goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Jerome Tang Coaches Kansas State Basketball => Topic started by: Bqqkie Pimp on November 27, 2013, 10:40:40 AM

Title: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on November 27, 2013, 10:40:40 AM
Wichita State is the best team in the state this year and it's really not even close. 

They have the better of the two Wiggins bros, Baker is a better shooter than anybody on our or ku's roster, Early is probably the best player to step foot in Kansas since Beasley and VanVleet is a very solid point guard...

Even though it'll be a rough year for the boys in purple, I'm glad to see baby bro having some success even if it rips the hearts out of lil bro to play second fiddle to an MVC team.

One of the best parts of "TSC" is the leeway that the "S" creates in matters like this.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: WildcatNation on November 27, 2013, 11:44:36 AM
I wish there was an option for mods to not allow some people to start threads.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 27, 2013, 11:57:34 AM
My squawk nephew who I tried to turn EMAW on Saturday told me Wichita St should be in the Big XII. I told him they have no football team and he was perplexed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on November 27, 2013, 12:00:34 PM
Hey, it could happen.  Could schedule the football games, line 'em up and then just take the W.  Sorta like we did w/ TCU  :alleyoop:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on November 27, 2013, 12:26:01 PM
I consider myself a casual fan of WSU but the majority of their fanbase has a horrible case of little man syndrome. Like makes KU fans seem super relaxed and confident and lacking a need for validation. It would almost be worth it to add them as a basketball only member just for the BBSing gold that would ensue.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on November 27, 2013, 12:39:20 PM
I wish there was an option for mods to not allow some people to start threads.

Sorry about that, SquawkNation...  I'll run everything past you henceforth.

 :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on November 27, 2013, 12:56:21 PM
Is there a less likeable poster on this blog than bookiepimp? Sheesh.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: slobber on November 27, 2013, 01:02:07 PM
I like Bookie Pimp. :dunno:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on November 27, 2013, 02:09:40 PM
I hate 'em. Can't stand them.

And yes, clearly this state's best team.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sys on November 27, 2013, 05:45:55 PM
they're a fun team to watch.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: star seed 7 on November 27, 2013, 05:48:27 PM
i have no emotion towards WSU.  i have met WSU alums, but never a WSU fan.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on November 27, 2013, 05:50:37 PM
I love wsu, absolutely love them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on November 27, 2013, 06:42:28 PM
I think too many Emaws have some deep-seated insecurities when it comes to Wichita State.

Why can't some of you give them their due?

They'll never be a threat to us, or even play us in the near future.

Be happy for them, it's the only bright spot in the most underachieving town in the Midwest. 


Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: chemhawk on November 27, 2013, 06:58:40 PM
Troll thread doesn't troll.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: DQ12 on November 27, 2013, 07:17:11 PM
they're a fun team to watch.
they really are.  baker (friend of gE) is a treat and their bigs are very good too.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on November 27, 2013, 07:22:39 PM
I think too many Emaws have some deep-seated insecurities when it comes to Wichita State.

Why can't some of you give them their due?

They'll never be a threat to us, or even play us in the near future.

Be happy for them, it's the only bright spot in the most underachieving town in the Midwest.

Mine goes back to when we played them and their chump coach Turgeon. And I haven't gotten over it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 27, 2013, 07:23:01 PM
Their fans are the worst, but I like Baker for personal reasons. His dad use to sit by my broadcasts when I did his games in HS. Now to the hardwood. With the voice of your beavers, Heath Fanning! :ROFL:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 27, 2013, 07:43:24 PM
Squawks have a pretty sweet thread over on the phog right now asking if Baker should transfer to KU and walk on?  :flush:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on November 27, 2013, 08:11:59 PM
i'll never forgive frank for not getting baker
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on November 27, 2013, 09:37:36 PM
i'll never forgive frank for not getting baker

Who was responsible for not getting Vanvleet? 

That is one scrappy pg.   He has shades of Clemente.   :love:  :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: everyone shut up on November 27, 2013, 09:54:02 PM
every shocker student i've ever met is actually a squawk fan. they don't give a crap about wsu. that said, i think wsu basketball plays hard and is a great team that deserves better than the shitty students that pretend to like them. also, commuter school
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on November 27, 2013, 10:20:44 PM
every shocker student i've ever met is actually a squawk fan. they don't give a crap about wsu. that said, i think wsu basketball plays hard and is a great team that deserves better than the shitty students that pretend to like them. also, commuter school

 I've seen the opposite. 

Its no secret that the Shocker fan base as a whole hates KU because they won't play them.  The negative attitude towards the hawks is written about in the papers and talked about on the sport shows. 

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sys on November 27, 2013, 10:34:08 PM
Who was responsible for not getting Vanvleet? 

That is one scrappy pg.   He has shades of Clemente.   :love:  :love:

yeah, i like him a lot.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mr Bread on November 27, 2013, 11:42:34 PM
Who was responsible for not getting Vanvleet? 

That is one scrappy pg.   He has shades of Clemente.   :love:  :love:

yeah, i like him a lot.

oscar recruited Orris over VanVleet at Illinois.  VanVleet was more highly regarded nationally and locally.  It wasn't just Gray.  Very bizarre oscar fixation on a kid he ran off after one season. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on November 27, 2013, 11:55:12 PM
Who was responsible for not getting Vanvleet? 

That is one scrappy pg.   He has shades of Clemente.   :love:  :love:

yeah, i like him a lot.

oscar recruited Orris over VanVleet at Illinois.  VanVleet was more highly regarded nationally and locally.  It wasn't just Gray.  Very bizarre oscar fixation on a kid he ran off after one season.

oscar being oscar.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: WavetheWheat on November 28, 2013, 08:43:28 AM
I do enjoy WSU and their "below the rim" style of basketball.  Makes it easier for me to relate to when watching their games.  There is really nothing as exiting as watching a perfectly executed lay-up.  Its a nice complement to old timey basketball before they were allowed to dunk.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on November 28, 2013, 08:54:26 AM
It's kinda sad that Ron Baker is better than Will Spradling.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Pett on November 28, 2013, 08:59:39 AM
I think too many Emaws have some deep-seated insecurities when it comes to Wichita State.

Why can't some of you give them their due?

They'll never be a threat to us, or even play us in the near future.

Be happy for them, it's the only bright spot in the most underachieving town in the Midwest.
Agreed here. They are in the MVC, why wish any worse on them? TSC.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: I_have_purplewood on November 28, 2013, 11:15:15 AM
I like Bookie Pimp. :dunno:

You would.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: DQ12 on November 28, 2013, 12:45:09 PM
I do enjoy WSU and their "below the rim" style of basketball.  Makes it easier for me to relate to when watching their games.  There is really nothing as exiting as watching a perfectly executed lay-up.  Its a nice complement to old timey basketball before they were allowed to dunk.
they dunked it a lot when i watched them the other night.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on November 28, 2013, 01:35:34 PM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 28, 2013, 02:02:43 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on November 28, 2013, 02:11:03 PM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.

He's a very good coach. He was actually in my top 10 when we hired Huggins.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on November 28, 2013, 11:08:55 PM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.

Holy hell naw. I get on Patterson quite a bit for being a big fish in a small pond, but Marshall makes Patterson seem like Steve Spurrier. Marshall is absolutely the most maniacal, paranoid, whiny, least media savvy coach in college basketball; it isn't even close. He has one of the most friendly media markets and insular fan base in America yet he is constantly feuding with someone about something insignificant. His assistant coaches don't love him and he doesn't have the best reputation nationally. This was publicly bantered about through the media after his final four run and during the post season hiring spree. I have a WSU insider who has pretty much confirmed all the rumors about his behavior.

He's a great basketball coach but the bright lights, if they ever come, will be an issue for him
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mr Bread on November 29, 2013, 12:55:45 AM
His hair is gross and his glasses look dumb on his sweaty fatish face. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sys on November 29, 2013, 04:01:04 AM
the most maniacal, paranoid, whiny, least media savvy coach in college basketball.

has more fit than a glove.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wabash909 on November 29, 2013, 06:19:08 AM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.

Holy hell naw. I get on Patterson quite a bit for being a big fish in a small pond, but Marshall makes Patterson seem like Steve Spurrier. Marshall is absolutely the most maniacal, paranoid, whiny, least media savvy coach in college basketball; it isn't even close. He has one of the most friendly media markets and insular fan base in America yet he is constantly feuding with someone about something insignificant. His assistant coaches don't love him and he doesn't have the best reputation nationally. This was publicly bantered about through the media after his final four run and during the post season hiring spree. I have a WSU insider who has pretty much confirmed all the rumors about his behavior.

He's a great basketball coach but the bright lights, if they ever come, will be an issue for him

Wait, are you seriously saying you wouldn't take Marshall over oscar Weber given the choice?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: CNS on November 29, 2013, 07:45:03 AM
Purp glasses frames

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on November 29, 2013, 07:54:23 AM
Still would take.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bill Clarahan on November 29, 2013, 08:27:10 AM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: mocat on November 29, 2013, 08:28:53 AM
When I see the name Greg Marshall, my first thought is always "Iowa State"
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on November 29, 2013, 09:03:03 AM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.

Holy hell naw. I get on Patterson quite a bit for being a big fish in a small pond, but Marshall makes Patterson seem like Steve Spurrier. Marshall is absolutely the most maniacal, paranoid, whiny, least media savvy coach in college basketball; it isn't even close. He has one of the most friendly media markets and insular fan base in America yet he is constantly feuding with someone about something insignificant. His assistant coaches don't love him and he doesn't have the best reputation nationally. This was publicly bantered about through the media after his final four run and during the post season hiring spree. I have a WSU insider who has pretty much confirmed all the rumors about his behavior.

He's a great basketball coach but the bright lights, if they ever come, will be an issue for him
yes, it was funny to hear his redassery come out in virtually  every national interview he did during the F4 run.

I will admit,  it does remind me a bit of LHC LHC LHC Bill Snyder before he evolved into the kindly grandfather he is now.  Is  Marshall as prickly with fans and boosters as he is the media?



Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on November 29, 2013, 11:38:50 AM
Just confirmed that the Shocks would JunkYard the Hawks' faces off.

Did we 'cruit Baker? :tucksinshirt:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on November 29, 2013, 11:52:44 AM
Would take greg marshall, would definitely take.

Holy hell naw. I get on Patterson quite a bit for being a big fish in a small pond, but Marshall makes Patterson seem like Steve Spurrier. Marshall is absolutely the most maniacal, paranoid, whiny, least media savvy coach in college basketball; it isn't even close. He has one of the most friendly media markets and insular fan base in America yet he is constantly feuding with someone about something insignificant. His assistant coaches don't love him and he doesn't have the best reputation nationally. This was publicly bantered about through the media after his final four run and during the post season hiring spree. I have a WSU insider who has pretty much confirmed all the rumors about his behavior.

He's a great basketball coach but the bright lights, if they ever come, will be an issue for him

Wait, are you seriously saying you wouldn't take Marshall over oscar Weber given the choice?

How did you get that out of what I typed? That's two completely different conversations. If we're having the conversation both are pretty poor long term solutions for a high major program.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on November 29, 2013, 12:09:47 PM
Greg Marshall is very good.  Very good.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on November 29, 2013, 01:49:00 PM
Greg Marshall is very good.  Very good.

Gregg
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on December 17, 2013, 08:14:06 PM
I'll never forgive Frank for not getting Baker.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on December 17, 2013, 10:34:42 PM
Troll thread doesn't troll.

It's fun knowing more about college basketball than the resident squawks....

 :whistle1:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on December 17, 2013, 10:39:58 PM
It's kinda sad that Ron Baker is better than Will Spradling.

Shoots the ball well and has a flawless complexion :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on December 17, 2013, 10:45:17 PM
They have a good shot at going undefeated into the tournament. I just looked at WSU's schedule, and man the Mo Valley is horrid.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Gooch on December 19, 2013, 04:11:35 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita is gonna eff you up.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 19, 2013, 05:01:27 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Gooch on December 19, 2013, 05:14:12 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on December 19, 2013, 05:52:40 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!

BAWITDABA!!!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 20, 2013, 01:38:57 AM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!

BAWITDABA!!!

Oh yeah, dude missed the dillards game for kid rock, not the shox. Sorry gooch I get your WichitaT outings confused
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Gooch on December 20, 2013, 04:41:50 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!

BAWITDABA!!!

Oh yeah, dude missed the dillards game for kid rock, not the shox. Sorry gooch I get your WichitaT outings confused
Wrong again. I saw the Dillards game from my mommas basement.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 20, 2013, 07:31:48 PM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!

BAWITDABA!!!

Oh yeah, dude missed the dillards game for kid rock, not the shox. Sorry gooch I get your WichitaT outings confused
Wrong again. I saw the Dillards game from my mommas basement.

And you didn't invite me  :curse: I bet your mom made pizza rolls and puppy chow
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on December 23, 2013, 04:56:08 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2013/12/21/3190907/marshallville-leaders-want-to.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on December 23, 2013, 05:52:58 PM
Also catching up on podcasts and heard Marshall say, prior to the game vs. UT in Wichita, that it'd be IBA's first sellout.

Does he have a radio show?  I might have to start doing #gregg coverage.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HerrSonntag on December 23, 2013, 08:16:23 PM
Also catching up on podcasts and heard Marshall say, prior to the game vs. UT in Wichita, that it'd be IBA's first sellout.

Does he have a radio show?  I might have to start doing #gregg coverage.
i was pretty sure WVU @ IBA was a sellout...
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 23, 2013, 09:09:32 PM
Also catching up on podcasts and heard Marshall say, prior to the game vs. UT in Wichita, that it'd be IBA's first sellout.

Does he have a radio show?  I might have to start doing #gregg coverage.
i was pretty sure WVU @ IBA was a sellout...

Yeah, that's why trim posted it, Marshall is a lying mcliarsons.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on December 24, 2013, 08:29:47 AM
Also catching up on podcasts and heard Marshall say, prior to the game vs. UT in Wichita, that it'd be IBA's first sellout.

Does he have a radio show?  I might have to start doing #gregg coverage.

Had to read this two or three times to realize that you were talking about that new place in Wichita and not GIA in Stillwater....


 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on December 24, 2013, 08:45:33 AM
The ugliest fan base to ever attend a game at Sprint center, bar none.

Also the oldest, I think they have fix-o-dent and malt-o-meal at their concession
Super fan Johnny Wichita (ftp://Johnny Wichita)me will eff you up.

You guys know Gooch missed a frank martin era elite non-con, the UNLV dillards game i believe, to see his shox at intrust bank arena
fixed and eff you it was the first ever game there! went for townie history not the shox!

 :Wha:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksupamplemousse on January 08, 2014, 08:38:21 PM
http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html (http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html)

I think this would be great from a fan's perspective, as long as both teams continue to be competitive. Sorry if luked.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 08, 2014, 09:16:01 PM
http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html (http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html)

I think this would be great from a fan's perspective, as long as both teams continue to be competitive. Sorry if luked.

Sure, it would be great, but the 10,500 WSU fans in the world will inspire their coach and AD to insure there is not the slightest perception that WSU is being treated poorly.   Which will mean it will be very difficult to put a series together.   They're pretty much basketball royalty now.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on January 08, 2014, 09:20:10 PM
I'm just glad Weber isn't scared like Self.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 1863 on January 08, 2014, 09:23:00 PM
Quote
For me, playing in Kansas City (against Wichita State) is my first inclination,” Weber said. “That’s what we were talking about last spring. It seats a lot of people and we drew 16,000 or 17,000 for our game against Florida there last season. So if you had Wichita State there, it definitely would become a demanded ticket.

“Again, it’s just got to make sense. Schedule-wise and season-wise. I understand something like that would be good for basketball, but you just have to be smart about it.”

I wouldn't mind seeing K-State playing the Shockers just because its good basketball, but doing something like every other year or three years to build excitement seems like a good money/publicity generator.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksupamplemousse on January 08, 2014, 09:25:41 PM
http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html (http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/08/4737433/k-states-oscar-weber-says-hes.html)

I think this would be great from a fan's perspective, as long as both teams continue to be competitive. Sorry if luked.

Sure, it would be great, but the 10,500 WSU fans in the world will inspire their coach and AD to insure there is not the slightest perception that WSU is being treated poorly.   Which will mean it will be very difficult to put a series together.   They're pretty much basketball royalty now.

Yeah, Marshall is being an uppity bitch about the whole thing. I think they'd be a nice opponent to play in KC every other year though. It'd be hard for them to complain about that.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 08, 2014, 10:07:38 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year. Wichita State would be ok, but it would rank behind Florida and UNLV in terms of excitement for me as a fan
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 08, 2014, 10:11:51 PM
They should make a triangle shaped basketball court and make Wichita state, k-state and KthUg play against each other all at the same time.  The game should be played at the basketball casino in dodge city. The winner stays in garden, the runner up in dodge and the loser in that town in between.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 08, 2014, 10:35:40 PM
Geeeze.... The squawk fans disappeared pretty fast, didn't they.

 :Chirp:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on January 08, 2014, 11:30:53 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year.

 :ROFL: remember when shitty KCers wouldn't by tickets during the OOD era? Because non KCers do.

They should make a triangle shaped basketball court and make Wichita state, k-state and KthUg play against each other all at the same time.  The game should be played at the basketball casino in dodge city. The winner stays in garden, the runner up in dodge and the loser in that town in between.

Cimmaron, Ingalls, or Pierceville? Can we just send the 3rd place team to Fort Dodge instead?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksupamplemousse on January 08, 2014, 11:41:26 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year. Wichita State would be ok, but it would rank behind Florida and UNLV in terms of excitement for me as a fan

We should alternate between KC and Wichita every year. Bring in WSU to KC for a biennial series, and then schedule a marquee game in Wichita on the off years. I would worry about good teams not wanting to go to Wichita to play a game, but the arena is pretty nice, and there has been some good talent coming out of Wichita recently.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on January 27, 2014, 10:50:13 AM
Quote
CatchItKansas ?@CatchItKansas  15m
QUESTION OF THE DAY: How will you react if KU leap frogs WSU in the rankings today? Respond using #catchitkansas! pic.twitter.com/lTAHH7yo6m

Good grief  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 27, 2014, 11:57:17 AM
With the realization that Wichita State has built this nice little 21-0 record against a whole lot of nobodies, I still think they'd push in ku's collective stool if they should meet...  Much like Hickory High was able to do when they played South Bend in the 1954 Indiana HS state finals.

While there is a slight talent advantage for ku, the Shox remain a far better "team".  "Teams" win tourney games typically.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 27, 2014, 11:59:21 AM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ChiComCat on January 27, 2014, 12:06:47 PM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.

Would be great for them to be undefeated and a 1 then we beat them in the second round
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 27, 2014, 12:08:09 PM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.

I disagree with the bolded statement wholeheartedly... This is almost the EXACT same team that played their way to the Final Four last year and damn near made it to the champy game.  They've played far bigger games against much better teams, albeit last spring.

Sure, they'd fold in the piss barn with Higgins making phantom calls. However, in a neutral venue with fair refereeing, Shox would win going away.



Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on January 27, 2014, 12:14:05 PM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.

I disagree with the bolded statement wholeheartedly... This is almost the EXACT same team that played their way to the Final Four last year and damn near made it to the champy game.  They've played far bigger games against much better teams, albeit last spring.

Sure, they'd fold in the piss barn with Higgins making phantom calls. However, in a neutral venue with fair refereeing, Shox would win going away.

This is pretty asinine.  It would also be pretty asinine to argue the inverse - that KU would win going away.  Two really good teams. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on January 27, 2014, 12:14:37 PM
KU beats WSU 98 times out of 100
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on January 27, 2014, 12:57:24 PM
Somebody wake me up when WSU actually plays someone with a pulse.

 :zzz:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 27, 2014, 01:33:38 PM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.

I disagree with the bolded statement wholeheartedly... This is almost the EXACT same team that played their way to the Final Four last year and damn near made it to the champy game.  They've played far bigger games against much better teams, albeit last spring.

Sure, they'd fold in the piss barn with Higgins making phantom calls. However, in a neutral venue with fair refereeing, Shox would win going away.

KU struggled early, but they are still really good, and WSU would put a whole lot of pressure on themselves by making the game bigger than it is. I think they would have a better shot at beating any other team in America than they would KU.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 27, 2014, 01:35:38 PM
I think WSU would collapse from the pressure of playing against KU. Thankfully, I think WSU is going to get a 1 seed and not have to worry about playing the Hawks. It's much more likely that they face us in the tournament.

I disagree with the bolded statement wholeheartedly... This is almost the EXACT same team that played their way to the Final Four last year and damn near made it to the champy game.  They've played far bigger games against much better teams, albeit last spring.

Sure, they'd fold in the piss barn with Higgins making phantom calls. However, in a neutral venue with fair refereeing, Shox would win going away.

This is pretty asinine.  It would also be pretty asinine to argue the inverse - that KU would win going away.  Two really good teams.

Although I generally discredit your totally biased opinion, youthful inexperience is more likely to fold in pressure than seasoned upperclassmen.   I do agree, however, that it's far less likely that ku would win going away.



Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on January 27, 2014, 01:37:55 PM
WSU would put a whole lot of pressure on themselves by making the game bigger than it is. I think they would have a better shot at beating any other team in America than they would KU.

