UCLA hasn't won in 20 years and has been very up and down in that time. I don't consider them elite at this time. Similar to Indiana, their best years are in the past.
Kansas over Last 13 yrs: 13 Conf Titles, Ave NCAA Seed of 1.8, TWO Final Fours; One National Title
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
UCLA hasn't won in 20 years and has been very up and down in that time. I don't consider them elite at this time. Similar to Indiana, their best years are in the past.
Your comparing apples to watermelons. Iowa is not KU in basketball anymore then were Alabama in football. For people in this area of the country, you have to put all of this in context. This is a team that has 13 straight conference championships, in what people say is a really good basketball conference. They have been basically a one seed,(average 1.8 over these years), in the NCAA tourney. These seedings are created to give the higher seeds an easier path to the final four. Remember in the first round their basically playing a 15 or 16 seed every year. Their usually rewarded by being seeded as close to home as possible. This year the game was in Kansas City. They get top 50 players to fill out their roster every year. For all of these built in advantages, they do seem to piss down their leg at least one game every year on the way to the final four. They made the Ducks look like the Cleveland Cavaliers last night.
You're crazy. Unlike Indiana, they have the talent base and plenty of money. Plus, they've actually had pretty consistent success over the past 20 years, they just haven't been able to win it all. Indiana and UCLA aren't at all alike.
The Big 12 is weak, but to compare them to Gonzaga's conference, whatever the hell it is, is absurd. And I don't believe Gonzaga has won their conference 13 years in a row.
how can you call it strong when one team has dominated for 13 straight years? it is a one team conference
4 of the top 5 players in Indiana are blue chippers. The 5th, is Nunge who is a highly regarded 4 star. Indiana has a very good talent base.
As for UCLA, they have been in and out of the NCAA tournament. Just a year ago they had a losing record and nearly got Alford fired. That's not consistent winning.
If you wouldn't take Elite 8s every other year on average you are insane. Iowa has averaged an Elite 8 every 15 or so since the 1950s.
I think Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, Indiana and Kentucky expect to win the national title on a consistent basis. So with these 6 schools and their huge egos, you would expect Self to win at least a couple national championships in 14 years; and some of his postseason losses have been head scratchers
When people are talking about a conference being"strong" they are talking about strength from top to bottom. Meaning there are usually 3-4 really good teams and everyone else who could beat any of those teams on any given night. The teams at the bottom are not gimmes. That is the Big 12 this year. When a conference is considered not as strong you still have the 3-4 really good teams but the teams at the bottom of the conference are quite weak and should be easy wins. That is the Big 10 this year. Having one or two really good teams in any sport says nothing at all about the so called strength of the conference but rather of those individual teams. The strength comes from the depth and parity.
Indiana has a nice talent base, but they also have to split it with prestigious programs like Purdue, Butler and Kentucky nearby.
I'd say UCLA has been a helluva lot more consistent the past 20 years than Indiana, or 99% of the rest of the programs.
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1962, 1964, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1980*, 1995, 2006, 2007, 2008
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1950, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980*, 1992, 1995, 1997, 2006, 2007, 2008
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1952, 1956, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980*, 1990, 1992, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2014, 2015, 2017
Which tells you all you need to know about the B12, at least the WCC has St. Mary's to steal a conference championship once in a while, the B12 is lacking a single team that can knock off Kansas.
That's really nothing like the B10 this year. There were no great teams, Nebraska beat Maryland at Maryland, Ohio St beat Michigan at Michigan and Wisconsin. There was parity up and down the conference this year, the bottom teams knocked off the top teams on several occasions so your point doesn't stand at all.
You can set your watch to Choke-a-zona.
I know that fans get spoiled, but I'm fairly certain none of them want to trade with us. They had a bad shooting night. That spells a loss in the tournament, period. They're doing fine.
kansas is in that elite group of schools with decades long record of success at a high level. Hardly surprising that they would have expectations that look severe to us Iowa fans.
Totally agree with your last statement. I'm sure neither Cyclone or Hawkeye fans would be bummed out by "another" 30+ win season that didn't reach the Final Four.
We would be bummed out with the what could of been but it is different than a oh great we aren't in the tourney again or we lost in the 1st rd disappointment. Whole other animal and I'd take that all day long!!
The Big 12 has had some pretty solid programs. It is much better than the WCC which is pretty much just Gonzaga and St. Mary's.
West Va and Oklahoma have both made the Final Four recently. Iowa State and Baylor are pretty good programs. Even TCU appears to be getting better. The Big 12 is much much tougher night in and night out than the WCC. Kansas winning 13 titles in a row is very very impressive even if the B12 isn't the best conference.
You made me defend the B12. Now, I'm going to puke. Thanks.
