goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Basketball is hard => Topic started by: sys on March 23, 2014, 01:41:29 PM

Title: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2014, 01:41:29 PM
be nice if isu or baylor could advance.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: CNS on March 23, 2014, 01:42:09 PM
Hard to tell.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kso_FAN on March 23, 2014, 01:42:31 PM
A bunch of pretty good teams. No great teams.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 01:44:22 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on March 23, 2014, 01:44:29 PM
ku sucked without embiid. isu sucks without niang. baylor sucks.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2014, 01:49:06 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

well, it's not a great indicator.  but it's a lot better than how the teams did playing 18 games against each other.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 01:53:41 PM
sys, i could have told you this a long time ago
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2014, 01:55:07 PM
sys, i could have told you this a long time ago

i wouldn't have listened.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 23, 2014, 01:55:58 PM
ku sucked without embiid. isu sucks without niang. baylor sucks.
Baylor does not suck.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 01:56:09 PM
sys, i could have told you this a long time ago

i wouldn't have listened.

yeah, well thats your mistake.  i may be controversial but i'm never wrong.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: michigancat on March 23, 2014, 01:57:56 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 03:25:32 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: ksufan44 on March 23, 2014, 03:32:46 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

Does this mean Coach K can't coach anymore because he's lost his first game 2 of the last 3 years to 14 and 15 seeds? Tourney is all about matchups, getting hot at the right time of the year, or riding some stud player like Kemba.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 03:34:56 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

Does this mean Coach K can't coach anymore because he's lost his first game 2 of the last 3 years to 14 and 15 seeds? Tourney is all about matchups, getting hot at the right time of the year, or riding some stud player like Kemba.

michigancat isn't saying that, he's taking a completely different conversation we were having about oscar last night and is intentionally misapplying it here
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: michigancat on March 23, 2014, 04:18:45 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2014, 04:36:27 PM
it's a much better indicator of conference strength.

big 12 teams will play a minimum of 11 tournament games against quality competition.  that's probably about 1/2 to 1/4 as many games against tournament-level teams as were played in the non-conference season.  so, it's not insubstantial.

Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 04:38:14 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.

yeah, or its a good indicator for both.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 04:42:54 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.

If you are equating this to our conversation you shouldn't, because I never said that oscar is a bad coach because his recent tournament record is terrible. As a matter of fact I don't think I have ever made a post that references oscar's coaching ability as bad. Good coaches get fired a lot.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: michigancat on March 23, 2014, 04:55:25 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.

If you are equating this to our conversation you shouldn't, because I never said that oscar is a bad coach because his recent tournament record is terrible. As a matter of fact I don't think I have ever made a post that references oscar's coaching ability as bad. Good coaches get fired a lot.

do you think it's smart to fire good coaches?
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 05:24:10 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.

If you are equating this to our conversation you shouldn't, because I never said that oscar is a bad coach because his recent tournament record is terrible. As a matter of fact I don't think I have ever made a post that references oscar's coaching ability as bad. Good coaches get fired a lot.

do you think it's smart to fire good coaches?

Depends on the circumstance, it was smart for Illinois to do it
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: michigancat on March 23, 2014, 05:59:44 PM
tournament performance is no indicator of conference strength

but it's a good indicator of coaching prowess?

To an extent, of course it does. Don't be so obtuse. Does your conference recruit for you, train your players, or determine what you run?

I just don't think you can have it both ways. It's a poor indicator for both conference strength and coaching ability.

If you are equating this to our conversation you shouldn't, because I never said that oscar is a bad coach because his recent tournament record is terrible. As a matter of fact I don't think I have ever made a post that references oscar's coaching ability as bad. Good coaches get fired a lot.

do you think it's smart to fire good coaches?

Depends on the circumstance, it was smart for Illinois to do it

You could argue that oscar isn't a good coach and deserved to be fired without considering his tournament record.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 06:05:28 PM
This conference is woefully bad.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 23, 2014, 06:06:44 PM
You could argue that oscar isn't a good coach and deserved to be fired without considering his tournament record.

You could but that would involve us having involving elements from a conversation that we aren't currently having.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Skipper44 on March 23, 2014, 06:07:49 PM
Drew, you're our only hope :lightsaber:
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 23, 2014, 06:09:31 PM
The A-10, ACC, BE & MWC sucked worse.  Also, we were saddled with a lot of 5 - 9 seeds which would explain few S 16 finishers.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 06:14:27 PM
the SEC is going to get 3 of 3 teams into the sweet 16, we might get one.  they're better in football and basketball.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: kim carnes on March 23, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
we have a sweet 16 team u guys!
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: grapesmakewine on March 23, 2014, 06:57:56 PM
I was pretty impressed with ISU. Skating without Niang they still won and got into the 16.  I wish the Flood Aggies luck the rest of the way.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: pvegs on March 23, 2014, 07:53:06 PM
Dumb question, but why was KU not better? Even minus Embiid they have great size and talent. Was it PG, shooting? That loss to Stanford was embarrassing.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Skipper44 on March 23, 2014, 08:03:39 PM
Dumb question, but why was KU not better? Even minus Embiid they have great size and talent. Was it PG, shooting? That loss to Stanford was embarrassing.
Stanford's length really bothered everyone but Black and Selden and Wiggins pretty terrible
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2014, 08:46:41 PM
hoiball and drewball have redeemed us all.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM
ku sucked without embiid. isu sucks without niang. baylor sucks.
Baylor does not suck.
:gocho:
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: bones129 on March 24, 2014, 12:00:34 AM
ku sucked without embiid. isu sucks without niang. baylor sucks.

ISU and Baylor won, tho
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: OKclone on March 24, 2014, 04:20:12 AM
ku sucked without embiid. isu sucks without niang. baylor sucks.

ISU and Baylor won, tho

But we suck, remember?
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: cvmcat on March 24, 2014, 09:50:41 AM
The fact that ku wins this conference every year show how bad it is.  Both are over-rated.

And to OK-Clone... Happy for you guys.  It's nice to see you finally have a modicum of success at something.  Too bad about Niang. 
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 24, 2014, 10:28:59 AM
sys, i could have told you this a long time ago

i wouldn't have listened.

yeah, well thats your mistake.  i may be controversial but i'm never wrong.

You're wrong if you believe that you're controversial.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Skipper44 on March 24, 2014, 10:43:17 AM
I think the lack of size in this league is partly to blame.  Only KU, Baylor and Texas have the kind of size that can exploit teams inside.  The small ball OU, KSU, OSU and ISU play is easier for lower seeds to matchup with - when you can depend on dominating the boards you are more susceptible to getting upset like OU this year and KSU last year.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: ksufan44 on March 24, 2014, 11:06:38 AM
The two teams that met in the Big 12 final both made the Sweet 16. The two teams that lost in the semis both made the round of 32. Everyone else who lost in the quarters lost in the round of 64. According to this pattern, Hoiball will make the elite 8 while Drewball will lose in the Sweet 16.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: nicname on March 24, 2014, 12:15:48 PM
The fact that ku wins this conference every year show how bad it is.  Both are over-rated.

And to OK-Clone... Happy for you guys.  It's nice to see you finally have a modicum of success at something.  Too bad about Niang.

KU has a national title, a title game, and two more elite 8s in their 10 yr conference run. They aren't overrated.
Title: Re: the big 12 may have sucked.
Post by: Powercat Posse on March 24, 2014, 04:21:27 PM
nm