They would do the exact same thing we do every game vs them except they would have an even worse case of small dick syndrome.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on January 27, 2014, 01:41:10 PM
WSU would put a whole lot of pressure on themselves by making the game bigger than it is. I think they would have a better shot at beating any other team in America than they would KU.

They would do the exact same thing we do every game vs them except they would have an even worse case of small dick syndrome.

Interesting if true. I dont see that due to how they composed themselves in the tournament last year
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 27, 2014, 01:43:10 PM
WSU would put a whole lot of pressure on themselves by making the game bigger than it is. I think they would have a better shot at beating any other team in America than they would KU.

They would do the exact same thing we do every game vs them except they would have an even worse case of small dick syndrome.

Interesting if true. I dont see that due to how they composed themselves in the tournament last year

We made an elite 8 run after losing to KU 3 times.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 27, 2014, 02:36:45 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year.

 :ROFL: remember when shitty KCers wouldn't by tickets during the OOD era? Because non KCers do.


Ok just seeing this like 2 weeks later, but I think we filled up the arena pretty well. Southern Miss vs KSU wasn't going to draw 18k anywhere.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on January 27, 2014, 02:47:35 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year.

 :ROFL: remember when shitty KCers wouldn't by tickets during the OOD era? Because non KCers do.


Ok just seeing this like 2 weeks later, but I think we filled up the arena pretty well. Southern Miss vs KSU wasn't going to draw 18k anywhere.
Yeah, wtf?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: puniraptor on January 27, 2014, 08:11:13 PM
How many balls in 3 way bball?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 27, 2014, 08:41:58 PM
Wichita State is really good you retards.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on January 28, 2014, 12:52:04 AM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year.

 :ROFL: remember when shitty KCers wouldn't by tickets during the OOD era? Because non KCers do.


Ok just seeing this like 2 weeks later, but I think we filled up the arena pretty well. Southern Miss vs KSU wasn't going to draw 18k anywhere.
Yeah, wtf?

Isn't there like 3 million people in the KC area? Those upper deck tickets were $20 & and under. Also don't act like that was the only game that did poorly because it wasn't. KC has been better the last couple of games but lol at scheduling a game every year.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: everyone shut up on January 28, 2014, 08:24:29 AM
This has been showing up in my news feed. Their fans annoy me.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Belvis Noland on January 28, 2014, 08:52:39 AM
Wichita State is really good you retards.

yeah, they are.  would easily be a top half Big XII team. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ben ji on January 28, 2014, 09:01:11 AM
How many balls in 3 way bball?

I would say 2...and make it like old timey womens bball where only a certain number of players can cross the half(tri?) court line at a time.


Would look something like this....The O is the 3 hoops


                                O
                                l
                                l
                           _______   
                         /             \
                         \ --------- /
                          \______/
                                 l
                                 l
          O                     l                 O


Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on January 28, 2014, 09:03:59 AM
if WSU goes undefeated on the season what seed are they in the tournement? like a 4?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on January 28, 2014, 09:12:18 AM
if WSU goes undefeated on the season what seed are they in the tournement? like a 4?

I would guess a #2, much to the chagrin of Gregggg Marshall and Shocker fans everywhere (Sedgwick County).
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TownieCat on January 28, 2014, 09:39:09 AM
if WSU goes undefeated on the season what seed are they in the tournement? like a 4?

If they go undefeated they'll be a 1, if they lose a game or two they'll be a 2.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on January 28, 2014, 09:44:10 AM
I didn't even know they were undefeated until I read this thread. I doubt anyone on the "committee" knows anything about them either. 4 seems like the ceiling to me. I don't know.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on January 28, 2014, 01:02:49 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/28/3254027/man-steals-shocker-play-angry.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Belvis Noland on January 28, 2014, 01:06:25 PM
I didn't even know they were undefeated until I read this thread. I doubt anyone on the "committee" knows anything about them either. 4 seems like the ceiling to me. I don't know.
 

The only thing we can all agree on is that WSU would likely be about .500 in conference play in any League but the SEC. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on January 28, 2014, 01:06:57 PM
(http://i41.tinypic.com/2ztkrkn.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on January 28, 2014, 01:28:24 PM
Another thing to think about regarding any potential NCAA tourny invite the Shockers receive is that the NCAA would have a hard time finding a network to broadcast their game because nobody would watch it so that has to factor into their seeding.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on January 28, 2014, 01:30:15 PM
This is the 2nd story the newspaper has run on how to watch shocker games.  In wichita, mind you.

http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/27/3252780/an-update-on-where-you-can-watch.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on January 28, 2014, 01:41:19 PM
According to my former friend who lives in Wichita, Magoos Bar & Grill has a wagon that drives around town and Shocker fans can just jump on and they can all ride together to Magoos to catch the game. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 28, 2014, 01:59:44 PM
This is the 2nd story the newspaper has run on how to watch shocker games.  In wichita, mind you.

http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/27/3252780/an-update-on-where-you-can-watch.html

In all fairness, there aren't 6-8 threads on GPC about what channel the Shox are on each and every gameday like there are for the wild, wild cats.

 :Carl:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fedor on January 28, 2014, 02:06:39 PM
According to my former friend who lives in Wichita, Magoos Bar & Grill has a wagon that drives around town and Shocker fans can just jump on and they can all ride together to Magoos to catch the game.
Why the falling out?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 28, 2014, 02:13:12 PM
oscar just needs to schedule a game in KC every year.

 :ROFL: remember when shitty KCers wouldn't by tickets during the OOD era? Because non KCers do.


Ok just seeing this like 2 weeks later, but I think we filled up the arena pretty well. Southern Miss vs KSU wasn't going to draw 18k anywhere.
Yeah, wtf?

Isn't there like 3 million people in the KC area? Those upper deck tickets were $20 & and under. Also don't act like that was the only game that did poorly because it wasn't. KC has been better the last couple of games but lol at scheduling a game every year.

Every non-con Cat game Since the Sprint Center opened:

2007-08: December 17*   7:00 pm   vs. Florida A&M      W 87–60    17,699   
2008-09: 12/11/2008*   7:00 PM   vs. Southern Miss         W 74–55    6,054   <--- ok that one is awkward, but still
2009-10:  11/28/2009*   3:00 PM   vs. IUPUI            W 70–57    7,053   <--- Tip was exact same time as ku/mu at Arrowhead, on Thanksgiving weekend
2010-11: 11/22/2010*   8:30 PM   vs. #22 Gonzaga               W 81–64    18,630   4–0
             11/23/2010*   9:00 PM   vs. #1 Duke              L 68–82    18,696   4–1
             12/21/2010*   8:00 PM   vs. UNLV                      L 59–63    18,422
2011-12: December 17   9:00 pm   vs. #23 Alabama              W 71–58    16,685
2012-13:12/22/2012*   7:00 PM   vs. #8 Florida         W 67–61    16,303   

6 of the 8 non cons they've done at Sprint have been capacity, or near capacity crowds. I'd like to think if they schedule a good opponent, 15 k will show up every time.

And yeah, there's a lot of people in the KC area, but 90% are ku or mu fans. I think the KC Wild Wildcat fanbase has shown that we'll support the team if they come play.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on January 28, 2014, 02:28:15 PM
According to my former friend who lives in Wichita, Magoos Bar & Grill has a wagon that drives around town and Shocker fans can just jump on and they can all ride together to Magoos to catch the game.
Why the falling out?

He said something once about the Jayhawks that wasn't abject praise.  It wasn't really negative, but it just wasn't very positive, either.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fedor on January 28, 2014, 02:34:03 PM
According to my former friend who lives in Wichita, Magoos Bar & Grill has a wagon that drives around town and Shocker fans can just jump on and they can all ride together to Magoos to catch the game.
Why the falling out?

He said something once about the Jayhawks that wasn't abject praise.  It wasn't really negative, but it just wasn't very positive, either.
Good call, keep your circle tight.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on January 28, 2014, 06:02:44 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/28/3254027/man-steals-shocker-play-angry.html

:ROFL: so Wichita. I bet the car was a white '99 Taurus with rust spots

2009-10:  11/28/2009*   3:00 PM   vs. IUPUI            W 70–57    7,053   <--- Tip was exact same time as ku/mu at Arrowhead, on Thanksgiving weekend

holy crap, the collective, not individuals, of K-Staters in KC  :Yuck:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on January 28, 2014, 11:47:36 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/28/3254027/man-steals-shocker-play-angry.html

:ROFL: so Wichita. I bet the car was a white '99 Taurus with rust spots

2009-10:  11/28/2009*   3:00 PM   vs. IUPUI            W 70–57    7,053   <--- Tip was exact same time as ku/mu at Arrowhead, on Thanksgiving weekend

holy crap, the collective, not individuals, of K-Staters in KC  :Yuck:

Just further proof that football is the tail that wags the dog, IYAM...

Regardless of where one lives, most good people would rather watch a football game that helps decide conference championship than a non-con vs some shithole IUPUI hoops game.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on January 29, 2014, 12:47:55 AM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/28/3254027/man-steals-shocker-play-angry.html

:ROFL: so Wichita. I bet the car was a white '99 Taurus with rust spots

2009-10:  11/28/2009*   3:00 PM   vs. IUPUI            W 70–57    7,053   <--- Tip was exact same time as ku/mu at Arrowhead, on Thanksgiving weekend

holy crap, the collective, not individuals, of K-Staters in KC  :Yuck:

Just further proof that football is the tail that wags the dog, IYAM...

Regardless of where one lives, most good people would rather watch a football game that helps decide conference championship than a non-con vs some shithole IUPUI hoops game.

Weird stance considering how much KCers whine about KU and Mizzou fans
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 29, 2014, 08:57:26 PM
Another thing to think about regarding any potential NCAA tourny invite the Shockers receive is that the NCAA would have a hard time finding a network to broadcast their game because nobody would watch it so that has to factor into their seeding.

Denigrating the shockers is about as small timey as it gets for a bcs school, so thanks for your continued effort to make this board as small timey as possible :flush:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on January 29, 2014, 09:00:13 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/01/28/3254027/man-steals-shocker-play-angry.html

:ROFL: so Wichita. I bet the car was a white '99 Taurus with rust spots

2009-10:  11/28/2009*   3:00 PM   vs. IUPUI            W 70–57    7,053   <--- Tip was exact same time as ku/mu at Arrowhead, on Thanksgiving weekend

holy crap, the collective, not individuals, of K-Staters in KC  :Yuck:

Just further proof that football is the tail that wags the dog, IYAM...

Regardless of where one lives, most good people would rather watch a football game that helps decide conference championship than a non-con vs some shithole IUPUI hoops game.

Weird stance considering how much KCers whine about KU and Mizzou fans

I went the game MIR.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 29, 2014, 09:03:28 PM
What the eff is IUPUI? Sounds like some sort of degenerative disease
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on January 29, 2014, 09:07:22 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/e6HOaYs.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on January 29, 2014, 09:38:45 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/e6HOaYs.jpg)

That's because it's lupus.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 0.42 on January 30, 2014, 09:32:20 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/e6HOaYs.jpg)

 :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Dugout DickStone on January 30, 2014, 01:20:50 PM
Another thing to think about regarding any potential NCAA tourny invite the Shockers receive is that the NCAA would have a hard time finding a network to broadcast their game because nobody would watch it so that has to factor into their seeding.

Denigrating the shockers is about as small timey as it gets for a bcs school, so thanks for your continued effort to make this board as small timey as possible :flush:

He is right tho.  Send them out west to play late games since the numbers won't change.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on February 01, 2014, 02:27:38 PM
Evansville has the Charlie Weis of bball coaches

(http://img2.findthebest.com/sites/default/files/642/media/images/Marty_Simmons_Mens_Basketball_coach_at_Evansville_50245.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 01, 2014, 02:33:21 PM
Evansville has the Charlie Weis of bball coaches

(http://img2.findthebest.com/sites/default/files/642/media/images/Marty_Simmons_Mens_Basketball_coach_at_Evansville_50245.jpg)

Lol
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 05, 2014, 09:17:46 PM
I watched, not impressed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on February 05, 2014, 09:49:23 PM
That was the last of their "tough" games. They can pretty much coast into postseason undefeated now.
The Watchus/PlayAngry/Whatever-and-0 that's all over Facebook isn't going to let up anytime soon.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 05, 2014, 10:03:29 PM
You know you've arrived among the elite when you're giddy about getting a win against Indiana State
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 05, 2014, 10:54:06 PM
You know you've arrived among the elite when you're giddy about getting a win against Indiana State

Final Four last season and undefeated this season, tho
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 05, 2014, 11:14:30 PM
I watched, not impressed.

Still haven't watched. I'll never care about mid-majors. They seem so insignificant when you go to titletown U. :users:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 06, 2014, 03:39:18 AM
You know you've arrived among the elite when you're giddy about getting a win against Indiana State

Final Four last season and undefeated this season, tho

Yeah they've earned this, it's pretty tough to hate on them with any creditability. They could be the first 1 to lose to a 16 but it wouldn't diminish what they accomplished to that point. The mid-major schedule thing is stupid, as evidenced by how rare it is for any program to have a run like this. WSU has high major. talent in a mid major conference.  The last two mid majors to make runs like this, St. Joseph's and UNLV, had multiple NBA players.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on February 06, 2014, 09:53:52 AM
They need to get more big-timey commercials during their broadcasts. A whole lot of commercials for the Terra Haute Holiday Inn last night.  :confused:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TownieCat on February 06, 2014, 09:58:30 AM
A 1-loss SDSU would be more deserving of a 1 seed than an undefeated WSU, and the committee won't give two mid-major conference schools a 1 seed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on February 06, 2014, 10:10:33 AM
Their best win is @ Saint Louis. I don't think people realize how shitty the MVC is.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 10:16:24 AM
Their best win is @ Saint Louis. I don't think people realize how shitty the MVC is.

Isn't SLU ranked 13 or somethiing?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on February 06, 2014, 10:20:55 AM
Their best win is @ Saint Louis. I don't think people realize how shitty the MVC is.

Isn't SLU ranked 13 or somethiing?

Yes, it's a quality win. But they're just beating up on bad teams in conference play. Half the MVC is below .500 overall.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 10:32:05 AM
Their best win is @ Saint Louis. I don't think people realize how shitty the MVC is.

Isn't SLU ranked 13 or somethiing?

Yes, it's a quality win. But they're just beating up on bad teams in conference play. Half the MVC is below .500 overall.

Still, it's hard for any team to go undefeated no matter how pud the competition. They have to win on their worst nights on the road.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 06, 2014, 10:33:11 AM
I still think they're pretty good tho and you can't punish them with their ranking, cause they're undefeated in a crappy league. Mainly cause they're coming off a final four run as well.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BIG APPLE CAT on February 06, 2014, 10:36:03 AM
this wouldn't even be a topic if Creighton would have just stayed put.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 06, 2014, 10:44:26 AM
WSU is just punishing the GWAL this year.  But I think their road game @ Bishop Carroll will give them some trouble.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 06, 2014, 10:45:44 AM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 06, 2014, 11:01:58 AM
Pretty indifferent about the actual basketball aspect, but nothing will stop me mocking wichita shockermania.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on February 06, 2014, 11:03:15 AM
Pretty indifferent about the actual basketball aspect, but nothing will stop me mocking wichita shockermania.

yes this
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TownieCat on February 06, 2014, 11:11:33 AM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 06, 2014, 11:19:14 AM
I agree that they've earned their ranking and seed, however when I watched them, they didn't impress me that much.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 06, 2014, 11:42:00 AM
The thing that kept popping up in my head last night is how far do they fall with just one loss? I think that is the tell for how respectable their season actually is.  I think they might drop into the upper teens if not twenties at that point.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 06, 2014, 11:45:10 AM
The thing that kept popping up in my head last night is how far do they fall with just one loss? I think that is the tell for how respectable their season actually is.  I think they might drop into the upper teens if not twenties at that point.

They'd fall to like somewhere between 8-12
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 06, 2014, 11:57:49 AM
The thing that kept popping up in my head last night is how far do they fall with just one loss? I think that is the tell for how respectable their season actually is.  I think they might drop into the upper teens if not twenties at that point.

You should think about other things at night.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 06, 2014, 12:08:01 PM
True, but growing up in Kansas and in the Wichita Metro area has always given me a desire to cheer on the Shockers.  But at the same time I find it intriguing the difference in importance between number crunching (all that kenpom stuff) and that hallowed 0 to the right of the hyphen. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 12:20:41 PM
True, but growing up in Kansas and in the Wichita Metro area has always given me a desire to cheer on the Shockers.  But at the same time I find it intriguing the difference in importance between number crunching (all that kenpom stuff) and that hallowed 0 to the right of the hyphen.

I've never heard someone refer to city you grew up in as the "Wichita Metro."  :facepalm:  "I live in the Wichita metro, just head to the outskirts then drive through 40 miles of mostly unincorporated farmland. BOOM, your at my house."
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 06, 2014, 12:28:54 PM
True, but growing up in Kansas and in the Wichita Metro area has always given me a desire to cheer on the Shockers.  But at the same time I find it intriguing the difference in importance between number crunching (all that kenpom stuff) and that hallowed 0 to the right of the hyphen.

I've never heard someone refer to city you grew up in as the "Wichita Metro."  :facepalm:  "I live in the Wichita metro, just head to the outskirts then drive through 40 miles of mostly unincorporated farmland. BOOM, your at my house."

The Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of 4 counties and over 600K people.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 12:36:51 PM
True, but growing up in Kansas and in the Wichita Metro area has always given me a desire to cheer on the Shockers.  But at the same time I find it intriguing the difference in importance between number crunching (all that kenpom stuff) and that hallowed 0 to the right of the hyphen.

I've never heard someone refer to city you grew up in as the "Wichita Metro."  :facepalm:  "I live in the Wichita metro, just head to the outskirts then drive through 40 miles of mostly unincorporated farmland. BOOM, your at my house."

The Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of 4 counties and over 600K people.

...and the place in question is not in one of those 4 counties.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 06, 2014, 01:04:25 PM
True, but growing up in Kansas and in the Wichita Metro area has always given me a desire to cheer on the Shockers.  But at the same time I find it intriguing the difference in importance between number crunching (all that kenpom stuff) and that hallowed 0 to the right of the hyphen.

I've never heard someone refer to city you grew up in as the "Wichita Metro."  :facepalm:  "I live in the Wichita metro, just head to the outskirts then drive through 40 miles of mostly unincorporated farmland. BOOM, your at my house."

The Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of 4 counties and over 600K people.

...and the place in question is not in one of those 4 counties.

Reno and Sedgewick touch. . .the news always included us in that area I thought. . .my what a lie I've been living under.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on February 06, 2014, 01:23:04 PM
take it to the cosmosphere thread dork
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 06, 2014, 04:26:17 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.



st joes also wears different uniforms than WSU so i guess you're right on the apples to oranges comparo, thanks TC for the "straightin' out" fwiw.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on February 06, 2014, 04:29:20 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TownieCat on February 06, 2014, 04:37:09 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.



st joes also wears different uniforms than WSU so i guess you're right on the apples to oranges comparo, thanks TC for the "straightin' out" fwiw.

Another fact I read about St Joes today is they play their home games in Philadelphia, which is nowhere near Wichita.  :surprised:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 06, 2014, 04:40:00 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.



st joes also wears different uniforms than WSU so i guess you're right on the apples to oranges comparo, thanks TC for the "straightin' out" fwiw.

Another fact I read about St Joes today is they play their home games in Philadelphia, which is nowhere near Wichita.  :surprised:

Confirmed. I checked a map.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 06, 2014, 04:59:40 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 06, 2014, 05:01:05 PM
Yeah, that's dumb. They proved they belonged last year and they haven't lost since.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 06, 2014, 05:43:00 PM


caution, wichita state success butthurt ahead!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on February 06, 2014, 05:57:33 PM


caution, wichita state success butthurt ahead!

Yeah, lot's of self-righteous dumbasses being outed in this thread. Def don't hate WSU, and being from ICT I probably appreciate them more than most on this board, but do agree their hardcore fans get annoying really quick, they epitomize little man syndrome but most of the butthurt in this thread feels like the same damn thing. Kenpom has them at 9, and even their SOS is better than Louisville who is ahead of them, so take that for what it's worth. And it's not like the other undefeated 'Cuse is blowing people out of the water with their Pyth SOS (77 to WSU's 139). FWIW even if they drop a few they're still a good team that can make it to a Sweet 16 or E8, maybe FF if things fall right.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: chemhawk on February 06, 2014, 06:09:59 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 06, 2014, 06:28:42 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?

Who said anything about last year's record chemsquawk?  I don't rough ridin' know how many games Wichita State won last year.  I know that they went to the final four last year and returned two NBA caliber players.  They're also undefeated, and for the second year in a row they have the best basketball team in state of Kansas. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 06, 2014, 07:49:56 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?

See EMAWers this is what jealousy looks like, don't be this guy.

They returned their entire team from a final four squad you simp. This proves that they are capable of playing to seed despite their conference. I bet you've uttered the phrase "Bill Self should be picked to win the Big 12 until he loses it." Mouth breathing hypocrite.

