CSNbbs

Full Version: Boeheim being Boeheim.....then gets owned by Greensboro
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
(03-09-2017 10:35 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Well ... this escalated quickly.

Your fault...03-lmfao

Bringing up the Boeheim promo...
(03-09-2017 10:47 PM)Hallcity Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 10:36 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 10:14 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 09:11 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]Re: Syracuse. Other schools in the conference with both a consensus football national championship and an NCAA Tournament Championship, please raise your hand.

Yeah, that's completely crazy to be taking shots at Syracuse whenever they've won a football and a basketball national championship. Who else has done that in this league?

Even take Clemson and how great their football program has become. It's a great program, there's no doubt about it.

However, if you took a list of the greatest players Clemson has ever produced in FOOTBALL and compared it to Syracuse's all-time team, it's absolutely no contest. And that's in football!

Obviously, Clemson is much better right now and the Tigers have a wonderful tradition as well. I would never disrespect their proud history. However, to diminish Syracuse's history and tradition is just flat out absurd. It's just poorly informed and anyone who expresses that level of idiocy should not be taken seriously when expressing other views.

Actually, if you include Pre-NCAA Tournament Helms National Championships, there are three conference schools that have both: Syracuse, Pitt, and Notre Dame.

If you look for schools with Final Four appearances and National titles in football, you have Syracuse, Pitt, ND, Georgia Tech, and Florida State. In other words, none of the original members (unless you count Maryland).

Helms "championships" are completely bogus. They were awarded years after the fact by a bread company. NIT championships were often considered more prestigious than NCAA championships back in the 1950s and earlier but Helms never meant anything.

Some are...some are not...just like the AP/UPI polls back in the day. Makes good debate fodder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythical_n...ampionship
(03-09-2017 10:47 PM)Hallcity Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 10:36 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 10:14 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 09:11 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]Re: Syracuse. Other schools in the conference with both a consensus football national championship and an NCAA Tournament Championship, please raise your hand.

Yeah, that's completely crazy to be taking shots at Syracuse whenever they've won a football and a basketball national championship. Who else has done that in this league?

Even take Clemson and how great their football program has become. It's a great program, there's no doubt about it.

However, if you took a list of the greatest players Clemson has ever produced in FOOTBALL and compared it to Syracuse's all-time team, it's absolutely no contest. And that's in football!

Obviously, Clemson is much better right now and the Tigers have a wonderful tradition as well. I would never disrespect their proud history. However, to diminish Syracuse's history and tradition is just flat out absurd. It's just poorly informed and anyone who expresses that level of idiocy should not be taken seriously when expressing other views.

Actually, if you include Pre-NCAA Tournament Helms National Championships, there are three conference schools that have both: Syracuse, Pitt, and Notre Dame.

If you look for schools with Final Four appearances and National titles in football, you have Syracuse, Pitt, ND, Georgia Tech, and Florida State. In other words, none of the original members (unless you count Maryland).

Helms "championships" are completely bogus. They were awarded years after the fact by a bread company. NIT championships were often considered more prestigious than NCAA championships back in the 1950s and earlier but Helms never meant anything.

Helms championships are retroactive, which are no different than many football national championships. Helms selections were largely duplicated by the more modern Premo-Porretta poll that retroactively ranked teams of those eras based on statistical methodology and was published in ESPN's College Basketball encyclopedia. Many teams, including UNC, hang banners and include Helms titles on their lists of national championships. In any case, basketball was still played prior to the national tournaments, just like football has been played without a post-season tournament for most of the entirety of its history, and you can pretend it was invented in 1939 or not.

NIT championships were absolutely not more prestigious by the 1950s. That is a common myth. The NCAA was more prestigious by the end of WWII and all you have to do is look at the AP rankings from this era to see where the majority of the top teams and conference champions were going.

In fact, even before that, during WWII, between '43 & '45, there was a Red Cross benefit game between the NIT and NCAA champs. The NCAA champ swept the series. Some teams played in both, like CCNY which won both in 1950, but by the early 50s the NCAA passed a rule prohibiting playing in both and the NIT was definitively cemented as a second class tournament.

As a statistical comparison, Premo-Poretta ranked the NIT champion over the NCAA champion in two seasons: 1939 and 1941.
(03-09-2017 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-09-2017 09:11 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]Re: Syracuse. Other schools in the conference with both a consensus football national championship and an NCAA Tournament Championship, please raise your hand.

