(10-23-2019 09:44 AM)pesik Wrote: (10-23-2019 02:55 AM)Tigermaniac Wrote: (10-23-2019 01:25 AM)pesik Wrote: (10-23-2019 12:19 AM)Tigermaniac Wrote: Some Memphis fans are pretty sensitive. Reading through this thread though is crazy. Look I am happy that after 34 years of being a below-average basketball program Houston has newfound life under Sampson. It's good for college basketball and it's good for the conference. A strong Houston is vital to the AAC. It's the exact reason I am personally on board with UConn's move to the Big East. It's where they belong, they will get things going again. A good UConn is great for college basketball.
Let's no pretend Houston is a better basketball program than Memphis though. It's assinine. You have won 3 Tourney games in 36 years. You do have 2 more final fours so congrats, but Memphis is the better overall program by quite a bit at this point. We've been down for a few years and have dealt with a few coaching changes. It happens to a lot of good programs. The best of them are able to bounce back quickly and start winning and competing in the NCAA's again.
Football between Memphis and Houston isn't even close. Memphis has been much better since joining the AAC but we're nothing in the big scheme compared to Houston's tradition and current program. We're building and having success but not many Memphis fans are delusional enough to think we actually have a better overall program.
The bickering back and forth is pretty ridiculous though. Unless there are some people here capable of seeing the future, no one knows how the season will play out. The way I see it, is we have 5-6 legitimate teams in the AAC right now. Enjoy the season. Sports matter very little in the big scheme and NONE of us do a damn thing in the games or contribute to the actual results of the games themselves. Have pride but good lord, you literally do nothing but watch. It's entertainment not life.
"assesine" is a strong word...
weve been to more final 4s, finals ..almost everything else is identical despite houston being down for "30 years" (and im counting the vacated wins, houston is ahead in all in the official record books)..while memphis has been playing ball 45years longer...
you bring up houston's down years, but memphis hasn't been to a sweet 16 in a decade... outside of the 4 year stretch under cal (half of which was vacated) from 1986 to now youve been to 2 other sweet 16s total....your magical 4 year stretch beating up c-usa now vacated, didn't separate you in a way that youre that far ahead
this is not a knock on memphis, you just seem to be understating houston basketball tradition and current program.. houston basketball was top tier from inception...
and yes we had a down period but take purdue from the big 10 (hundreds of millions) put them in the mwc (pennies) and see who doesnt have a down period having to have massive cutbacks and layoffs (swc/c-usa)..we've just now gotten out of that money whole and got rid of our run down arena
i'd have memphis a better program because of fan support (even though that techincally isnt the program) but its not by much...
Yes, we've had plenty of down years and Houston has a great tradition. My point is as of this very moment. Memphis has a better program. I know the Final Fours of 1967, 1968, 1982, 1983, and 1984. Of course, they are respected. The issue with Houston TODAY is the fact there was such a dramatic gap. 34 years between NCAA wins is rough, but conference affiliation has very little if anything to do with that. Memphis was competing for championships in C-USA. As was Cincy and Louisville. Marquette made a Final Four out of C-USA. UAB had a Sweet 16. I 100% believe that C-USA 1.0 was a better basketball conference than anything Houston had been in prior. Obviously not football-wise. Memphis has also been in some great conferences in the past too. Chances were there in C-USA and before for Houston, but Houston also let their facilities dwindle. Where Memphis improved. Houston stopped caring about basketball and it will take quite a few years or not only pumping money into basketball but also winning and winning big for Houston to fully catch up to Cincy, Wichita State, and Memphis. UConn will be gone, but even with their down years, they are still the best overall program in the AAC.
As far as my points go. I am not hating on Houston. I am big on Grimes and I think Coach Sampson will put a much better version of Grimes on the court than what we saw at Kansas. I think Houston is 100% an AAC contender and NCAA deep run contender. Not because I believe in the players, but also because I believe in Coach Sampson. However, it is very disrespectful to continue to bash Penny though for those fans doing it. He's done nothing but overachieve in every single way. He increased Memphis 100 slots in the rankings. Brought in the #1 recruiting class, and has busted his butt to turn the program around. As you know, we have been down the last 4 years+. When people continue to trash his name it's pretty assinine as I pointed out. They keep moving the goalposts on him. He proved himself last season. Then for people to say he's nothing compared to someone else is absolutely ridiculous lol.