Also any K-State or KU fan that criticizes their schedule should always add, "but their schedule would be better if my coach wasn't such a coward." At least Weber isn't a mealy mouthed liar, he has admitted to being scared.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 08:01:04 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?

See EMAWers this is what jealousy looks like, don't be this guy.

They returned their entire team from a final four squad you simp. This proves that they are capable of playing to seed despite their conference. I bet you've uttered the phrase "Bill Self should be picked to win the Big 12 until he loses it." Mouth breathing hypocrite.

Also any K-State out KU fan that criticizes their schedule should always add, "but their schedule would be better if my coach wasn't such a coward." At least Weber isn't a mealy mouthed liar, he has admitted to being scared.

WOW

Some strong sports takes here.  Charlie STRONG.  Boston STRONG.

I'm going to have to digest this for a while.  It's quite the mealy to swallow.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: chemhawk on February 06, 2014, 08:26:04 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?


They returned their entire team from a final four squad you simp.


No, they didn't.  You're so close.  Get there.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on February 06, 2014, 08:34:32 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?


They returned their entire team from a final four squad you simp.


No, they didn't.  You're so close.  Get there.

Wow.  U are totes jelly of Wichita st.  Why does the success of other state universities bother you so much?   Very losery IMO.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: chemhawk on February 06, 2014, 08:45:55 PM
undefeated is undefeated.  st joe's got the 1 seed when they went 27-0 and so should wsu.

That St Joes team had two 1st round picks and the A10 was a 4 bid league that year. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison just because they are from mid major conferences.

And fwiw, they were blown out by 20 in their conf tourney game and still got a 1. If WSU gets blown out by 20 in the MVC tourney they would drop to a 3.

They should be a 3 seed even if they go undefeated.

So an undefeated team coming off of a final four should be no higher than a three seed?  Makes sense, if you're a complete dumbass.

Definitely we should include last year's record in seeding.  McGruder gets KSU a 6 seed methinks.  Also, Kentucky's loss to Bobby Morris should knock them out of the tourney yes no?


They returned their entire team from a final four squad you simp.


No, they didn't.  You're so close.  Get there.

Wow.  U are totes jelly of Wichita st.  Why does the success of other state universities bother you so much?   Very losery IMO.

WSU deserves a 1 seed IMHO .   Except for their coach a very easy team to root for. 

Last years record is irrelevant tho.   
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 06, 2014, 08:56:44 PM
Not when evaluating a mid major that is undefeated in a "crappy conference" and finished off the previous year in the final four. You evaluate that team differently.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 06, 2014, 09:03:18 PM
My stance on Wichita State.

a) they deserve any recognition and praise they get this year and last. They are good and they win a lot.

b) I absolutely can't stand them and hope they lose every game. I would certainly cheer for ku if they played.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 09:04:24 PM
My stance on Wichita State.

a) they deserve any recognition and praise they get this year and last. They are good and they win a lot.

b) I absolutely can't stand them and hope they lose every game. I would certainly cheer for ku if they played.

YES rough ridin' THIS ^^^
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on February 06, 2014, 09:05:39 PM
My stance on Wichita State.

a) they deserve any recognition and praise they get this year and last. They are good and they win a lot.

b) I absolutely can't stand them and hope they lose every game. I would certainly cheer for ku if they played.

:sdeek:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 09:14:15 PM
Not when evaluating a mid major that is undefeated in a "crappy conference" and finished off the previous year in the final four. You evaluate that team differently.

I don't know.  Maybe you do, maybe the universal "you" does, but the only "you" that is germane to the discussion is the yous on the selection committee.  I tend to think that they have come to rely on standards that are measurable and repeatable, as a CYA protocol. I could be wrong, but then again I've already been wrong once today, so statistically speaking it would be incredibly unlikely that I'm wrong again.   
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 09:15:25 PM
Talking about WSU is brilliant bait for KU butthurt. :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 09:19:25 PM
Talking about WSU is brilliant bait for KU butthurt. :love:

Do you think I'm bh about WSU?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 09:20:12 PM
Talking about WSU is brilliant bait for KU butthurt. :love:

Do you think I'm bh about WSU?

Not really. chemhawk tho.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 06, 2014, 09:20:56 PM
Not when evaluating a mid major that is undefeated in a "crappy conference" and finished off the previous year in the final four. You evaluate that team differently.

I don't know.  Maybe you do, maybe the universal "you" does, but the only "you" that is germane to the discussion is the yous on the selection committee.  I tend to think that they have come to rely on standards that are measurable and repeatable, as a CYA protocol. I could be wrong, but then again I've already been wrong once today, so statistically speaking it would be incredibly unlikely that I'm wrong again.
If VCU went undefeated after their run vs you and the country the next year, do you think they would have deserved a #1 seed?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 09:23:04 PM
Not when evaluating a mid major that is undefeated in a "crappy conference" and finished off the previous year in the final four. You evaluate that team differently.

I don't know.  Maybe you do, maybe the universal "you" does, but the only "you" that is germane to the discussion is the yous on the selection committee.  I tend to think that they have come to rely on standards that are measurable and repeatable, as a CYA protocol. I could be wrong, but then again I've already been wrong once today, so statistically speaking it would be incredibly unlikely that I'm wrong again.
If VCU went undefeated after their run vs you and the country the next year, do you think they would have deserved a #1 seed?

I'm a fan with an obvious bias and no real consequence for my opining, so I don't see how that's relevant.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 06, 2014, 09:30:11 PM
I just compare vcu and witchita states performances comparable. If VCU ran the table the following year, hands down they would have deserved a #1 seed.

Fwiw, I think you would beat them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 06, 2014, 09:37:28 PM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

Nicname uses NIT
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 06, 2014, 09:39:16 PM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 06, 2014, 09:45:53 PM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
16
And this is the problem for the reasonable WSU fan, I would think.  The value of their team, to the greater public, must needs be evaluated by their success in the tournament, and the tournament is such a crapshoot.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 06, 2014, 09:47:42 PM
What is Memphis arguing? And who is he arguing with? What is going on in here?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 06, 2014, 09:55:29 PM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
16
And this is the problem for the reasonable WSU fan, I would think.  The value of their team, to the greater public, must needs be evaluated by their success in the tournament, and the tournament is such a crapshoot.

I think the depth of their success this regular season supersedes this. If they went like 30-4 then I think this would be the case but they are going to finish with one of the most successful regular seasons in college basketball history, they just need to make it to the second week of the tournament to validate their success and that's no different than any other 1-4 seed.

Also sprance your view of WSU as it relates to their tournament success and how they are viewed nationally is exactly what everyone else thinks of KU. Not picking on you or calling you butthurt,  just pointing out an irony.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on February 06, 2014, 10:00:38 PM
What is Memphis arguing? And who is he arguing with? What is going on in here?

Who's arguing? :dunno: . Just making some observations bout the shockers.

No one understands your observation
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 06, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
What is Memphis arguing? And who is he arguing with? What is going on in here?

Who's arguing? :dunno: . Just making some observations bout the shockers.

Your observation about the tournament is simplistic. You have to have a very good, very tough team to make the final four. Mediocre teams don't win 4 games in a row on neutral courts against the best teams in the country. If you make the final four it absolutely means you are one of the best teams in the country, it isn't some dice roll.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: j-dub on February 06, 2014, 10:28:53 PM
My stance on Wichita State.

a) they deserve any recognition and praise they get this year and last. They are good and they win a lot.

b) I absolutely can't stand them and hope they lose every game. I would certainly cheer for ku if they played.

(http://simplifypersonalproductivity.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/jumping-the-fence.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 06, 2014, 10:37:56 PM
What is Memphis arguing? And who is he arguing with? What is going on in here?

Who's arguing? :dunno: . Just making some observations bout the shockers.

Your observation about the tournament is simplistic. You have to have a very good, very tough team to make the final four. Mediocre teams don't win 4 games in a row on neutral courts against the best teams in the country. If you make the final four it absolutely means you are one of the best teams in the country, it isn't some dice roll.

I think you just stumbled upon the fact that there are many good and capable teams. Tournament is single elimination because it's fun not to find the "best" team.

Now I'm arguing :D

What  :confused:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 07, 2014, 07:01:02 AM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
16
And this is the problem for the reasonable WSU fan, I would think.  The value of their team, to the greater public, must needs be evaluated by their success in the tournament, and the tournament is such a crapshoot.

I think the depth of their success this regular season supersedes this. If they went like 30-4 then I think this would be the case but they are going to finish with one of the most successful regular seasons in college basketball history, they just need to make it to the second week of the tournament to validate their success and that's no different than any other 1-4 seed.

Also sprance your view of WSU as it relates to their tournament success and how they are viewed nationally is exactly what everyone else thinks of KU. Not picking on you or calling you butthurt,  just pointing out an irony.

Something to be proud of? Sure.  Something that will be remembered in their conference for a long time? Absolutely.  Would it be viewed as a greater accomplishment if Syracuse did the same? You bet. WSU has put together a nice two-year run here, but to the broader audience, it won't have much staying power unless they make a special run this year.  I almost feel bad for them, because they have reached the zenith of their success, and if they don't cash in, who knows how long it will be until they get another shot?  They've set themselves up with the crushing weight of expectations, and if they flame out early, certain less-scrupulous neighbors will tease them relentlessly.  I won't, because I know that's the price of competing at the highest level. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 07, 2014, 07:15:32 AM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
16
And this is the problem for the reasonable WSU fan, I would think.  The value of their team, to the greater public, must needs be evaluated by their success in the tournament, and the tournament is such a crapshoot.

I think the depth of their success this regular season supersedes this. If they went like 30-4 then I think this would be the case but they are going to finish with one of the most successful regular seasons in college basketball history, they just need to make it to the second week of the tournament to validate their success and that's no different than any other 1-4 seed.

Also sprance your view of WSU as it relates to their tournament success and how they are viewed nationally is exactly what everyone else thinks of KU. Not picking on you or calling you butthurt,  just pointing out an irony.

Something to be proud of? Sure.  Something that will be remembered in their conference for a long time? Absolutely.  Would it be viewed as a greater accomplishment if Syracuse did the same? You bet. WSU has put together a nice two-year run here, but to the broader audience, it won't have much staying power unless they make a special run this year.  I almost feel bad for them, because they have reached the zenith of their success, and if they don't cash in, who knows how long it will be until they get another shot?  They've set themselves up with the crushing weight of expectations, and if they flame out early, certain less-scrupulous neighbors will tease them relentlessly. I won't, because I know that's the price of competing at the highest level.

You're a true warrior Spracne Goebbels . . . godspeed!!

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on February 07, 2014, 11:08:16 AM
WSU's run is looking a lot like Butler in 10 ( :curse:) and 11.  In fact, I would say WSU this season is more talented than Butler in 11 if only beacasue Early stayed vs Heyward leaving.

I don't see WSU cashing in on this great run like Butler was able to by ending up in the best bb conference in the country but the parallels between Stevens and Marshall will be interesting.

It may be because I am not from Wichita but I see very little downside for KSU if WSU is a good program.  There is so little high major talent in the state it doesn't really matter, it's almost inconsequential if you accept that KU will almost always get the cream of what crop there is.  I guess we do compete with WSU for JC kids but it seems like good JC kids are few and far between these days.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 07, 2014, 11:21:19 AM
I have nothing against the team, and they are fun to watch, but GGreggg Marshall is such a rough ridin' crybaby, small-dick syndrome pud loser that I hope they have an epic crash and burn that results in loser Shocker fans #watchus slit our wrists.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 07, 2014, 12:13:01 PM
Smh at everyone who uses the final four as a benchmark of a team, or the ncaa tournament in general.

They're still very good. Will they deserve a 1 seed if they go undefeated? Probably. Will they be a top 4 team in the country. Probably not. Will they make it to back to back F4s? Probably not.
16
And this is the problem for the reasonable WSU fan, I would think.  The value of their team, to the greater public, must needs be evaluated by their success in the tournament, and the tournament is such a crapshoot.

I think the depth of their success this regular season supersedes this. If they went like 30-4 then I think this would be the case but they are going to finish with one of the most successful regular seasons in college basketball history, they just need to make it to the second week of the tournament to validate their success and that's no different than any other 1-4 seed.

Also sprance your view of WSU as it relates to their tournament success and how they are viewed nationally is exactly what everyone else thinks of KU. Not picking on you or calling you butthurt,  just pointing out an irony.

Something to be proud of? Sure.  Something that will be remembered in their conference for a long time? Absolutely.  Would it be viewed as a greater accomplishment if Syracuse did the same? You bet. WSU has put together a nice two-year run here, but to the broader audience, it won't have much staying power unless they make a special run this year.  I almost feel bad for them, because they have reached the zenith of their success, and if they don't cash in, who knows how long it will be until they get another shot?  They've set themselves up with the crushing weight of expectations, and if they flame out early, certain less-scrupulous neighbors will tease them relentlessly.  I won't, because I know that's the price of competing at the highest level. 

ku fans have been saying the same thing about k-state football for 20 years, fwiw

it's a "no matter what you do you're not as good as us and here's why" mentality
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 07, 2014, 02:36:01 PM

I have nothing against the team, and they are fun to watch, but GGreggg Marshall is such a rough ridin' crybaby, small-dick syndrome pud loser that I hope they have an epic crash and burn that results in loser Shocker fans #watchus slit our wrists.

I hate WSU just as much as the next guy but even I think that was a little harsh.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 07, 2014, 04:06:21 PM
So I do this bit anytime a Shocker fan mentions that they're undefeated.  I just act like I'm hearing it for the first time and am shocked that I didn't already know that, considering how much hoops I watch.  I think 1 guy figured out my ruse like a week later and posted an angry, drunken rant on my FB page about how Ggregg was a better coach than Self, how they have better players than KU, and how they have better fans, too. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 07, 2014, 04:07:08 PM
So I do this bit anytime a Shocker fan mentions that they're undefeated.  I just act like I'm hearing it for the first time and am shocked that I didn't already know that, considering how much hoops I watch.  I think 1 guy figured out my ruse like a week later and posted an angry, drunken rant on my FB page about how Ggregg was a better coach than Self, how they have better players than KU, and how they have better fans, too.

My friend's name is "Gregg."  :angry:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 08, 2014, 10:46:41 PM

25-0.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 08, 2014, 10:49:03 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 11, 2014, 09:43:26 PM

26-0.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GoodForAnother on February 11, 2014, 10:06:06 PM
we've played more top 25 RPI teams than WSU has played top 100 RPI teams  :sdeek:

26-0 is impressive against anyone though, and also I hate them and hope they get a 1 seed and lose to a 16
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 11, 2014, 10:52:11 PM
Although it probably won't happen, I'd love to see WSU and ku end up meeting up fairly early.  I'm not sure the interwebs could handle the level of ku butthurt that would come out of a WSU loss... 

After the game ended, Nick would give Andy a hug, wipe his tears and say "Sorry, Lil Bro..." and we (awesome good people K-Stater's) would console our TSC bros in much the same way: "Sorry, lil bro... sorry".

 :tsc:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 11, 2014, 11:50:54 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EMAWzified on February 12, 2014, 12:01:36 AM
Sorry if luked, but could the Cats run the table in the Valley? I mean if Indiana State is the big danger, I think maybe we could.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: yoman on February 12, 2014, 12:24:00 AM
I don't like most WSU fans much, but this Shockers team is really fun to watch. Has a Frank Martin vibe to it (although they are noticeably different). The Play Angry stuff is overplayed, but I can't help but kinda like it. Add in that WSU has always been a guilty pleasure, second team for me, and I am happy for them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 12, 2014, 08:19:00 AM

26-0.

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 12, 2014, 08:47:30 AM
I do kind of like the latest WuShuck fan talking point in regards to K-State, that is, K-State has only won 1 true road game this year.   Which is true, the other true road game losses were at KU, at Texas, and at Iowa State.   Granted, those teams are no 11-13 Northern Iowa, but facts are facts.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on February 12, 2014, 08:51:06 AM
they'd be hanging around 6th'ish in the B12 this season. which would be their highest ever hanging around area of conference standings in their programs history.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: massofcatfan on February 12, 2014, 11:21:55 AM
bonus of WSU doing well is that it rubs salt in wounds of little Mark's ongoing failure at University of Maryland*

*(I obviously refer to infamous squawker and ex-wsu coach Mark Turgeon)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 12, 2014, 11:23:44 AM
Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

This would be fantastic.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 12, 2014, 12:01:04 PM
Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do
:drool:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GoodForAnother on February 12, 2014, 12:15:06 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

it is my dream
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 12, 2014, 12:18:20 PM
They'd be mentioned everywhere forever.

"Only one team has ever lost to a 16 seed, undefeated Wichita State in 2014"

 :crossfingers:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 12, 2014, 02:09:59 PM

They'd be mentioned everywhere forever.

"Only one team has ever lost to a 16 seed, undefeated Wichita State in 2014"

:boing:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 12, 2014, 02:14:32 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

Because I like Wichita State.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 12, 2014, 02:32:36 PM
Although it probably won't happen, I'd love to see WSU and ku end up meeting up fairly early.  I'm not sure the interwebs could handle the level of ku butthurt that would come out of a WSU loss... 

After the game ended, Nick would give Andy a hug, wipe his tears and say "Sorry, Lil Bro..." and we (awesome good people K-Stater's) would console our TSC bros in much the same way: "Sorry, lil bro... sorry".

 :tsc:

If this could happen I would love it like. . .sooo much.  :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on February 12, 2014, 03:00:15 PM
I absolutely love WSU. Early, Baker, Cotton are adorable; the whole damn team is adorable.  Easily my second favorite team, and the cherry on top of that fiery, fudge dragon sundae (Thanks, CK!) is that KU fans are so threatened by their success. It is absolutely b-e-a-utiful!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 15, 2014, 09:17:24 AM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/02/14/3287600/shocker-party-so-big-at-koch-arena.html

Especially funny for those that know of Tony Adame and/or Revolution Rock Bar.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 15, 2014, 09:49:08 AM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

Trust me, they're not gonna be that team.  They're actually good enough to take care of that portion of the tourney. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 15, 2014, 09:52:19 AM
they'd be hanging around 6th'ish in the B12 this season. which would be their highest ever hanging around area of conference standings in their programs history.

You should get your facts straight.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 15, 2014, 09:57:34 AM

I'll continue to maintain that crap talking the shox is extremely small-timey, and that a lot of you should be ashamed of yourselves
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: steve dave on February 15, 2014, 10:34:52 AM

they'd be hanging around 6th'ish in the B12 this season. which would be their highest ever hanging around area of conference standings in their programs history.

You should get your facts straight.

You should get your face straight.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: gatoveintisiet on February 15, 2014, 11:06:21 AM
Who threatens people anymore?  Wow :facepalm:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 15, 2014, 11:08:13 AM
Who threatens people anymore?  Wow :facepalm:

wut
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 15, 2014, 12:19:24 PM
Who threatens people anymore?  Wow :facepalm:

Is this a threat?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 15, 2014, 12:30:22 PM

they'd be hanging around 6th'ish in the B12 this season. which would be their highest ever hanging around area of conference standings in their programs history.

You should get your facts straight.

You should get your face straight.

Minus the 90s the Shox have been a pretty formidable team in the Valley.

They went a Final Four in the 60s and even gained a #1 ranking the early 80s. All Im trying to say Stevie is that they have a decent history and one that is comparable to ours in terms of tourney appearances, final fours, and conference champs.   

Don't hate 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on February 15, 2014, 01:14:31 PM
Guys, why all the hate towards baby bro? Can't we just enjoy being part of the best college basketball state in the country?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 15, 2014, 01:20:47 PM
WSU is like the cute baby bro that you like to see learning and developing, but still doesn't clean up or have all his manners straight, while KU is the sibling within age range that borrows stuff and doesn't return them or keeps you up all night when his punk ass friends are over. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: gatoveintisiet on February 15, 2014, 03:22:56 PM
The most endearing part about wsu is how butthurt ku fans are about them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 15, 2014, 03:39:13 PM
The most endearing part about wsu is how butthurt ku fans are about them.

Yes.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 16, 2014, 05:28:29 PM
Andy Assalay sighting
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 16, 2014, 05:52:52 PM
Evansville's coach is an abusive tub of lard. Like a fat, slightly more spotty, slightly less red-faced, none tupee wearing Massa Seff
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 16, 2014, 06:15:21 PM
They are so good, can anybody stop this juggernaut?  I mean maybe Syracuse because they
Don't lose basketball games either, would love to see who would win that coin- flip
Of a game.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 16, 2014, 10:18:06 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

Trust me, they're not gonna be that team.  They're actually good enough to take care of that portion of the tourney.

pfft, oh thanks for droppin knowledge headselfhater, I'll trust your basketball knowledge always and forever
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 16, 2014, 10:21:58 PM

25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do

Trust me, they're not gonna be that team.  They're actually good enough to take care of that portion of the tourney.

pfft, oh thanks for droppin knowledge headselfhater, I'll trust your basketball knowledge always and forever

Was I supposed to give you some in depth analysis on why they won't be that team?

I sure hope not because it would be rough ridin' stupid.

