quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,224
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2440
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
|
RE: Nova wins Big East and ends 32 year drought...
(03-12-2014 03:46 PM)upstater1 Wrote: (03-12-2014 03:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (03-12-2014 12:04 PM)upstater1 Wrote: (03-12-2014 11:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (03-12-2014 10:57 AM)upstater1 Wrote: What better competition did Syracuse face in 1987?
This shows how absolutely out of it you are. Go back and look at that 1987 Indiana team and compare it to 1999 Duke.
1999 Duke had future NBA players all over the court. Maggette, Brand, Avery, Battier, etc.
Indiana had 1 guy that played 4 or 5 seasons and scored 3 or 4 pts a game.
Do you realize how preposterous this sounds?
Competition is about the whole tournament, not just one game. UConn benefited from upsets throughout that tournament, including facing Cinderella 10 seed Gonzaga in their regional final.
Cuse had to beat a 32-3 UNC team in their regional final, a team that featured 4 guys who would play 10+ years in the NBA.
Yes, UConn beat a very good Duke team in the finals, a great victory, no question. Cuse lost at the buzzer to an Indiana team during a time when Bobby Knight could beat anyone on a given night, just ask #1 UNLV that year or Michael Jordan in 1984.
But Cuse 1987 was clearly better than UConn 1999.
Basicallly, when someone responds to your points with facts (you argued Cuse lost to tougher competition originally), you then change your argument entirely to something equally bogus.
Actually, this whole thread has been about me winnowing down your outlandish pro-UConn claims with facts, such that you are now left with the trivial tangent comparing who UConn 1999 and Syracuse 1987 played in the their NCAA title games.
And I have not a changed my argument. By "tougher competition", I meant the entirety of the season and the tournament, not just the final game. Tougher competition takes it toll on a team throughout the season.
But to your tiny, nitzy remaining point: Yes, Indiana 1987 was not as talented as Duke 1999. There's no question of that. But Indiana had Knight at his peak, who could beat anyone with anything back then. That explains a buzzer-beater loss by a team that was better than 1999 UConn.
Here you go again. Every time a new clarification. Now I'm supposed to be comparing schedules between 1999 and 1987. Easy to do off the top of my head. BE + Syracuse plays no one OOC outside NY State, whereas UConn plays at least 3 but usually 4 ranked teams OOC.
Sure enough, I'm right: UConn played #5 Michigan St., #13 Washington (the MacCullough team), and Calipari's #20 UMass (which was top 10 most of the year). Miami, St john's, Syracuse, Pitt and Villanova were all ranked in top 25 during the year (although Pitt was early and then fell apart).
As for Cuse in 1987, they too went to the NCAAs with 4 other BE tourney teams, and only those 4 were ranked in the NCAA Top 25 during the year. Cuse didn't play a single ranked team OOC all year. Not one! Cuse also lost 7 games. UConn lost 1. UConn had a tougher OOC and only lost 1 game. Going into the tournament Syracuse was ranked #10 in the poll. UConn started at #3 in the poll, went up to #2, and stayed at #2 and #1 all season long.
To even compare the two teams is absolutely laughable. UConn had a tougher schedule, lost a lot fewer games, played tougher teams in the Final 4 (and that tourney you tout for Syracuse had 1 tough game, North Carolina, but otherwise it was filled with mediocrities such as North Kentucky, Georgia Southern and a low unranked Florida team, not to mention Providence a 6 seed and Indiana).
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketb...1999-uconn
There is no new clarification. As for overall SOS, Syracuse 87 was ranked 18, UConn 27 (link below). But you miss the broader point: As Boeheim, K, and others have said, the level of talent across the board was better in the 80s, so played a #20 team in 1987 was playing a better team than playing the #20 team in 1999.
As for that link best-champions link, WTF? That is the most HILARIOUS list of all-time best champion teams ever! He has 2012 Kentucky, with a bunch of freshman, at #7? He has 2008 Kansas, with almost nobody, at #3? It is loaded with mediocre teams of the past 20 years that could not hold a candle to the great champions before that, before college basketball got watered down.
Hell, any of the 1960s UCLA Jabbar teams would have killed any of those teams by 20 points. Thanks for the MASSIVE laughs. Simply Awesome!
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/scho.../1987.html
|
|