like UK and IU
Both have points but being a legacy program means you have staying power that exceeds a single coach.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:10 am to Hawgeye
quote:
Arkansas actually has 30 NCAA Tournament Invitations. The school claims 30 NCAA Tourneys.
And that skews this as many of those were in the one bid era prior to 1975. Its highly likely Arkansas would have sat home and watched UK play in the NCAAs many times through the 1973-1974 season had they been in the SEC. Alabama,LSU,Tennessee and Vanderbilt would have many more NCAA appearances had they been in the SWC prior to 1975.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:22 am to KCM0Tiger
What about the NIT tourney bids. I ask for two reasons.
1) As a Bama fan, that's all I got.
2) There was a time when the NIT was THE tourney.
1) As a Bama fan, that's all I got.
2) There was a time when the NIT was THE tourney.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:25 am to I-59 Tiger
Of all the teams to cheat...Coach K and Duke are bottom of the list. Coach K is one of the best 2 coaches in college basketball history (allowing for Wooden argument.) How many former Duke players are excellent people to go along with basketball? Coach K built his program the right way and deserves respect.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:26 am to 5thTiger
okay? 
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:41 am to 5thTiger
quote:
Of all the teams to cheat...Coach K and Duke are bottom of the list. Coach K is one of the best 2 coaches in college basketball history (allowing for Wooden argument.)
Whatever.
Wooden was sanitized. I take it you never heard of Papa Sam
As for Duke, if you think they don't cheat you probably still believe in the Easter Bunny.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:46 am to I-59 Tiger
quote:
And that skews this as many of those were in the one bid era prior to 1975. Its highly likely Arkansas would have sat home and watched UK play in the NCAAs many times through the 1973-1974 season had they been in the SEC. Alabama,LSU,Tennessee and Vanderbilt would have many more NCAA appearances had they been in the SWC prior to 1975.
You cant assume that.
The SEC was a one team league. There was no conference tourney for years, because of what UK did to the rest of the league in round ball.
Arkansas has legit teams in the past. Final Fours in the 1940's, more in the 1970's.
Arkansas wasn't just a regional program. The Hogs went out of league and played the North Carolina's, Louisville's, etc.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:52 am to Hawgeye
Aren't a few of Arkansas' "Final Fours" from years only 8 teams went to the tourney? Winning one game to go to the "Final Four" isn't that impressive.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:55 am to I-59 Tiger
Then it isn't impressive for any program to claim Final Fours by your argument in the early days.
When teams went 19-1 or 20-2 or 20-0 back in the day, that is impressive. No matter what point you're trying to make in your argument.
When teams went 19-1 or 20-2 or 20-0 back in the day, that is impressive. No matter what point you're trying to make in your argument.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 11:00 am to Cheese Grits
Personally, I'm not a fan of Wooden, but the fact that he won so many championships suggests he is a pretty solid coach.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 11:10 am to hogminer
quote:
Or more importantly conference tournament titles.
Personally, with no bias at all, I think that's all that matters.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 2:25 pm to I-59 Tiger
quote:
And that skews this as many of those were in the one bid era prior to 1975. Its highly likely Arkansas would have sat home and watched UK play in the NCAAs many times through the 1973-1974 season had they been in the SEC. Alabama,LSU,Tennessee and Vanderbilt would have many more NCAA appearances had they been in the SWC prior to 1975.
This.
The Big 8 and SWC were weaker than the SEC historically (which is one reason why neither the Big 8 nor SWC still exist). No way Arky or Mizzou have even a fraction of the conference titles/NCAA tourney appearances if they were in the SEC during that era. In fact, Arky had to step up their play quite a bit when they joined the stronger SEC in '92, and it paid off big for them--their new SEC opponents' strength helped challenge the Hogs to compete at a higher level and they immediately were able to finally use that drive to march through the NCAA tourney on to the title (ditto for their track program, which only had a couple of nattys in the mid-1980s before joining the SEC and being pushed to greatness).
Posted on 1/30/15 at 3:36 pm to TheDude321
quote:
The Big 8 and SWC were weaker than the SEC historically (which is one reason why neither the Big 8 nor SWC still exist). No way Arky or Mizzou have even a fraction of the conference titles/NCAA tourney appearances if they were in the SEC during that era. In fact, Arky had to step up their play quite a bit when they joined the stronger SEC in '92, and it paid off big for them--their new SEC opponents' strength helped challenge the Hogs to compete at a higher level and they immediately were able to finally use that drive to march through the NCAA tourney on to the title (ditto for their track program, which only had a couple of nattys in the mid-1980s before joining the SEC and being pushed to greatness).
1989-90 - Final Four
1990-91 - Elite Eight
I think we were on the right path...
Posted on 1/30/15 at 3:48 pm to PiggieSmalls
quote:
90-91 - Elite Eight
Waxed Bama by 23 in the sweet sixteen.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 4:03 pm to TheDude321
Haha, whoever wrote that article has no clue what they are talking about. As far a to say Arkansas would have fewer tourney appearances had they been in the SEC, you're exactly right. So would have Kentucky. Kentucky bitch slapped every member of this league for nearly a century before Arkansas came in. It could be argued Arkansas made SEC basketball relevant since the 90s
This post was edited on 1/30/15 at 4:04 pm
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News