Started By
Message
re: Basketball - More important - League Championship or Tournament Championship?
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:43 pm to BluegrassBelle
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:43 pm to BluegrassBelle
Anyone else want to answer the original question?
My answer: League Championship is more important if you have a top 4 seed already locked up. Tournament Championship is more important if you're still fighting for a berth.
My answer: League Championship is more important if you have a top 4 seed already locked up. Tournament Championship is more important if you're still fighting for a berth.
1
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:43 pm to BluegrassBelle
Who is to say we wouldn't have?
You base your opinion off of Stan Heath and Pelpurey coaches teams. Under Richardson, Arkansas was 7-10 against UK. We made terrible hires, shite happens.
For you to assume UK walks all over our program if we are in the same league for all our years is a baseless opinion. It's an assumption.
Alabama was your main competition in league play, with an occasional LSU uprising.
You base your opinion off of Stan Heath and Pelpurey coaches teams. Under Richardson, Arkansas was 7-10 against UK. We made terrible hires, shite happens.
For you to assume UK walks all over our program if we are in the same league for all our years is a baseless opinion. It's an assumption.
Alabama was your main competition in league play, with an occasional LSU uprising.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:43 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Anyone else want to answer the original question?
We did in the first couple pages.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:44 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Am I the only one who answered the original question?
A couple people tried but the Hog inferiority complex is just too strong. This outcome, its inevitable.
The thread might change but the cast of idiots stays the same.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:45 pm to BluegrassBelle
Seriously retard??? Link????
I said we could have been competitive in the SEC (which is true) because that one guy downplayed our success due to it being in the SWC. We proved we could compete in this league by winning it in year one.
I said we could have been competitive in the SEC (which is true) because that one guy downplayed our success due to it being in the SWC. We proved we could compete in this league by winning it in year one.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:45 pm to JDM1992
quote:
I think it's completely stupid that you can go winless in the regular season and win the National Championship via automatic tie-ins by winning the conference tourney
If you go winless in the regular season, chances are about as likely as a 16 beating a 1 that you're going to win the tournament title.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:45 pm to Hawgeye
quote:
Who is to say we wouldn't have?
You haven't in 20 years. That's probably a pretty good statistical indicator.
quote:
You base your opinion off of Stan Heath and Pelpurey coaches teams. Under Richardson, Arkansas was 7-10 against UK. We made terrible hires, shite happens.
And we hired Billy Gillispie who ended up with us in the NIT. You're not the only program to make bad coaching hires so this argument is for naught as well.
quote:
For you to assume UK walks all over our program if we are in the same league for all our years is a baseless opinion. It's an assumption.
As it is an assumption that you would be Kentucky Lite if you had showed up in conference earlier. Of course we have the last 20 years where you've actually been in conference to use as an indicator.
quote:
Alabama was your main competition in league play, with an occasional LSU uprising.
So you weren't the first? Thanks for confirming that.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:47 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
So how many SWC teams in your time there won a National Championship in Basketball in the NCAA Tournament?
Houston was runner-up in 83 and 84.
Made the Final Four in 67, 68, 82, 83, 84.
Texas made the final four in 43 and 47.
SMU made the Final Four in 56.
So the SEC has similar parity in the league pre-expansion?
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:48 pm to Arkansasrazorback
quote:
Seriously retard??? Link????
quote:
He was saying we would have never been able to compete with UK had we been in the SEC, which is false. Derp.
False would imply that you could compete. In the grand scheme of things, a very short period of time out of a 20 year span isn't exactly competing.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:50 pm to BluegrassBelle
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:56 pm to Arkansasrazorback
Only Arkansas fans would get into a pissing contest with a blueblood like UK over basketball.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:57 pm to DaleDenton
And you didn't answer my question, how many SWC teams won the NCAA Tournament and a championship in your time there?
Obviously the answer is none. So I guess we're not the only ones who didn't have much competition given your logic.
LSU had 3 Final Fours in that span. Mississippi State had one.
So it was you all and Houston. One team does not make consistent "competition" across the conference.
FWIW, Florida has been far greater competition post-expansion then Arkansas has. Maybe had they hired some better coaches they would've been the one competing (using Hog logic of course).
Obviously the answer is none. So I guess we're not the only ones who didn't have much competition given your logic.
quote:
So the SEC has similar parity in the league pre-expansion?
LSU had 3 Final Fours in that span. Mississippi State had one.
So it was you all and Houston. One team does not make consistent "competition" across the conference.
FWIW, Florida has been far greater competition post-expansion then Arkansas has. Maybe had they hired some better coaches they would've been the one competing (using Hog logic of course).
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:59 pm to BluegrassBelle
Arkansas was 45-19 vs the SEC prior to joining.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:59 pm to kilo
quote:
Only Arkansas fans would get into a pissing contest with a blueblood like UK over basketball.
I think I'm done for now. I think everyone else gets my point. tBasketball Flagship of the SEC over and out.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:01 pm to Hawgeye
quote:
Arkansas was 45-19 vs the SEC prior to joining.
0-4 vs. Kentucky prior to joining. 8-25 overall.
That 32% winning percentage is frightening.
This post was edited on 12/27/12 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:01 pm to Hawgeye
Also, only a retard uses bad coaching hires as a non excuse. I guess we should has our entire opinion of Kentucky basketball on just the Billy G years, right?
Now, do you see how stupid that sounds?
Now, do you see how stupid that sounds?
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:03 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
I think I'm done for now.
Yea, the sad thing though is you really cant have a basketball thread without the Hogs turning it into a real time example of their inferiority complex.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:03 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
LSU had 3 Final Fours in that span
1953, 1981, 1986
Post Expansion:
LSU
2006
Ms State
1996
Florida
1994, 2000, 2006, 2007
So it was LSU and LSU meeting the pre-expansion criteria.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:04 pm to Hawgeye
quote:
Also, only a retard uses bad coaching hires as a non excuse. I guess we should has our entire opinion of Kentucky basketball on just the Billy G years, right?
Now, do you see how stupid that sounds?
Totally. Missing. The. Point.
You're using it as an excuse as to why you haven't done well in years. Virtually every SEC team in the conference could say the same thing.
Like I said before, that would be like me saying but Kentucky Football could compete with Alabama Football for conference titles IF we had hired better coaches or kept Bear Bryant. No one says that because it didn't happen. Capice?
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:06 pm to BluegrassBelle
fact is, there were a lot of really, really good SEC basketball teams that didn't have a shot at a tournament, because we were vying for one spot with the best basketball program of all time.
Teams that could have easily made a nice run in the tournament.
Teams that could have easily made a nice run in the tournament.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News