LOL

One basketball championship won 13 years ago and a football championship won 57 years ago.

Meanwhile in 2017 we are dealing with a basketball program that can't win a game in the ACC tournament and is .500 in basketball against a program that puts little emphasis on hoops in Clemson, and a football program that is 9-24 in conference play despite all the hubris from their fans.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCA...Tournament
(03-09-2017 09:46 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ]Since this is about basketball catdaddy...tells us all about those Clemson National Championships?

Easier said than done...Cuse has been in the F4 twice in the last 4 years...Clemson can't even make one ever...so kindly STFU

I love how SU is a reigning FF team in both men's and women's basketball, but a Clemson t-shirt fan is taking shots at SU for only being .500 against Clemson in a 3-4 year sample size - at least half of which SU has been under sanction.
(03-09-2017 10:01 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]To me it should be a rotation:

Greensboro
Greensboro
DC
Greensboro
Greensboro
NYC
Charlotte
Greensboro
Greensboro
Charlotte

Start over

NYC
DC
Charlotte
Greensboro
Atlanta
Miami

Startover
MSG - NC - DC - NC

Or

MSG - NC - DC/ATL/Miami - NC

25% NYC, 50% NC, 25% other (w/ DC in the mix)
(03-10-2017 12:50 AM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]MSG - NC - DC - NC

Or

MSG - NC - DC/ATL/Miami - NC

25% NYC, 50% NC, 25% other (w/ DC in the mix)

While MSG would be great, the Big East is locked into that tourney and with the ACC unlikely ever to agree to moving it to MSG on a permanent basis I don't see that changing. As for a rotation through MSG, unlike the B1G, I have no interest in the ACC tourney being moved up a week just to book MSG once every 4 years so.

As for the rotation how about:

NYC - NC (Charlotte or Greensboro, either is fine with me) - DC - Atlanta


Cheers,
Neil
(03-10-2017 12:55 AM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2017 12:50 AM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]MSG - NC - DC - NC

Or

MSG - NC - DC/ATL/Miami - NC

25% NYC, 50% NC, 25% other (w/ DC in the mix)

While MSG would be great, the Big East is locked into that tourney and with the ACC unlikely ever to agree to moving it to MSG on a permanent basis I don't see that changing. As for a rotation through MSG, unlike the B1G, I have no interest in the ACC tourney being moved up a week just to book MSG once every 4 years so.

As for the rotation how about:

NYC - NC (Charlotte or Greensboro, either is fine with me) - DC - Atlanta


Cheers,
Neil

https://pix-media.priceonomics-media.com...-money.jpg

Contracts are suggestions.
(03-10-2017 12:55 AM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2017 12:50 AM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]MSG - NC - DC - NC

Or

MSG - NC - DC/ATL/Miami - NC

25% NYC, 50% NC, 25% other (w/ DC in the mix)

While MSG would be great, the Big East is locked into that tourney and with the ACC unlikely ever to agree to moving it to MSG on a permanent basis I don't see that changing. As for a rotation through MSG, unlike the B1G, I have no interest in the ACC tourney being moved up a week just to book MSG once every 4 years so.

As for the rotation how about:

NYC - NC (Charlotte or Greensboro, either is fine with me) - DC - Atlanta


Cheers,
Neil

In order, I think the rotation should be NYC, NC, Atlanta, DC - wash, rinse, repeat.

That way you hit the relative northern and southern outposts of the conference every 4 years, and you hit the relative geographic center every two years switching between NC & DC.
(03-09-2017 07:07 PM)MKPitt Wrote: [ -> ]A minor thing because I agree with most of your points but from 2001-2005, the big east was not a two team conference. Pitt had turned into a consistent contender by that point.

