32-31 (guess what that is)

[TEvans4Three]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/Stacey21King/status/1625888789871616001[/TWEET]

 

[WichitaSooner]

I would largely agree with your opinion but caveat that I think this team in “an average league” would be a conventional bubble team as opposed to being uncommonly frustrating. They would likely miss out on the tournament due to the drop in SOS not making up for the number of additional wins (although look at Rutgers last season) but the entire narrative/sentiment around the program would be far different. Greater number of wins, less opportunities for absolute bloodbaths.

I don’t think that solves the issue necessarily for diehards on a message board but the overall sentiment around the program would be far less listless/more optimistic.

There is probably some truth to this but I think there would still be a lot of apathy and frustration simply because of how bad we often play. We had several noncon games against mediocre or poor teams where we played like garbage, and our style is anything but fun to watch. So even with a better record in a different league, when you combine poor play, a difficult style to watch, and no NCAA bid, I think the overall feeling would still be largely negative.

 

[TEvans4Three]

There is probably some truth to this but I think there would still be a lot of apathy and frustration simply because of how bad we often play. We had several noncon games against mediocre or poor teams where we played like garbage, and our style is anything but fun to watch. So even with a better record in a different league, when you combine poor play, a difficult style to watch, and no NCAA bid, I think the overall feeling would still be largely negative.

I could argue the opposite and say we won our biggest NonCon games, one being the #1 team, (#3 in KenPom), by 30 points. Not to mention potential tourney/bubble teams in Seton Hall and Florida.

OU would be a bubble team in another league, I will provide comparable resumes if you would like me to. If the fanbase would still be largely negative, then that is more a reflection of the fanbase at that point.

Team|--KP Rank|--Record|----------Worst L|---------Best W|----T25 Rec|SOS|---Bracketology|--Notes
Memphis----38---23-8(11-4)----104 Saint Louis---22 Auburn-----2-2----65---LAST FOUR BYES---3 losses of 80+ rank teams
Oregon------45---15-13(9-8)----98 UC Irvine-----10 Arizona------1-5----9---NEXT FOUR OUT---4 losses of 80+ rank teams
UNC---------47---17-11(9-8)----81 Wake Forest---39 NC State---0-3-----38---FIRST FOUR OUT
Florida------53---14-14(7-8)-----88 Vanderbilt-----6 Tennessee---1-9----17--N/A---Just outside bubble talk
Oklahoma---56---13-15(3-10)---71 SHSU-------3 Alabama-------3-10---2---N/A
Wisconsin---64---16-11(8-9)----89 Nebraska----11 Marquette----2-3----12---LAST FOUR IN

 

[steverocks35]

You can post numbers until you're blue in the face. I don't care. The product I see on the court is terrible. We can't execute an out-of-bounds play. We turn the ball over constantly. We have nobody that can defend a big man. We have average shooters aside from Sherfield, who doesn't do anything else well. Our much ballyhooed depth is non-existent. Our most athletic players sat on the bench the first 2/3rds of the season. Nearly every game we get endless substitutions with no rhyme or reason to them. We seem to always meltdown at the ends of halves. I could go on and on.

Not having talent is one thing. Not executing is another, and that comes down to coaching.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I could argue the opposite and say we won our biggest NonCon games, one being the #1 team, (#3 in KenPom), by 30 points. Not to mention potential tourney/bubble teams in Seton Hall and Florida.

OU would be a bubble team in another league, I will provide comparable resumes if you would like me to. If the fanbase would still be largely negative, then that is more a reflection of the fanbase at that point.

Team|--KP Rank|--Record|----------Worst L|---------Best W|----T25 Rec|SOS|---Bracketology|--Notes
Memphis----38---23-8(11-4)----104 Saint Louis---22 Auburn-----2-2----65---LAST FOUR BYES---3 losses of 80+ rank teams
Oregon------45---15-13(9-8)----98 UC Irvine-----10 Arizona------1-5----9---NEXT FOUR OUT---4 losses of 80+ rank teams
UNC---------47---17-11(9-8)----81 Wake Forest---39 NC State---0-3-----38---FIRST FOUR OUT
Florida------53---14-14(7-8)-----88 Vanderbilt-----6 Tennessee---1-9----17--N/A---Just outside bubble talk
Oklahoma---56---13-15(3-10)---71 SHSU-------3 Alabama-------3-10---2---N/A
Wisconsin---64---16-11(8-9)----89 Nebraska----11 Marquette----2-3----12---LAST FOUR IN

We beat Alabama? I didn't know. No one ever seems to mention it.

