Osu gets worked by VaTech..

And yet we'll still probably split with them.

Also, they aren't in the 2nd year of a rebuild. You are comparing two teams, two programs that didn't "start over" at the same time.

This. If Ford was any good, they would have been at this point 2-3 years ago...
 
And yet we'll still probably split with them.

Also, they aren't in the 2nd year of a rebuild. You are comparing two teams, two programs that didn't "start over" at the same time.

Kruger is a solid coach...but OSU is better than us b/c they are bringing solid recruits. Baylor is better than us b/c they are bringing in solid recruits. Everyone that hates on Ford and Drew...Drew just beat Kentucky at Kentucky.
 
The relentless stream of nonsensical negativity from one poster in this thread (and elsewhere) has finally gotten to me. I've thrown in the towel; my Ignore list is now one name longer. Life's just too short to put up with a naysaying Chicken Little with an agenda.
 
I know it's strange to step outside your Stillwater bubble and look at college basketball around you. Like I mentioned, N.C. State is a team known for it's implosion. Grantland wrote an article after their loss to you guys detailing the teams history for constantly not living up to exceptions.

So, I'm not only using the teams performance this season, but also their history, and updated expectations given by ACC analysts and their own fan base. Not only that, but C.J. Leslie and Rodney Purvis haven't made near the strides they reportedly had made during the offseason. N.C. State fans believe that almost everyone on their current roster was over hyped or severely under performing. Again, these are all things you might know if you visited other sites aside from this one and (presumably) Orangepower

I saw the article you referenced. I guess it all depends on your definition of "imploding." NC State probably won't win the ACC this year, like they were picked to in the preseason, so if that's an "implosion", then so be it.

You can argue semantics and split hairs about where they might finish, but I think that it will still be a solid win (RPI Top 50) at the end of the year.

I also think that Akron and Tennessee will also end up being decent wins.

And OSU still has an opportunity to pick up a high-quality win in the non-conference, with Gonzaga.

So again to the point of this thread, I would have liked to have beaten VT, but winning those other games makes it more palatable. If we are fortunate enough to beat Gonzaga and finish OOC play at 11-1, I'll be more than satisfied.
 
It was just a response to earlier postings about how NC State was going to lose.

at this point I think there are probably 8-10 teams that we know are "good" and that's about it.
 
I will obviously take a coach who has 500 wins and multiple trips to the sweet 16, Elite 8 & one final four trip. Compared to a guy who can barely get out the first round of the tournament (the only time that happened was in 2009 where he was really coaching someone else's guys).

Oh the irony. Kruger is almost as good at losing in the 1st or 2nd round as Sampson was (six 1st round exits in 11 NCAA trips at OU). Multiple trips to the sweet 16 and elite? How far are we gonna go back? Back to when he was still rocking a sweet unibrow? Kruger is so far past his prime. Outside of ONE Sweet 16 in 2007, Kruger hasn't made it past the 2nd round in almost 2 decades, 1994!

In 13 trips to the NCAA he has 5 first round and 5 second round exits.

In more than a quarter century worth of seasons coaching college he has made it past the 2nd round THREE times:

Sweet Sixteen: half a decade ago
Final Four: even before Big Country led OSU to the FF
Elite 8: Michael Jackson's "Bad" was released that year

Ford hasn't proved a whole lot as far as the postseason but all the stuff you're touting about Lon happened a loooooonnnnngggg time ago. I guess Larry Brown is still a stud college coach too, loo
 
Never seen anyone call five years, 'half a decade' before.

Good work!
 
Oh the irony. Kruger is almost as good at losing in the 1st or 2nd round as Sampson was (six 1st round exits in 11 NCAA trips at OU).

This is perhaps the dumbest argument in college basketball. Everyone would like their team to win in the first round but everyone would also like their team to make the tournament rather than get left out. This argument seems to suggest that a first round loss is worse than not making the tournament.

In fact a team seeded 9 or below is supposed to lose according the experts that picke the field. Teams seeded 5, 6, 7, and 8 are only moderate favorites.

Much better evaluations of a coach would be how many times did he make the Tournament when the so called experts said he wouldn't (Sampson did this 4 or 5 times at OU) and how many times did a team upset someone in the tournament.
 
This is perhaps the dumbest argument in college basketball. Everyone would like their team to win in the first round but everyone would also like their team to make the tournament rather than get left out. This argument seems to suggest that a first round loss is worse than not making the tournament.

In fact a team seeded 9 or below is supposed to lose according the experts that picke the field. Teams seeded 5, 6, 7, and 8 are only moderate favorites.

Much better evaluations of a coach would be how many times did he make the Tournament when the so called experts said he wouldn't (Sampson did this 4 or 5 times at OU) and how many times did a team upset someone in the tournament.

OU lost in the 1st round as a 4 seed TWICE under Sampson and as a 6 seed as well. Do the teams Indiana State, Manhattan, and UW-Milwaukee ring a bell?

Sampson was the king of the first round belly flop. He was out in the 1st round more than 50% of his trips to the dance at OU! His underachieving in the tourney is what separated him from Eddie, a man that lost in the 1st round only twice at OSU in 13 trips. He was the higher seed in only 1 of the 2.
 
Back
Top