A little early but..Next year's basketball team?

Discussion in 'The Tiger's Den' started by joshpberg, Sep 16, 2009.

  1. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    just to play devils advocate. every sec team has been to the ncaa tourn in the 2000s. something that the B12, BEast, P10 and B10 cant say. the ACC can because they are good and have the smallest # of teams.

    itll be interesting to see if the jump in $$$ from football will allow some fball powers to maintain a high level of bball success. there are very few schools that have been able to do that---you could even argue that the bball success of UF, OhioSt, Ok, and Tx are fleeting. i think the money hanging out there now means LSU, Bama, UGA, UT and UF may be able to do that. (sorry auburn)
     
  2. TGer'nLHornLand

    TGer'nLHornLand Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    2,238
    Likes Received:
    205
    Well, I'd give you that the SEC is deep. But, another way to look at this, is that generally speaking SEC programs are inconsistent. To me, just b/c Auburn or South Carolina has made it to the tourney, doesn't necessarily speak to the overall "strength" of the conference as much as it says, over the decade, the programs in the conference have risen and fallen. To really get at overall strength of the conferences, you'd actually need to see where they were seeded when they went (if you believe that seeding is an accurate depiction of strength) and how far they ended up going. For example, if Auburn got a bid in 2004, did they just get there and lose in the first round? No doubt that NCAA tourney bids is indicative of how many teams the NCAA selection committee deemed worthy to put in the tournament, and the SEC has historically been a league that got good respect from the committee. But that tapered off in recent years, and I'd argue that while the SEC teams got bids, they were usually lower seeds, sort of that 5 or 6 through 9 seeds, which usually equate to early round losses. Outside of Kentucky, Florida, LSU and Tennessee (maybe Miss St), alot of that SEC "depth" ended up not going too far. The Big 12, Big10, and to some lesser degree the Pac10, I'd argue had more "impactful" teams when they got to the tourneys... You think about Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan St, UCLA, Stanford, Arizona, Washington, Ok St, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma and they likely received higher seeds and went a little farther, than the SEC teams, generally speaking. In any case, we're sort of splitting hairs.

    I agree with you though, I do think that the "can football schools" become basketball schools question will increasingly be answered over the next decade. When you listen to Alleva talk, it's clear that he and other SEC ADs are looking to take the football money and spread it around, as they should. Also, as the money engine of college football continues to expand, you have to think that over time, that's going to hurt a school like Duke (to some modest degree, as long as Coach K is there) or Gonzaga (to a greater degree) competing against an Alabama who can throw $30M at a new basketball arena.

    I also wouldn't say that basketball is "fleeting" at some of the schools you mentioned. Texas' program is in great shape, as is Oklahoma's. Ohio State has a killer recruiting class coming in. Florida, I would agree, is a little wobbly, but Billy D is going to be ok. I believe the key is coaching talent, recruiting and success breeds success. You're always going to have the "basketball" schools out there that do well--I'd say that's a relatively small group of players though--UNC, Duke, Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas, then "next" tier may be GTown, UConn, Louisville, Michigan St and a few others. But, you have a lot of movement around that level, Villanova, Arizona, some midmajors like Butler, Xavier. I think the "football" schools can certainly play throughout that spectrum--you look at LSU, Florida, Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Michigan, Notre Dame, ... (for sake of debate, where do you put a school like Ok St, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Arkansas, Purdue, Iowa, Miss St, where honestly, fans are probably "split" in terms of success of both programs). To me, it's hard to crack that truly upper echelon of UNC, Duke, Kentucky, UCLA and Kansas, but the big public schools with a lot of $ to throw at the goal of NCs will have a reasonable shot to get there with good coaches, good recruiting and the proper resources expended... I personally think that Trent, as much as I love him as a coach, is not quite there yet--although time will tell and I do think he's headed in the right direction. I think some of it is going to come down to can he continue to sign top 20 classes, but start to sign a few top 10 classes, and have this 2010 class stay around and be juniors and seniors in a few years. Plus LSU has to make it an initiative to win a NC in basketball--they're starting that with the practice facility, but they'll need to do more. LSU is always going to be an underdog with respect to matching up against the likes of UNC, but with the right breaks and a few impactful recruits, we could have a Florida '07 moment. You think about putting our '06 team in the hands of Trent as opposed to Brady, and I've got to think that we'd have had a better chance against UCLA... we just have to hope that we get that opportunity again. :) :popcorn:
     
  3. JohnLSU

    JohnLSU Tigers

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    6,870
    Likes Received:
    293
    Was just reading this. No love for LSU, just like this time last year:

    AP

    1. Kansas Jayhawks (55) 27-8 1,612 14
    2. Michigan State Spartans (5) 31-7 1,515 8
    3. Texas Longhorns (1) 23-12 1,397 NR
    4. Kentucky Wildcats (3) 22-14 1,372 NR
    5. Villanova Wildcats 30-8 1,347 11
    6. North Carolina Tar Heels (1) 34-4 1,320 2
    7. Purdue Boilermakers 27-10 1,284 17
    8. West Virginia Mountaineers 23-12 1,115 NR
    9. Duke Blue Devils 30-7 1,064 6
    10. Tennessee Volunteers 21-13 897 NR
    11. Butler Bulldogs 26-6 864 22
    12. Connecticut Huskies 31-5 844 5
    13. California Golden Bears 22-11 800 NR
    14. Washington Huskies 26-9 776 15
    15. Michigan Wolverines 21-14 578 NR
    16. Ohio State Buckeyes 22-11 465 NR
    17. Oklahoma Sooners 30-6 410 7
    18. Mississippi State Bulldogs 23-13 393 NR
    19. Louisville Cardinals 31-6 335 1
    20. Georgetown Hoyas 16-15 326 NR
    21. Dayton Flyers 27-8 318 NR
    22. Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 12-19 301 NR
    23. Illinois Fighting Illini 24-10 282 NR
    24. Clemson Tigers 23-9 217 24
    25. Minnesota Golden Gophers 22-11 172 NR

    Others receiving votes: Maryland 171, Siena 112, Notre Dame 107, Florida State 92, Vanderbilt 90, Syracuse 83, Oklahoma State 65, U-C-L-A 63, Florida 53, Wake Forest 50, Xavier 42, Gonzaga 37, South Carolina 28, Kansas State 24, B-Y-U 21, Northern Iowa 16, Tulsa 16, Ole Miss 15, Texas A&M 10, Missouri 8, Boston College 6, Pittsburgh 4, Utah State 2, V-C-U 2, Western Kentucky 2, Holy Cross 1, Old Dominion 1.


    USA/ESPN

    1. Kansas Jayhawks (27) 0-0 770 10
    2. Michigan State Spartans (3) 0-0 732 2
    3. Texas Longhorns 0-0 676 23
    4. North Carolina Tar Heels (1) 0-0 653 1
    5. Kentucky Wildcats 0-0 635 NR
    6. Villanova Wildcats 0-0 620 4
    7. Purdue Boilermakers 0-0 586 14
    8. Duke Blue Devils 0-0 528 11
    9. West Virginia Mountaineers 0-0 501 NR
    10. Butler Bulldogs 0-0 408 25
    11. Tennessee Volunteers 0-0 406 NR
    12. California Golden Bears 0-0 370 NR
    13. Washington Huskies 0-0 364 16
    14. Connecticut Huskies 0-0 361 3
    15. Michigan Wolverines 0-0 279 NR
    16. Oklahoma Sooners 0-0 244 7
    17. Ohio State Buckeyes 0-0 241 NR
    18. Minnesota Golden Gophers 0-0 151 NR
    19. Mississippi State Bulldogs 0-0 149 NR
    20. Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 0-0 136 NR
    21. Georgetown Hoyas 0-0 134 NR
    22. Dayton Flyers 0-0 130 NR
    23. Louisville Cardinals 0-0 123 5
    24. Clemson Tigers 0-0 114 NR
    25. Syracuse Orange 0-0 111 12

    Others receiving votes: Maryland 100, Illinois 83, Siena 72, U-C-L-A 59, Vanderbilt 38, Oklahoma State 29, Missouri 28, Xavier 25, Gonzaga 24, Notre Dame 22, U-S-C 22, Pittsburgh 19, Tulsa 17, B-Y-U 16, Kansas State 16, Florida State 15, Florida 13, Wake Forest 13, San Diego State 8, Creighton 7, Boston College 4, Texas A&M 4, Cornell 3, Memphis 3, Ole Miss 3, Southern Illinois 3, Utah State 3, U-N-L-V 2, Northern Iowa 1, South Carolina 1.

    http://www.tigerforums.com/college-sports-forum/91376-usa-today-espn-ap-poll-released.html
     
  4. TGer'nLHornLand

    TGer'nLHornLand Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    2,238
    Likes Received:
    205
    I wouldn't expect it, especially this year. But to be fair, last year LSU did get some votes (4th highest vote getting SEC team), just not in the top 25. Last year there were 6 SEC teams that garnered votes, with only Tennessee (#14) and Florida (#19) in the top 25. This year there are 7 teams getting votes, and 3 teams ranked in the top 25.

    So, more respect for the SEC, less respect for LSU, based upon inexperience. Which is to be expected.
     
  5. TGer'nLHornLand

    TGer'nLHornLand Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    2,238
    Likes Received:
    205

Share This Page