If you are hanging your hat on beating a team (UF) that is outside bubble talk, and a team (Seton Hall) that isn't even good enough to be labeled just outside bubble talk, that says it all. And last I checked, Villanova and Sam Houston count just as much as the games you list.

As steverocks35 pointed out, any fan who actually watches the games can see that we are not a good team. We play ugly basketball and we lose. I can tolerate ugly if it leads to wins. I could even tolerate some level of losing if we played a good, fun system and it was obvious that we were improving and making strides. But when you play an ugly style, lose, and dramatically regress from year to year, and within the course of this individual season, it's a big problem. I don't understand why you are unwilling to admit that.

 

[SoonerDutch]

There is probably some truth to this but I think there would still be a lot of apathy and frustration simply because of how bad we often play. We had several noncon games against mediocre or poor teams where we played like garbage, and our style is anything but fun to watch. So even with a better record in a different league, when you combine poor play, a difficult style to watch, and no NCAA bid, I think the overall feeling would still be largely negative.

I think you are largely right, especially from a dedicated fan perspective, but my greater concern is the seemingly listless drift of the program with the wider fanbase going back to the last few years of Lon’s tenure as “bubble or better teams” slogged through the Big 12 minefield.

I thought highly of Lon’s tenure but the common knock against him I would see in press was the regular in-conference swoon (typically in February and by continuation the unevenness in KC). To us, it’s probably not surprising that OU has struggled (relative to the 2000s and before) in conference play since 2013ish. The Big 12 has been very-to-historically good over the past decade and that’s pretty easy to see when looking at the rankings metrics (SOS, Quad 1 record, KenPom, NET etc…).

However, that’s completely lost on the casual fan. If anything there’s an impression of the Big 12 (largely from football but also reinforced by the KU run IMO) that it’s full of mediocrity. I agree with you that even if was being executed well, Moser’s style of play is not conductive to fan enthusiasm but a better than .500 team beating unranked “conference rivals” UF & Ole Miss as opposed to a last place team getting slaughtered by unranked “conference rivals” Ok State & WVU is viewed far more positively by the casual fanbase (& likely the national media).

I won’t pretend that PM has endeared himself by any stretch of imagination or that he’s a long-term solution for OU but the Big 12’s relatively strength is definitely magnifying the “existential crisis” facing the program right now IMO.

 

[Eielson]

Name a program that Porter didn't leave better than he inherited it.

UALR (his closest thing to a quick fix)
- Inherited three straight losing seasons including 4-24 before he took over
- Had three straight winning seasons (overall and in conference), which continued the following two years after he left

Illinois State
- Inherited an 8-win program
- Struggled in his four years there and was fired, but Illinois State was projected to finish near the top of conference in year 5, which is exactly what they did. The team then gradually trended downward each year from 25-10 to 12-19 under Jankovich.

Loyola
- Inherited a team that hadn't been to the NCAA tourney since 1985 and only once since 1968
- Had the greatest 4-year stretch in program history including a Final 4 and Sweet 16 run. Handed over a top 25 team to Valentine that once again went to the NCAA tourney.

I'm still waiting, Wichita.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I'm still waiting, Wichita.

In the 12 seasons before his arrival, ISU, under 3 coaches, finished above .500 10 times, made the tourney twice, won four conference titles and had three second-place finishes, and twice made the NIT. In his four seasons, they finished above .500 once, never finished better than 6th, always went below .500 in league play, and never made any postseason tournament. Damn, what a job he did!

Oh, I forgot, there is one other place he took over that got worse. A school in Norman, OK.

 

[TEvans4Three]

We beat Alabama? I didn't know. No one ever seems to mention it.

