|
Post by 101mitch on Sept 30, 2013 19:36:32 GMT -5
Correction: KU > Puke............ > Kensucky > Misery I respect KU so don't test my patience!! But same to you, join a real conference. No one cares KU wins their conference every year when they don't play anyone. I respect Duke, but I hate them. We can't join a "real conference" since we suck at football. The Big 12 has been competitive in past years though. You can't stand here and tell me KU hasn't had competition the last 10 years.
|
|
|
Go Duke!!
Sept 30, 2013 19:38:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Morkim on Sept 30, 2013 19:38:53 GMT -5
Oh. And on Mitch's point. Kentucky stays with the SEC because football money is yummy.
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Sept 30, 2013 21:19:39 GMT -5
Morkim - No doubt they're extremely talented. They're probably the most talented team in the country, but they were probably the most talented team in the country last year too fwiw. I'm not saying UK will faceplant this year. I don't think they will. I just thinking acting like UK will definitely be one of the top teams in the country is wrong at this point.
|
|
steeldevil
NFL Draft pick
The King of the Queen City
Posts: 1,238
|
Go Duke!!
Sept 30, 2013 22:08:24 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by steeldevil on Sept 30, 2013 22:08:24 GMT -5
Who cares about SEC depth. And I wasn't disputing your conference is deeper. It is. But how do you define better? Because I count the final fours, championships, wins etc. Feels like UK is winning. Pretty sure they have more championships total than the whole state of North Carolina. Correct me if I'm wrong. And disclaimer: I'm not trolling. But I do enjoy the debate. So if it feels trollish it's not. And as a UK fan, getting UofL only makes me resent your conference more. You are wrong. Duke has 4 Carolina has 5 state has 2. That's 11. Uk has 8 may be going back to 7 soon considering who their coach is. And UK has historically had more chances to win national titles because back in the day only the conference champ made it to the big dance. When you make it every year because your conference sucks... Well.... Glad people are wanting to talk basketball because with my 3 football teams sucking I'm about over it. Playoff baseball time then basketball time.
|
|
|
Go Duke!!
Sept 30, 2013 22:47:12 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Morkim on Sept 30, 2013 22:47:12 GMT -5
MO: I honestly don't think we were the most talented team last year. Pretty talented yeah, but not close to the most.
Steeler: ok, I concede that. But if you're going to start that cheap calipari shots, I'm not going to have a legit basketball discussion with you. If you seriously care, I can explain why I think those allegations and stereotype are bs.
Also BS? That argument we had more chances than duke NC etc. that argument is like saying the steelers 4 Super Bowls mean less because it was before the current 12 team playoff system. We won the early ones because we had a great coach and great players.
|
|
steeldevil
NFL Draft pick
The King of the Queen City
Posts: 1,238
|
Go Duke!!
Oct 1, 2013 7:17:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by steeldevil on Oct 1, 2013 7:17:43 GMT -5
Ok no cal shots. For now. This is a thread called Go Duke ya know.
To the point about UK having more chances and you comparing it to the steelers. That's totally different. Even playing field in nfl. UK in a crappy conference back in the day. And in the NFL there was 1 wild card. Before like 1980 only 1 team per conference made the NCAAT. I would guess UK made it like 75% of the time and Duke/UNC only made it like 35/40% of the time each because of having to play each other plus a better conference and only 1 could make it.
The steelers reference you made is referring a time when there were less teams and less teams made THe playoffs. I am talking about how there were The same number of schools but only half as many use to make it, and only 1 per conference. This if your conference was weaker and you are a good program you would make it more often than a good program in a tough conference. 2 totally different things.
It's a valid argument but I get if you don't want to agree with it. Hehe
|
|
|
Go Duke!!
Oct 1, 2013 12:29:42 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Morkim on Oct 1, 2013 12:29:42 GMT -5
So UCLA's decade of dominance means less because they had an easier road to the tourney? I would say not.
Kentucky just had better teams those years. What year did UK win a championship that some other team was better but didn't make it because of their conference? Kentucky was always the better team.
Kentucky won the championship two years ago. We had a 'weak' conference. Were there any teams better than Kentucky?
|
|
steeldevil
NFL Draft pick
The King of the Queen City
Posts: 1,238
|
Go Duke!!
Oct 1, 2013 13:03:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by steeldevil on Oct 1, 2013 13:03:05 GMT -5
Not gonna get into ucla.
I'm not saying UK wasn't deserving of the ones they won, just that they had more chances in those days than the ACC schools because their conference was weaker and it was thus easier for them to qualify for the NCAAT when only 1 team made it.
I really don't know how simpler to make it.
We, along with others, can hold other conversations in my duke thread, but it appears we are going in a circle.
|
|
|
Go Duke!!
Oct 1, 2013 13:10:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Morkim on Oct 1, 2013 13:10:51 GMT -5
I guess we are. I just think it is a silly point. It's not like the lottery where more draws gives you a better chance. They still had to play the games and still won them.
Duke should have played better and they could have made the tournament more.
|
|
steeldevil
NFL Draft pick
The King of the Queen City
Posts: 1,238
|
Go Duke!!
Oct 1, 2013 13:25:01 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by steeldevil on Oct 1, 2013 13:25:01 GMT -5
Not like a lottery just that it is easier when you play an easier schedule. Yes they still had to win games to get in. But it was a whole lot easier back then to win the sec t than the ACC t.
An example of what I'm talking about was In 1974 when nc state and Maryland were the top 2 teams but only 1 could make it. And that ACC title game was one of the best basketball games ever. State own and them won the national title.
It was that scenario that led to the NCAA expanding the tournament to include at large bids.
Some cool history if you didn't know it. You can look up more details if you want.
I live in NC so I'll always argue for my ACC. Best there is.
|
|