NCAA Seeding?

Not a 1, despite the "most wins in the upper quadrant" record this year.
It is my understanding we also have the most LOSSES in that "upper quadrant", so maybe all that record is really saying is --

1. The Big 12 is one darn tough conference, and we did well against our conference foes (except, of course... grrr), and
2. We played a pretty tough non-con schedule to get ready for conference play.

I think KU has earned a 2, and I hope that is what is assigned, the 2 in the Midwest Region.

If we're a 1, you can queue the "The Jayhawks are the Atlanta Braves of the NCAA...they dominate their league (division in baseball) during the regular season, then fold in the preseason" national narrative because chances are it will be thus. Especially this year.

I'd rather go in a little out of the limelight, with expectations not high, and then see how the chips fall. That means a 2 seed, in all likelihood, which also feels about right in the current field.

I care about the national narrative on KU because it's very damning of the program that I love.

The narrative is widespread. I hear it all the time in the DC metro area, among different people I hang out with and run into. I can tell you it's pervasive - not so much the specific "Atlanta Braves" narrative (which I heard Lunardi trot out on national TV and thought it pretty much nailed it), but the "Kansas always gets a 1 seed and chokes" narrative. I think it's compounded by the fact that everyone and their brother participate in tourney brackets and therefore see KU getting a 1 practically every year and then falling well short of the hype.

We can blow that off and puff out our chests and say that many other programs don't even have a national championship, or we can look at the likes of UConn (4 championships in the last 15 years, 1 more than KU has garnered in the entire history of the tourney) and admit there's a problem. We can also look at our fellow bluebloods who we compete against (on the court and in recruiting) and see a very noticeable (and widening) gap in NC crowns: UK 8, UNC 6, Duke 5, KU 3.

We are simply too great of a program, IMHO, to settle for those results. At some point in time, to "seal the deal" on our elite stature, we need to bring home a couple or few more crowns. It's very simple. We have unparalleled history and tradition. That goes for our origins, our coaching, our arena, our players, and all of the offshoots that came (and continue to come) from Kansas basketball. We have set fantastic records in league play, and our consistency in getting to the tourney is the current pole-setter. We are #2 in all-time wins, and at some point if Self sticks around a long time, I suspect UK will have some dips and we'll surpass them. All of that is amazing. Exceptional. I wouldn't trade our program for any other. Ever.

But as an objective fan, I can take off the crimson and blue-colored glasses and admit that the critics out there (including many of my friends) have a point about KU post-season performance. Yes, the tourney is a crapshoot, but guess what? It's a crapshoot for UNC and Duke and UK and UConn as well. You can't have it both ways. KU needs more tournament crowns to demonstrate post-season excellence that is commensurate or on par with all of the other amazing feathers in its cap. I will believe that and shout it to the rafters till I'm blue in the face, and don't really care if I change opinions of those KU fans on the other side who pooh-pooh it as unimportant. But I do think simply dismissing it in a way is just an effort to sweep something ugly under the rug and pretend it's not there.

Last comment on this. How is the game that we all follow and love (NCAA men's basketball) any different from any other sport? In all sports, the goal of every team, every fan base, is to win it all. In the NFL, the goal isn't to win one's division every year and be happy with that. Hell no! It's to get to (and win) the Super Bowl! World Series, anyone? Stanley Cup? World Cup? As sports fans, I don't think that's too hard to understand.

It feels like we have this discussion every year. (Which also might be telling unto itself...)

konza63 wrote: ...Last comment on this. How is the game that we all follow and love (NCAA men's basketball) any different from any other sport? In all sports, the goal of every team, every fan base, is to win it all. In the NFL, the goal isn't to win one's division every year and be happy with that. Hell no! It's to get to (and win) the Super Bowl! World Series, anyone? Stanley Cup? World Cup? As sports fans, I don't think that's too hard to understand.