If you are hanging your hat on beating a team (UF) that is outside bubble talk, and a team (Seton Hall) that isn't even good enough to be labeled just outside bubble talk, that says it all. And last I checked, Villanova and Sam Houston count just as much as the games you list.

As steverocks35 pointed out, any fan who actually watches the games can see that we are not a good team. We play ugly basketball and we lose. I can tolerate ugly if it leads to wins. I could even tolerate some level of losing if we played a good, fun system and it was obvious that we were improving and making strides. But when you play an ugly style, lose, and dramatically regress from year to year, and within the course of this individual season, it's a big problem. I don't understand why you are unwilling to admit that.

Please stop taking my posts out of context. I am not hanging my hat on anything, I am showing you the opposite of your slanted objective statement about "noncon games against mediocre or poor teams where we played like garbage".

Why do you keep moving the goal posts? I am providing you with data that is beyond a "casual fan". If you are relying on the eye test, safe to say, we can't really have an rational conversation.

" But when you play an ugly style, lose, and dramatically regress from year to year, and within the course of this individual season, it's a big problem. I don't understand why you are unwilling to admit that."

What am I supposed to admit here? 4-out/5-out motion isn't ugly when we execute. I don't like losing. A dramatic regress? I wouldn't agree there. You are using big adjectives but not providing actual facts to back up points. From 30 to 56 in KenPom is a drop, but you would then have to admit we were decent last year (which you may be unwilling to do). We had a bad few games in the middle, but bounced back with some fight (a good win) and some close games. Your end sentence is very confusing.

I am not saying losing games is fun, no one here is at all, but to ignore/downplay playing one of the toughest SOS, and easily the toughest 2-year stretch for a brand new coach, is completely absurd. I don't understand why you are unwilling to admit that.

 

[Eielson]

Please stop taking my posts out of context.

You're going to have to converse with somebody other than Wichita if that's your goal on this board.

 

[Eielson]

In the 12 seasons before his arrival, ISU, under 3 coaches, finished above .500 10 times, made the tourney twice, won four conference titles and had three second-place finishes, and twice made the NIT. In his four seasons, they finished above .500 once, never finished better than 6th, always went below .500 in league play, and never made any postseason tournament. Damn, what a job he did!

Oh, I forgot, there is one other place he took over that got worse. A school in Norman, OK.

I'll give you credit for finally attempting at least. There's no doubt that Illinois State performed poorly under Moser, but the question posed was about the team he left (25-10) compared to the one he inherited (8-21). 25 is a much bigger number than 8. The success you mentioned from Illinois State was largely from Kevin Stallings, a guy that went on to spend almost 20 years in P5 coaching. The other two coaches preceding him (including the one that handed him an 8-21 roster) both had losing records.

 

[WTSooner]

I'll give you credit for finally attempting at least. There's no doubt that Illinois State performed poorly under Moser, but the question posed was about the team he left (25-10) compared to the one he inherited (8-21). 25 is a much bigger number than 8. The success you mentioned from Illinois State was largely from Kevin Stallings, a guy that went on to spend almost 20 years in P5 coaching. The other two coaches preceding him (including the one that handed him an 8-21 roster) both had losing records.

So dishonest to look at overall record when that is so greatly impacted by OOC schedule. Let's look at Illinois State's conference records. You know, a series of games against consistent opponents, something needed to do this time of comparison.

ISU conference records in the three years before PM took over:
12-6
12-6
5-13

ISU conference records under PM:
4-14
8-10
4-14
6-12

I mean.....

 

[WTSooner]

I'll give you credit for finally attempting at least. There's no doubt that Illinois State performed poorly under Moser, but the question posed was about the team he left (25-10) compared to the one he inherited (8-21). 25 is a much bigger number than 8. The success you mentioned from Illinois State was largely from Kevin Stallings, a guy that went on to spend almost 20 years in P5 coaching. The other two coaches preceding him (including the one that handed him an 8-21 roster) both had losing records.

Are you really trying to give PM credit for the team on the court the year after he was FIRED? lol

That is crazy.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Are you really trying to give PM credit for the team on the court the year after he was FIRED? lol

That is crazy.