I grant you that. To be fair, there was a rotation of schools that were competitive during this period in short stretches, and Syracuse itself has a few bad years. However, as compared to the 1980's and the post realignment (2005-2013) versions, the Big East was in a down period. I think the previous poster who said that the Big East was a one team conference (UConn) was clearly recalling this period of conference history. However, I think he's suffering from a phenomenon similar to that of recalling the age of coworkers' kids. You remember how old they were when you met them and then think of them as being that age forever. You are then surprised when 12 year old Ashley is graduating college. The previous poster appears unaware of an entire 8 year period of Big East history during which it was the dominant conference in college basketball. I suppose this shouldn't be entirely surprising since he was busy watching the ACC (i.e., his own kids).
You Big East guys are all alike.
It's just like the new kid in the neighborhood that moved in from somewhere else where everything was bigger and better than it is here. We all know this attitude is born out of insecurity. Sometimes that kid grows up, adapts, and learns to appreciate where he is.
That's my hope for you Syracuse and Pitt guys.
(03-10-2017 08:52 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]You Big East guys are all alike.
It's just like the new kid in the neighborhood that moved in from somewhere else where everything was bigger and better than it is here. We all know this attitude is born out of insecurity. Sometimes that kid grows up, adapts, and learns to appreciate where he is.
That's my hope for you Syracuse and Pitt guys.

And all the old ACC guys are alike. They haven't seen another conference, so they have no idea what they're talking about, and they all apparently live here:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/...9u0yw=s0-d
(03-08-2017 09:25 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017 09:11 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017 08:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...greensboro

Quote:Suffice it to say Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim is not a big fan of Greensboro, North Carolina, the traditional site of the ACC tournament.

Given a soft-toss question after his team's loss to Miami about playing in his home state of New York, Boeheim instead used the opportunity to riff on why the league should not play its future tourneys in Greensboro -- as in ever.

"There's no reason to play in Greensboro,'' he said Wednesday. "The only reason they play there is because the league offices are there, it's always been there and there are like 150 people who like to have meetings. It should not be there.''

Quote:Boeheim -- whose team used to participate in the Big East tournament at Madison Square Garden -- argued that the value of playing in bigger markets is far greater than keeping up with the same old, same old.
a
"The media centers, the recruiting centers are Atlanta, Washington, D.C., and New York,'' he said. "How many good players are in Greensboro? New York made the Big East.''

The city of Greensboro, replying to a tweet about Boeheim's comments, took a pointed, yet lighthearted approach, tweeting that Syracuse "can lose in the first round anywhere."

Missing from the quoted tweet from Greensboro is this:

Quote:At least it's a quick ride home.

Well this year two top 10 national recruits, freshmen Harry Giles and Bam Adebayo played in High Point (abuts Greensboro).

This season, 111 players from New York City are on Division 1 rosters. That is tops in the country from one city. That isn't including places right around NYC like in the suburbs or across the river in NJ.

22 players from Greensboro are on D1 rosters.

Your point about players from NYC isn't as impressive as you think. NYC has 30 times the population of Greensboro, but only 5 times the D1 players, that seems like a win for Greensboro.

I totally agree that MSG is where you want to be, but Brooklyn is not. Rotating the tournament among 3 or 4 cities is great for recruiting and is the right thing to do with such a large conference footprint, but you have to bring it home to Greensboro every 2-3 years.
(03-10-2017 09:20 AM)Meathead Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017 09:25 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017 09:11 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2017 08:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...greensboro

Quote:Suffice it to say Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim is not a big fan of Greensboro, North Carolina, the traditional site of the ACC tournament.

Given a soft-toss question after his team's loss to Miami about playing in his home state of New York, Boeheim instead used the opportunity to riff on why the league should not play its future tourneys in Greensboro -- as in ever.

"There's no reason to play in Greensboro,'' he said Wednesday. "The only reason they play there is because the league offices are there, it's always been there and there are like 150 people who like to have meetings. It should not be there.''

Quote:Boeheim -- whose team used to participate in the Big East tournament at Madison Square Garden -- argued that the value of playing in bigger markets is far greater than keeping up with the same old, same old.
a
"The media centers, the recruiting centers are Atlanta, Washington, D.C., and New York,'' he said. "How many good players are in Greensboro? New York made the Big East.''

The city of Greensboro, replying to a tweet about Boeheim's comments, took a pointed, yet lighthearted approach, tweeting that Syracuse "can lose in the first round anywhere."

Missing from the quoted tweet from Greensboro is this:

Quote:At least it's a quick ride home.

Well this year two top 10 national recruits, freshmen Harry Giles and Bam Adebayo played in High Point (abuts Greensboro).

This season, 111 players from New York City are on Division 1 rosters. That is tops in the country from one city. That isn't including places right around NYC like in the suburbs or across the river in NJ.

22 players from Greensboro are on D1 rosters.

Your point about players from NYC isn't as impressive as you think. NYC has 30 times the population of Greensboro, but only 5 times the D1 players, that seems like a win for Greensboro.