While I wholeheartedly agree with your post and want to see our beloved Jayhawks win more NCs (FFs are great, but not my hope for the team) to add to Bill's and the program's lustrous reputation, I have to point out -- as we are all too painfully aware -- that the only championship listed above that really fits with CBB is the NFL single elimination playoffs system. All the others provide at least a second chance for a team to win it all if they have a bad game. But in the win or go home NCAAs one bad game -- or one really playing out of their minds game by the opponent -- can end a year for any team.

KU has been to 14 FFs
Even the great Phog Allen only won 1 of 3, and only made the FF 3 times in his 16 years of coaching from the tournament's inception.

If our guy Bill can get his squad past the Elite 8 (which is, of course, an integral part of this topic, along with Roy's FF 0-4 and 1997), Bill has done well.

So to your question, yes the goal is to win it all, that is not too hard to understand. But only the NFL and the NCAA share the single elimination format that makes it so damnably hard,, which is why it is not unusual for either sport to have a champion which is not considered by most to be the best team for that year -- just for that day.

Since I do not want this year's team to add fuel to the fire of this discussion, I do not want the 1 seed for them. It has not been helpful to this program advancing in the past. Besides, we all know that what is more important is how the brackets are set, so I hope for a good bracket more than worry about a particular seed.

I couldn't agree more on the problem with the tourney format, HE. All too often it doesn't reward the best team overall (just the hottest and/or the one that catches some breaks). Of course, there are notable exceptions to that (UK 2012, for sure), which is a testament to that team and coach in going the distance with the target all year as the team to beat).

But it's titling at windmills in a way, because the format is never going to change to a multi-game series format. There are WAY too many teams and too much money invested in the current format to even make it worth discussing.

Right with you on the windmill tilting, Konza63.

Only way to really change the narrative is for KU to not just make the FF, but to win it all.

It would be deliriously ironic if what is arguably Self’s worst team to date would equal what only his arguably best team to date has done and win its final game of the year.

First we are the Atlanta Braves, then HE basically says we are the Buffalo Bills.

Either way, they are not good comparisons if you only care about championships or place a very high value on those.

My perspective is as follows:

In the old days making the tournament was an amazing accomplishment. The Final Four wasn't really a thing until the Magic Johnson Larry Bird game was so hyped. That game changed a lot of perceptions about the NCAA tourney, for good and bad.

Since the expansion to 64, I always placed a great deal on Final Fours. Why there and not the NC? Because it is indeed a crapshoot. You don't have to look any further than the 86 and 88 KU teams to verify that. In 86, one could argue that we were the best team in the nation. We did not win the NC. In 88, one could argue that we were lucky to make the tourney and we won the NC.

Today, it is all about NCs. I think that is wrong and cheapens a teams accomplishments through out the year. This year is a good example. KU just accomplished something no other college in D1 has ever done. We stand alone with 14 straight Conference Championships. That is amazing and should have value. Yet many are saying that it doesn't mean anything if you don't win an acknowledged crapshoot. That doesn't make sense to me.

I value FFs; I value NCs; and I value Conference Championships.

Would I love to have more NCs? Absolutely. Do I think KU is somehow diminished by not winning them? Maybe slightly, but not to the same degree that many seem to feel.

Kong wrote: First we are the Atlanta Braves, then HE basically says we are the Buffalo Bills.
...
I value FFs; I value NCs; and I value Conference Championships.

Would I love to have more NCs? Absolutely. Do I think KU is somehow diminished by not winning them? Maybe slightly, but not to the same degree that many seem to feel.

LOL!
I was not thinking of the Bills under Jim Kelly, but yeah, it's a decent comparison -- except for the fact that KU has won the whole shebang 3 times now.

I am with you 100%, Kong. Unfortunately for KU's rep, the greater perception of others, unwashed in the history of the program and cemented in the prevailing "what have you done lately" attitude, is the underachiever label. And it is hard for us to argue with them based on total FF appearances and total NCAA titles, especially compared with the other blue bloods and UConn under Calhoun (who once making the FF won the NC 3 out of 4 times, with Ollie heading the absurd 2014 title winner).