but the stripes are doing their damned best to make sure the Cowboys get every chance. Is it a P12 crew?
Beaver believer
- Thread starter BleedCrimsonandGray
- Start date
15 of 16 from the line. He took over the last part of the game.
I'm loving this sweet, sweet extra conference money coming in...
I was thinking the same thing. Tomorrow's a big day, as four P12 teams play. Interestingly enough, UCLA is the only P12 team that is the higher seed. They are an 11 seed and play Abilene Christian, who is a 14 seed.
Those are all really tuff games.. Even Abilene Christian impressed me.. Oregon and Colorado I feel are really big underdogs.. Iowa and FSU are really physical which most pundits say is the big issue with the PAC.. I think we have a chance in every game though..
Your point? Whether they are or are not, they earned their way to the tournament by winning the P12 tournament, and they earned themselves into being one of the last eight teams standing.
In tourney play, if you win, they can't send you home, right! The Beavers are on a 6 win, or go home, run. This is the type of run I have dreamt the Cougs would take at some point. The Beavs were picked last in the conference for Christ sake. I don't begrudge them one iota. Frankly, they have earned honorary Cougs status, UCLA, Oregon, not so much.
I agree when have the last 8 teams in the tourney ever been there best 8 teams in the country?? That statement is just silly. I will tell you what they are though.. STILL PLAYING, GO PAC 12!!
The Superbowl winning Tampa Bay Buccaneers were at one time a mediocre 7-5. They won their last four regular season games, and then continued to win (4-0) throughout the playoffs. There is nothing wrong with getting hot at the right time.
The best team doesn't always win because no sport crowns the best team every year. Oregon St's run has been phenomenal and they deserve to have won every game in this stretch. No extra lives handed to them by favorable zebras.
Now that everybody has explained how tournaments work, I feel better about a mediocre Oregon State team in the “Elite” 8.
My point was that college basketball has become a sloppy mess because of all of the talent leaving early for the NBA. This has impacted the NCAA Tournament, and not for the better. It’s just lower-quality basketball: the real talent is too young, the experienced players are all players with less talent.
This is great for those who love the “underdogs.”
My point was that college basketball has become a sloppy mess because of all of the talent leaving early for the NBA. This has impacted the NCAA Tournament, and not for the better. It’s just lower-quality basketball: the real talent is too young, the experienced players are all players with less talent.
This is great for those who love the “underdogs.”
I love what the Beavs are doing but, honestly, I have mixed feelings about conference tournaments. I'm old school. I believe that your conference champ should be the team with the best record in conference play and that team should get the automatic birth. When you have run the gauntlet, and come out on top, you are the champ, not some team that gets hot over a long weekend, in my opinion. Conference tournaments seriously undermine the importance of conference and head to head play. But this is America, sadly money is king, not the integrity of athletic competition. So, we are stuck with a process that rewards lucky breaks and getting hot late. But the Beavs had zero to with that. They are just kids playing their hearts out, who just happen be the beneficiary of conference and NCAA's search for ever more TV revenue. Can't begrudge them for that.
While I acknowledge what you are saying, I still disagree.. Are you attempting to say that the sweet 16 teams of the present could not compete with those of the past 10 years?? Simply not the case... The truth is basketball as a whole has grown tremendously. The difference between a 4 or 5 star kid compared to a 2 or 3 star kid is what has changed.. Previously the blue bloods and big conference teams got all the talent. Regardless of how you feel about AAU it has developed a crap load of basketball talent.. On any given night that is what you are seeing..It is a trend that will continue.. The level of basketball being played is actually far better...
Take are own WSU.. Previously we could have never had a recruiting class like the one we had.. Credit to the coaches, but it is also because their are more kids who can play and therefore more kids who get overlooked.. I love it Because it creates parity in college basketball.. You no longer have to go to a Kentucky or UCLA to reach a sweet 16 or go to the NBA....
While I agree I have become a bit of a convert.. Having the conference tournament does not hurt the conference regular season champion. Theywill always be the highest seed from the conference in the. NCAA tournament and they still hang the regular season banner, but it does offer a second chance to teams who maybe had injuries or are peaking at the right time... Besides. It keeps basketball interesting.. Without it most teams fans would be checked out mid season because there was no hope?! The Beavs for instance..That could just as easily be the Cougs!!
I would not say the level of basketball is better, I would say it is more competitive, paritive.
Competitiveness, parity does not necessarily equal a higher, better level of play.
