Conference Title in Basketball Overrated

If you don't have a coach capable of winning a conference title, you don't have a coach capable of winning a National Title.



Kevin Ollie says hi.

I'd bet you about anything that the vast majority of the last 10 national title winners were cheating and paying players. Coaches look a lot better when they have elite talent on the team.
 
This is EXACTLY my point. Unbalanced schedules really make it tough to say that one 15-3 team is undisputedly better than a even 13-5 team. Nebraska just won 13 B1G games and got NOTHING for it if you ask me.
They got nothing for it because they lost nearly every game they played against top 25-50 teams. Beating the cupcakes isn't good enough. And it has nothing to do with conference titles. Nebraska couldn't win tge conference title because they couldn't beat MSU or Purdue.
 
They got nothing for it because they lost nearly every game they played against top 25-50 teams. Beating the cupcakes isn't good enough. And it has nothing to do with conference titles. Nebraska couldn't win tge conference title because they couldn't beat MSU or Purdue.
Im not going to look up his conference schedule right now but Tim Miles must have had one of the easiest. What deal with the devil did he make?
 
Don't get me wrong, a conference title would be nice. I would just rather have other accomplishments over it, that is for sure. Lets just say you have these two options, which would you pick?

1) Win a conference title, get to the sweet 16 and lose
2) Don't win the conference, get to the Elite 8 or Final 4?

I'd value 1 extra win in the NCAA tournament over a conference title.[/QUOTE

Agreed. Conference titles are very nice, but National Title runs trump it. Usually they go hand in hand, but not always.

This would seem to be especially true in Division 1 basketball with how the tournament is set up.

Now, in football, I would say a Conference Title holds more value than in basketball, especially if that said conference champion is not playing any part in the playoff game picture. If they lose a very good bowl game (but not play off bowl game) the Conference title will still feel good.

In basketball, the way Virginia lost, it will feel more painful despite being a Conference Champion. And, they now have the distinction of being the first number 1 seed to ever lose to a 16 seed. That will haunt them for quite some time.
 
Im not going to look up his conference schedule right now but Tim Miles must have had one of the easiest. What deal with the devil did he make?

The coach acted with class unlike what Fran would have done. A 2 loss season is phenomenal. Losing the 6th man obviously hurt as they weren't very deep.

NC 2-0 - home and tourney
Duke 1-0 on road
VT 1-1 with home loss OT and road
Miami 1-0 on road
Lou 2-0 Home and tourney
Clem 2-0 Home and tourney
ND 1-0 Home
NC St 1-0 Home
Syr 1-0 road

So it was a bit skewed to home.

The coach and team acted with class. Give me a 3 loss season with a loss to a 16 without my 6th man any day over Fran.
 
LOL, so you have anecdotal evidence from what 5 people? So did MSU's conference title even count in 2015 then, as they got destroyed in the playoffs. OSU has gotten destroyed in the playoffs. OU has gotten housed 40-8, and 37-11 in the playoffs. Were all those teams "pretenders" as well?

It is like people don't even watch or understand football on this board. Teams get housed all the time, even in the playoffs, and even more so in Bowl games, that don't mean crap really. Iowa beating BC was nice this year, but it meant nothing really, just like Fry getting housed in the Rose Bowl several times doesn't mean much.
Well those are teams that are in the National discussion year after year. When Iowa joins that discussion one random year and gets crushed, it validated the thinking that it was one lucky year. Like it or not, that’s the narrative, I didn’t create it.

But I thought you didnt want this to be about Iowa football. I made a point to support your OP about Crean at IU.
 
I know it has been a long time since Iowa has won the B1G, and some on here act like if you don't win the B1G then you aren't doing anything. I would argue different, so I guess my question is would Virginia's season satisfy those who want a conference title desperately? I say that season would suck. Winning the regular season conference title, winning the conference tournament but getting bounced in round 1 is a historic fail of a season if you ask me. I'd much prefer finishing 5th in the conference, and going to the sweet 16.

5th in conference when Iowa and Purdue was in the Final 4 at MN, OSU and IU all could have won the NC, sure I'll take 5th. M and IL were also worthy of being in the Tourney by today's standards. Wisconsin was also worthy and a very tough out with Wes Mathews maybe being as good as Ronnie Lester.

Wes Mathews was an Iowa hero for a couple of weeks.