Quit hatin.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 16, 2014, 10:49:00 PM
you told me to trust you so I'm gonna trust you. I didn't have the proper info to form my own opinion, so thanks
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Jackstack99EMAW on February 16, 2014, 10:52:26 PM
Why does anyone think Wichita State is really good?  I think Duke, KU, Syracuse, Kentucky, Arizona, Florida, SDSU, and probably a few more would beat them by a sizeable margin.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 16, 2014, 11:04:42 PM
Why does anyone think Wichita State is really good?  I think Duke, KU, Syracuse, Kentucky, Arizona, Florida, SDSU, and probably a few more would beat them by a sizeable margin.

that's because you're dumb, no big deal though. SDSU got their asses kicked by Wyoming, they were 103 in the RPI at the time of tip-off. 103 is 50 places worse than Indiana State.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 16, 2014, 11:05:24 PM
Wichita State would beat Duke and Kentucky.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 16, 2014, 11:06:39 PM
Why does anyone think Wichita State is really good?  I think Duke, KU, Syracuse, Kentucky, Arizona, Florida, SDSU, and probably a few more would beat them by a sizeable margin.

Because they are?

Let's not forget that this is largely the same team that made the final four last year and beat both the top 2 seeds in their regional to get there.  Granted, their schedule hasn't been the best this year.  Despite that fact, it's still not easy to be 27-0 and 17-6 against the spread.  So not only are they beating all the teams they're supposed to, they're beating most of them worse than expected.

All the teams you listed "could" beat them, sure.  By a sizable margin?  On any given day, I suppose.  This team will be a tough out come tourney time as they've proven quite capable over the past two seasons... Nobody gets to 57-9 over a two year run without being pretty salty.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Jackstack99EMAW on February 16, 2014, 11:09:44 PM
Why does anyone think Wichita State is really good?  I think Duke, KU, Syracuse, Kentucky, Arizona, Florida, SDSU, and probably a few more would beat them by a sizeable margin.

that's because you're dumb, no big deal though. SDSU got their asses kicked by Wyoming, they were 103 in the RPI at the time of tip-off. 103 is 50 places worse than Indiana State.
Woof, didnt know that.  I guess I just looked at the sched.   :dunno:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 16, 2014, 11:14:56 PM
Wichita State should be DQ'd from college basketball.  It's not college.

http://www.wichita.edu/thisis/admissions/index.asp?role=freshmen

Quote
Ask 10 different people to define the typical Wichita State experience and chances are you'll get 10 different answers. That's because there really is no "typical" Wichita State experience. WSU students have always had the luxury of creating their college life, exactly the way they want it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 17, 2014, 09:05:13 AM
27-0

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 17, 2014, 09:05:26 AM
27-0

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TownieCat on February 17, 2014, 09:32:07 AM
27-0

The longer this streak gets the more it's going to hurt when they are bounced in the 2nd round.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 17, 2014, 09:36:37 AM
27-0

 :Woohoo:

I wish I had more than one favorite team, would make being a fan a hell of a lot easier
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 17, 2014, 10:10:51 AM
27-0

 :Woohoo:

I wish I had more than one favorite team, would make being a fan a hell of a lot easier

WSU fans have always had the luxury of creating their fan life, exactly the way they want it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 17, 2014, 11:24:30 AM
27-0

 :Woohoo:

I wish I had more than one favorite team, would make being a fan a hell of a lot easier

WSU fans have always had the luxury of creating their fan life, exactly the way they want it.

Just so I understand, that's just a fancy way of saying "commuter school" right?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on February 17, 2014, 11:27:40 AM
Just so I understand, that's just a fancy way of saying "commuter school" right?

it's a play on their own marketing of wsu as a school to "create your own experience" - don't recall exactly but it's been brought up somewhere on here...
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 17, 2014, 11:47:23 AM
Just so I understand, that's just a fancy way of saying "commuter school" right?

it's a play on their own marketing of wsu as a school to "create your own experience" - don't recall exactly but it's been brought up somewhere on here...

I know that - ask 10 freshman about their experience at WSU and you'll get 10 different answers.  What I'm saying is: That's just a fancy way of saying they're a commuter school, correct?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on February 17, 2014, 11:47:52 AM
I know that - ask 10 freshman about their experience at WSU and you'll get 10 different answers.  What I'm saying is: That's just a fancy way of saying they're a commuter school, correct?

of course
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 17, 2014, 11:49:33 AM
Not as good as Pete's way of calling a school a commuter school.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 17, 2014, 12:12:22 PM
Just so I understand, that's just a fancy way of saying "commuter school" right?

it's a play on their own marketing of wsu as a school to "create your own experience" - don't recall exactly but it's been brought up somewhere on here...

I know that - ask 10 freshman about their experience at WSU and you'll get 10 different answers.  What I'm saying is: That's just a fancy way of saying they're a commuter school, correct?

in this particular case, basketball fandom, I think this it's unique to Wichita State. A commuter school that is good at basketball in a mid major conference that shares a space with high majors that are also good at basketball. Its like the perfect storm of convenient bandwagoning.  Maybe Butler?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 17, 2014, 01:37:08 PM
eff butler
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 19, 2014, 09:11:39 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bg1spSPIYAA4npV.jpg)



Quote
Jenn Bates ?@KWCHJenn  1h
This is what I'm saying RT @mpfister77: @KWCHJenn @AlexGold My question is, why aren't the guys in swimsuits?

 :sdeek:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on February 19, 2014, 09:14:11 AM
ron baker does remind me of a young pat forde
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 19, 2014, 10:28:44 AM
ron baker does remind me of a young pat forde

 :lol:  I saw this and was going to tweet something back to her about how she would feel if a similar comment was made about the girls volleyball team or something like that.  However, I soon lost interest in the whole endeavor. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: michigancat on February 19, 2014, 10:50:25 AM
that's a stud cover. I'm officially happy for WSU.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 19, 2014, 10:53:33 AM
Ron Baker should be in the front and the rest of the dweebs should be in the back.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: michigancat on February 19, 2014, 10:56:44 AM
wacky loves ron baker a lot!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Shooter Jones on February 19, 2014, 11:07:29 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Paul Moscow on February 19, 2014, 11:10:56 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

I like them. I mean if people are going to think you're just a mid-major overachiever no matter how consistently good you are you might as well double down on it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 19, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
wacky loves ron baker a lot!
Yup and i'm not even mad about it!  :gocho:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 19, 2014, 10:25:42 PM
28-0. Only undefeated team in the country.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on February 19, 2014, 10:30:20 PM
Theyre the best
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 19, 2014, 10:42:10 PM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 19, 2014, 10:46:01 PM

cDDnD <-- shocker
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 20, 2014, 08:23:29 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

I had to do a double take to see that they were Nike.  I agree they look odd. . .they don't have the modern fit that most jerseys in D1 seem to have. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on February 20, 2014, 10:52:43 AM
TRY TO JINX THEM!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 20, 2014, 10:54:23 AM
I guess I'll say what everybody's thinking:  If WSU doesn't go undefeated and win the NC, this season will be a huge embarrassment/disappointment.  I hope that doesn't happen.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: hatingfrancisco on February 20, 2014, 10:58:09 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

I had to do a double take to see that they were Nike.  I agree they look odd. . .they don't have the modern fit that most jerseys in D1 seem to have.

Shocker gear is legit.  You can never go wrong with that color scheme.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 20, 2014, 10:59:28 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

I had to do a double take to see that they were Nike.  I agree they look odd. . .they don't have the modern fit that most jerseys in D1 seem to have.

Shocker gear is legit.  You can never go wrong with that color scheme.

(http://cdn.overclock.net/6/6f/6f7d7db4_350x700px-LL-4ad90b08_Not-sure-if-serious2.jpeg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on February 20, 2014, 11:26:37 AM
I guess I'll say what everybody's thinking:  If WSU doesn't go undefeated and win the NC, this season will be a huge embarrassment/disappointment.  I hope that doesn't happen.

:flush:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: eastcat on February 20, 2014, 11:42:25 AM
I guess I'll say what everybody's thinking:  If WSU doesn't go undefeated and win the NC, this season will be a huge embarrassment/disappointment.  I hope that doesn't happen.

:flush:

Would be huge source of butthurt for Harvard of the Plains.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Shooter Jones on February 20, 2014, 11:51:53 AM
I'm sure it's been said on here, and fine with WSU being good, but I rough ridin' hate the Shock Squawks (Squawkers? Shawks? Shawkers? Shquawks? Wheat Squawkers?) hitting the social media hard. WSU grads that have always been diehard Squawk bball fans, posting nothing but KU basketball hayseed crap in previous years, but over the last year or so it's become a mix and they act like they're the biggest fans and so proud of both.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 20, 2014, 11:54:34 AM
I'm sure it's been said on here, and fine with WSU being good, but I rough ridin' hate the Shock Squawks (Squawkers? Shawks? Shawkers? Shquawks? Wheat Squawkers?) hitting the social media hard. WSU grads that have always been diehard Squawk bball fans, posting nothing but KU basketball hayseed crap in previous years, but over the last year or so it's become a mix and they act like they're the biggest fans and so proud of both.

.....K-State fans/students from the Wichita area are SOOOOO MUCH worse than KU fans at this.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 20, 2014, 11:58:38 AM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

I had to do a double take to see that they were Nike.  I agree they look odd. . .they don't have the modern fit that most jerseys in D1 seem to have.

Shocker gear is legit.  You can never go wrong with that color scheme.

(http://cdn.overclock.net/6/6f/6f7d7db4_350x700px-LL-4ad90b08_Not-sure-if-serious2.jpeg)

Love the irony of the way the little Asian kid is dressed in your meme.

 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 20, 2014, 12:10:38 PM
I'm sure it's been said on here, and fine with WSU being good, but I rough ridin' hate the Shock Squawks (Squawkers? Shawks? Shawkers? Shquawks? Wheat Squawkers?) hitting the social media hard. WSU grads that have always been diehard Squawk bball fans, posting nothing but KU basketball hayseed crap in previous years, but over the last year or so it's become a mix and they act like they're the biggest fans and so proud of both.

.....K-State fans/students from the Wichita area are SOOOOO MUCH worse than KU fans at this.

:dubious:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 20, 2014, 12:11:29 PM
Don't get me wrong, they're good.. but ever since they made a huge deal about the surprise new uni's for the Final Four, and they came out in what appeared to be late 90's AND1 gear, I just think it's hard to take the Shockers serious. I mean, their uniforms look like they're made for a 14 and under AAU team.

*Their home uni's this year are decent.

Looks like a typical uni to me.

I had to do a double take to see that they were Nike.  I agree they look odd. . .they don't have the modern fit that most jerseys in D1 seem to have.

Shocker gear is legit.  You can never go wrong with that color scheme.

(http://cdn.overclock.net/6/6f/6f7d7db4_350x700px-LL-4ad90b08_Not-sure-if-serious2.jpeg)

Love the irony of the way the little Asian kid is dressed in your meme.

 :thumbsup:

I'm glad you picked up on that.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 20, 2014, 12:17:08 PM
I'm sure it's been said on here, and fine with WSU being good, but I rough ridin' hate the Shock Squawks (Squawkers? Shawks? Shawkers? Shquawks? Wheat Squawkers?) hitting the social media hard. WSU grads that have always been diehard Squawk bball fans, posting nothing but KU basketball hayseed crap in previous years, but over the last year or so it's become a mix and they act like they're the biggest fans and so proud of both.

The most annoying and only, really, Shocker fan I know is this to a 'T'.  Constantly sending me unsolicited texts and FB messages out of the blue.  I finally asked him, "What happened to you being a huge KU fan?  Or is that only when the Shockers are irrelevant?"  He changed the subject to something about KSU fans being the worst or some such.  Honestly, he is the only reason I root against the Shockers, but I'm petty like that and don't have any real connection to or stake in the city of Wichita. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 20, 2014, 12:49:22 PM
don't have any real connection to or stake in the city of Wichita. 

Neither does Wichita State.  It's that weird school in that one of many shitty quadrants of town. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 0.42 on February 20, 2014, 02:17:16 PM
If Texas State ever becomes great at anything the UT/A&M fan - TXST grad hordes that will start acting like they've followed the 'Cats from day 1 are going to be rough ridin' unbearable.

we probably won't ever be great at anything tho :(
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 20, 2014, 02:26:26 PM

If Texas State ever becomes great at anything the UT/A&M fan - TXST grad hordes that will start acting like they've followed the 'Cats from day 1 are going to be rough ridin' unbearable.

we probably won't ever be great at anything tho :(

:(
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 03:44:31 PM
so I live in central Iowa, not very far from Wichita and in the heart of the Missouri Valley Conference footprint, my SI today has Jabari Parker on the cover. Possibly the most limited regional cover ever, petty messed up of SI actually.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 20, 2014, 03:56:30 PM
Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 20, 2014, 06:53:18 PM

Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:

And everything he said was right.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 20, 2014, 07:04:16 PM
Post the tweets.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 07:28:05 PM

Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:

And everything he said was right.

Right or complete and total speculation based on his preconceived notions? It's a dumb conversation even dumber to be definitive on how he thinks WSU or anyone else would do in another conference. Did anyone ask him why he didn't have the same crusade against SDSU?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 07:44:14 PM

Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:

And everything he said was right.

Right or complete and total speculation based on his preconceived notions? It's a dumb conversation even dumber to be definitive on how he thinks WSU or anyone else would do in another conference. Did anyone ask him why he didn't have the same crusade against SDSU?

SDSU?

They lost a game in November and another one a couple weeks ago. The most compelling thing about discussing WSU is that they are undefeated. Its a great discussion point that a lot of people are paying attention to right now. Every game they play now is discussed. It makes sense that Gottlieb would make a point to discuss it, its what he does. The record they might have in some other conference might be a side track, but its still something a lot people are going to discuss, especially on twitter.

Besides, SDSU beat KU in Lawrence. They also beat Creighton. So they have 2 wins much, much better than any WSU has so far.

However, WSU deserves a 1 seed IMO.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 07:53:34 PM

Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:

And everything he said was right.

Right or complete and total speculation based on his preconceived notions? It's a dumb conversation even dumber to be definitive on how he thinks WSU or anyone else would do in another conference. Did anyone ask him why he didn't have the same crusade against SDSU?

SDSU?

They lost a game in November and another one a couple weeks ago. The most compelling thing about discussing WSU is that they are undefeated. Its a great discussion point that a lot of people are paying attention to right now. Every game they play now is discussed. It makes sense that Gottlieb would make a point to discuss it, its what he does. The record they might have in some other conference might be a side track, but its still something a lot people are going to discuss, especially on twitter.

Besides, SDSU beat KU in Lawrence. They also beat Creighton. So they have 2 wins much, much better than any WSU has so far.

However, WSU deserves a 1 seed IMO.

he's high on SDSU because he's a homer, I'm pointing out inconsistencies with his argument. The one off win at KU is not an indicator that SDSU would win on the road with regularity if they were in the Big 12. The biggest reason why it is a dumb argument is that you could also make the same argument against Kentucky, Florida, Duke, and Arizona; they all play in conferences that don't have nearly the road tests that the Big 12 has this season. When in the hell did we decide the worthiness of a 1 seed should be based on how good their record would be in the best conference?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 07:57:12 PM
He picked the WSU discussion because they are undefeated and play in a bad conference. I assume he picked the Big 12 because he played at a Big 12 school. Also because the league is really good.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 08:13:31 PM
He picked the WSU discussion because they are undefeated and play in a bad conference. I assume he picked the Big 12 because he played at a Big 12 school. Also because the league is really good.

yeah :dunno: was there doubt about any of that

Yeah Florida, the defacto #1 team in the country is in a bad conference too, he isn't making the same case against Florida because his argument and anyone who makes the same isn't making a case against WSU, they are making a case against The Valley and that's dumb. Why is it so hard to say, "I have no idea how good WSU is but they have won all of their games and haven't done anything horrible like losing at home to Boston College or losing to Wyoming so lets make them a 1 seed and see how it goes." Making an absolute value judgment about them based on their schedule is simple, I know he's smart enough to understand this, so I'm guessing he doing his annual trolling/attention whoring like he has done in the past to Syracuse and Missouri.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 20, 2014, 08:22:14 PM
He picked the WSU discussion because they are undefeated and play in a bad conference. I assume he picked the Big 12 because he played at a Big 12 school. Also because the league is really good.

yeah :dunno: was there doubt about any of that

Yeah Florida, the defacto #1 team in the country is in a bad conference too, he isn't making the same case against Florida because his argument and anyone who makes the same isn't making a case against WSU, they are making a case against The Valley and that's dumb. Why is it so hard to say, "I have no idea how good WSU is but they have won all of their games and haven't done anything horrible like losing at home to Boston College or losing to Wyoming so lets make them a 1 seed and see how it goes." Making an absolute value judgment about them based on their schedule is simple, I know he's smart enough to understand this, so I'm guessing he doing his annual trolling/attention whoring like he has done in the past to Syracuse and Missouri.

yeah, it's times like these that I wish we had some kind of computerized system or "ranking" index or something, that we could use to help us make value judgments on teams.  Like, some kind of index that takes in to account several factors (like strength of schedule for example).  maybe in the future we get something like that.  it's kind of tough crap for everyone right now though.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 20, 2014, 08:25:41 PM
Seems like whatever Gottlieb is doing its working because here you are arguing about it
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 08:32:15 PM
He picked the WSU discussion because they are undefeated and play in a bad conference. I assume he picked the Big 12 because he played at a Big 12 school. Also because the league is really good.

yeah :dunno: was there doubt about any of that

Yeah Florida, the defacto #1 team in the country is in a bad conference too, he isn't making the same case against Florida because his argument and anyone who makes the same isn't making a case against WSU, they are making a case against The Valley and that's dumb. Why is it so hard to say, "I have no idea how good WSU is but they have won all of their games and haven't done anything horrible like losing at home to Boston College or losing to Wyoming so lets make them a 1 seed and see how it goes." Making an absolute value judgment about them based on their schedule is simple, I know he's smart enough to understand this, so I'm guessing he doing his annual trolling/attention whoring like he has done in the past to Syracuse and Missouri.

Why do I feel like your argument is "why would a sports talk show host (who played college basketball) choose to discuss one of the top 5 current talking points in college basketball right now".

And while Gottlieb is certainly being definitive, much more he is taking a side in a discussion and letting the discussion happen because of that. Lots of people listen to him on the radio and follow him on twitter.

Including you obviously.

I really don't care how he framed his point (and he probably doesn't either), but he's getting people to take sides and discuss the topic, which as you said, was his intent all along.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 08:42:03 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 08:52:53 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 20, 2014, 08:58:15 PM
 
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

isn't the valley, like, quantifiably easier than the SEC?  Like, leaps and bounds easier?  I think the Valley has 2 teams in the top 100. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 20, 2014, 09:20:26 PM
Heard a shocker fan say that since Seff won't agree to play one in allen, one in sprint and one in intrust, that his shockers will just play ku in a parking lot.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 20, 2014, 09:21:26 PM
I bet we'd meet them in front of Burge Union.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: _33 on February 20, 2014, 09:27:15 PM

Gottlieb angering up the mob on twitter  :Carl:

And everything he said was right.

Right or complete and total speculation based on his preconceived notions? It's a dumb conversation even dumber to be definitive on how he thinks WSU or anyone else would do in another conference. Did anyone ask him why he didn't have the same crusade against SDSU?

If I know anything I know that speculation has no place on twitter. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 09:53:37 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 09:57:53 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

Perhaps, but via Twitter it seemed to make some sense for sparking discussion/interest.

That said, Doug did take his Ray Rice tweet a bit too far just a bit ago. Woof.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: _33 on February 20, 2014, 10:09:02 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

It's just sports so I think discussing whatever you want is fine.  I could be wrong though because I have no clue what you guys are talking about.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 20, 2014, 10:10:31 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

It's just sports so I think discussing whatever you want is fine.  I could be wrong though because I have no clue what you guys are talking about.

I'm kind of with you 33.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on February 20, 2014, 10:11:53 PM
i think its weird/very weird that you guys listen to sports radio or whatever it is that you're talking about
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on February 20, 2014, 10:11:58 PM
i think its weird/very weird that you guys listen to sports radio or whatever it is that you're talking about
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on February 20, 2014, 10:21:30 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

And there you have the overratedness of one Doug Gotleib. I think he was great when he was coming up in the ranks but I think he's starting to take his game to the middle aged level where Colin Cowherd resides.

His show is becoming a lil dry to me when I hear it now. 

Great analysis MIR..
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 20, 2014, 10:23:02 PM
I think it's more weird how MIR is getting all Beems Gridiron Club butthurt about a Shocker team that has nothing to do with the Cats...maybe the bandwagon didn't want to stop to pick him up in his neighborhood?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bloodfart on February 20, 2014, 10:24:35 PM
I think it's more weird how MIR is getting all Beems Gridiron Club butthurt about a Shocker team that has nothing to do with the Cats...maybe the bandwagon didn't want to stop to pick him up in his neighborhood?

Shut up butthole.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 10:25:13 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.
My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

It's just sports so I think discussing whatever you want is fine.