Yes AAU has produced more college, NBA, competitiveness, parity, etc.
But it has also produced a lack of skills, talent, fundamentals, because of the RAT ball, everybody jack 3's, fast breaking, no hakf court offense, no take care of ball, turnover the ball, bad freethrow shooting, no midrange jumpers, etc, nature of the AAU game.
Those are the players and coaches that are playing, coaching at the highschool, AAU, College, etc level.
So yes, more competitive, parity, equality, etc. Better? NO.
While NCAA tourny teams from 13 to 23 years ago, are, were not as competitive, parity, equalized, etc, as today's players, teams they were, ARE better.
The Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final 4 teams from 13 to 23 years ago would win, beat todays Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final 4, most of the time in a best 2 out of 3 series, to account for 1 of todays teams getting lucky, and jacking up 65 3 pointers and hitting 40 of them.
I hear you, get what you are trying to say. And you have a couple, few semi valid points.
I know that you know how tourny's and all works.
But you seem to still not be getting that any team, whether its a 10 win, 20 loss team, etc, that can go 4,5 straight wins to win a conference tourny and a NCAA tourny auto birth, and then wins 6 more straight in row to be NCAA Tourny Champs, and has won 10,11 straight against the best in conference tourny, and NCAA tourny combined, IS THE BEST TEAM, AND DID, DO DESERVE TO BE IN THE NCAA TOURNY, SWEET 16, ELITE 8, FINAL 4, FINAL 2.
The only time I disagree with that is when a 10th seed to 13th seed like a Ore St, beats another 10th to 13th seed in each round, even in the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final 4, Final 2, etc.
Those teams did not earn it. They got LUCKY, due to seeding, bracketing, etc.
And while the Beavs might have gotten 1 LOW seed, they certainly have not played LOW seeds every round, like in my example.
The Beavs do belong, and have EARNED a spot as ONE of the best as the 8th best team, even if you disagree.
That said. The way to fix the NCAA tourny, conference tourny, is to strip the auto bids tied to conference tournies. Also if gona have a auto bid tied to a conference tourny, then require at least a 500 record for autobid, make a losing record grounds for disqualification for autobid. Also require that the worst teams dont get to play in conference tourny or else conference tourny loses auto bid.
And then in the NCAA, only have 32 teams, instead of 64, and the 32 teams, play in a best of 3 series, in the 1st and 2nd and 3rd rounds, to avoid a team getting lucky in 1 game.
Those changes would lock out the underdogs, cinderella's, and those that wouldnt deserve to be in Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final 4.
But those things would never happen, so its a muted, moot point.
I think you are confusing AAU with the NBA.. The NBA sets the tone for style of play.. If you pay attention the successful teams now a days have consistently good coaching..SO CALLED GREAT COACHES struggle today because they can’t just out talent everyone..(Kentucky, Duke, UNC). Talent doesn’t always win.. AAU is only a money grabbing institution. The money involved has brought the numbers... The coaches create teams everywhere because there is money to be made...
You have no idea about basketball or evolution if you truly believe that a team from 20 years ago could compete today.. The kids today are far more skilled and get better coaching then 15-20 years ago.. That is at every level of basketball..
People love to wax nostalgic because they remember how much they loved a team and how great they thought they were win they were growing up, but the average nba players would be a Hall of Famer 20 years ago.. Same as college.. The 3rd or 4th best player on these sweet 16 teams would dominate 15 years ago.. Just about every single team has better guards (ball handling), shooters, more athletes, and better coaching..
The kids today unfortunately get professional level training as early as 7th/8th grade and some before...
You are confusing Skill, talent,etc, with NBA esque FREAKISH Athleticism.
Todays players are more ATHLETIC, then players 13 to 23+ years ago.
But they are NOWHERE near as SKILLED, TALENTED.
Yeah AAU, etc, teaches them well, teaches them how to RAT BALL, RUN AND GUN UP AND DOWN THE COURT BACK AND FORTH, JACKING UP 3 POINTER AFTER 3 POINTER, AND UNFORCED TURNING THE BALL OVER VERY WELL
And the poor big men. They stagnate in AAU, as AAU do NOT teach them how to rebound, post skills, and all they are taught is guard skills, and how to Jack 3's.
The players, teams that do, do well, are the one's who coaches like Coach K of Duke, coach the AAU SHET out of them, and replace the AAU Shet, with real skills, talent, fundamentals.
Yes you have to have both athleticism and the skills, talent, as those who are either only athletic, or only skilled, etc, but not athletic, who are not athletic AND skilled dont do well.
