Shaka Smart at UT

[Zimwillett]

You know what this ALSO means? It means you get to play some teams at home that we didn't get to back then. I sure am glad we got to play KU and WVU in Norman this year. Know what I mean?

I think we're getting to a bit of an impasse. If you honestly can't see that it is more difficult to play a round robin home & home vs. an imbalance schedule (especially when that imbalance puts the best program in your conference on the schedule once a year and the worst two teams twice a year), then we don't have a lot more to talk about.

 

[Zimwillett]

Ok, what is your point? That my expectation above is not reasonable or that my expectation is based on something that no longer exists? I accept your research and findings, but I am trying to apply what you have found to our current discussion of evaluating Kruger.

My point is that the Big 12, as it exists today, is more difficult than it was during the Kelvin Sampson era. Nothing less, nothing more.

Similarly, I think it SUCKS that OU has not competed better in that more difficult conference the last few seasons. I am extremely frustrated with Lon Kruger's results, and I want him to do better or find something else to do.

See. Two things.

 

[152219]

I think we're getting to a bit of an impasse. If you honestly can't see that it is more difficult to play a round robin home & home vs. an imbalance schedule (especially when that imbalance puts the best program in your conference on the schedule once a year and the worst two teams twice a year), then we don't have a lot more to talk about.

Quit wasting your time. I presented much of this same evidence a couple of years ago. It will fall on deaf ears, because the Sampson homers don't want to hear that the Big 12 wasn't nearly as good during his era than the current one.

You have data to support your argument and they simply present their own opinion sans data. Their mind is set, doesn't matter how much data you give them. They are the flat earthers of OUHoops.com.

 

[skyvue]

You have data to support your argument and they simply present their own opinion sans data.

This has been a recurring theme in a number of threads of late. Truthiness rules the day.

 

[SuperHoops]

This has been a recurring theme in a number of threads of late. Truthiness rules the day.

Don't forget about the posters who manufacture their own cherry picked data and present it as fact.

 

[WTSooner]

I think we're getting to a bit of an impasse. If you honestly can't see that it is more difficult to play a round robin home & home vs. an imbalance schedule (especially when that imbalance puts the best program in your conference on the schedule once a year and the worst two teams twice a year), then we don't have a lot more to talk about.

Your data is garbage.

2003. Bottom three teams in the league are all from the North. Teams 2, 3, and 4 are all from the South.

2004. Yes, the worst two teams are aTm and Baylor. The next three worse teams? All from the North. Guess what? OU won all of those games. Would have had zero effect of who we played where, most likely. Second closest game out of that group of games was actually a game against winless aTm. They are a South team. Oh yeah, a team from the SOUTH won the league. KU second. South team 3rd. Very interesting.

2005. Conference standings go KU, OU, OSU, & TT. That is North, SOUTH, SOUTH, & SOUTH. Worst team was Baylor. NEXT FOUR WORST teams are ALL from the NORTH.

Like I said, this notion that the South hasn't held it's own is straight garbage. If I had the time, I'd prove it out once and for all, but I currently don't. How about Big 12 records for all teams over the two tenures? Even that is flawed.

 

[WTSooner]

And another point.....

By far the worst team in Big 12 history is TCU. A team that wasn't around when Kelvin coached in the Big 12, that Lon has gotten to beat up on twice a year.

Top teams winning percentage-wise, through the end of the 2017 season? KU, OU, UT, WVU, Mizzou, and OSU. Pretty balanced.

 

[WichitaSooner]

And another point.....

By far the worst team in Big 12 history is TCU. A team that wasn't around when Kelvin coached in the Big 12, that Lon has gotten to beat up on twice a year.

Top teams winning percentage-wise, through the end of the 2017 season? KU, OU, UT, WVU, Mizzou, and OSU. Pretty balanced.

Since WT ignores my posts, can someone please copy and paste my post from yesterday pointing out the track records of several programs who were awful for a majority of the Sampson era? His take on this is just patently ridiculous. I bet you wouldn't be able to find a single coach or analyst who covered the league then and now who would argue that the league was as strong 15-20 years ago as it has been the past several years. It is laughable.