I'll acknowledge this post now so you don't feel the need to post it a third time

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 20, 2014, 10:27:11 PM
i think its weird/very weird that you guys listen to sports radio or whatever it is that you're talking about

And I'll ack. this post so HE doesn't feel the need to post it a third time.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 10:29:38 PM
I think it's more weird how MIR is getting all Beems Gridiron Club butthurt about a Shocker team that has nothing to do with the Cats...maybe the bandwagon didn't want to stop to pick him up in his neighborhood?

get out of the thread then, simp


25-0.

 :Woohoo:

Why the woohoo? Do you want them to keep winning so they could potentially be the first 1 seed to lose to a 16, because I do
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2014, 10:32:02 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

And there you have the overratedness of one Doug Gotleib. I think he was great when he was coming up in the ranks but I think he's starting to take his game to the middle aged level where Colin Cowherd resides.

His show is becoming a lil dry to me when I hear it now. 

Great analysis MIR..

I don't know what it is but he has annoyed me quite a bit since he went to CBS Sports, especially on Twitter, it just seems to be a giant troll job.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: _33 on February 21, 2014, 06:57:27 AM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

And there you have the overratedness of one Doug Gotleib. I think he was great when he was coming up in the ranks but I think he's starting to take his game to the middle aged level where Colin Cowherd resides.

His show is becoming a lil dry to me when I hear it now. 

Great analysis MIR..

I don't know what it is but he has annoyed me quite a bit since he went to CBS Sports, especially on Twitter, it just seems to be a giant troll job.

I know what it is, and you're not going to like it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 21, 2014, 07:52:03 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 21, 2014, 08:10:35 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

Yes, good post.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 21, 2014, 08:54:45 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

this is exactly why I discount WSU.  It's not that they played Southern Illinois (226)...it's that they then played @ Evansville (226) and then @ Loyola (279)...up next is Drake (181) then a roadie at Bradley (248). 

sure, Syracuse lost to BC (166) but that was after playing Duke (8), ND (108), Clemson (68), @ Pitt (31), NC St (63)...and then after playing BC, they have to @ Duke (8), @ Maryland (74), @ Virginia (14). 

IMO, a team from the Big 12, Big 10, Pac-12, ACC, and possibly Florida deserve a #1 seed over WSU.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 21, 2014, 01:45:55 PM
Its a really simple and hackneyed talking point, guess I expected him to take up a cause more nuanced and unexplored like how may Florida be helped by playing in a garbage conference.

Why?

Most college fans care about how good Wichita State is right now. The undefeated thing in the regular season is a big deal. The discussion of "would Florida go undefeated in the MVC" simply isn't interesting for most people. Plus Florida still has 7 wins over Top 50 teams.

I think you are reading something different than what I'm saying re Florida.

My larger point isn't that we shouldn't be discussing whether or not we should be discussing how good Wichita State is. Speculating whether or not they would lose in Ames does not advance that discussion, nor would it for any other team in America. The discussion about every other team and their worthiness is revolves around who they put on the floor. Is it too much to ask that one of the preeminent voices in the sport move the conversation beyond what we would hear on Mike and Mike or some random local hacky sports talk show in Cleveland?

And there you have the overratedness of one Doug Gotleib. I think he was great when he was coming up in the ranks but I think he's starting to take his game to the middle aged level where Colin Cowherd resides.

His show is becoming a lil dry to me when I hear it now. 

Great analysis MIR..

I don't know what it is but he has annoyed me quite a bit since he went to CBS Sports, especially on Twitter, it just seems to be a giant troll job.

I know what it is, and you're not going to like it.

tell me because I'm not foolish enough to think that he's changed so why do I see him differently
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: michigancat on February 21, 2014, 02:43:00 PM
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_invisible_hand_of_home_court_advantage
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 21, 2014, 03:08:03 PM
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_invisible_hand_of_home_court_advantage

i have no idea what he was trying to say.  apparently, Syracuse is the only team that benefits from home court advantage.  so eff them and everyone who thinks they are the #1 team.  meanwhile, wsu plays Bishop Carroll this week.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: michigancat on February 21, 2014, 03:09:59 PM
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_invisible_hand_of_home_court_advantage

i have no idea what he was trying to say.  apparently, Syracuse is the only team that benefits from home court advantage.  so eff them and everyone who thinks they are the #1 team.  meanwhile, wsu plays Bishop Carroll this week.

that's exactly what he's saying
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 21, 2014, 03:32:18 PM
28-0. Only undefeated team in the country.

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 21, 2014, 03:35:58 PM
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_invisible_hand_of_home_court_advantage

i have no idea what he was trying to say.  apparently, Syracuse is the only team that benefits from home court advantage.  so eff them and everyone who thinks they are the #1 team.  meanwhile, wsu plays Bishop Carroll this week.

that's exactly what he's saying

well, then I guess I do know what he's saying.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 PM

29-0.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on February 23, 2014, 08:27:43 AM

29-0.

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on February 23, 2014, 08:41:05 AM
:jerk:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PvtLamb on February 23, 2014, 09:24:34 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

Seems like there are examples on both sides of that - #2 Missouri losing in the 2nd round and of course KU losing in the 2nd or 3rd round after playing in the Big 12.

The biggest difference b/t WSU's schedule last year and this year, is not playing Creighton 3x.  Three games against Creighton, who lost their 2nd NCAA game, will make all of the difference?

Florida Gulf Coast last year smoking #2 Georgetown after playing in the Atlantic Sun.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ChiComCat on February 23, 2014, 09:35:30 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

Seems like there are examples on both sides of that - #2 Missouri losing in the 2nd round and of course KU losing in the 2nd or 3rd round after playing in the Big 12.

The biggest difference b/t WSU's schedule last year and this year, is not playing Creighton 3x.  Three games against Creighton, who lost their 2nd NCAA game, will make all of the difference?

Florida Gulf Coast last year smoking #2 Georgetown after playing in the Atlantic Sun.

Georgetown's consistency in the tournament says more about them than the win did for FGCU
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 23, 2014, 09:47:48 AM
i could be wrong but i don't think most people look at the strength of schedule thing in a way that i think is most important.  at this point in the season, the biggest issue w/ SoS is the cumulative effect (or lack thereof) that playing shitty teams all season has on a team, not the singular event of playing a shitty team on a random tuesday night.  the opposite is true of those teams playing in tougher conferences.  i know it's obvious but i'm not sure people really consider it a whole lot when having these discussions.

Seems like there are examples on both sides of that - #2 Missouri losing in the 2nd round and of course KU losing in the 2nd or 3rd round after playing in the Big 12.

The biggest difference b/t WSU's schedule last year and this year, is not playing Creighton 3x.  Three games against Creighton, who lost their 2nd NCAA game, will make all of the difference?

Florida Gulf Coast last year smoking #2 Georgetown after playing in the Atlantic Sun.

past tourney performance should have no bearing on current tourney seeding.  what you earn/do in this season should be the only thing evaluated.   
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PvtLamb on February 23, 2014, 09:54:39 AM

past tourney performance should have no bearing on current tourney seeding.  what you earn/do in this season should be the only thing evaluated.

Of course.   I was responding to the thought that the cumulative effect of playing weak teams in the regular season doesn't prepare a team for the NCAA tournament.   There are facts on both sides of that, so I am not sure you can draw a firm conclusion. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on February 23, 2014, 09:58:31 AM

past tourney performance should have no bearing on current tourney seeding.  what you earn/do in this season should be the only thing evaluated.

Of course.   I was responding to the thought that the cumulative effect of playing weak teams in the regular season doesn't prepare a team for the NCAA tournament.   There are facts on both sides of that, so I am not sure you can draw a firm conclusion.

I think clams point was in regards to how you would evaluate the "merits" of a team in a shitty conference (and their resulting unblemished record) vs. a team in a tough conference (that has some losses) in order to determine their seeding. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 23, 2014, 10:28:46 AM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=590875027666390&set=a.336114443142451.81198.138041119616452&type=1&theater
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 23, 2014, 10:40:07 AM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=590875027666390&set=a.336114443142451.81198.138041119616452&type=1&theater

The Incredible SHOCK!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on February 23, 2014, 10:43:38 AM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=590875027666390&set=a.336114443142451.81198.138041119616452&type=1&theater

Wichita State0?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on February 23, 2014, 10:58:30 AM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=590875027666390&set=a.336114443142451.81198.138041119616452&type=1&theater

Wichita State0?
:love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BackPayne on February 23, 2014, 11:02:03 AM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=590875027666390&set=a.336114443142451.81198.138041119616452&type=1&theater

Hey WSU, just wait until footba...well nevermind.
Title: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 23, 2014, 01:09:29 PM
Is Tina Turner  a WSU alumna?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on February 23, 2014, 05:08:43 PM
I wish EMAWs weren't so butthurt over WSU's success. It makes the KU butthurt much less enjoyable.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Pete on February 23, 2014, 05:14:50 PM
Is Tina Turner  a WSU alumna?

muscly Tina Turner holding a Jayhawk and a purple fox.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 23, 2014, 06:00:13 PM
I wish EMAWs weren't so butthurt over WSU's success. It makes the KU butthurt much less enjoyable.

Alright, I guess I'll stop painting this giant anti-WSU portrait I was in the middle of that was going to hang in Tubby's.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 25, 2014, 12:00:00 AM
Gottlieb vs. Lutz today was fun.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on February 25, 2014, 12:35:12 AM
Gottlieb vs. Lutz today was fun.

Really surprised you didn't jump on that ample @ing opportunity.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 25, 2014, 12:42:59 AM
Gottlieb vs. Lutz today was fun.

Really surprised you didn't jump on that ample @ing opportunity.

They were mostly @'n each other by the time I was aware of it.

The interview's on here: http://gottlieb.radio.cbssports.com/audio/1730-doug-gottlieb-interviews/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on February 25, 2014, 12:49:53 AM
Gottlieb vs. Lutz today was fun.

Really surprised you didn't jump on that ample @ing opportunity.

They were mostly @'n each other by the time I was aware of it.

The interview's on here: http://gottlieb.radio.cbssports.com/audio/1730-doug-gottlieb-interviews/

oscar n Bob are trying to get Doug on "Sports Daily" tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: star seed 7 on February 25, 2014, 01:01:07 AM
I wish EMAWs weren't so butthurt over WSU's success. It makes the KU butthurt much less enjoyable.

go shox  :D
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cork_sniffer on February 25, 2014, 07:20:20 AM
BPI has the shockers at #7 which IMO is closer to reality.  They are a solid team with veteran and experienced players who haven't let a game slip against second rate competition.  They haven't played enough tournament teams though to give them the clout needed for a 1 seed in my book.  The committee shouldn't award them for playing a soft schedule and not losing, precisely the opposite: no 1 seed for super weak scheduling teams from horrible conferences regardless of record (set a precedent).  Marshall needs to get off his high horse and play some road games at major schools if he wants to avoid this in the future.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on February 25, 2014, 08:27:43 AM
BPI has the shockers at #7 which IMO is closer to reality.  They are a solid team with veteran and experienced players who haven't let a game slip against second rate competition.  They haven't played enough tournament teams though to give them the clout needed for a 1 seed in my book.  The committee shouldn't award them for playing a soft schedule and not losing, precisely the opposite: no 1 seed for super weak scheduling teams from horrible conferences regardless of record (set a precedent).  Marshall needs to get off his high horse and play some road games at major schools if he wants to avoid this in the future.

the precedent has already been set, you go undefeated and you get a 1 seed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 25, 2014, 08:32:38 PM
Wackeycat just messed his shorts on that Ron Baker jam
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 26, 2014, 09:05:57 AM
Got a pickle of a situation.   

While watching some of the WuShuck vs another sub .500 team game last night, I noticed 2 WuShuckers sitting in the endzone seats at the Bradley Arena, I believe it was at the Bradley bench end.  Every time the WuShucks on the floor would do something well, which was fairly often as WuShuck basketball is good and Bradley is a sub .500 team.   The two WuShuck fans in the end zone would stand up and taunt the crowd and/or turn and point up what seemed to be a contingent up WuShuck fans sitting in the nose bleeds. 

I am perplexed by my reaction, as my initial thought was that those two were a couple of dorks, but then I thought about that the fact that WuShuck hoops was going for 30 wins, but then I thought about how Bradley is pretty crappy and then I thought about why I would be concerned about the 2 WuShuck dorks at all . . .

Like I said, a pickle.   
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: emawmason on February 26, 2014, 01:22:06 PM
Wichita State is the best team in the state this year and it's really not even close. 

They have the better of the two Wiggins bros, Baker is a better shooter than anybody on our or ku's roster, Early is probably the best player to step foot in Kansas since Beasley and VanVleet is a very solid point guard...

Even though it'll be a rough year for the boys in purple, I'm glad to see baby bro having some success even if it rips the hearts out of lil bro to play second fiddle to an MVC team.

Are you serious? Early is the best player in Kansas since Beasley? Andrew Wiggins' brother is better than him? So many things wrong with that post. KU would win at least 8/10 times, for us the 'cats would probably go 5-5.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: AbeFroman on February 26, 2014, 01:26:23 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 26, 2014, 01:31:29 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 26, 2014, 01:49:06 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

It's a win/win deal
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on February 26, 2014, 01:56:07 PM
BPI has the shockers at #7 which IMO is closer to reality.  They are a solid team with veteran and experienced players who haven't let a game slip against second rate competition.  They haven't played enough tournament teams though to give them the clout needed for a 1 seed in my book.  The committee shouldn't award them for playing a soft schedule and not losing, precisely the opposite: no 1 seed for super weak scheduling teams from horrible conferences regardless of record (set a precedent).  Marshall needs to get off his high horse and play some road games at major schools if he wants to avoid this in the future.

Course they could do more, but they did play Tennessee, @ ALA, and @ SLU (a tourny team and 25-2), yes, the MVC isn't lights out but that noncon is at least something. They also got wins over a 2nd place BYU team and the first place team in the Southern in Davidson. Top flight noncon? No. Weak? Not too much, it is #34 noncon SOS according to ESPN. Other than playing one or two top RPI top 50 noncon I don't know what really more they could do. For reference K-State's non conference SOS is 148.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 26, 2014, 02:05:52 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 26, 2014, 02:12:32 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

But since they're both the same S, move on to C. :tsc:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 26, 2014, 02:16:55 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

But since they're both the same S, move on to C. :tsc:

I'm all S, bruh... All S.  There's a reason it's TSC, not TCS. 

 :dubious:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on February 26, 2014, 02:18:38 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

But since they're both the same S, move on to C. :tsc:

I'm all S, bruh... All S.  There's a reason it's TSC, not TCS. 

 :dubious:

So since they're the same S, you get to pick without even using C? :nono:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: AbeFroman on February 26, 2014, 02:25:25 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

The last paragraph is pretty funny. Phantom foul butthurt and "smug" Wichita State
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 26, 2014, 02:29:03 PM
Butthurt phoggies are some of the most entertaining people on the planet...  I really don't think you understand the entertainment value inherent in a WSU win over ku, ESPECIALLY in their beloved game of basketball.

I'm gonna stand pat.

 :pray:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on February 26, 2014, 02:34:15 PM
Butthurt phoggies are some of the most entertaining people on the planet...  I really don't think you understand the entertainment value inherent in a WSU win over ku, ESPECIALLY in their beloved game of basketball.

I'm gonna stand pat.

 :pray:

I do not want to play WSU ever, unless it's in the E8 or beyond.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Brock Landers on February 26, 2014, 02:36:25 PM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

The last paragraph is pretty funny. Phantom foul butthurt and "smug" Wichita State


Yeah, they conveniently ignore how Valentine missed the front end of a 1 and 1 and then missed a breakaway layup.  Point shaving perhaps?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Institutional Control on February 27, 2014, 07:39:29 AM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 27, 2014, 08:16:13 AM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

She is gross.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 27, 2014, 08:58:24 AM
WSU vs ku in the tournament would be hilarious.  :crossfingers: :pray:

I would TSC my face off.

Fortunately, the "S" comes first....  Was glorious the last time.

http://kuhistory.com/articles/shocked/

About KU coach Ted Owens:

"The editors of the magazine claimed that he was consistently out-coached by his conference peers, and for some inexplicable reason his Jayhawks “regularly lost to teams with less talent.” To add further insult the magazine quoted NBA scouts who claimed that Owens’s system handicapped his players’ chances of being selected early in the draft. The magazine ultimately concluded that the “noose hangs high for Owens.”

Sound familiar?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 27, 2014, 09:11:46 AM
I would love to see Ku v. WSU in the tourney.  KU would dive bomb them by 10 or more.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 0.42 on February 27, 2014, 10:31:10 AM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

Does KSU make an active effort to count her as one of "our" alums? Because if so that needs to stop like rough ridin' pronto.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: AbeFroman on February 27, 2014, 10:47:16 AM
Kirstie is TSC'ing hard.  :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on February 27, 2014, 11:43:33 AM
BPI has the shockers at #7 which IMO is closer to reality.  They are a solid team with veteran and experienced players who haven't let a game slip against second rate competition.  They haven't played enough tournament teams though to give them the clout needed for a 1 seed in my book.  The committee shouldn't award them for playing a soft schedule and not losing, precisely the opposite: no 1 seed for super weak scheduling teams from horrible conferences regardless of record (set a precedent).  Marshall needs to get off his high horse and play some road games at major schools if he wants to avoid this in the future.

Course they could do more, but they did play Tennessee, @ ALA, and @ SLU (a tourny team and 25-2), yes, the MVC isn't lights out but that noncon is at least something. They also got wins over a 2nd place BYU team and the first place team in the Southern in Davidson. Top flight noncon? No. Weak? Not too much, it is #34 noncon SOS according to ESPN. Other than playing one or two top RPI top 50 noncon I don't know what really more they could do. For reference K-State's non conference SOS is 148.

Because their conference is so weak they should be doing  a lot more.  KSU doesn't need to because our conference is the strongest in the nation.  Check out this comparison.  KSU played the same number of top 50 teams in the RPI that WSU did.  Pretty telling honestly.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/team-comparison/KSTATE/WICHST
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: emawmason on February 27, 2014, 12:16:17 PM
I consider myself a casual fan of WSU but the majority of their fanbase has a horrible case of little man syndrome. Like makes KU fans seem super relaxed and confident and lacking a need for validation. It would almost be worth it to add them as a basketball only member just for the BBSing gold that would ensue.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 27, 2014, 01:17:37 PM
Kenny weighs in: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/my_wichita_state_talking_points
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on February 27, 2014, 01:22:02 PM
Kenny weighs in: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/my_wichita_state_talking_points
That clarified nothing for me.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on February 27, 2014, 01:46:06 PM
Kenny weighs in: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/my_wichita_state_talking_points
That clarified nothing for me.

Norlander with some nice responses to Kenny. This one is interesting: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24449233/last-clan-standing-how-final-unbeaten-teams-have-finished-seasons (maybe luked, I missed it when it came out)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on February 27, 2014, 10:53:33 PM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

She is gross.

Is gross a synonym for great in your vernacular? If so I agree.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on February 27, 2014, 11:10:14 PM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

She is gross.

Is gross a synonym for great in your vernacular? If so I agree.

Two dumbasses duking it out
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HerrSonntag on February 27, 2014, 11:19:49 PM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

She is gross.

Is gross a synonym for great in your vernacular? If so I agree.

Two dumbasses duking it out
I like that one where they dubbed all the baby speak in to big people speak.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: XocolateThundarr on February 28, 2014, 08:37:01 AM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

She is gross.

Is gross a synonym for great in your vernacular? If so I agree.

:eek: How did you know that was what I meant?  That is scary.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on February 28, 2014, 12:22:00 PM
I would love to see Ku v. WSU in the tourney.  KU would dive bomb them by 10 or more.

 :surprised:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 28, 2014, 10:26:28 PM
(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/02/28/20/41/1vECcv.SlMa.80.jpeg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BostonPancake on February 28, 2014, 11:42:42 PM
Oh Kirstie....

http://collegespun.com/homepage/kirstie-alley-got-into-it-with-doug-gottlieb-over-wichita-states-ncaa-resume#

I think the takeaway from this is we need more midwest scrappers.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on March 01, 2014, 03:27:03 PM
Its said and done. Great season folks.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wabash909 on March 01, 2014, 03:42:52 PM
Grats on the #1 seed, Shox.  A #2 seed is pretty good too, Hawks.


Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: everyone shut up on March 01, 2014, 03:53:25 PM
what's the over/under on how many times "rock shock" will be posted on facebook? i've already seen it 762 times.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 01, 2014, 04:00:17 PM
what's the over/under on how many times "rock shock" will be posted on facebook? i've already seen it 762 times.

Jayhawk fans and Shocker fans don't really bother me much. A Jayshock fills me with an insatiable rage. They are the absolute worst kind of people.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on March 01, 2014, 04:03:42 PM
what's the over/under on how many times "rock shock" will be posted on facebook? i've already seen it 762 times.

Jayhawk fans and Shocker fans don't really bother me much. A Jayshock fills me with an insatiable rage. They are the absolute worst kind of people.

What about Shockats?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksufan44 on March 01, 2014, 04:05:10 PM
I feel they are very similar to the snitches 'get stitches' Delonte West, and Jammer Nelson St. Joes team. Who is/was better, I have no idea..
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 01, 2014, 04:05:51 PM
what's the over/under on how many times "rock shock" will be posted on facebook? i've already seen it 762 times.