I totally agree that MSG is where you want to be, but Brooklyn is not. Rotating the tournament among 3 or 4 cities is great for recruiting and is the right thing to do with such a large conference footprint, but you have to bring it home to Greensboro every 2-3 years.

1) I agree that there should be a rotation, and I agree that MSG >>>>> Brooklyn

2) But I disagree about the per capita part. If per capita players was the factor, we should hold the tourney in the #1 recruit's bedroom every year.

"He shoots ... and ... is .... BLOCKED by the bedpost!"
Matt Viser‏ @mviser 2h
Good thing the ACC tournament is being held in NYC, the media capital of the world, to get all this extra exposure.
[Image: C6jxiefWwAAT2Wz.jpg]
I'm not sure I see recruiting as the major reason for picking a tournament site. Or even as a major reason.

Are recruits more likely to watch the ACC tournament on television because it's being played in Brooklyn than they would be if it were somewhere else? Or are coaches cramming lots of home visits between tournament games? Maybe the New York Times devotes a little more ink to the tournament when it's played in New York, but I doubt many HS basketball players are looking to the NYT for their sports news.

It seems to me the only consideration in picking venues has to be "where do your donors want it to be". If they want the tournament in places where there are a lot of nice restaurants and other tourist attractions, then put it there. And the list of such places is pretty small, and doesn't include Greensboro. That being said, I suspect that the donors of many of the old ACC schools don't want to never be able to drive to the tournament.

I could see a rotation among NYC, DC and Charlotte being a reasonable compromise. But until the ACC gets the rights to play in MSG every year, I don't care to see it in New York more often than once every three years.
(03-10-2017 09:20 AM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2017 08:52 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]You Big East guys are all alike.
It's just like the new kid in the neighborhood that moved in from somewhere else where everything was bigger and better than it is here. We all know this attitude is born out of insecurity. Sometimes that kid grows up, adapts, and learns to appreciate where he is.
That's my hope for you Syracuse and Pitt guys.

And all the old ACC guys are alike. They haven't seen another conference, so they have no idea what they're talking about, and they all apparently live here:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/...9u0yw=s0-d

Denial!! Clever. Still Greensboro 5 out of ten years way to go.
(03-10-2017 08:52 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]You Big East guys are all alike.
It's just like the new kid in the neighborhood that moved in from somewhere else where everything was bigger and better than it is here. We all know this attitude is born out of insecurity. Sometimes that kid grows up, adapts, and learns to appreciate where he is.
That's my hope for you Syracuse and Pitt guys.

I, for one, absolutely do appreciate the opportunity to play in the ACC. However, for anyone to suggest that the ACC "rescued" our basketball, is completely false. The realignment has been mutually beneficial in basketball for the reasons that I have described. It was not bigger and better there than it is here now. It was bigger and better there than it was here then. In fact, the new ACC looks like it will be bigger and better than it was there then.

It would be fair to say, though, that the ACC did rescue our football. However, at the time the ACC started the recent realignment process, it was in desperate need to renegotiate it long term, under market television deal. The initial addition of Syracuse and Pittsburgh immediately increased the annual payout for every school in the conference from $13 million to $17 million and laid the ground work for later improvements to the TV deal. This was all masterfully managed by Swofford and the ACC team, but needed the right additions to make it work. Pittsburgh, at least, was actively talking to the Big 12, so there was never a guarantee that the ACC could even get the schools it wanted or needed (imagine if the B12 now had Pittsburgh, Louisville and Notre Dame along with WVU).
(03-10-2017 10:13 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2017 09:20 AM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-10-2017 08:52 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]You Big East guys are all alike.
It's just like the new kid in the neighborhood that moved in from somewhere else where everything was bigger and better than it is here. We all know this attitude is born out of insecurity. Sometimes that kid grows up, adapts, and learns to appreciate where he is.
That's my hope for you Syracuse and Pitt guys.

And all the old ACC guys are alike. They haven't seen another conference, so they have no idea what they're talking about, and they all apparently live here:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/...9u0yw=s0-d

Denial!! Clever. Still Greensboro 5 out of ten years way to go.

Greensboro 5/10 years is good in my book.

I'd just like to see NYC 2.5/10, too.

Then the other 2.5 can go almost anywhere, and I'll be happy. But I'd prefer D.C.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Reference URL's