(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:10 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 07:30 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 06:57 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 06:46 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  Aye, but bupkis over the past two seasons.

The point being this: Would you rather be Kentucky with Calipari or Houston with Sampson at this point? I would prefer to be Houston with Sampson.

Either is fine. Complaining about either would be good problems to have n

Kentucky has only won 22.5 games per year (2019-2022), on average, and have only made it past the first round once.

Houston has won 29.0, and has made it to the Sweet 16 or better every year.

To me, Sampson vs. Calipari is somewhat similar to the tale of the Tortoise and the Hare. Building up a quality program gradually with team players may surpass quick builds with young one-and-done players over time.

The SEC has also been a significantly tougher basketball conference than the 2 bid AAC over that stretch.

True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

(09-20-2022 08:35 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:10 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 07:30 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 06:57 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Either is fine. Complaining about either would be good problems to have n

Kentucky has only won 22.5 games per year (2019-2022), on average, and have only made it past the first round once.

Houston has won 29.0, and has made it to the Sweet 16 or better every year.

To me, Sampson vs. Calipari is somewhat similar to the tale of the Tortoise and the Hare. Building up a quality program gradually with team players may surpass quick builds with young one-and-done players over time.

The SEC has also been a significantly tougher basketball conference than the 2 bid AAC over that stretch.

True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

Look at it by year.
2019: Kentucky makes an E8 beating UH in the S16
2020: They were probably going to be a 3 or 4 seed with an excellent shot at making a S16 while UH was projected as 6 or 7 seed. That tourney gets cancelled.
2021: They have a down year and miss the NCAAT for the 2nd time under Cal.
2022: They get a #2 seed and get upset in the first round (it happens)

So basically they were better than UH in at least 2 or 3 of those seasons. Last year they had a good team that underperformed in the tourney. Even Coach K had years like that. It doesn't mean the whole season is a failure. Tony Bennet had a 31-2 team that earned a #1 seed and got upset by a #16 seed a few years ago. You know what happened the next season? They won the championship. Same thing could happen for Kentucky this year.

(09-20-2022 10:37 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:35 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:10 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 07:30 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  Kentucky has only won 22.5 games per year (2019-2022), on average, and have only made it past the first round once.

Houston has won 29.0, and has made it to the Sweet 16 or better every year.

To me, Sampson vs. Calipari is somewhat similar to the tale of the Tortoise and the Hare. Building up a quality program gradually with team players may surpass quick builds with young one-and-done players over time.

The SEC has also been a significantly tougher basketball conference than the 2 bid AAC over that stretch.

True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

Look at it by year.
2019: Kentucky makes an E8 beating UH in the S16
2020: They were probably going to be a 3 or 4 seed with an excellent shot at making a S16 while UH was projected as 6 or 7 seed. That tourney gets cancelled.
2021: They have a down year and miss the NCAAT for the 2nd time under Cal.
2022: They get a #2 seed and get upset in the first round (it happens)

So basically they were better than UH in at least 2 or 3 of those seasons. Last year they had a good team that underperformed in the tourney. Even Coach K had years like that. It doesn't mean the whole season is a failure. Tony Bennet had a 31-2 team that earned a #1 seed and got upset by a #16 seed a few years ago. You know what happened the next season? They won the championship. Same thing could happen for Kentucky this year.

Kentucky went 9-16 in 2020-21. Houston went to the Final Four.
Kentucky was one and done in 2022. Houston went to the elite eight.

I rest my case.

(09-20-2022 11:41 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 10:37 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:35 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:10 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  The SEC has also been a significantly tougher basketball conference than the 2 bid AAC over that stretch.

True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

Look at it by year.
2019: Kentucky makes an E8 beating UH in the S16
2020: They were probably going to be a 3 or 4 seed with an excellent shot at making a S16 while UH was projected as 6 or 7 seed. That tourney gets cancelled.
2021: They have a down year and miss the NCAAT for the 2nd time under Cal.
2022: They get a #2 seed and get upset in the first round (it happens)

So basically they were better than UH in at least 2 or 3 of those seasons. Last year they had a good team that underperformed in the tourney. Even Coach K had years like that. It doesn't mean the whole season is a failure. Tony Bennet had a 31-2 team that earned a #1 seed and got upset by a #16 seed a few years ago. You know what happened the next season? They won the championship. Same thing could happen for Kentucky this year.