 

[BCSooners]

So is the expectation for a coach to have a better conference record or an overall body of work? Would you rather be OU or Texas right now? The EXPECTAION should be to make the tournament 80-90% of the time, compete in the conference (which the past few years the conference is amazing), make a run every 4 years in the dance. Lon has done that, he might not be as good as Sampson but it’s close. He’s a good coach at a football school.

The Big12 is the best conference now, the Big12 then was 4th. The 7th best team in SEC football this year was Miss St, the 3rd best in the PAC 12 was Oregon. They are pretty much identical.

 

[152219]

I checked this quickly so I apologize if there are errors but during Sampson's years, Texas A&M's overall record while a member of the Big 12 was 119-169. Baylor's overall record during Sampson's years was 120-160.

Since they joined the Big 12 (all Kruger years except Kruger's 1st year), TCU's record is 115-119.

 

[WTSooner]

I checked this quickly so I apologize if there are errors but during Sampson's years, Texas A&M's overall record while a member of the Big 12 was 119-169. Baylor's overall record during Sampson's years was 120-160.

Since they joined the Big 12 (all Kruger years except Kruger's 1st year), TCU's record is 115-119.

How bout Big 12 records? TCU was 14-76 two years ago.

And what is the difference between a team that wins 30% of their conference games and a team that wins 38%, or 40%? In terms of what that means to OU's chances of beating them, I'd argue not much.

 

[WTSooner]

And an additional point. Kelvin's first two seasons were in the Big 8, where they did still play a round robin schedule. The more I did, the more this myth unravels.

 

[BigTime]

Big 12 is absolutely tougher now then it was back then. I remember fondly the days that A&M and Baylor and usually one or more of Nebbish and Colorado were EASY wins both at home and even on the road. 20 plus and home and 10 plus on the road.

That doesn’t exist now.

The Big 12 now is brutal. Fun to watch though.

 

[152219]

How bout Big 12 records? TCU was 14-76 two years ago.

And what is the difference between a team that wins 30% of their conference games and a team that wins 38%, or 40%? In terms of what that means to OU's chances of beating them, I'd argue not much.

Big 12 records support the argument that the Big 12 is tougher overall now, top to bottom.

And yes, TCU during Kruger's time is better than A&M and Baylor during Sampson's. The records show that, as does the play on the court (and the fact that TCU has produced at least 1 NBA player, which A&M and Baylor didn't during the Sampson era).

 

[152219]

And an additional point. Kelvin's first two seasons were in the Big 8, where they did still play a round robin schedule. The more I did, the more this myth unravels.

You've produced no actual evidence to support your claim. But I digress. No reason to continue to discuss this with an OUHoops flat earther.

 

[152219]

Big 12 is absolutely tougher now then it was back then. I remember fondly the days that A&M and Baylor and usually one or more of Nebbish and Colorado were EASY wins both at home and even on the road. 20 plus and home and 10 plus on the road.

That doesn’t exist now.

The Big 12 now is brutal. Fun to watch though.

Ssshhhhhh, this a myth.

 

[Zimwillett]

Your data is garbage.

2003. Bottom three teams in the league are all from the North. Teams 2, 3, and 4 are all from the South.

2004. Yes, the worst two teams are aTm and Baylor. The next three worse teams? All from the North. Guess what? OU won all of those games. Would have had zero effect of who we played where, most likely. Second closest game out of that group of games was actually a game against winless aTm. They are a South team. Oh yeah, a team from the SOUTH won the league. KU second. South team 3rd. Very interesting.

2005. Conference standings go KU, OU, OSU, & TT. That is North, SOUTH, SOUTH, & SOUTH. Worst team was Baylor. NEXT FOUR WORST teams are ALL from the NORTH.

Like I said, this notion that the South hasn't held it's own is straight garbage. If I had the time, I'd prove it out once and for all, but I currently don't. How about Big 12 records for all teams over the two tenures? Even that is flawed.

Look. This has gotten more heated than I intended. I never expected someone to die so hard on this particular hill. Here are the facts:

1. KU was in the North. Once the Big 12 formed, Kelvin only had to play in Lawrence every other year. During that span of time, KU won at least a share of the Big 12 7 times with three more 2nd place finishes. They never had fewer than 23 total wins, never had fewer than 9 conference wins, had one 16-0 conference season, two 15-1 conference seasons. went to the NCAA tournament every single year including a national runner up, a final four, and two Elite 8s.