Jayhawk fans and Shocker fans don't really bother me much. A Jayshock fills me with an insatiable rage. They are the absolute worst kind of people.

What about Shockats?

They don't make me that mad, but I really don't understand it either.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: slobber on March 01, 2014, 05:03:38 PM
What is the history of every other team that was undefeated in the regular season? Did they all go on to be National Champs? Could end up being a big black mark for WSU if they are the first to go undefeated and then not become National Champs.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on March 01, 2014, 05:12:26 PM
What is the history of every other team that was undefeated in the regular season? Did they all go on to be National Champs? Could end up being a big black mark for WSU if they are the first to go undefeated and then not become National Champs.

The guy announcing the games brought up Indiana St. with Larry Bird finished -0 but they lost to Mich. St. in the Natty. Also they brought up the '91 UNLV squad but they lost in the Final Four. Indiana went all the way in '76, and UCLA did it like 4 times in the 60's-70's.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 01, 2014, 06:19:26 PM
Undefeated in regular season  :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 01, 2014, 08:35:25 PM
Undefeated in regular season  :Woohoo:

Pretty rough ridin' incredible
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EMAWzified on March 01, 2014, 08:41:17 PM
I think Indiana was undefeated in regular season the year before, too. But lost a star to injury and didn't go all the way.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EMAWzified on March 01, 2014, 08:43:52 PM
If, as every sqwawk fan believes, KU could beat the shocks, they have to feel pretty bad the game was scheduled this year because it would pretty much ensure sqwawks a No. 1 seed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 06, 2014, 10:26:53 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/06/3330102/being-a-fan-a-full-time-job-for.html

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/PyuBZ.SlMa.80.jpeg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 06, 2014, 10:27:57 PM
:sdeek:

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/1t2z2b.SlMa.80.jpeg)

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/hWAqG.SlMa.80.jpeg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on March 06, 2014, 10:29:11 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/06/3330102/being-a-fan-a-full-time-job-for.html

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/PyuBZ.SlMa.80.jpeg)
future Orr
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on March 06, 2014, 10:29:58 PM
(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/PyuBZ.SlMa.80.jpeg)

 :Yuck:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 06, 2014, 10:32:01 PM
If I was fat and ugly, I'd probably do the same thing for K-State. What do you have to lose? :dunno:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on March 06, 2014, 10:32:55 PM
(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 06, 2014, 10:42:45 PM
(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

He's scaring Phillip Seymour Hoffman.  #acting
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on March 06, 2014, 10:44:48 PM
That guy: "LFG!!!!"

Everyone else: "Meh" while calmly clapping.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on March 06, 2014, 10:45:35 PM
lots of "branding" in that pic
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 06, 2014, 10:47:12 PM
#Fangry
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 06, 2014, 11:22:48 PM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

I have better hair. Face pretty spot on.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 06, 2014, 11:23:40 PM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sunny_cat on March 06, 2014, 11:25:05 PM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

Left side yellow, right side black. It's tough to tell.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on March 06, 2014, 11:25:21 PM
all bets are off when you're dealing with a kroger brand scottwildcat
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: yoman on March 06, 2014, 11:32:46 PM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

After closer examination, it appears to be face paint. At first, I was alarmed because it appeared that he had a strange face tattoo, but alas, it was only paint.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 06, 2014, 11:37:32 PM
all bets are off when you're dealing with a kroger brand scottwildcat

and that is being nice to that kid.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on March 06, 2014, 11:47:00 PM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

After closer examination, it appears to be face paint. At first, I was alarmed because it appeared that he had a strange face tattoo, but alas, it was only paint.

What is that in his left hand? Doesn't look good.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: That_Guy on March 07, 2014, 12:08:37 AM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

It looks like he got some washable crayola markers and just started coloring in his face.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 07, 2014, 02:32:43 AM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BIG APPLE CAT on March 07, 2014, 09:05:54 AM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

It looks like he got some washable crayola markers and just started coloring in his face.

I like that he's flanked by sweat pants and jersey/camo. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: massofcatfan on March 07, 2014, 09:29:10 AM
“I consider being a Wichita State Shocker fan a full-time job. There’s no days off. You’re constantly doing homework. You’re constantly thinking, ‘OK, so we beat Bradley. Now we’re going to play Evansville. What’s their roster? Who scores the most?’ ”  :runaway:

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/06/3330102/being-a-fan-a-full-time-job-for.html#storylink=cpy (http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/06/3330102/being-a-fan-a-full-time-job-for.html#storylink=cpy)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on March 07, 2014, 11:42:12 AM
If I see one more K-State student wearing WSU apparel on campus....
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: IPA4Me on March 07, 2014, 11:44:06 AM
If I see one more K-State student wearing WSU apparel on campus....
:Wha:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ednksu on March 07, 2014, 11:54:32 AM
If I see one more K-State student wearing WSU apparel on campus....
Hey they're from Andover Wichita!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 07, 2014, 11:58:33 AM
 :combofan:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 07, 2014, 02:51:31 PM
A lot of fake ass TSCers in this thread   :dubious:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on March 07, 2014, 03:57:50 PM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
I don't think I could come up with 9 things to tattoo that are not KSU cats related.  As someone that is generally anti tat, I think a KSU related tat is one of the only things I would not regret.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 07, 2014, 04:02:46 PM
Quote
Fred Wuthrich, a salesman at Scott Rice Office Interiors, has loved the 31 games (32 since we chatted) left with nothing but good feelings.

And for Wichita, it’s great, he says.

“I think it put us on the map, it gives us some good press around the country,” Wuthrich says. “I think it’s real positive for the local kids, they don’t have to be embarrassed about going to WSU anymore. There’s increased enrollment. My son, my wife, myself — we’ve all been students at WSU and there’s a lot of pride in your school as a result.”

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2014/03/shocker-mania-pride-evident-at.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on March 07, 2014, 04:12:48 PM
getting kinda dusty in here
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 07, 2014, 04:16:48 PM
We Don't Have to be Embarrassed about Going to WSU Anymore!!!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 07, 2014, 04:49:56 PM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
I don't think I could come up with 9 things to tattoo that are not KSU cats related.  As someone that is generally anti tat, I think a KSU related tat is one of the only things I would not regret.

Would you regret this one? (not mine)

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/lopak1/powercat_zps61acf14d.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on March 07, 2014, 04:55:02 PM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
I don't think I could come up with 9 things to tattoo that are not KSU cats related.  As someone that is generally anti tat, I think a KSU related tat is one of the only things I would not regret.

Would you regret this one? (not mine)

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/lopak1/powercat_zps61acf14d.jpg)
I don't think any regret associated with that tat is due to the subject matter.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 07, 2014, 06:53:12 PM
Quote
Fred Wuthrich, a salesman at Scott Rice Office Interiors, has loved the 31 games (32 since we chatted) left with nothing but good feelings.

And for Wichita, it’s great, he says.

“I think it put us on the map, it gives us some good press around the country,” Wuthrich says. “I think it’s real positive for the local kids, they don’t have to be embarrassed about going to WSU anymore. There’s increased enrollment. My son, my wife, myself — we’ve all been students at WSU and there’s a lot of pride in your school as a result.”

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2014/03/shocker-mania-pride-evident-at.html

There's no need to feel inferior about going to WSU.   Their aeronautics program is one of the best in the nation.  Not a bad school for MBAs either.   

#littlesisfuturegrad.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 07, 2014, 07:34:25 PM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
I don't think I could come up with 9 things to tattoo that are not KSU cats related.  As someone that is generally anti tat, I think a KSU related tat is one of the only things I would not regret.

Would you regret this one? (not mine)

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/lopak1/powercat_zps61acf14d.jpg)

they give powercat tats in prison :excited:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on March 08, 2014, 10:19:14 AM
I sat next to a kid in a class at K-State once. Like, sat next to him everyday we had class for an entire semester, which was twice a week. He had a huge powercat with purple flaes tattoo'ed on his forearm. I told myself, the second I saw it and every single day that I had class with him and saw it again, that no matter how huge of a K-State fan I turned into I would never get something like that tattoo'ed on myself. Which is all fine and dandy for your average goEMAW'r, but for the go'EMAW'r who already has nine tattoos, that was a pretty big statement to make to myself. Anyways, all that to say that tattoos of your favorite sports teams are stupid and that guy will probably regret that tat at some point.
I don't think I could come up with 9 things to tattoo that are not KSU cats related.  As someone that is generally anti tat, I think a KSU related tat is one of the only things I would not regret.

Would you regret this one? (not mine)

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/lopak1/powercat_zps61acf14d.jpg)
Is treatment for hepatitis C included with this tat? This looks like one of Skinny Benny's drawings from second grade (if the Powercat had been invented then).
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bloodfart on March 08, 2014, 03:27:10 PM
Godmotherfuck kstate pussiest school in the land.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Johnny Thunderbone on March 08, 2014, 03:53:17 PM
Godmotherfuck kstate pussiest school in the land.
Interesting if true
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bloodfart on March 08, 2014, 06:55:01 PM
Q
Godmotherfuck kstate pussiest school in the land.
Interesting if true
(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/suicide.gif)(http://goEMAW.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/shooturmouth.gif)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bloodfart on March 08, 2014, 09:30:13 PM
I'm still mad.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 08, 2014, 09:58:08 PM
http://vimeo.com/88406645
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 08, 2014, 10:03:43 PM
Wichita, the City, sucks ass  :comehere:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 08, 2014, 10:49:39 PM
Wichita, the City, sucks ass  :comehere:

True
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 09, 2014, 10:36:33 AM
http://youtu.be/FC2EvpH_DhQ
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 09, 2014, 03:01:41 PM
http://youtu.be/FC2EvpH_DhQ

they stole that from VCU after they beat Wichita State in the tournament in 2012
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on March 09, 2014, 11:59:05 PM
34-0 (and MVC regular season and tourney champs, for what they're worth). Will the many days off before the NCAA starts hurt or help them? I think the lull may hurt.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HerrSonntag on March 10, 2014, 12:51:09 AM
Wichita, the City, sucks ass  :comehere:
Why don't you choke on your own tongue, you bad person.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MeatGeeKSU on March 10, 2014, 02:23:12 AM

(http://media.kansas.com/smedia/2014/03/06/20/56/15IdSG.SlMa.80.jpeg)

@scottshocker face

Also wtf was that a week face paint attempt or is his skin messed up.

It looks like he got some washable crayola markers and just started coloring in his face.

I like that he's flanked by sweat pants and jersey/camo.

I know the kid in the jersey/camo.  He's a stud Special Olympics athlete, I am not joking.  He also manages a 3.5 plus GPA at WSU.  His Facebook posts about the Shockers and CM Punk are just wonderbad.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on March 10, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
34-0 (and MVC regular season and tourney champs, for what they're worth). Will the many days off before the NCAA starts hurt or help them? I think the lull may hurt.

The commitee is so "what have you done lately?" that I think an impressive performance from a current NCAA two seed in their conference tournament could still see WSU slip.  That being said, there is still that overwhelming shoulder shrug when you compare SOS to the fact they are undefeated.  I don't think they get the number one over all for sure, but I am willing to bet the farm they stay a 1 seed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HerrSonntag on March 10, 2014, 03:53:59 PM
34-0 (and MVC regular season and tourney champs, for what they're worth). Will the many days off before the NCAA starts hurt or help them? I think the lull may hurt.

The commitee is so "what have you done lately?" that I think an impressive performance from a current NCAA two seed in their conference tournament could still see WSU slip.  That being said, there is still that overwhelming shoulder shrug when you compare SOS to the fact they are undefeated.  I don't think they get the number one over all for sure, but I am willing to bet the farm they stay a 1 seed.
At this point WSU is a lock for a #1 seed.  If 34-0 doesn't get you a #1 seed, what does?  The whole system breaks down if mid-majors think there's no way to get a #1 seed.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 10, 2014, 04:06:22 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on March 10, 2014, 04:09:42 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

Don't agree.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 10, 2014, 04:29:28 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

Don't agree.

Any rationale, or are we back to their schedule sucks? They are a part of a group of three that are clear #1s, even before yesterday. The fact that there's still 4 teams fighting for that last 1 seed is evidence enough. Also St. Joseph's.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 10, 2014, 05:04:04 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on March 10, 2014, 05:14:05 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

Don't agree.

Any rationale, or are we back to their schedule sucks? They are a part of a group of three that are clear #1s, even before yesterday. The fact that there's still 4 teams fighting for that last 1 seed is evidence enough. Also St. Joseph's.

I think they'd have still got a 1 but there would have been doubt. If, say, all of the teams fighting for that last 1 seed would win their conference tourney combined with aWSU loss might have pushed them to a 2
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 10, 2014, 05:17:04 PM
Anyone see the Grantland piece on WSU (and KU) today?

http://grantland.com/features/kansas-wichita-state-rivalry-big-12-basketball/ (http://grantland.com/features/kansas-wichita-state-rivalry-big-12-basketball/)

Pretty in-depth piece that includes interviews with WSU's intellectual elite, including a random poster from ShockerNet #Makin'News
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 10, 2014, 05:24:12 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

When you go to Dillon's to buy the shirt can you pick up some milk and eggs for me?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 10, 2014, 06:15:55 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

When you go to Dillon's to buy the shirt can you pick up some milk and eggs for me?

 :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on March 10, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
34-0 (and MVC regular season and tourney champs, for what they're worth). Will the many days off before the NCAA starts hurt or help them? I think the lull may hurt.

The commitee is so "what have you done lately?" that I think an impressive performance from a current NCAA two seed in their conference tournament could still see WSU slip.  That being said, there is still that overwhelming shoulder shrug when you compare SOS to the fact they are undefeated.  I don't think they get the number one over all for sure, but I am willing to bet the farm they stay a 1 seed.

WSU deserves and will get a #1. Just wondering what effect, if any, the several days off without a game will have when they get back in a game.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 10, 2014, 09:39:07 PM
34-0 (and MVC regular season and tourney champs, for what they're worth). Will the many days off before the NCAA starts hurt or help them? I think the lull may hurt.

The commitee is so "what have you done lately?" that I think an impressive performance from a current NCAA two seed in their conference tournament could still see WSU slip.  That being said, there is still that overwhelming shoulder shrug when you compare SOS to the fact they are undefeated.  I don't think they get the number one over all for sure, but I am willing to bet the farm they stay a 1 seed.

WSU deserves and will get a #1. Just wondering what effect, if any, the several days off without a game will have when they get back in a game.

More time for that misfit Puck to flutter by and pour his mischievous potion in their eyes.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 11, 2014, 01:03:01 AM
Quote
In Wichita, Lutz estimates, “It’s 60 percent Wichita State fans, 15 percent Kansas fans, 15 percent K-State fans, and 10 percent everybody else.”

everybody else = bellator?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 11, 2014, 01:08:16 AM
Quote
In Wichita, Lutz estimates, “It’s 60 percent Wichita State fans, 15 percent Kansas fans, 15 percent K-State fans, and 10 percent everybody else.”

everybody else = bellator?

that's absurd
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fedor on March 11, 2014, 07:30:24 AM
Quote
In Wichita, Lutz estimates, “It’s 60 percent Wichita State fans, 15 percent Kansas fans, 15 percent K-State fans, and 10 percent everybody else.”

everybody else = bellator?

that's absurd
When I started reading that I thought the sum would add up to over 100%, but then the quote was over and Lutz actually did make one of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on the subject.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on March 11, 2014, 08:22:40 AM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

I want to punch you in your dumbass hayseed face
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 11, 2014, 09:10:43 AM
http://ksn.com/2014/03/10/koch-arena-concession-stand-cited-for-bug-problem/

The shockers/squawks rivalry is alive on all fronts.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 11, 2014, 09:22:47 AM
http://ksn.com/2014/03/10/koch-arena-concession-stand-cited-for-bug-problem/

The shockers/squawks rivalry is alive on all fronts.

They one upped the KU bedbug epidemic IMHO.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 11, 2014, 12:55:57 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

When you go to Dillon's to buy the shirt can you pick up some milk and eggs for me?

Nope. I went to Kansas Sampler and got this one for my wife (WSU grad)

(http://www.rallyhouse.com/prodimages/164320-DEFAULT-l.jpg)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bill Clarahan on March 11, 2014, 01:11:02 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

When you go to Dillon's to buy the shirt can you pick up some milk and eggs for me?

Nope. I went to Kansas Sampler and got this one for my wife (WSU grad)

(http://www.rallyhouse.com/prodimages/164320-DEFAULT-l.jpg)

She's only going to get to wear that about two weeks
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 11, 2014, 01:31:30 PM
lol at that shirt.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: WildcatNkilt on March 11, 2014, 01:38:26 PM
WSU's marketing team should have taken jabs at KU and K-State.  Missed opportunity. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 11, 2014, 03:20:38 PM
they would have gotten a 1 seed even if they lost yesterday

But they didn't.

 :Woohoo:

When you go to Dillon's to buy the shirt can you pick up some milk and eggs for me?

Nope. I went to Kansas Sampler and got this one for my wife (WSU grad)

(http://www.rallyhouse.com/prodimages/164320-DEFAULT-l.jpg)

She's only going to get to wear that about two weeks

 :facepalm: 

I didn't really buy her the shirt.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mr Bread on March 11, 2014, 03:32:30 PM
Obvs it's got sleeves. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on March 13, 2014, 10:06:45 AM
Currently the most popular article on kwch.com

http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/tournament-media-luncheon/24928288 (http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/tournament-media-luncheon/24928288)

The comments... :lol:

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 13, 2014, 10:18:41 AM
Gottlieb vs Shocker nation (including all the bandwagon K-State/KU fans) is very fun.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HELLHAMMER on March 13, 2014, 10:35:00 AM
Just when I thought I couldn't love Doug Gottlieb any more  :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ydarg2012 on March 13, 2014, 10:37:19 AM
Currently the most popular article on kwch.com

http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/tournament-media-luncheon/24928288 (http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/tournament-media-luncheon/24928288)

The comments... :lol:

@DennisKimble
He was a better player than commentator and he wasn't even that good of a player.

Interesting if true.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on March 13, 2014, 11:10:07 AM
O MY  :drool:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 15, 2014, 10:47:21 AM
Wichita's (and NYC's) gone bonkers for these shockers!

http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/03/11/garvey-center-goes-to-great-heights-to-show-shocker-support/

http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/12/3341906/sewing-sisters-we-wu-puppets-capture.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2014/03/new-york-strangers-share-the-shocker-love-with.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2014/03/shockers-coach-marshall-is-feeling-the-local-love.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2014/03/more-wsu-branded-license-plates-hitting-the.html

http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/03/13/you-dont-say-915/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on March 15, 2014, 11:23:42 AM
Gottlieb vs Shocker nation (including all the bandwagon K-State/KU fans) is very fun.

Yes it is. The WSU fans are beyond butthurt on twitter.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Boondock Poonhound on March 15, 2014, 11:25:15 AM
This is all going to end in a resounding thud when they fall behind to the 8/9 seed in the round of 32. The rim will get a little smaller, and they will be playing the best team they have seen in 3 months.

(See Gonzaga,2013)

Nice little run they had tho.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 15, 2014, 11:34:57 AM
If we played Wichita st in the tourney I would root for them
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 15, 2014, 11:38:57 AM
If we played Wichita st in the tourney I would root for them
You're a loser tho.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on March 18, 2014, 12:27:36 PM
What if the Shockers go 35-1 this year?

35-0 against the rest of the college basketball world and 0-1 vs the wild, wild cats?

  :emawkid: :ksu:  :emawkid:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 18, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
What if the Shockers go 35-1 this year?

35-0 against the rest of the college basketball world and 0-1 vs the wild, wild cats?

  :emawkid: :ksu:  :emawkid:
:bball:
I'm not sure where it's coming from, but they zeal is back for me.

I didn't want this to happen so soon but big brotha don't have time for silly games.