Kentucky went 9-16 in 2020-21. Houston went to the Final Four.
Kentucky was one and done in 2022. Houston went to the elite eight.

I rest my case.

Look we had a better tourney run last year no question but Kentucky had as good of a season if not better. Them getting upset in the tournament is just part of March Madness. In the grand scheme it means nothing. As the Virginia example shows they could bounce back and win the whole thing this season. I expect UH to be great this season and to compete for a title. I expect Kentucky to do the same. Both schools are preseason top 5. So if your point is that CKS has UH on par with Coach Cal's program at Kentucky I can buy that. But it seems like you're trying to use the covid year and one fluke tournament game to suggest that Kentucky is no longer one of the premiere programs in the country which is ridiculous.

(09-21-2022 02:47 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 11:41 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 10:37 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:35 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

Look at it by year.
2019: Kentucky makes an E8 beating UH in the S16
2020: They were probably going to be a 3 or 4 seed with an excellent shot at making a S16 while UH was projected as 6 or 7 seed. That tourney gets cancelled.
2021: They have a down year and miss the NCAAT for the 2nd time under Cal.
2022: They get a #2 seed and get upset in the first round (it happens)

So basically they were better than UH in at least 2 or 3 of those seasons. Last year they had a good team that underperformed in the tourney. Even Coach K had years like that. It doesn't mean the whole season is a failure. Tony Bennet had a 31-2 team that earned a #1 seed and got upset by a #16 seed a few years ago. You know what happened the next season? They won the championship. Same thing could happen for Kentucky this year.

Kentucky went 9-16 in 2020-21. Houston went to the Final Four.
Kentucky was one and done in 2022. Houston went to the elite eight.

I rest my case.

Look we had a better tourney run last year no question but Kentucky had as good of a season if not better. Them getting upset in the tournament is just part of March Madness. In the grand scheme it means nothing. As the Virginia example shows they could bounce back and win the whole thing this season. I expect UH to be great this season and to compete for a title. I expect Kentucky to do the same. Both schools are preseason top 5. So if your point is that CKS has UH on par with Coach Cal's program at Kentucky I can buy that. But it seems like you're trying to use the covid year and one fluke tournament game to suggest that Kentucky is no longer one of the premiere programs in the country which is ridiculous.

Actually, I am not suggesting that Kentucky is no longer a top 20 quality program. They certainly are.

What I am arguing is that, given their incredible recruiting record, Kentucky has underperformed to a certain extent since 2015 (see data below), and particularly over the past two seasons.

They went 9-16 in 2021, and they were upset in the first round of the NCAA tournament by 15 seed Saint Peters. That is the very definition of "underperforming" for - as you put it - one of the "premiere" programs in the nation.

My broader point is that recruiting blue chip "one and done" types of players has only brought Kentucky one NCAA championship - - A FULL DECADE AGO - - and a good, but not outstanding NCAA tournament record.

They've done ok, but a lot of people would have expected them to have done better. That's my point.

Their peak period under Calipari was from 2010 to 2015:

2011 NCAA Semifinalist (Final Four)
2012 NCAA Champions
2013 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
2014 NCAA Finalist
2015 NCAA Semifinalist (Final Four)

NCAA wins (2011-2015): 19 wins (3.8 NCAA wins per season)

Their program's performance since then has been somewhat less remarkable:

2016 One and done (lost their second round game)
2017 Elite Eight
2018 Sweet 16
2019 Elite Eight
2020 NO NCAA TOURNAMENT
2021 9-16 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
2022 Lost First Round Game

NCAA wins (2016-2022): 8 wins (1.3 NCAA wins per season)

That's a 65.8% decrease in NCAA wins per season since 2015.

There have been few basketball programs that have had the kind of recruiting success that Kentucky has had over the past 50 years, but here is what is possible for a Head Coach who is not only a fine recruiter, but who has the good fortune to retain quality players for four years (in his case, because his players weren't able to turn pro til after finishing college):

UCLA - John Wooden (1964-1975):

1964 NCAA Champions
1965 NCAA Champions
1966 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
1967 NCAA Champions
1968 NCAA Champions
1969 NCAA Champions
1970 NCAA Champions
1971 NCAA Champions
1972 NCAA Champions
1973 NCAA Champions
1974 NCAA Champions
1975 NCAA Champions

The point isn't that Calipari is a poor Head Coach (he clearly isn't), but that in the era of "one and done players," the strategy of relying on the "one and done player" to take a team to a national championship may not necessarily be the best one.

