The SEC is embarrasing
- Thread starter jalovell23
- Start date
- Status
The SEC won 2 out of its first 3 games last year too. Gotta let the cake bake.
"Elite program," my a$$...
90% is even a stretch for you. That would mean we only about theee challenging games since there is 31 games in the regular seaspn
If South Carolina beats Duke or Arkansas beats UNC, those would be monumental upsets. I just don't see them happening.
Virginia and Florida is a toss up.
It should be but this is a single elimination tournament and Duke is a jump shooting team. North Carolina a lot more likely to be consistent throughout
Carolina, Louisville, Duke, UCLA... You guys played 34 games before the NCAA tournament. Four divided by 34 is 12%. I was off by 2%.
"Elite program," my a$$...
I musta missed it. Did they end the tourney early?
"Elite program," my a$$...
"Elite program," my a$$...
Florida x 2 and Arkansas x 2 South CarolinaCarolina, Louisville, Duke, UCLA... You guys played 34 games before the NCAA tournament. Four divided by 34 is 12%. I was off by 2%.
"Elite program," my a$$...
That doesn't discredit them. I think they've proven that.
Edit: maybe not Florida, they've had a pretty easy first couple of games
Tournament finishes, is not indicative of a whole season.
One could argue, vandy , Ark, and Scar did not even deserve bids, but received them
due to weak bubble.
2016 Syracuse was 19-13 and received a #10 at large bid. Some argued they didnt deserve a bid. They reached the FF.
Heck, that was Scar's first tourney win since 1973
I think you can do more than argue it. Especially Vandy. Any other year they don't get in the tournament but this year the bubble sucked terribly. Syracuse almost made it in with I think the same record as Vandy except they only won two games away from home all year.Tournament finishes, is not indicative of a whole season.
One could argue, vandy , Ark, and Scar did not even deserve bids, but received them
due to weak bubble.
2016 Syracuse was 19-13 and received a #10 at large bid. Some argued they didnt deserve a bid. They reached the FF.
Heck, that was Scar's first tourney win since 1973
You're in a OAD tourney--which proves nothing that flies in the face of prior results. Play last weekend's games again, get the same result, and you have the start of something.
"Elite program," my a$$...
If they beat Duke in the first round then I would concede that but they have looked good their first two games and are only +3 underdogs against Baylor
You're deep diving ONE data point. Statistically, that's seldom a fruitful effort.
"Elite program," my a$$...
No they're now 24-10 I would call that a deserving season (a great season by their standards).
How come the OAD tourney excuse is convenient for UofL fans to use when describing the ACC. But Calipari slips up a few times and its all because of his coaching failures?
Now, I agree with you Zipp...the best team does not always win in the tourney. Basketball is a sport where anything can happen on any night. If they player 5 or 7 game series in March, then Kentucky would probably have the 2010 and 2015 national titles and you all probably would have had the 2014 title.
But, based on UofL fan logic on Cal's "failures"...the ACC failed this year because of tournament results.
Perhaps because you don't understand the basics of sampling statistics... The easier it is to find evidence of something, the fewer samples you need. Consequently, the more often you sample, the more likely you are to find that evidence.
Pitino Lite has twice the number of 5-star kids as the next highest program, Duke. You shouldn't need a lot of samples (tournaments) to show the effect of that. That's unless something else is going on to diminish that result--like he tries to coach them.
An OAD tourney is not a great discriminator for comparable teams. It has a lot of noise. But it IS a discriminator. The more often you run it, the better it is as a discriminator. It's just that when you're ranked 1 or 2 every year in the preseason, you ought to be able to win it at least once without an Anthony Davis. Eight years is probably enough samples.
"Elite program," my a$$...
How did the ACC choke ?
The ACC doesnt have a team.
EVERY SEC team that made the tournament would have more losses were they in
the SEC. Vandy, Scar, and Arkansas wouldn't have made the tourney were they in the ACC.
While I agree the ACC is better top to bottom, I think it's fair to say the suckiness of the SEC is exaggerated.
Yes. I have often this season.
Allow me the courtesy to ask you the same question. If you took UofK away from the SEC, would you ever watch a SEC game???
Can our fans just admit that the ACC was likely overrated? I mean it's not rocket science. That doesn't devalue any one school in particular, just that the baseline of the ACC coming into this season was obviously too high.
I am not sure what the hell happened, but it's down right embarrassing and I am afraid UNC will have their hands full with Butler or UCLA (hopefully) either one.
I am not sure what the hell happened, but it's down right embarrassing and I am afraid UNC will have their hands full with Butler or UCLA (hopefully) either one.
I would not.
I'm not sure what your point is on the whole though. I was saying the SEC is better than people are giving it credit for.
If you had 3 ACC teams in the Sweet 16, well that's proof the ACC is dominant.
When the SEC does it, is it meaningless? Add in the fact that SC beat Duke and Arkansas took UNC to the wire.
I think the conference is better than it's getting credit for.
The ACC had 5 out 8 in the sweet 16 last year and none won the Title.
Were they the best tourney conference? Had a 19-7 record.
Im just saying you cant measure a conference on the NCAAT alone.
Scar winning was a shock, but not unprecedented.
You only think the conference is good because of uofk. I know they cant pick their conference mates. Those other teams have to step up-all year, not just tourney time.
I watch no SEC basketball because those two hours of my life are valuable. Not even games that LPT's playing in.
I watch plenty of ACC basketball not involving U of L.
"Elite program," my a$$...
I watch plenty of ACC basketball not involving U of L.
"Elite program," my a$$...
What exactly are we arguing?
Your thread title is that the SEC is embarrassing. My point was that how terrible the SEC is has been overblown.
I wouldn't dream of saying it's the best conference.
But I have watched our 3rd and 4th best teams go toe to toe with the big dogs from the ACC. The ACC is absolutely a stronger conference. But the notion that the SEC is embarrassing, when they beat Duke, and almost bit UNC as well--is a little overdone.
I probably watch 100+ games a year.
Mizzou @ Ole Miss on a weeknight at 9pm is must see TV
If your time was so valuable, why are you spending hours
here wasting time just to show your superior BB IQ..
Last edited:
This is a good question considering trash like you keep showing up here.If your time was so valuable, why are you spending hours
here wasting time just to show your superior BB IQ..
That's not watching LPT play. That's listening to the "thinking" of the most ridiculous and hilarious fanbase in the country.
"Elite program," my a$$...
There's never enough time for true entertainment. Like slappin' around slappies.If your time was so valuable, why are you spending hours here wasting time just to show your superior BB IQ..
"Elite program," my a$$...
- Status
Similar threads
