Started By
Message
re: Lots of chatter about Nate Oats in Lexington
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:08 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:08 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Equating the 8 team NCAAT of 1950 to the 20+ team, conference champ only tournaments of the 1970s is definitely something.
How about the 1954 Tournament? Bradley made it to the Final Four. A tournament of only 24 teams in an era where many teams chose to play in the NIT instead. You think that should be weighted the same as a Final Four today that starts out as a Tourney of 68 teams?
quote:
Better let everyone know that anything that happened pre-1985 is as irrelevant
Never said 1985. I said 1978 was the advent of the modern era as at least that’s when seeding started.
Prior to 1975 the SEC had exactly six ALL TIME NCAA Tournament appearances by teams other than Kentucky (LSU 2x, Vandy 2x, Tennessee and Miss St 1x). That’s it.
Theoretically a SEC team could be #2 in the country but not make the Tournament because Kentucky almost always won the SEC and was the only representative. There was a limit of one per league.
That’s why so many programs from today’s Big 12 and Big 10 have Final Four appearances on their resume because their leagues were more balanced and offered more opportunity for multiple teams to make the Tourney over a span of several years.
Tournament appearances and accomplishments should be worth WAY more value if they occurred in the modern era… certainly since 1975 (when leagues could send more than one team). More so since 1978 (when seeding began)… even more so after 1979 (expanded to 40 teams). And especially after 1985 (expanded to 64 teams).
This post was edited on 2/6/24 at 2:09 pm
0
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:08 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Factoring NCAA Tournament success, weighted with a recency bias since a Tournament appearance in the last 5 years should be worth more than 75 years ago (I have a calculation to factor all of this):
1. Kentucky- 429.4
2. Florida- 170.3
3. Arkansas- 124.9
4. LSU- 82.5
5. Tennessee- 53.0
6. Missouri- 48.5
7. Alabama- 47.6
8. Auburn- 45.3
9. Mississippi St- 31.0
10. South Carolina- 30.6
11. Texas A&M- 30.0
12. Vanderbilt- 28.2
13. Georgia- 22.9
14. Ole Miss- 11.6
quote:
Neither of those single seasons have any bearing on a basketball program that is historically among the worst of all-time.
The 85%er jokes write themselves.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:13 pm to Salty Morton
quote:
Why would he leave Alabama for kentucky?
Why would a football coach leave Kentucky for Alabama?
It's the same thing in reverse. You aren't Kentucky basketball. You aren't close. You will never be close. Just stop. They would take your coach if they wanted him, just like you'd take their football coach if you wanted him.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:19 pm to Hawgeye
quote:
A tournament win or two would put them ahead of a program with more National Titles, Final Fours,
Sorry I’m not too impressed with Arkansas’ 1941 and 1945 Final Fours that started with just 8 teams making the entire field. You think winning one game (without seeding) is worth the same as a Final Four in today’s world???
Since seeding began in 1978, here’s how it breaks down:
Tournament appearances:
Arkansas- 30
Oklahoma- 30
2nd round appearances:
Arkansas- 23
Oklahoma- 19
Sweet 16 appearances:
Oklahoma- 11
Arkansas- 8
Elite 8 appearances:
Arkansas- 6
Oklahoma- 6
Final Four appearances:
Arkansas- 4
Oklahoma- 3
Championship Game appearances:
Arkansas- 2
Oklahoma- 1
National Titles:
Arkansas- 1
Oklahoma- 0
When you factor is Arkansas has very little to show for the past 29 seasons, yeah it’s pretty close.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:20 pm to CatfishJohn
More chatter about Oats to Louisville.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:42 pm to AUTiger789
Here’s an example of just how absurd historical NCAA accomplishments are:
In 1950, BYU made the Final Four. A banner hangs in their arena today.
Their record was 21-10 and they received an NCAA Tournament invitation because they were deemed the best team in the sparsely populated Mountain Region.
At the time, only 8 teams made the Tournament in whole, so everyone who got an invite counts an Elite 8 appearance to this day.
There was no seeding, so teams were just randomly paired up.
BYU was paired up to play 14-12 Baylor (no joke), and they of course won the game to advance to the Final Four.
So 1950 Baylor (14-13) counts an Elite 8 appearance. Also 1950 BYU (22-12) counts a Final Four appearance. Neither team ever made an appearance in the AP poll all season long.
Meanwhile 1950 St John’s finished the regular season 22-4 and was ranked every week in the AP poll with an average ranking of 4.7. But they did not receive an NCAA Tournament invitation and to this day doesn’t count even a first round tournament appearance for that season.
Sorry I’m unimpressed with some of these NCAA “accomplishments” from before the modern era.
In 1950, BYU made the Final Four. A banner hangs in their arena today.
Their record was 21-10 and they received an NCAA Tournament invitation because they were deemed the best team in the sparsely populated Mountain Region.
At the time, only 8 teams made the Tournament in whole, so everyone who got an invite counts an Elite 8 appearance to this day.
There was no seeding, so teams were just randomly paired up.
BYU was paired up to play 14-12 Baylor (no joke), and they of course won the game to advance to the Final Four.
So 1950 Baylor (14-13) counts an Elite 8 appearance. Also 1950 BYU (22-12) counts a Final Four appearance. Neither team ever made an appearance in the AP poll all season long.
Meanwhile 1950 St John’s finished the regular season 22-4 and was ranked every week in the AP poll with an average ranking of 4.7. But they did not receive an NCAA Tournament invitation and to this day doesn’t count even a first round tournament appearance for that season.