2. Baylor and A&M were AWFUL in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Baylor literally had to recover from a murder scandal involving its coach. Baylor's conference record during that period was 41-119 (.25%). They never finished above .500 in conference play.

Thanks to Gillispe coming during Kelvin's last 2 years, A&M's record was a little better at 56-104 (35%). Both A&M and Baylor had seasons where they went 0-16 in conference play. It's just hard to describe how terrible those programs were.

3. We can quibble about a lot of things, but let's put it this way. From 1997 (the first season of Big 12 basketball) to 2006 (Kelvin's last season), he went 39-1 against Baylor and Texas A&M. So was it more advantageous, to play 4 total games vs. those two turds and only one vs. KU (regardless of where it was played) or not? I'll leave that for you to decide.

4. Since Lon has been the coach at OU, Baylor has had 6 NCAA tournament appearances (including an Elite 8 and 2 Sweet 16s) and won the NIT. They have never once had a losing season during that period. I could go on, but I think it's fair to say their program is a little different now than it was in the 1990s and early 2000s.

Look, I'm really not trying to take away from what Kelvin did at OU. It was excellent. I enjoyed it more than most. But I'm also willing and able to recognize that the conference, as a whole, is more difficult than it was back then. It's deeper with fewer freebie wins and more road games. If you want to look at the raw numbers, that's there too---conference RPI, NCAA tournament bids, and on and on.

I can see we're not going to ever see eye to eye on this, but I honestly do appreciate the conversation. It's been fun going back and looking at all this history.

 

[WaymanFan]

You can argue that the top half of the league was better 15-20 years ago than today (debatable), but no one can make a reasonable argument that the bottom of the league was anywhere close to what it is right now. I miss the Big XII days of beating up on a Melvin Watkins coached aTm 15-20 years ago, plus beating up on Baylor and Colorado, or beating up on the likes of Colorado and Nebraska during the 1980s...just don't have games like that on our schedule any longer.

 

[stormspencer]

So is the expectation for a coach to have a better conference record or an overall body of work? Would you rather be OU or Texas right now? The EXPECTAION should be to make the tournament 80-90% of the time, compete in the conference (which the past few years the conference is amazing), make a run every 4 years in the dance. Lon has done that, he might not be as good as Sampson but it’s close. He’s a good coach at a football school.

The Big12 is the best conference now, the Big12 then was 4th. The 7th best team in SEC football this year was Miss St, the 3rd best in the PAC 12 was Oregon. They are pretty much identical.

I agree with you, but instead of making a run in the dance every 4 years, I think our expectations should be a little higher.....more like every 2-3 years (or 2 times every 5 years). And by making a run, I mean at least making the second weekend. It's not a big disparity, but I also don't think it is asking too much either.....hell, we did it back to back in 15-16.

 

[WTSooner]

You can argue that the top half of the league was better 15-20 years ago than today (debatable), but no one can make a reasonable argument that the bottom of the league was anywhere close to what it is right now. I miss the Big XII days of beating up on a Melvin Watkins coached aTm 15-20 years ago, plus beating up on Baylor and Colorado, or beating up on the likes of Colorado and Nebraska during the 1980s...just don't have games like that on our schedule any longer.

And that is the point I've been trying to make. OSU and UT, even ISU, had some really, really good teams back then. That impacts "conference strength" every bit as much, and moreso IMO, as how bad the bad teams are. OU should have beaten up on the bottom 2-3 teams in Kelvin's era, and they should be beating up on the bottom 2-3 teams in Lon's era. But NOW, there are more winnable games. There is no FF-caliber OSU or UT team. No Fizer/Tinsley ISU team. When this TT and this KSU team is the best in the conference, the top of the conference is down. OU, even as mediocre as we are this year, had a legit shot in games against those teams. We only won once in six tries against those guys, but NOBODY went into those games thinking we didn't have a shot. Imagine playing that ISU team with this year's OU team? Or a normal KU team? OSU had THREE Elite 8 teams during Kelvin's tenure, 1 a FF team. UT had 2 Elite 8's including 1 FF during Kelvin's tenure. FIVE Sweet 16's. They've had one since (and it wasn't in Lon's tenure).

Top of the Big 12 was SO much tougher back then. How many schools made a FF while Kelvin coached vs when Lon has? I think that is a pretty lopsided number.