Coach K, Duke's Grant Hill, Bobby Hurly, Laetner, UNBEATEN 30-0 NCAA champ team would CRUSH todays teams.
UNLV Larry Johnson, Stacy Augmon, 30-0 team would CRUSH todays teams.
Michigans Fab 5 Final 2 team would CRUSH Today's Teams.
And SHAQ LSU team would CRUSH TODAYS TEAMS.
And they would CRUSH todays teams because they are beyween Almost to just as Athletic, and werent TAUGHT AAU SHET, and had great awesome coaches like coach K of Duke teaching them great awesome skills, talent to go with that athleticism.
AAU is HORSESHET SKILLS. The only skills that are taught are how to dribble, drive, run and gun, shoot, RAT BALL.
UNLIKE COACH K OF DUKE AND BOBBY HURLY, LAETNER, GRANT HILL, ETC, WHO LEARNED REAL BBALL NOT HORSESHET AAU SHET.
3 guaranteed teams in the elite 8.
Banner year for the P12.
Also, not sad to see Oregon staring down a L barring SC curling up and dying. Had to listen to local honks call them the conference Champs (pre tourney) and presumptive final four team.
Banner year for the P12.
Also, not sad to see Oregon staring down a L barring SC curling up and dying. Had to listen to local honks call them the conference Champs (pre tourney) and presumptive final four team.
I think USC's length could be an issue for Gonzaga. It is going to be an interesting matchup and fun to watch.
Today’s players are way more skilled in the physical aspects of the game, shooting, dribbling and they are trained at a young age to be athletically superior. They however lack basic understanding of what us older guys called basketball. The game is just not the same at the highest levels as it used to be.
Mikalas you said our freshmen were better than the Duke team of Hurley and Laetner so why didn’t we win more if you think that team “would crush today’s champs”
And FYI the last those teams weren’t undefeated the last undefeated team was Indiana 1976
Mikalas you said our freshmen were better than the Duke team of Hurley and Laetner so why didn’t we win more if you think that team “would crush today’s champs”
And FYI the last those teams weren’t undefeated the last undefeated team was Indiana 1976
Last edited:
Hurly, and Laetner, and Grant Hill, etc, when they were FRESHMAN, the previous, the last 1,2 years before Laetner, Hurly were FRESHMAN, Duke went 14-16.
At that point, I am said that Hurly and Laetner, COMING OUT OF HIGHSCHOOL, were not as ATHLETIC, SKILLED, TALENTED, ON PAPER, as EFE, DISCHON, Koulibaly, AJ, Bamba, Rosario, were, when they came out of highschool, etc, ON PAPER.
IF EFE, DISCHON, KOULIBALY, BAMBA, ROSARIO, AJ, as FRESHMAN, were to play Laetner, Hurly, as FRESHMAN, without Coach K, they would beat the freshmen Laetner, Hurly, etc.
The Junior, Senior Laetner, Hurly, Grant Hill, Coach K of Duke team that had 30 wins, won the NCAA championship, would crush today's Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four, etc. Some of that is on Laetner, Hurly, but a LOT of that is what Coach K of Duke, taught, developed, coached.
The freshman, Sophmore Laetner, Hurly, would NOT beat Todays Sweet 16/Elite 8/Final four teams. In fact most to almost all of todays NIT/NCAA tourny teams would probably beat the freshmen/Soph Laetner, Hurly.
You are again as usual misrepresenting what I said, meant.
THAT, THIS ^^^^^^^^^
And thats because of RATBALL AAU.
About 33% to 43% of the AAU is not RATBALL, and is ok, good, very good, but at least 49% of AAU is RATBALL.
And only Oakland Soldiers, Seattle Rotary, etc, that have, are ELITE AAU, and have Jamal Crawford, and other Pros, working with AAU and PRO AM JAMS, are teaching REAL NON RAT BALL SKILLS, TALENT, etc. But as I said, those account for only about 33% to 43% of AAU. The rest is at least 50% RATBALL.
And todays sweet 16, Elite 8, Final 4 teams are only as good as they are, because of ATHLETICISM, and coaches like coach K of Duke, that despite the RATBALL AAU, coached the AAU RATBALL OUT of their players, RECRUITS and coached, taught, developed their players, RECRUITS,teams, into great players, teams, DESPITE AAU RATBALL.