Over the past two seasons, Coach Sampson has proven to many observers that his way may be the better way. Some have even described Coach Sampson as the best Head Coach in college basketball. They may be right.

(09-21-2022 02:47 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 11:41 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 10:37 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:35 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-20-2022 08:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  True, but how do you explain the fact that Houston has made it to the Sweet 16 or better in the past 3 NCAA tournaments, while Kentucky has only done so once in the past 3 tournaments?

At this point, I'd take Sampson over Calipari, any time.

Look at it by year.
2019: Kentucky makes an E8 beating UH in the S16
2020: They were probably going to be a 3 or 4 seed with an excellent shot at making a S16 while UH was projected as 6 or 7 seed. That tourney gets cancelled.
2021: They have a down year and miss the NCAAT for the 2nd time under Cal.
2022: They get a #2 seed and get upset in the first round (it happens)

So basically they were better than UH in at least 2 or 3 of those seasons. Last year they had a good team that underperformed in the tourney. Even Coach K had years like that. It doesn't mean the whole season is a failure. Tony Bennet had a 31-2 team that earned a #1 seed and got upset by a #16 seed a few years ago. You know what happened the next season? They won the championship. Same thing could happen for Kentucky this year.

Kentucky went 9-16 in 2020-21. Houston went to the Final Four.
Kentucky was one and done in 2022. Houston went to the elite eight.

I rest my case.

Look we had a better tourney run last year no question but Kentucky had as good of a season if not better. Them getting upset in the tournament is just part of March Madness. In the grand scheme it means nothing. As the Virginia example shows they could bounce back and win the whole thing this season. I expect UH to be great this season and to compete for a title. I expect Kentucky to do the same. Both schools are preseason top 5. So if your point is that CKS has UH on par with Coach Cal's program at Kentucky I can buy that. But it seems like you're trying to use the covid year and one fluke tournament game to suggest that Kentucky is no longer one of the premiere programs in the country which is ridiculous.

Actually, I am not suggesting that Kentucky is no longer a top 20 quality program. They certainly are.

What I am arguing is that, given their incredible recruiting record, Kentucky has underperformed to a certain extent since 2015 (see data below), and particularly over the past two seasons.

They went 9-16 in 2021, and they were upset in the first round of the NCAA tournament by 15 seed Saint Peters. That is the very definition of "underperforming" for - as you put it - one of the "premiere" programs in the nation.

My broader point is that recruiting blue chip "one and done" types of players has only brought Kentucky one NCAA championship - - A FULL DECADE AGO - - and a good, but not outstanding NCAA tournament record.

They've done ok, but a lot of people would have expected them to have done better. That's my point.

Their peak period under Calipari was from 2010 to 2015:

2011 NCAA Semifinalist (Final Four)
2012 NCAA Champions
2013 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
2014 NCAA Finalist
2015 NCAA Semifinalist (Final Four)

NCAA wins (2011-2015): 19 wins (3.8 NCAA wins per season)

Their program's performance since then has been somewhat less remarkable:

2016 One and done (lost their second round game)
2017 Elite Eight
2018 Sweet 16
2019 Elite Eight
2020 NO NCAA TOURNAMENT
2021 9-16 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
2022 Lost First Round Game

NCAA wins (2016-2022): 8 wins (1.3 NCAA wins per season)

That's a 65.8% decrease in NCAA wins per season since 2015.

There have been few basketball programs that have had the kind of recruiting success that Kentucky has had over the past 50 years, but here is what is possible for a Head Coach who is not only a fine recruiter, but who has the good fortune to retain quality players for four years (in his case, because his players weren't able to turn pro til after finishing college):

UCLA - John Wooden (1964-1975):

1964 NCAA Champions
1965 NCAA Champions
1966 (Did not play in NCAA tournament)
1967 NCAA Champions
1968 NCAA Champions
1969 NCAA Champions
1970 NCAA Champions
1971 NCAA Champions
1972 NCAA Champions
1973 NCAA Champions
1974 NCAA Champions
1975 NCAA Champions

The point isn't that Calipari is a poor Head Coach (he clearly isn't), but that in the era of "one and done players," the strategy of relying on the "one and done player" to take a team to a national championship may not necessarily be the best one.