1) swc was far better than c-usa 1.0..it wasn't even close. you are using modern eyes and perception to evaluate the past...ie arkansas was a kingpin back in the day, and Louisville weren't what they are today as small examples ..you can look at the ncaa seeding difference (swc teams had way highers seeds on average than c-usa by a margin)
2) the 34 year number is used for dramatic effect..we were good into the mid 90s, pat foster was just a tournament choke artist. we were only really bad for 10 years. and nit level for the next 10
cincys program isnt withering away becuase they are pilling up ncaa wins.
smu ran the aac for 3 year and had a dominant streak just 2 years ago (most conference tourneys and most AAC POYs)....they havent won a tournament game since the 80s
3) you dont seem to understand houstons situation, we didnt "let" our facilities dwindle and c-usa wasnt a "missed opportunity"...everyone else in c-usa 1.0 it was a monetary and SOS step up (again dont use 2019 perception in 1994)..its like getting paid $100 dollars for a job..when your old job you were getting $80 its a step up and momentum to build up (memphis)...but if your old job payed $500 and you have $450 in hard expenses, getting paid $100 is a death blow.you have no money to improve, all you can do it cut whatever good things you have to try and make $100 work (firing staff,getting cheap coaches, ignoring facilitiy issues etc)..everyone left out of the swc had a dark period in every sport... we didnt let our facilities go bad, we couldnt do anything about it
1. SWC basketball wise was not better than C-USA 1.0 lol.
Texas- Respectable, not great.
Texas A&M - LOL
SMU- LOL
Texas Tech - LOL
Rice - LOL
Baylor - LOL
TCU - LOL
Arkansas left in 1991. They didn't win their title until 1994 and were runners up in 1995. They did have some great runs in the SWC but 1 or 2 teams don't define a conference.
Outside of Arkansas Houston was the only other GREAT program at that time in the SWC.
C-USA 1.0 had:
Louisville- had 2 NCAA titles and had 7 Final Fours entering C-USA.
Cincy- had 2 NCAA titles and had 6 Finals FOurs entering C-USA.
Memphis- had 2 finals fours, an NCAA runner up entering C-USA.
Marquette- had 1 NCAA title, an NCAA runner up 2 final fours entering C-USA.
Depaul- had 2 Final Fours entering C-USA.
Charlotte- had a final four entering C-USA.
St. Louis- was a program that had the majority of its success once joining C-USA.
UAB -had some success in C-USA as well reaching the Sweet 16 and knocking off #1 seed Kentucky in 2003-2004.
If you look at any data especially in 1996. The majority of the C-USA basketball programs were much better than the programs that left the SWC. Maybe you have a selective/biased memory but I can assure you, the SWC in any era was not better in basketball than the Metro or C-USA 1.0.
2.) You made 2 NCAA's in the '90s. 4 total until 2017-2018. So 4 NCAA's without a win in 34 years. Better?
3.) The only negative perception was yours. We made it work. Not to mention:
" The 1980s saw many of the conference's athletic programs hit by recruiting scandals and NCAA probations.[4][5][6] The only programs to escape probation in the 1980s were Arkansas, Baylor, and Rice.[4][6][7] Because of repeated major violations, in 1987, the SMU Mustangs football program became only the third in NCAA history to receive the so-called "Death Penalty" (after Kentucky basketball in 1952-53 and Southwestern Louisiana basketball from 1973 to 1975). The NCAA canceled SMU's 1987 season, and limited it to seven road games for 1988. However, nearly all of the school's lettermen transferred elsewhere, forcing SMU to keep its football program shuttered for 1988 as well. SMU also remained on probation until 1990. At that time, NCAA rules prohibited schools on probation from appearing on live television. As a result, the conference's market share in television coverage dwindled.
The SWC's performance in football declined precipitously. The last SWC Football Champion to win a bowl game was Texas A&M, who beat Notre Dame in the 1988 Cotton Bowl Classic by a score of 35-10. Since then, the final eight SWC champions lost in their bowl games. After SMU's second-place finish in most polls in 1982, SWC programs usually were not serious contenders for the national title. Texas had strong teams in 1981, 1983, 1990, and 1995. Arkansas had strong teams in 1988 and 1989, and Texas A&M was strong from 1985 to 1995, but by the end of their respective seasons' none were able to remain in the national championship hunt."
That's the truth about the SWC. Basketball was an after thought and football was dying. So the dark days you mention after the fact started several years prior to the actual split.
Willing to discuss this further but there are zero excuses and your perception or SWC fans perceptions are not fact. C-USA 1.0 basketball-wise was much better.
/
Quentin Grimes has been granted immediate eligibility