I’m glad you posted this because for the life of me I couldn’t figure out where he was coming up with the number 25. Amazing to credit Moser for the success the next coach had after Moser was so bad he got canned. I guess by this logic, we should credit Weber for what KSU is doing this season.

 

[Eielson]

Are you really trying to give PM credit for the team on the court the year after he was FIRED? lol

That is crazy.

They were projected to finish near the top of conference before he was fired, and then they did...so yes, I think he had a role. Their record worsened every year over the next four seasons to a trough of 12-19. Pretty similar to the 30-5 SMU team Jankovich inherited from Larry Brown that tumbled to 9th place AAC finishes soon after. Jank is not a good coach.

 

[Eielson]

I’m glad you posted this because for the life of me I couldn’t figure out where he was coming up with the number 25. Amazing to credit Moser for the success the next coach had after Moser was so bad he got canned. I guess by this logic, we should credit Weber for what KSU is doing this season.

Five of the top six scorers on KSU are new to the roster and have no ties to Weber, so that's an absolutely terrible comparison.

But if you want to talk about Weber by whatever means necessary -- yes, I would give Self a good bit of credit for his early success at Illinois. That's a reasonable comparison given that a large part of Weber's early roster was inherited and his success wasn't maintained after Self's players graduated.

 

[WTSooner]

They were projected to finish near the top of conference before he was fired, and then they did...so yes, I think he had a role. Their record worsened every year over the next four seasons to a trough of 12-19. Pretty similar to the 30-5 SMU team Jankovich inherited from Larry Brown that tumbled to 9th place AAC finishes soon after. Jank is not a good coach.

Huh? Now you are just making stuff up. How could they have been predicted to finish near the top of the conference standings the following year, when Moser was canned on March 5th? You are saying they were already predicting the next season's standings when March Madness for the current year hadn't even started? I hope I'm misunderstanding you, b/c if I'm not, that is an absolutely made up and laughable argument.

Edit: And if you meant they were projected to finish higher the year he got fired, then did the next year, I'd say that only proves that PM isn't a very good coach if the next guy was able to accomplish what PM was expected to with similar players. Just sayin'.

 

[opsooner]

You can post numbers until you're blue in the face. I don't care. The product I see on the court is terrible. We can't execute an out-of-bounds play. We turn the ball over constantly. We have nobody that can defend a big man. We have average shooters aside from Sherfield, who doesn't do anything else well. Our much ballyhooed depth is non-existent. Our most athletic players sat on the bench the first 2/3rds of the season. Nearly every game we get endless substitutions with no rhyme or reason to them. We seem to always meltdown at the ends of halves. I could go on and on.

Not having talent is one thing. Not executing is another, and that comes down to coaching.

Yup. You can play with numbers all you want but your eyes don’t lie. Or, as they say in the analytics world, if you torture the data long enough it will confess. I can’t figure out if it was our lack of talent that beat Bama or our good coaching.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eielson]

Huh? Now you are just making stuff up. How could they have been predicted to finish near the top of the conference standings the following year, when Moser was canned on March 5th? You are saying they were already predicting the next season's standings when March Madness for the current year hadn't even started? I hope I'm misunderstanding you, b/c if I'm not, that is an absolutely made up and laughable argument.

Edit: And if you meant they were projected to finish higher the year he got fired, then did the next year, I'd say that only proves that PM isn't a very good coach if the next guy was able to accomplish what PM was expected to with similar players. Just sayin'.

Illinois State was set to return almost every major contributor the following year. The top four scorers on Jankovich's first roster were all returning starters from Moser. You can say that Moser had a bad stint at Illinois State, but there's no way to say he didn't set the foundation for that 25 win team.

 

[WTSooner]

Illinois State was set to return almost every major contributor the following year. The top four scorers on Jankovich's first roster were all returning starters from Moser. You can say that Moser had a bad stint at Illinois State, but there's no way to say he didn't set the foundation for that 25 win team.

It can 100% be debated how much PM impacted that next team.

That's like saying John Blake was a good coach because some of his players contributed largely to our 2000 NC team.