Totally agree with your point, but I would like to add that they have no idea of what us older guys call basketball because it has lost its usefulness.. We would pass and move and pass and cut because we needed that movement to find open shots.. With the talent of today’s players it becomes mute.. It’s not that they can’t do it.. it’s that they dont need to. Today’s game is about spacing because the players can create a shot for themselves or for other players simply by making a defender help.. The movement of the offense used to be what got a defense off balance, now it is the skill of the player.. Good coaches design very simple movements to get the ball where a player can utilize his skill and then allow him to do so.. I had a long conversation with a “famous, to semi famous, possible hall of famer, should be hall of famer,” coach a few years ago and we talked about offenses needing to change because of the length of today’s players.. The court hasn’t gotten bigger, but now the guards have the length of yester years centers. The passing lanes that were previously available are simply not there any longer.. It truly is about evolution. It doesn’t make today’s players not as intelligent.. Things have just changed.. The pyramids in Egypt are a world marvel in their construction, similarly though the world has moved on from this building style because our tools to accomplish the same task have improved..
As you well know, it's a little of both.
HIGHLY skilled individual players and trained athletes offset by an unreal concentration of low basketball IQ. Just are not taught rudimentary team basketball principles at a young age.
When you're teaching pistols-up, point ball-you-man to 9th and 10th graders, somebody dropped the ball on the way up the AAU journey. So many others I can't even begin to list them all.
Everyone is marveling at Gonzaga's player and ball movement - that's just old school motion stuff with heavy ball screen mixed in.
We'll agree to disagree. A decade plus in the AAU world tells me otherwise.
It was almost too easy to compete with the 'elite' squads with a little bit of brains and fundies mixed in. Opponents couldn't or wouldn't adjust to what was thrown at them. Stupid stuff like play zone if the ball goes to the right, play man if it goes left. It was comical at times.
if they couldn't ball screen/drive/kick, totally lost.
Your comment "the court hasn't gotten bigger" reminds me of the UO-USC game the other night when an offensive player camped out in the corner so deep that when he got the ball, he stepped out of bounds along the sideline. This happened FOUR times in the game (2 each by UO and USC players). Prior to recent years, you might have seen that happen a couple of times in a season. The perimeter game and the emphasis on 3-point shooting has encouraged players to set up farther away from the basket. In fact, more often than not, a player who penetrates the key and appears to have a reasonably open drive to the basket will kick the ball out to a perimeter shooter camped outside the 3-point line even though it's a lower % shot than the certain layup or potential foul. It's definitely a different game these days.
Glad Cougar
But it really isn’t... They don’t teach that as much anymore again because it is not relevant... Teams know ball you man and help principles but coaches don’t use it as much because everyone can shoot.. it is based on advanced metrics.. Most teams would rather make you score 1on 1 vs length then allow you to draw the help and kick to a shooter.. AAU coaches teach Ball-you-man there’s just not as much opportunity to use it because they know what will happen.. Baylor, Oregon games are excellent examples... Baylor does not help ball side, they allow the penetration of you can win the one on one matchup, they contest at the rim, then they scramble to contest shots... Oregon often provides no help, rather they force you to score one on one in the first half then they trap in the second half as soon as the ball hits the floor often... Good coaches disguise defenses.. If you play those old defensive principles you mention you will get torched.. It’s way to basic and basketball has advanced... Its not that the AAU teams don’t know it or teach it.. It’s that it no longer works!! You are talking about things that coaches now teach in the 3rd/ 4th grade..
Except the don't. A garage full of trophies prove otherwise. At one point off my last squad, there were six kids playing college ball - one played professionally overseas as well and is now coaching as a GA. From one school.
And Tanner Groves never dropped 35 on us, I can assure you that.
The 'elite' AAU squads were simple to beat.
If you help on penetration , that shooter you have to get back to is now shooting from 3 to 4 feet further out.. How can you get there.. Any coach who sees you play that way will simply put his best penetrator and shooters ball side.. Wait for you to help and kick it to the shooter.. I don’t even need an offense. I will shoot open 3’s all game.. Add in a pick and roll to bring your big guy out from under the basket so your rotation has to guard the basket until the big man recovers and voila your little defense is useless... Baylor executed this to perfection against a great defensive team in Arkansas, who in my opinion was easily out schemed by Baylor.. It is also why in my opinion the PAC 12 is having so much success this year.. They are the new wave of basketball with excellent coaching.. Position-less basketball, new age defensive schemes, and athletes who are 5 tool guys (shoot,pass,dribble,rebound, and defend multiple positions)...
Times change and things advance..
Similar threads