Sorry I’m unimpressed with some of these NCAA “accomplishments” from before the modern era.
This post was edited on 2/6/24 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 2/6/24 at 2:50 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Sweet 16 appearances: Oklahoma- 11 Arkansas- 8
Arkansas has 13 in your selected (dumb) timeframe.
quote:
When you factor is Arkansas has very little to show for the past 29 seasons, yeah it’s pretty close.
So now you move the goalposts again?
Arkansas also has 15 conference titles in your 1978 timeframe, a national title, another Final Four, head to head lead against Oklahoma, more NCAAt wins…and another win or two and you’d put OU ahead of a top 10-15 all time program.
Makes sense all the Bama posters are pointing and laughing at you in this thread
This post was edited on 2/6/24 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 2/6/24 at 3:14 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Sorry I’m unimpressed with some of these NCAA “accomplishments” from before the modern era.
There also were not 300+ basketball programs in the early era. With the expansion of teams playing basketball they had to expand the tournament.
History is history. Simply discrediting it simply because your program wasn’t good, doesn’t delete it.
Auburn had 25 losing or .500 seasons up until 1977-78. So your history probably doesn’t change that much.
Auburn has finished ranked only 9 times in the AP poll. Auburn has averaged just 12.4 wins per season as a program all time. Expanded field wouldn’t help your program much.
Auburn has averaged nearly 11 losses per season in its programs existence. Expanded field wouldn’t help your program much.
Alabama has averaged over 16 wins per season in their existence, less than 10 losses per season, and finished ranked in the AP poll 17 times.
The gap is large between the two programs, but had their always been what you’re clamoring about, the gap would be even larger in favor of Alabama.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 3:23 pm to Hawgeye
quote:
There also were not 300+ basketball programs in the early era. With the expansion of teams playing basketball they had to expand the tournament.
There were also not just a few. There were dozens… around 100… major CBB programs.
quote:
History is history. Simply discrediting it simply because your program wasn’t good, doesn’t delete it.
That’s the problem though. Teams that were “not good” were selected for the NCAA Tournament simply because they resided in a sparsely populated region (like 1950 Baylor).
quote:
Auburn had 25 losing or .500 seasons up until 1977-78. So your history probably doesn’t change that much.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Auburn. This is simply stating the obvious that a Final Four appearance in the 1940s is in no way remotely impressive compared to a Final Four in the modern era. If you can’t see the difference, you are stupid or willfully biased.
quote:
The gap is large between the two programs, but had their always been what you’re clamoring about, the gap would be even larger in favor of Alabama.
How exactly is this known? The whole point of this is to show we don’t know how things would have been because the game of yesterday is not the same as it is today.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 3:49 pm to AUTiger789
Wait until this guy finds out how many teams have been getting invited to the CFB Playoff.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 4:13 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
That’s the problem though. Teams that were “not good” were selected for the NCAA Tournament simply because they resided in a sparsely populated region (like 1950 Baylor).
Baylor won the SWC that year. Has nothing to do with a sparsely populated area.
quote:
This has absolutely nothing to do with Auburn. This is simply stating the obvious that a Final Four appearance in the 1940s is in no way remotely impressive compared to a Final Four in the modern era. If you can’t see the difference, you are stupid or willfully biased.
You can’t simply discredit program’s accomplishments because you don’t agree with the system. Should national champions be wiped away? Should John Wooden and UCLA have their titles discredited? Should Adolf Rupp have asterisks next to his name?
Sports all evolve over time, but you don’t wipe away or discredit history just because you don’t like it.
quote:
How exactly is this known? The whole point of this is to show we don’t know how things would have been because the game of yesterday is not the same as it is today.
It’s known because Alabama has won more games, and therefore has been a more successful program. Which means, if you had your way and the tournament always included a large number of teams, they would have even a larger advantage in NCAAt accomplishments, while Auburn wouldn’t. One outlier of a season where Auburn made a Final Four doesn’t erase the other 118 years of your program.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 4:19 pm to paperwasp
quote:
You can hang a picture of that one Final Four banner right next to your oil painting of the Kick Six.
Neither of those single seasons have any bearing on a basketball program that is historically among the worst of all-time.
now do the last five years, because what happened in the 60's/70's doesn't mean a damn thing today.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 4:22 pm to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Wait until this guy finds out how many teams have been getting invited to the CFB Playoff.
Right?
I mean good lord. There were seasons where Arkansas went 17-3 or 18-3 and didn’t make the NCAA tourney. Maybe Arkansas has a few more titles and Final Fours?
We could talk about how stupid SEC football used to be where all teams didn’t even play each other. 4-5 game league schedules.
Evolution of sport can always be criticized, but attempting to minimize programs accomplishments is absolutely ludicrous.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 4:25 pm to Hawgeye
Posted on 2/6/24 at 7:20 pm to WildcatMike
Appears Oats is a candidate for Louisville
This post was edited on 2/6/24 at 7:20 pm
Posted on 2/6/24 at 7:48 pm to BigBlue8Titles
I just dropped in to post BigBlueTitties.
BigBlueTitties
BigBlueTitties
Posted on 2/6/24 at 7:50 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Appears Oats is a candidate for Louisville
I heard Pearl this evening.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 8:36 pm to CatfishJohn
Kentucky has lost its luster in basketball.. OATS has the keys to the house at Bama .. he aint leaving. Kentucky is just a thing of the past.
Page 10 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News