Over the past two seasons, Coach Sampson has proven to many observers that his way may be the better way. Some have even described Coach Sampson as the best Head Coach in college basketball. They may be right.

(09-21-2022 04:15 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Tiger’s 2022-2023 BB Schedule

(09-21-2022 06:08 PM)pesik Wrote:  top 100 4star Jacob McFarland is commiting on friday



(in the new espn 100 and #99 in top247...rivals150 not updated yet, be he is expected to be top 100 there too when updated )

if houston lands him, he will be the tallest HS commit in the sampson era at 6'11

(09-21-2022 09:38 PM)JFlight21 Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 06:08 PM)pesik Wrote:  top 100 4star Jacob McFarland is commiting on friday



(in the new espn 100 and #99 in top247...rivals150 not updated yet, be he is expected to be top 100 there too when updated )

if houston lands him, he will be the tallest HS commit in the sampson era at 6'11

Where is he leaning?

(09-21-2022 10:01 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 09:38 PM)JFlight21 Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 06:08 PM)pesik Wrote:  top 100 4star Jacob McFarland is commiting on friday



(in the new espn 100 and #99 in top247...rivals150 not updated yet, be he is expected to be top 100 there too when updated )

if houston lands him, he will be the tallest HS commit in the sampson era at 6'11

Where is he leaning?

no strong sources either way, but many are thinking Houston.. he only recently started blowing up (The last month or so). we are the only big team thats been on him for a while.. his other big offers came in too late (Gonzaga, lsu etc.)

there are a ton of soft predictions for houston, but no one is standing firm on those...but noting we already have a top 60 center committed (even though he is only 6'7 but still a center like him)..and with tic tok today kids record everything, took us on all his officials ...and just based off excitement they seemed really wow'd with the extravagance of their georgia visit, if that means anything

(09-21-2022 10:27 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  PESIK - THE 2021 SEASON IS OVER. YOUR BANNER PHOTO ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF YOUR POSTS IS "DATE EXPIRED."

enough already...no need to be such a homer, dude...

(09-21-2022 11:17 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 10:27 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  PESIK - THE 2021 SEASON IS OVER. YOUR BANNER PHOTO ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF YOUR POSTS IS "DATE EXPIRED."

enough already...no need to be such a homer, dude...

lol this is like the 3rd time you've tried to force me to change my banner, im not sure why it bothers you so much...
i normally change it whenever the new poster is released which hasnt been released yet

but for you ill switch it to something football for now till the new poster is released...

i dont get the "such a homer".. for not constantly changing my banner? thats a weird take

(09-21-2022 11:40 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 11:17 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 10:27 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  PESIK - THE 2021 SEASON IS OVER. YOUR BANNER PHOTO ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF YOUR POSTS IS "DATE EXPIRED."

enough already...no need to be such a homer, dude...

lol this is like the 3rd time you've tried to force me to change my banner, im not sure why it bothers you so much...
i normally change it whenever the new poster is released which hasnt been released yet

but for you ill switch it to something football for now till the new poster is released...

i dont get the "such a homer".. for not constantly changing my banner? thats a weird take

I'm sure I wasn't the only fan who got tired of seeing that banner every single day.

Dude, of course, it's a "homer" thing to post a photo of your team in every post. You're one of the only people who does it. Nobody wants to look at a bunch of snarly guys. Why not post a photo of your team's sexiest cheerleaders, instead? We're men.

(09-21-2022 11:49 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 11:40 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 11:17 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 10:27 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  PESIK - THE 2021 SEASON IS OVER. YOUR BANNER PHOTO ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF YOUR POSTS IS "DATE EXPIRED."

enough already...no need to be such a homer, dude...

lol this is like the 3rd time you've tried to force me to change my banner, im not sure why it bothers you so much...
i normally change it whenever the new poster is released which hasnt been released yet

but for you ill switch it to something football for now till the new poster is released...

i dont get the "such a homer".. for not constantly changing my banner? thats a weird take

I'm sure I wasn't the only fan who got tired of seeing that banner every single day.

Dude, of course, it's a "homer" thing to post a photo of your team in every post. You're one of the only people who does it. Nobody wants to look at a bunch of snarly guys. Why not post a photo of your team's sexiest cheerleaders, instead? We're men.

Its weird that you care at all. Pretty sure there's a setting to make it to where you dont see other peoples sigs.