Cats win by 10+
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on March 18, 2014, 09:29:16 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834)

 :confused: :confused: :confused:
very mid majory
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 18, 2014, 09:56:52 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834)

 :confused: :confused: :confused:
very mid majory

They should've used better tweets.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on March 18, 2014, 10:08:58 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834)

 :confused: :confused: :confused:
very mid majory

They should've used better tweets.
I liked the one where Ron admitted he listened to Nickleback and there is nothing wrong with it  :ROFL:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 19, 2014, 01:40:13 PM
His nose...  :lol:

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 19, 2014, 02:32:47 PM
It looks like a penis you dorks. Sheesh. You guys are bad at this.  :buh-bye:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 19, 2014, 02:57:20 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152312559223834)


 :love: :love:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Shooter Jones on March 19, 2014, 04:37:04 PM
I guess I just don't see it, Wacky.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 19, 2014, 04:38:08 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bloodfart on March 19, 2014, 06:57:27 PM
Funny that Wacky is making dick jokes, Wacky what's your fav past time huh WACKY?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 19, 2014, 10:14:06 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/19/3355359/no-water-on-wichita-state-university.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 19, 2014, 10:17:04 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/19/3355388/bob-lutz-two-more-st-louis-wins.html

:lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Katpappy on March 19, 2014, 10:21:08 PM
His nose...  :lol:
What a DICK!!!  :horrorsurprise:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Katpappy on March 19, 2014, 10:22:18 PM
I guess I just don't see it, Wacky.
I don't see it either, Shooter.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: everyone shut up on March 19, 2014, 10:33:08 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/19/3355359/no-water-on-wichita-state-university.html

quote from that article. wtf?
Quote
Yeah, my mother's cutesy/ great view of the fountains apartment, thousands and thousands, and thousands of dollars per month 'high end' retirement community was 'without water' for an afternoon or a day, or no hot water. But that was up to their children to find out. But that didn't merit Eagle and exile attention. They are old people and rich, so what. THEY PROBABLY SHOWER TOO MUCH ANYWAY? If the now famous, Nationally Famous Shox, are without water, now THAT IS NEWS! look up the words diffidence and sardonic. then synthesize a new emotion. somewhere in those ballparks. whatever. all my tap water before drank by me, gets a Scandanavian filter job, charcoal type, first. so much water, but nothing to drink? not really Kansas, I agree. right.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 21, 2014, 05:02:00 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/slideshow/2014/03/21/wichita-employees-sport-their-ncaa-team-gear-at.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MadCat on March 21, 2014, 05:06:47 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/slideshow/2014/03/21/wichita-employees-sport-their-ncaa-team-gear-at.html

I imagine most years the Shocker fans would be in plain clothes for those pictures...then again, those pictures probably don't get taken in most years.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mr Bread on March 21, 2014, 05:13:53 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/slideshow/2014/03/21/wichita-employees-sport-their-ncaa-team-gear-at.html

I imagine most years the Shocker fans would be in plain clothes for those pictures...then again, those pictures probably don't get taken in most years.

There is such an overwhelming majority of unattractive people in the Midwest, maybe other places too.  I mean eff. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trogdor on March 21, 2014, 06:30:13 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/slideshow/2014/03/21/wichita-employees-sport-their-ncaa-team-gear-at.html

I imagine most years the Shocker fans would be in plain clothes for those pictures...then again, those pictures probably don't get taken in most years.

There is such an overwhelming majority of unattractive people in the Midwest, maybe other places too.  I mean eff.

Its just people who have jobs
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on March 23, 2014, 01:44:53 PM
Carrying the hopes and dreams of the state
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 23, 2014, 02:01:21 PM

Carrying the hopes and dreams of the state

DGAF go big blue
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 02:04:30 PM

Carrying the hopes and dreams of the state

DGAF go big blue

GTFO
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on March 23, 2014, 02:10:20 PM
shockers are gonna destroy these losers
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
it is amazing how lovable this team is
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on March 23, 2014, 02:48:28 PM
I can understand hating WSU for the fans or for Marshall being a dick but no way can you not enjoy watching them play. Really fun to watch.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on March 23, 2014, 02:49:29 PM
Would Marshall have come here after Frank left?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on March 23, 2014, 02:50:14 PM
Man they would have just broke it off in us.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Boondock Poonhound on March 23, 2014, 02:54:54 PM
Would Marshall have come here after Frank left?

No way. Two strong-headed personalities like Greggg and JC ? Nah.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on March 23, 2014, 03:04:01 PM
Man they would have just broke it off in us.

Yes.  Blessing in disguise.  oscar knew what he was doing. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 03:16:04 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/slideshow/2014/03/21/wichita-employees-sport-their-ncaa-team-gear-at.html

scoop angry
johnnywichita :curse:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2014, 03:19:50 PM
We would have killed Wichita State.  We'll just never know that for sure.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: star seed 7 on March 23, 2014, 03:20:37 PM
it is amazing how lovable this team is

yup, go shox
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on March 23, 2014, 03:53:14 PM
Wichita State is the best team in the state this year and it's really not even close. 

They have the better of the two Wiggins bros, Baker is a better shooter than anybody on our or ku's roster, Early is probably the best player to step foot in Kansas since Beasley and VanVleet is a very solid point guard...

Even though it'll be a rough year for the boys in purple, I'm glad to see baby bro having some success even if it rips the hearts out of lil bro to play second fiddle to an MVC team.

One of the best parts of "TSC" is the leeway that the "S" creates in matters like this.

 :emawkid:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 03:54:00 PM
 :excited:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Cire on March 23, 2014, 04:04:32 PM
I've never watched wsu play.  I love them.  What a fun team.

Any chance Westicles could develop into early?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: star seed 7 on March 23, 2014, 04:07:45 PM
what a stud to leave van fleet in with 4 fouls
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Benja on March 23, 2014, 04:17:07 PM
this is the greatest game i've ever seen
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: felix rex on March 23, 2014, 04:19:08 PM
Sucks they're gonna lose. Stupid 3-PT line, amirite?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on March 23, 2014, 04:20:52 PM
 :cool:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Benja on March 23, 2014, 04:22:02 PM
oh my!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 04:25:05 PM
that was a charge and a flagrant
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BackPayne on March 23, 2014, 04:26:27 PM
 :ohno:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Skipper44 on March 23, 2014, 04:26:34 PM
 
that was a charge and a flagrant
yes, not a basketball play
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Benja on March 23, 2014, 04:28:15 PM
I think this is the first time I've been truly entertained during this tournament
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 04:29:12 PM
Just what I thought. Might as well have been Randy Burns and Jamar Howard out there.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on March 23, 2014, 04:30:02 PM
Where will presser be on?  I want to hear gregg.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: eastcat on March 23, 2014, 04:30:44 PM
Congrats to wichita for playing your first ranked team!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on March 23, 2014, 04:31:44 PM
LOSE ANGRY
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Benja on March 23, 2014, 04:35:48 PM
poor kansas (the state)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on March 23, 2014, 04:36:07 PM
I'm not talking about the fans, but you gotta feel bad for the kids that lose that game. Whether it was Kentucky or WSU who came out on top. That was high-level basketball from start to finish. I enjoyed every minute of it as a basketball fan. That was fun to watch.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Benja on March 23, 2014, 04:37:55 PM
basketball is mostly horrible, but that was a good game
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 04:45:52 PM
I was indifferent going into this game but the longer it went the harder I rooted for WSU, I couldn't sit down at the end.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on March 23, 2014, 04:52:07 PM
I was indifferent going into this game but the longer it went the harder I rooted for WSU, I couldn't sit down at the end.

1.24 ppp for WSU. It's been a long time since I've seen two really good teams trading blows like that. Kentucky showed how good they can be. I think you're right about Baylor getting ready to do the same.

There were just studs galore out there on that court today.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BIG APPLE CAT on March 23, 2014, 04:56:13 PM
The "screwed by the refs" meltdown is going to go nuclear for them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 05:00:56 PM
I was indifferent going into this game but the longer it went the harder I rooted for WSU, I couldn't sit down at the end.

1.24 ppp for WSU. It's been a long time since I've seen two really good teams trading blows like that. Kentucky showed how good they can be. I think you're right about Baylor getting ready to do the same.

There were just studs galore out there on that court today.

Last night's Wiscy game featured similar offensive efficiency. Fun to watch both.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: lopakman on March 23, 2014, 05:06:27 PM
 :frown:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: wetwillie on March 23, 2014, 05:32:47 PM
:frown:

hopefully you learned your lesson
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: because emaw on March 23, 2014, 06:03:20 PM
Wichita State is the best team in the state this year and it's really not even close. 

They have the better of the two Wiggins bros, Baker is a better shooter than anybody on our or ku's roster, Early is probably the best player to step foot in Kansas since Beasley and VanVleet is a very solid point guard...

Even though it'll be a rough year for the boys in purple, I'm glad to see baby bro having some success even if it rips the hearts out of lil bro to play second fiddle to an MVC team.

One of the best parts of "TSC" is the leeway that the "S" creates in matters like this.
The only thing that would make wushock better is if those guys were coached by Scott Homer Drew. Because basketball science.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 23, 2014, 06:05:10 PM
Bad day for the Konza line segment.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: scottwildcat on March 23, 2014, 06:10:00 PM

Bad day for the Konza line segment.

DGAF glad Wichita lost.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 23, 2014, 06:15:11 PM

Bad day for the Konza line segment.

DGAF glad Wichita lost.

Oh, me too.  I just can't miss an opportunity to bust out the Konza Geometry.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 23, 2014, 07:07:41 PM
Tully made a good point on Twitter today. I'd be embarrassed if my team lost as a 1 seed to an 8 seed and everyone was like "oh no, they really were good! This isn't you're average 8 seed!" Give me a break, they were still an 8 seed. Your goal was to win the NC, and you couldn't win 2 games on your way there. Everyone sticking up for them is like going easy on the physically inferior kid on the basketball court. Everytime a 1,2 or 3 seed lost, everybody nation wide makes fun of them for it. But not poor lowly WuShock.

Anyways, that doesn't mean it wasn't the most fun game I've watched this tournament. I'm with MIR, I was standing up the last minute of it.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Hurricane Cat on March 23, 2014, 07:09:13 PM

Bad day for the Konza line segment.

DGAF glad Wichita lost.

 
Oh, me too.  I just can't miss an opportunity to bust out the Konza Geometry.

:thumbs:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Katpappy on March 23, 2014, 07:12:17 PM
Tully made a good point on Twitter today. I'd be embarrassed if my team lost as a 1 seed to an 8 seed and everyone was like "oh no, they really were good! This isn't you're average 8 seed!" Give me a break, they were still an 8 seed. Your goal was to win the NC, and you couldn't win 2 games on your way there. Everyone sticking up for them is like going easy on the physically inferior kid on the basketball court. Everytime a 1,2 or 3 seed lost, everybody nation wide makes fun of them for it. But not poor lowly WuShock.

Anyways, that doesn't mean it wasn't the most fun game I've watched this tournament. I'm with MIR, I was standing up the last minute of it.
The better team won.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: because emaw on March 23, 2014, 07:17:21 PM
The "screwed by the refs" meltdown is going to go nuclear for them.
The main rason I hate refs is because they pull up their pants so high it's camel toe city.
Well, also because they have destroyed the game with their mannerisms, but those britches - oh my.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 07:18:48 PM
Tully made a good point on Twitter today. I'd be embarrassed if my team lost as a 1 seed to an 8 seed and everyone was like "oh no, they really were good! This isn't you're average 8 seed!" Give me a break, they were still an 8 seed. Your goal was to win the NC, and you couldn't win 2 games on your way there. Everyone sticking up for them is like going easy on the physically inferior kid on the basketball court. Everytime a 1,2 or 3 seed lost, everybody nation wide makes fun of them for it. But not poor lowly WuShock.

Anyways, that doesn't mean it wasn't the most fun game I've watched this tournament. I'm with MIR, I was standing up the last minute of it.

I think the only people thinking poor lowly WuShock or sticking up for them are Kansas people. Plenty (like Doug) are probably thinking this just shows they played no one during the season and they couldn't handle playing a good/talented team.

Its also fair to say this is probably the most talented 8 seed ever. I can't remember one that had at least 6 NBA players on it. This team underachieved  during the season after starting the year ranked #1. They are finally playing up to their talent and ability, and that probably started in the SEC tournament.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 07:19:47 PM
uk is the most talented team in the tourney forget about the 8 seed. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 07:54:44 PM
Tully made a good point on Twitter today. I'd be embarrassed if my team lost as a 1 seed to an 8 seed and everyone was like "oh no, they really were good! This isn't you're average 8 seed!" Give me a break, they were still an 8 seed. Your goal was to win the NC, and you couldn't win 2 games on your way there. Everyone sticking up for them is like going easy on the physically inferior kid on the basketball court. Everytime a 1,2 or 3 seed lost, everybody nation wide makes fun of them for it. But not poor lowly WuShock.

Anyways, that doesn't mean it wasn't the most fun game I've watched this tournament. I'm with MIR, I was standing up the last minute of it.

I think the only people thinking poor lowly WuShock or sticking up for them are Kansas people. Plenty (like Doug) are probably thinking this just shows they played no one during the season and they couldn't handle playing a good/talented team.


If Doug or anyone else says this they should be dismissed as a complete dumbass, because of your second paragraph. And like conference affiliation, your schedule has nothing to do with your post-season success, if this were the case there's no way the SEC would have 3 Sweet 16 teams.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 08:02:01 PM
Actually, Doug was fine.

Doug Gottlieb ?@GottliebShow  3h
A loss doesn't take away from a spectacular season... #Shockers

I agree with that and I agree with what you said, but you know plenty of college fans are thinking what I mentioned, especially with WSU this season.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on March 23, 2014, 08:13:55 PM
I was indifferent going into this game but the longer it went the harder I rooted for WSU, I couldn't sit down at the end.

1.24 ppp for WSU. It's been a long time since I've seen two really good teams trading blows like that. Kentucky showed how good they can be. I think you're right about Baylor getting ready to do the same.

There were just studs galore out there on that court today.

Last night's Wiscy game featured similar offensive efficiency. Fun to watch both.

Yeah, I rarely bet on sports, but have been having some fun with microwagers. Picked the over on that one. Was a really fun game.

I think the thing about the WSU UK game particularly was that both teams were defending, but both teams were also making stud play after stud play offensively as well.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: nicname on March 23, 2014, 08:18:12 PM
I'm glad I've been insulated from WSU fans enough to separate the team on the floor, and the game I watched from any fanstuffs. We all knew that Kentucky at it's best had a lot of JYC in them. During the game I felt both teams played with that toughness and tenacity. Really reminded me of why we all loved watching Frank's teams play so much.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 23, 2014, 08:19:53 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 08:24:33 PM
I'm glad I've been insulated from WSU fans enough to separate the team on the floor, and the game I watched from any fanstuffs. We all knew that Kentucky at it's best had a lot of JYC in them. During the game I felt both teams played with that toughness and tenacity. Really reminded me of why we all loved watching Frank's teams play so much.

JYCing while also hitting shots is pretty fun to watch. They shot 62% (59% 2s, 44% 3s) and still rebounded 35% of their misses and had a 44% FT rate (both better than WSU). WSU was slightly better shooting and on TO%, but out-JYCing the Shocks won the game.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: BIG APPLE CAT on March 23, 2014, 08:32:45 PM
I'm glad I've been insulated from WSU fans enough to separate the team on the floor, and the game I watched from any fanstuffs. We all knew that Kentucky at it's best had a lot of JYC in them. During the game I felt both teams played with that toughness and tenacity. Really reminded me of why we all loved watching Frank's teams play so much.

JYCing while also hitting shots is pretty fun to watch. They shot 62% (59% 2s, 44% 3s) and still rebounded 35% of their misses and had a 44% FT rate (both better than WSU). WSU was slightly better shooting and on TO%, but out-JYCing the Shocks won the game.

I can't help but feel like wsu played to its ceiling today but I guess I have no way of knowing bc it was the first time this season they've had to. Even still I really doubt wsu could have played any better than they did.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HELLHAMMER on March 23, 2014, 08:36:00 PM
The WSU team was damn good all year long but I have grown very tired of the ICT bandwagon asshats that put their KU gear away just to wear their new Shocker crap.  Guess they think they're combo-fans of some sort.  Oh yeah ... most have OU or Nubbs football gear for the fall.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 08:37:36 PM
I can't help but feel like wsu played to its ceiling today but I guess I have no way of knowing bc it was the first time this season they've had to. Even still I really doubt wsu could have played any better than they did.

2nd best shooting game, 2nd worst oboarding game, worst defensive game of the year.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: SdK on March 23, 2014, 08:47:38 PM
I was really taken aback at the number of people I saw sporting KU and WSU gear while their games were on tv today. Who in the heck goes shopping while the team they support is playing a game in the tourney? T-Shirt fans, that's who.

Also it should be noted that I saw no KSU gear sporting fans while the game against UK was on. because I wasn't working, I was watching the game like a fan should.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 23, 2014, 09:08:31 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.

It will go back to being its shitty self minus a good basketball team.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: everyone shut up on March 23, 2014, 09:21:39 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.
put back on their ku tshirts and hate ksu till the end of time
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: catzacker on March 23, 2014, 09:23:14 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.

third shift at Spirit is just going to be a little tougher, that's all.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 09:25:22 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.

I think oscar needs to go ahead and pull the trigger on the #EMAW/#watchus game. It should be called "The Loser Leaves the T-Shirt Aisle of the Grocery Store, Sponsored by Dillons."
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 23, 2014, 10:16:29 PM
I'm not sure what's gonna happen to this town now.

I think oscar needs to go ahead and pull the trigger on the #EMAW/#watchus game. It should be called "The Loser Leaves the T-Shirt Aisle of the Grocery Store, Sponsored by Dillons."

:lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Demo158 on March 23, 2014, 11:08:56 PM
TBS just showed Marshall giving his guys their post game speech in the locker room. Highly motivating and classy speech IMO. You could tell how well he relates to his players. I'll see if I can find a copy online.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on March 23, 2014, 11:13:40 PM
I'm not talking about the fans, but you gotta feel bad for the kids that lose that game. Whether it was Kentucky or WSU who came out on top. That was high-level basketball from start to finish. I enjoyed every minute of it as a basketball fan. That was fun to watch.

 :thumbs:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on March 23, 2014, 11:18:47 PM
Like I said in game, hating WSU fans is understandable, most are horrible, and hating Marshall for being a bit of a dick is also understandable. But if you truly watched that team play and came away hating the team you deserve every first round loss oscar gives us.

They'll be back next year too. Losing Early hurts, he's a bonafide stud, but Baker and VanVleet will destroy the MVC again next year.

Random side note, but if the AAC and WSU don't figure out a way to get together heads should roll. With them taking Navy as football only they fit together like only a commuter school and the BCS cast-offs can
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: TheCatFanSpeaks on March 23, 2014, 11:23:02 PM
Wsu getting getting broken was great!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Panjandrum on March 24, 2014, 12:12:37 AM
I can't help but feel like wsu played to its ceiling today but I guess I have no way of knowing bc it was the first time this season they've had to. Even still I really doubt wsu could have played any better than they did.

2nd best shooting game, 2nd worst oboarding game, worst defensive game of the year.

If I'm a Kentucky fan, I'd be kind of pissed at the fact that this Kentucky team didn't play anywhere near this hard most of the season.

Their tenacity on defense, especially on the perimeter, has been really good.  Combine that with the rebounding ability, and they may go really damn far.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 24, 2014, 12:19:26 AM
If I was a Kentucky fan, I'd be really happy right now, pan.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 24, 2014, 11:01:27 AM
I'm disappointed WSU lost, but that was a great game and hardly an upset. Both are FF caliber teams, both played well, and either could have won. The problem, of course, is that this never should have been a 1-8 matchup. WSU got royally screwed drawing a significantly under seeded Kentucky in the second round. Somewhat crapty season aside, Kentucky's raw talent and athleticism finally started clicking in the SEC tourney.

By same token, K-State also got hosed, but we weren't making the Sweet 16 anyway.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 24, 2014, 11:07:34 AM
I've seen a lot of people say that Kentucky isn't really an 8 seed. Who did they beat this year to justify giving them a better seed? They lost 3 out of their last 4 games coming into the tournament.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 24, 2014, 11:08:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people say that Kentucky isn't really an 8 seed. Who did they beat this year to justify giving them a better seed? They lost 3 out of their last 4 games coming into the tournament.

How is that possible considering they played Florida in the SEC championship game?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 24, 2014, 11:11:24 AM
I've seen a lot of people say that Kentucky isn't really an 8 seed. Who did they beat this year to justify giving them a better seed? They lost 3 out of their last 4 games coming into the tournament.

How is that possible considering they played Florida in the SEC championship game?

Sorry, that was going into the SEC tournament. They lost 4 or their last 7.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 24, 2014, 11:11:36 AM
Felt bad for the players, didn't really feel bad at all for WSU fans and Marshall tho.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 24, 2014, 11:11:43 AM
Kentucky got the correct seed based on their season. Its not like the committee can say that they didn't perform well, but we'll seed them higher because they have talented players. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 24, 2014, 11:12:25 AM
I've seen a lot of people say that Kentucky isn't really an 8 seed. Who did they beat this year to justify giving them a better seed? They lost 3 out of their last 4 games coming into the tournament.

How is that possible considering they played Florida in the SEC championship game?

And lost by 1 point. I know the conference tourneys don't matter much to the committee, but if a team as talented as Kentucky suddenly gets hot, they should.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 24, 2014, 11:15:18 AM
I've seen a lot of people say that Kentucky isn't really an 8 seed. Who did they beat this year to justify giving them a better seed? They lost 3 out of their last 4 games coming into the tournament.

How is that possible considering they played Florida in the SEC championship game?

And lost by 1 point. I know the conference tourneys don't matter much to the committee, but if a team as talented as Kentucky suddenly gets hot, they should.

The problem is that the SEC's only good team is Florida, and Kentucky failed to beat them. They had a really nice win over Louisville, but their second best win was against Tennessee. If I were looking at Kansas State's schedule and results versus Kentucky's, I would give us the 8 seed and them the 9. They are pretty similar.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 24, 2014, 11:17:11 AM
There isn't really much consistency when it comes to how the committee operates.  On the one hand, you are allegedly rewarded (or punished) for what you accomplish during the regular season.  But on the other hand, they do take into account how you might perform during the tournament based on externalities.  Take for example how the committee announced they would be in constant communication w/ KU in regards to Embiid's availability.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 24, 2014, 11:21:25 AM
There isn't really much consistency when it comes to how the committee operates.  On the one hand, you are allegedly rewarded (or punished) for what you accomplish during the regular season.  But on the other hand, they do take into account how you might perform during the tournament based on externalities.  Take for example how the committee announced they would be in constant communication w/ KU in regards to Embiid's availability.

