NCAA Seeding?

Kong:

You made the statement:

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.

Anyone disagreeing with that should have their head examined. I can only speak for myself, but I think that is an incredible feat, and I've posted on here that I believe it is woefully undervalued, underappreciated, and under-covered by the national media. If it had been Duke, UNC, or UK, it would've been covered ad nauseum.

Speaking again just for me, I also have made the point in recent weeks that, for me at least, gaining title 14 in a row was the season's main meal for me. In most seasons, I place greater value on deep tourney runs than league success (though I do value the latter, but it's not the same as post-season success), but this season, given the historical nature of the crown pursuit and given the inadequacies of this team, I basically set my expectations sometime, oh, maybe in January, for winning the league crown as the optimal season goal.

Mission accomplished. And I, for one, am satisfied with the season. But come next year, my expectations turn back to post-season success. That's the ultimate metric. And if it's not, then why even have a championship? Not only in this sport, but any sport? Let's just play games for the regular season and congratulate the league winners on a job well done, then move on to the next sport and season. No champion, just a bunch of dispersed league champions.

As for your attached, follow-on comment about the 14th title:

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.

Can you point to the commentator (national, local, or on this board) who is saying this? Because I most definitely disagree. Again, for this year, I've adjusted my expectations downward on post-season success. And my joining this thread in the first place was grounded in that impulse - namely, my assertion that it would be better to go in as a 2-seed this year than a 1-seed, primarily due to our inadequacies and the damning narrative that is pervasive out there about KU choking with all of its 1 seeds. Of all the years we could be a 1, this is one year I personally want no part of. Mainly because it's a recipe for disappointment, and further fuel for the anti-KU narrative. The latter pains me greatly, as an alum, a fan, and a student of the game, given KU's second-to-none tradition, history, and impact on the game.

Anyway, I'm just curious who is making the argument that the historic 14th successive crown doesn't mean anything if we don't win a title.

True that, NotO. (The woodwork angle and the gazillion insta-pundits) They're not unlike the folks who pick football teams in weekly pools based on the color of their unis or how cool their helmets are.

I don't think you can dismiss all purveyors of "the narrative" as uninformed or merely casual observers, however. Many track the game and convey that view (Lunardi is one...a nerdy dimwit in some ways, I know, but not exactly some dude who never watches games--he watches probably more games per season than the entire membership of this board combined, because it's his job)

I also do think that many purveyors of the narrative have bad motives -- namely, bashing KU because they realize the incredible success KU has had in every measure except NCs. Whether that be league championships, consecutive tourney appearances, 1 seeds, # of weeks in the Top 25 rankings over X amount of time, and on and on and on..

The more informed observers know this, but they often hail from either:

a) a competitor in the Big 12 or nationally (esp. bluebloods, who despise KU just like we KU fans tend to despise the other bluebloods--funny how that works); or

b) a school that is consistently lousy in hoops

So they slam KU on NC crowns because it's basically the only way they can do so. KU's dominance and history on every other measure makes it relatively impervious to criticism. Which takes me right back to where I started:

If we want to take the wind out of the sails of the national anti-KU critique, AND if we want to round out our "elite program" resume in the fullest fashion possible, and on a level commensurate with all the other metrics for which we are unassailable, we need to win a few more national championships in coming years. Not in coming decades, but in coming years. As in 2 or 3 over 20 years.

And with the level of talent combined with great coaching that we have year in and year out, and have had since the early 90s, we should be able to do that, just based on the law of averages. Which is what makes '86, '97, and '03, in particular, so damn painful. But especially, for me, '86 and '03, because those teams actually lived up to their expectations deep into the tourney (unlike the '97 team) and should've taken the crown if not for horrible injury luck (Archie) and ridiculous free throw shooting (freaking Syracuse). (And yes, the "Dean" hotel pigeonholing factor as well in '03)

I'll stop there, cuz now my temperature is rising ('86 and '03...just can't shake those memories).

konza63 wrote: And with the level of talent combined with great coaching that we have year in and year out, and have had since the early 90s

Make that early 80s with the arrival of Brown for the 1983-84 season and we are in lockstep,Brother K!

I started to write early 80s but then realized it wouldn't have been factually accurate for the late 80s (when we won with one amazingly talented superstar and some role players, then went on probation and took a year to recover before Roy started the re-ascendancy).

But that's a minor point. For the most part, you're right: early 80s on.

You wrote: And with the level of talent combined with great coaching

The level of talent did dip a little because Larry’s “traveling man” rep kept him from landing top recruits (I’m still surprised he landed Kevin Pritchard and Mark Randall), but the great coaching was always there, which is why I always start with 1983-84 and Brown.

Also —

There is no question Roy had some rebuilding to do when he took over, and the probation hurt (for something that today would be notifying the NCAA for the okay to help a kid with a family crisis), but IMO his first team would have made the tournament but for the probation. And he managed to get some excellent players in despite hamstringing himself by refusing to compete with The Traitor Smith for recruits. He never really had the relatively consistent recruiting success Self has had even with landing Pierce, Gooden and Simien (we both recall Kirk and Nick ended up at KU because Tim Floyd went to the NBA and Kirk brought Nick with him, and correct me if I’m wrong but I seem to recall KU was not Raef’s initial choice either? Wasn’t he Iowa bound? Then Tom Davis left? I’m a little Phoggy on that ).

Finally, I note that because of Roy’s alternate year recruiting success, your “superstar vs solid player” argument for excluding the post-Manning 1980s could also apply to the post-Pierce/LaFrentz 1990s.

I correct myself on Roy and LaFrentz. Raef was Iowa’s top prospect, but chose KU because he felt he could better accomplish his goals at KU. It was losing him to KU that played a role in Tom Davis not being kept on by Iowa.

www.google.com/amp/www.thegazette.com/20...e%3ftemplate=amphtml

konza63, thinking about our discussion on the late 80s and late 90s, I took a look at the records post-Manning and post-Pierce/LaFrentz, and they are quite similar.
I was also struck by something else in the old Bill can't get past the E8 discussion.

Roy got to the E8 just 5 times in his 14 chances at KU, advancing all but once.

Bill has gotten to at least the E8 7 times in his 14 opportunities at KU to date.
The complaint, of course, is our failure to advance to the FF in 5 of those opportunities.

LSHawk wrote: I’m an alum, season ticket holder and overall super fan, but I have learned to lower my expectations for post season. I believe getting #14 was nothing short of a miracle this year and I’m thrilled we made history. I expect 0-2 hereafter, though. Any win will be gravy.

Agreed on #14 being rather miraculous. The guys had to play well down the stretch despite being so thin, and let’s face it Providence stepped in as a 6th Man in Lubbock to help seal the deal. They might have won even if Tech had its PG @100%, but we’ll never know. And we’ve had our own share of injury disappointments, so I guess this time the wheel of fortune turned in our favor.

That’s 1-0 so far.

More gravy, LS?

Well, as luck would have it we're drawing Whiney and the Staties tomorrow, so yes, I say more gravy.

I really wish it had been TCU, just because now the game tomorrow matters and will have extra juice with Whiney wanting to beat Self, the Staties getting their 3rd crack at us (never good), and all those purple fans that will be in the house alongside the blue.

I had kind of hoped we'd get at least one break (decent draw) in this tourney, but I guess not. Yet another game coming up where the whole squad will be pushed and our key players will play a ton of minutes...

But it's the Purps, so here's to a win. And a double-heaping of gravy on LS's biscuits.

And so say all of us!