 
Kevin Ollie says hi.

I'd bet you about anything that the vast majority of the last 10 national title winners were cheating and paying players. Coaches look a lot better when they have elite talent on the team.
You found 1 example and that 1 example proves my point. 1 example in how many years of NCAA championships? 80?
The last 10? I'd say the last 50. But I'd say that over half of the NCAA tournament field has been cheating over the past 50 years.
 
Im not going to look up his conference schedule right now but Tim Miles must have had one of the easiest. What deal with the devil did he make?
They played 7 teams that were ranked at the time they played. They beat Minnesota, early in the season. We all know how bad they turned out to be, so they don't count. And they beat Michigan at home.
They only played MSU, OSU and Purdue 1 time in conference play. They played Michigan twice. That's pretty easy when you look back on it. Iowa only played Purdue and MSU 1 time each, so our schedule wasn't exactly a murder's row.
 
There have been several coaches that haven’t won conference titles that had final 4 or elite 8 runs. Give me a deep run in the tournament over a conference title any day of the week.

Those conference tournaments Alford won were nice in the moment. I would have traded those for a deep run in the tourney.
 
You found 1 example and that 1 example proves my point. 1 example in how many years of NCAA championships? 80?
The last 10? I'd say the last 50. But I'd say that over half of the NCAA tournament field has been cheating over the past 50 years.

Look at the list of National title winners, it is littered with Blue Bloods. They recruit at a different level than what Iowa can by either cheating or being a Blue Blood. If your argument is an Iowa coach should be BOTH a conference title winner, and a national champion, you might want to just become a Duke fan instead.
 
I know it has been a long time since Iowa has won the B1G, and some on here act like if you don't win the B1G then you aren't doing anything. I would argue different, so I guess my question is would Virginia's season satisfy those who want a conference title desperately? I say that season would suck. Winning the regular season conference title, winning the conference tournament but getting bounced in round 1 is a historic fail of a season if you ask me. I'd much prefer finishing 5th in the conference, and going to the sweet 16.

I could be happy with either scenario. I would imagine that conference superiority is more important for your recruiting base while the NCAA tournament is better for your National brand recognition.

In Virginia's case the worst thing is they got bounced as the only 1v16 matchup ever. I think the fans could easily live with a second round loss, but there will be some justifiable disappointment with how the Cavaliers finished. At the end of the day though they have that shiny trophy to make them feel warm and fuzzy and their fan base has been sky high happy for the entire 4 months of basketballs season. I'm sure they can live with the disappointing finish.
 
Look at the list of National title winners, it is littered with Blue Bloods. They recruit at a different level than what Iowa can by either cheating or being a Blue Blood. If your argument is an Iowa coach should be BOTH a conference title winner, and a national champion, you might want to just become a Duke fan instead.
You go ahead and root for whomever you like and I'll do the same. You feel free to limit your expectations to whatever Gutless Gary tells you they should be. I'll decide what my expectations are.
 
Fran is NEVER going to win a conference or a national title....so, this conversation shouldn't be about Fran McCaffery.
 
Instead of deflecting, why not address the point. Winning a conference in basketball just doesn't carry much importance any longer. Nobody is going to give two shits that Virginia won and incredibly tough ACC this year because they got bounced in the first round. It is what it is.

If and when if Iowa ever wins a regular season conference championship, which I consider the real conference championship, and/or a conference tourney championship, which is really an artificial money grab where all kinds of things can happen, I will think if very successful for an Iowa bball program than is devoid of such things.

If they were to lose their first or second game in the tourney would not diminish a conf championship as again one and done tourneys are just that where upsets happen when favorites shoot poorly, have a bad day on Dee, and do not hustle or rebound. From what I have heard and read Virginia just had a crap game and the Retrievers played great.
 
Why is this turning into a football thing? People outside of Iowa don't care if Iowa gets beat down in the Rose Bowl. Teams get bad beats all the time in football in bowl games, Bama, OU, all of them, it happens all the time.

Yes, Tom Osbourne got beat regularly in bowl games before he figured it out as have many other coaches.
 
If Fran won 3 Big Ten regular season titles, These same posters would build him a freaking shrine with a 10' tall statue in front of the new practice facility.
That's better than KF and they want to give him a life long contract with hereditary rights to give his first born child the job when he retires.
 
Top