Yeah, and that is just wrong, imo. The committee should only consider the results during the season. A team with only one win vs a ranked team that was swept by Arkansas and lost to South Carolina just shouldn't be seeded above an 8/9. If anything, that seeding might have been generous.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ChiComCat on March 24, 2014, 11:30:17 AM
Fans complaining about seeding or tough draws past the first round annoy me.  It's the National Championship.  You are going to have to play some good teams and beat some.  You either play your way into a top 3 seed where you have a 90% chance of winning in round one or you play a capable team.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 25, 2014, 05:56:22 PM
http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/warm-welcome-home-for-the-shockers/25131112
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 26, 2014, 09:55:30 PM
Wichita's (and NYC's) gone bonkers for these shockers!

http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/03/11/garvey-center-goes-to-great-heights-to-show-shocker-support/

:frown: http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/03/24/you-dont-say-921/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 26, 2014, 09:55:52 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/26/3370077/pr-firms-insult-to-team-draws.html

:lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 26, 2014, 10:46:20 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/26/3370077/pr-firms-insult-to-team-draws.html

:lol:

I read a lot of dissent from said e-mail, but what the article failed to mention was the specific content of the offending article.  If the gist of the article were about not being totally butthurt, then I would say that PR news ethically and responsibly couched their message.  But what do I know?  I'm not a PR pro living in Wichita.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 26, 2014, 10:48:46 PM
http://www.kansas.com/2014/03/26/3370077/pr-firms-insult-to-team-draws.html

:lol:

I read a lot of dissent from said e-mail, but what the article failed to mention was the specific content of the offending article.  If the gist of the article were about not being totally butthurt, then I would say that PR news ethically and responsibly couched their message.  But what do I know?  I'm not a PR pro living in Wichita.

It apparently was so offensive that it couldn't be repeated.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Spracne on March 26, 2014, 10:50:48 PM
With each successive quote I felt the urge to c/p into this thread, but eventually I realized that would require c/p'ing the entire article, and that would be just silly.  Seriously, folks, read that article and savor the quotes - especially the threats regarding unsubscribing from the e-mail blast.  Power to the PRpl!
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 26, 2014, 10:59:21 PM
I've reached out to @PRNews to see if they'll get us the details.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 26, 2014, 11:55:15 PM
I just read that an hour ago and was wondering what the the PR piece was actually referring to. The article never stated. 

If it just means "don't lose" then Shocker fans really need to grow up.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: felix rex on March 27, 2014, 12:09:38 AM
"Hi Beth – I am truly sorry for this oversight on our part and any stress this has caused you."


:lol:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 27, 2014, 06:27:18 AM
Email Angry
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: felix rex on March 27, 2014, 07:01:12 AM
#dontbelikeus


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mr Bread on March 27, 2014, 07:06:13 AM
It's @barth.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on March 27, 2014, 11:14:21 PM
http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/03/27/pr-news-apologizes-to-wichita-state-university-and-the-shockers/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 28, 2014, 08:37:53 AM
Good for PR News. Keitzman still hasn't apologized to Jacob Pullen.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on April 04, 2014, 11:54:53 AM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft)

Not really sure why he was even thinking about it, but here ya go
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 04, 2014, 12:38:11 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft)

Not really sure why he was even thinking about it, but here ya go

So they bring everyone back but Early? jfc
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: joda on April 04, 2014, 12:57:40 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10727511/ron-baker-return-wichita-state-enter-nba-draft)

Not really sure why he was even thinking about it, but here ya go

So they bring everyone back but Early? jfc

They lose a couple of there big men and the other Wiggans, but yea, most of their good players besides Early should be back. They should run the train on the MVC again
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on April 04, 2014, 01:00:10 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 01:07:03 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Based on what?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on April 04, 2014, 01:08:42 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Bases on what?

Oh god, here we go.....
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 01:11:38 PM
Nothing? Ok, cool.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on April 04, 2014, 01:21:56 PM
RB defends, and isn't afraid to drive to the basket. 

I think he could at least be a solid backup.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: ChiComCat on April 04, 2014, 03:23:00 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Based on what?

He received a second round grade.  Second round players generally get destroyed in the NBA.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on April 04, 2014, 04:07:16 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Based on what?

He doesn't have NBA talent imo.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: FranklyFrankYou on April 04, 2014, 07:28:34 PM
He was having a hard time guarding one of the Harrison's. He could barely stay in front of him and neither of the Harrison's are renowned for their speed on or off the ball. Granted, they both had a length advantage but Baker was an absolute defensive liability in that second half. He is an elite level shooter though
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on April 04, 2014, 07:35:12 PM
Ron Baker would get destroyed in the NBA.
Based on what?

omg you guys  :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: OK_Cat on April 04, 2014, 09:41:06 PM
Nobody loves mid major white guys like fanning
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 09:47:01 PM
You guys haven't brought one compelling thought to the table, so I'll just assume you guys don't think he's an NBA player cause he's white and from a small town in Kansas.

CASE CLOSED!

Non tapatalk from Antons shitter
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: OK_Cat on April 04, 2014, 09:49:03 PM
He's small and he sucks
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on April 04, 2014, 09:51:52 PM
He's small and he sucks

Yeah Spradling ain't even gonna play overseas
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kslim on April 04, 2014, 09:51:58 PM
You guys haven't brought one compelling thought to the table, so I'll just assume you guys don't think he's an NBA player cause he's white and from a small town in Kansas.

CASE CLOSED!

Non tapatalk from Antons shitter
He was having a hard time guarding one of the Harrison's. He could barely stay in front of him and neither of the Harrison's are renowned for their speed on or off the ball. Granted, they both had a length advantage but Baker was an absolute defensive liability in that second half. He is an elite level shooter though
the man makes a pretty good point here fanning
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 09:58:23 PM
He's small and he sucks
He's growin 2 inches in the last year and definitely doesn't suck. Dude can drive and is nails from deep, but hey, he plays for Witchita State and scouts live him, so what do I know. He's 6'4" BTW.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on April 04, 2014, 10:00:20 PM
it is scary how dumb fanning is
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 10:01:43 PM
it is scary how dumb fanning is
It's scary how much you follow me around on here. You know nothing about sports.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kim carnes on April 04, 2014, 10:08:37 PM
it is scary how dumb fanning is
It's scary how much you follow me around on here. You know nothing about sports.

it is scary that you think you know anything about sports
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 10:14:06 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: OK_Cat on April 04, 2014, 11:05:44 PM
Fanning played high school baseball for whatever hick school he went to and almost was good enough to try out for a real college team, Kim Carnes.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 04, 2014, 11:10:43 PM
Fanning played high school baseball for whatever hick school he went to and almost was good enough to try out for a real college team, Kim Carnes.

Thought we were talking basketball, tho
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: OK_Cat on April 04, 2014, 11:12:06 PM
He probably played high school hoops. Get off his ass, you guys.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: _33 on April 04, 2014, 11:14:45 PM
To be fair to fanning, most people are really, really dumb when it comes to determining which college players will play in the NBA.  He's in the majority.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: #LIFE on April 04, 2014, 11:15:58 PM
Ron is worth a look if you're filling out your intramural team.  Fanning has lost his mind and needs a couple week ban from a D-1 BBS
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 04, 2014, 11:16:18 PM
To be fair to fanning, most people are really, really dumb when it comes to determining which college players will play in the NBA.  He's in the majority.

He might have played high school hoops, tho
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 04, 2014, 11:54:55 PM
MIR was right. Major racist board.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 05, 2014, 12:02:41 AM
Hey Ron, some nobodies from the middle of nowhere think you suck. You should quit for their shitty jobs cause they think you stink and are too short! Thoughts?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 05, 2014, 12:05:03 AM
Hey Ron, some nobodies from the middle of nowhere think you suck. You should quit for their shitty jobs cause they think you stink and are too short! Thoughts?

Finally. A way to connect directly to Ron.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 05, 2014, 12:06:48 AM
Hey Ron, some nobodies from the middle of nowhere think you suck. You should quit for their shitty jobs cause they think you stink and are too short! Thoughts?

Finally. A way to connect directly to Ron.
Dude, you're the worst poster on this blog. Next...
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 05, 2014, 12:09:25 AM
Hey Ron, some nobodies from the middle of nowhere think you suck. You should quit for their shitty jobs cause they think you stink and are too short! Thoughts?

Finally. A way to connect directly to Ron.
Dude, you're the worst poster on this blog. Next...

Have another drink, dude. For what it's worth to you, I thought your last post made sense. Sorry you didn't see it that way.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 05, 2014, 12:11:34 AM
K-Stater's who hate shock nation are the best! True little dick syndrome.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Tobias on April 05, 2014, 12:13:03 AM
on the positive, fanning's love life is clearly at its zenith
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 05, 2014, 12:17:41 AM
Hey Ron, some nobodies from the middle of nowhere think you suck. You should quit for their shitty jobs cause they think you stink and are too short! Thoughts?

Finally. A way to connect directly to Ron.
Dude, you're the worst poster on this blog. Next...

Have another drink, dude. For what it's worth to you, I thought your last post made sense. Sorry you didn't see it that way.

Relax, my friend. As I said, you misunderstood what I was trying to say. Obviously you have an inside to Ron. That's good. I like your perspective on that issue. But to call me the worst poster here seems a bit extreme. That said, be glad I'll to buy you a drink if we ever meet IRL.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: OK_Cat on April 05, 2014, 12:18:48 AM
Fanning always dies on the strangest hills, and I think it is great. So entertaining.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 05, 2014, 12:27:01 AM
I'd be happy to drink with bones. I just think we (gE blog) nit pick at strange things. We'd love Ron in our lives.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: bones129 on April 05, 2014, 12:28:14 AM
I'd be happy to drink with bones. I just think we (gE blog) nit pick at strange things. We'd love Ron in our lives.

And I'd be happy to drink with you, W.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kslim on April 05, 2014, 08:37:31 AM
Wtf does it even matter?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: _33 on April 05, 2014, 02:53:36 PM
I'd be happy to drink with bones. I just think we (gE blog) nit pick at strange things. We'd love Ron in our lives.

Of course we would love him dumbass.  He's a really good college basketball player.  We loved Jacob Pullen too but he wasn't NBA material either.  Stop being a college basketballtard who thinks every good player in the tournament is NBA bound.  Sorry for calling you a dumbass earlier in this post.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: PowercatPat on April 05, 2014, 05:03:01 PM
K-Stater's who hate shock nation are the best! True little dick syndrome.

 :facepalm:

You are a dumbass.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on April 05, 2014, 05:45:07 PM
K-Stater's who hate shock nation are the best! True little dick syndrome.

 :facepalm:

You are a dumbass.
Cool.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on April 06, 2014, 10:06:41 AM
MIR was right. Major racist board.

WTF? When did I say that?



Anyway on Baker; although he's much more athletic than more simple people give him credit for I don't think he's athletic enough to play in the NBA. He isn't particularly big, for a shooting guard even at 6'4", and he doesn't shoot well enough; with that combo you would need to be a freak athlete and he isn't.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on May 18, 2014, 11:19:35 PM
http://blogs.kansas.com/haveyouheard/2014/05/14/pr-news-offends-kansas-prsa-chapter-two-months-after-causing-uproar/
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on May 18, 2014, 11:20:22 PM
http://youtu.be/DiLL_W-kLBw
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Asteriskhead on May 19, 2014, 11:10:50 AM
http://youtu.be/DiLL_W-kLBw

no rough ridin' way.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on December 14, 2014, 12:50:07 PM
They've got their own little Bennettville now.

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/paul-suellentrop/article4469114.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on February 24, 2015, 07:28:36 PM
http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article11085059.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on February 27, 2015, 10:27:04 AM
This thread is just as relevant today as the day I created it... It's got to just be killing squawk nation that redheaded stepbrother has overtaken lil bro...

:alleyoop:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Pete on February 27, 2015, 10:37:50 AM
I don't want to put anyone down, but at the same time you really have acknowledge that WSU is at the top right now.  Bravo to them.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 27, 2015, 10:42:52 AM
They'd seem like total bitches if they don't storm.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on March 09, 2015, 10:57:22 AM
https://twitter.com/KWCH12/status/574958589300752384
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GregKSU1027 on March 09, 2015, 12:17:45 PM
SFA will give em a run for their money.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on March 09, 2015, 12:41:40 PM
If that match up happens, I will enjoy the complaints about matching up higher seeded mid majors with other mid majors.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bqqkie Pimp on March 09, 2015, 02:03:07 PM
If that match up happens, I will enjoy the complaints about matching up higher seeded mid majors with other mid majors.

I will also enjoy taking the 4 to 5 points with SFA and putting little on the ML with Brad's boys as well.

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: HerrSonntag on March 09, 2015, 08:38:32 PM
If that match up happens, I will enjoy the complaints about matching up higher seeded mid majors with other mid majors.

I will also enjoy taking the 4 to 5 points with SFA and putting little on the ML with Brad's boys as well.
Brad crushing WSU's dreams on national television would skyrocket him right past what we can expect in a post-oscar hire.  We won't settle for digging through the ashes under Currie when the blue bloods come calling.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on March 09, 2015, 08:42:30 PM
If that match up happens, I will enjoy the complaints about matching up higher seeded mid majors with other mid majors.

I will also enjoy taking the 4 to 5 points with SFA and putting little on the ML with Brad's boys as well.

Brads offense is a giant mismatch for WSU. It would be hard not to put heavy money on the ML.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on March 09, 2015, 11:17:09 PM
If that match up happens, I will enjoy the complaints about matching up higher seeded mid majors with other mid majors.

I will also enjoy taking the 4 to 5 points with SFA and putting little on the ML with Brad's boys as well.

Brads offense is a giant mismatch for WSU. It would be hard not to put heavy money on the ML.

 :lol: man, you are something else :lol:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Bill Clarahan on March 10, 2015, 02:17:39 PM
https://twitter.com/KWCH12/status/574958589300752384

This would make the tourny worthwhile for me, put on the SFA gear and go to any bar in Wichita and chear for the Jacks just for the reaction :ROFL:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 11, 2015, 02:06:46 AM
Heard a nasty rumor today. Roy and UNC mutually part ways at the end of the season, Gregg Marshall replaces him.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Headinjun on March 11, 2015, 06:45:51 AM
Heard a nasty rumor today. Roy and UNC mutually part ways at the end of the season, Gregg Marshall replacesw him.

I've heard Texas from some local realators.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on July 02, 2015, 04:26:03 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g29
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on July 04, 2015, 12:01:39 AM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g29

WTF is under 40 about that photo?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on July 04, 2015, 12:03:50 AM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g29

WTF is under 40 about that photo?

Lil man hornsup'n in the center?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on July 06, 2015, 03:26:28 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g35 (http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g35)

someone had a horrible accident with a lip filler.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on July 06, 2015, 04:37:53 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g35 (http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2015/07/a-look-at-wednesday-nights-40-under-40-celebration.html?ana=e_wich_bn_newsalert&u=iXeE0cuQBIS1nMsikeFlN1Qyupe&t=1435872165#g35)

someone had a horrible accident with a lip filler.

There's quite a bit going on in the next pic too.  Nothing shocking, though. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GW6lk5KW1PM)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on October 16, 2017, 04:46:32 PM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on October 16, 2017, 07:19:03 PM
wichita state0
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: michigancat on October 16, 2017, 07:23:33 PM
he's perfect for them
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Steffy08 on October 16, 2017, 10:24:04 PM
he's perfect for them

He's a damn good coach.  And, yes, perfect for WSU.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on October 17, 2017, 12:26:16 AM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html

Every time he opens his mouth he says something dipshitty, it's quite a talent.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: mhkpasa on October 17, 2017, 01:02:18 PM
(http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/4xdri2/picture179099786/alternates/FREE_768/MVC%20Wichita%20St%20Illinois%20St%20Basketball(2))
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: renocat on October 17, 2017, 03:43:09 PM
KU SnotHaaaaawkers second best in KS.  Go shock
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on October 17, 2017, 05:02:18 PM
He's dorky but the Shox, Cocks, and Hawks have left us behind. oscar is even more dorky than he is so there's that. 
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 17, 2017, 07:09:03 PM
Would take Marshall in a NY minute
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: renocat on October 18, 2017, 05:55:27 PM
KU SnotHaaaaawkers second best in KS.  Go shock
Snot Haaaaaawkers aren't even being considered as National champs.  The Shox are.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2017/8/28/16214474/wichita-state-college-basketball-national-championship-final-four-favorite
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on October 30, 2017, 07:05:25 PM
Would take Marshall in a NY minute
Wichita State is slowly becoming the better coaching job.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on November 10, 2017, 08:39:17 PM
They aren’t going to miss a beat in the AAC.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on November 10, 2017, 08:53:41 PM
They aren’t going to miss a beat in the AAC.

Oh for sure, they lost no one of note and return everyone that matters. They are a legit E8/FF caliber team.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on November 10, 2017, 08:56:14 PM
Would take Marshall in a NY minute
Wichita State is slowly becoming the better coaching job.

When you got tons of $$ from the Koch Bros and they aren't doing it for evil (other than for making WSU a better coaching job) than yes, they will become quite the job.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on November 10, 2017, 09:18:38 PM
Would take Marshall in a NY minute
Wichita State is slowly becoming the better coaching job.

When you got tons of $$ from the Koch Bros and they aren't doing it for evil (other than for making WSU a better coaching job) than yes, they will become quite the job.
It helps to have a coach that's not a complete dork that actually wins games.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 13, 2017, 10:59:52 AM
Their coach is a huge dork, though.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on November 13, 2017, 11:14:35 AM
Their coach is a huge dork, though.

a winner though
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: gatoveintisiet on November 13, 2017, 09:25:30 PM
They are so good, it’s just ridiculous
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on November 14, 2017, 07:12:40 AM
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/irdc.gif)
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GregKSU1027 on November 15, 2017, 03:42:47 PM
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/irdc.gif)
I'm with fan. You guys are a bunch of tucks if you care about Wichita Staty Universite

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GregKSU1027 on December 12, 2017, 08:39:46 PM
Can't wait for OU to beat WSU

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on December 12, 2017, 08:48:34 PM
Can't wait for OU to beat WSU

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

That's fairly bold.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on December 12, 2017, 09:20:08 PM
I can't believe how good Shamut is
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 12, 2017, 11:38:28 PM
They went from Jordan Brand last year to Nike this year to Under Armour next year :flush:
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Gooch on December 13, 2017, 09:23:39 AM
Under Armor true to form has ruined their baseball uniforms.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on December 13, 2017, 09:32:53 AM
I can't believe how good Shamut is

He is very good, and the crazy thing about them is they are doing all this w/o McDuffie. He's supposed to be back in like 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on December 13, 2017, 10:48:51 AM
Can't wait for OU to beat WSU

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

They’ll smoke OU by double digits.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: FantasticFan on December 13, 2017, 04:31:01 PM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html

Every time he opens his mouth he says something dipshitty, it's quite a talent.

Sorry, I just don't see what was "dipshitty" about his response to Louisville cheating.  Can you explain?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Gooch on December 13, 2017, 04:49:46 PM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html

Every time he opens his mouth he says something dipshitty, it's quite a talent.

Sorry, I just don't see what was "dipshitty" about his response to Louisville cheating.  Can you explain?
Really Greggggggg?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: FantasticFan on December 13, 2017, 05:11:30 PM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html

Every time he opens his mouth he says something dipshitty, it's quite a talent.

Sorry, I just don't see what was "dipshitty" about his response to Louisville cheating.  Can you explain?
Really Greggggggg?

Maybe you can explain it?
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: MakeItRain on December 14, 2017, 12:14:29 AM
:lol:

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wichita-state/article179099791.html

Every time he opens his mouth he says something dipshitty, it's quite a talent.

Sorry, I just don't see what was "dipshitty" about his response to Louisville cheating.  Can you explain?
Really Greggggggg?

Maybe you can explain it?

Listen, you're not on shockernet, no one here it's going to fellate 3G.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: kso_FAN on December 16, 2017, 04:23:43 PM
What a guy...

https://twitter.com/bitterwhiteguy/status/942156954645999616
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Prince McJunkins on December 16, 2017, 04:53:28 PM
Can't wait for OU to beat WSU

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

They’ll smoke OU by double digits.

Nice call, dumbass.
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: GregKSU1027 on December 17, 2017, 04:14:45 PM
Can't wait for OU to beat WSU

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

They’ll smoke OU by double digits.

Nice call, dumbass.
Every Kansas Basketball team collapses in IBA

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: pissclams on December 17, 2017, 04:32:03 PM
What a guy...

https://twitter.com/bitterwhiteguy/status/942156954645999616

he is just so rough ridin' weird
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: Trim on January 12, 2018, 10:51:56 AM
https://twitter.com/tayloreldridge/status/951678314367897605
Title: Re: Shockers
Post by: cfbandyman on January 12, 2018, 02:21:07 PM
:yawn:

They keep rolling through the American.