2015 NCAA Tournament thread

I might have phrased it differently if it was actually out of respect ie "that fucking so-and-so." Saying "fuck that guy" to me comes off as angry. But then again that's me and not him.

Have to give the kid credit for calling the other guy to apologize, even if his apology on Twitter was a little weak.

 

I'll be one of 'em.

 

The faithful are unhappy:

 

With a few years of Calipari-Ball on the books, its strengths and shortcomings are starting to become clear.
Strengths:
1) Raw talent - Calipari's system will work because he's getting the largest number of best players. Kentucky might not win a national title every year, but they'll be in the mix nearly every year if outside factors (like injuries or suspensions) don't interfere.
2) Name recognition - Kentucky is a top shelf program and has the advantages that come with it. That includes enough money to recruit top talent, pay Calipari, and provide all the other advantages that come with it. It also provides a certain intimidation factor to most teams. They'll get everyone's best shot, but only a handful of teams each year will see Kentucky as a talented peer and not the game of the year. That counts for something.
3) John Calipari - He's a great recruiter and motivator who is skilled at selling his system to the best players in the country.

Weaknesses:
1) John Calipari - It's proven now that he's not the best in-game coach around. He'll win on talent and put his team in a good position at the end of the season, but when the shit hits the fan against a Coach K or Bo Ryan, he's at a definite disadvantage. His teams will rarely overachieve like some of Izzo's Michigan State teams have done.
2) Team chemistry - When they have a group of guys that buy in, like this year, the results can be impressive. When they miss on a freshman class, or get a bunch of guys who don't get along, it can be laughably disastrous. See the 2012-13 season. The key is, they're not necessarily stuck with those guys for three or four years. They can quickly regroup in one or two years.
3) The one-and-done factor - As you pointed out, Michael, the one-and-done model has some drawbacks itself. How long will players want to go to a basketball factory when they can be The Man at another, equally competitive program? And can Calipari and his staff recruit the right guys every year for his system? If they miss on two or three classes in a row and there's more seasons like 2012-13 than the last two, it'll be interesting to see if the heat gets turned up on Calipari.

 

Yes, what a horrible model this has been for Kentucky.

I mean, it sucks to be in the Final Four four times in six years, Elite Eight five times in six years and have a national title and it sucks to be like 115-3 on your home court and it sucks to have, what, four SEC titles or so in six years? And God it sucks to be 23-4 in NCAA Tournament games, too.

Yes, what a horrible model that is and what a terrible way to go.

Kentucky should fire Calipari and go to the four-year model of blue bloods like North Carolina, UCLA and Indiana as what they are doing is clearly working much, much better.

Some things that get said and written about Calipari and Kentucky are just flat out stupid.

They take the best shot of every team, every night and have their every move scrutinized and criticized and analyzed to the point of where it has now become downright asinine.

You are not going to win every game, not in today's climate and not in today's world of college hoops. You just aren't - but in terms of building a dynasty this is as close to one as we have seen since Duke of the late 1980s and early 1990s.

And while we are at it - I hope that Wisconsin wins so we can have the same jackass storyline "heart over hype" and "team over talent" because Duke has more one-and-dones starting than Kentucky does and also has nine McDonalds All Americans.

But I'm guessing this won't be the discussion if Duke loses, nor will we hear about this model being broke.

 

And one other thing that is hilarious to me - March is "IZZO MONTH" and he is the genius of genius in the NCAA Tournament and yet, somehow, nobody talks about him "leaving championships on the table" and "choking" considering he has been to 7 Final Fours and only has one title and his record in the Final Four is just 3-6.

If you get to the Final Four and lose, you are losing to one of the very best teams in the country - and usually a team that has had a great season and won a lot of games, too -- and that means for the most part the game is far more of a tossup than anything and it comes down to who plays better.

 

Bo Ryan referenced Finland on Sunday. Great minds ...

 

With the talent the shoe company bagman has paid to assemble at UK, not only should they never lose a game, they should never be in DANGER of losing a game -- they should never have a game closer than 30 points, against anybody. Most of their games they should win by 50 or more.

But they don't, because Calipari wants to engage in self-gratifying mental masturbation, and prove to his prospective NBA owners that he's really a sooper strategic geeenyus and knows how to magically coach up victories in the final seconds, so he plays NBA style sludgeball and goes into a stall with a 2-point lead and 3:00 left.

Cause if he really turned the horses loose and won every game by 30-70 points:
1, everyone would realize the reason the team wins is the MFkers slamming the ball through the hoop, not the oily sleazeball on the sidelines, and
2, if they win games by 50-70 and more, all of his sympathy in the media would evaporate in a firestorm of bitching about RUTS, and people would start digging HARD into the WWW pipeline, and the NCAA boogeyman would land on his ass like a ton of bricks.

Play with fire, you get burned. Tough shit.

 

I haven't read this entire thread, but I sure hope you people are giving Calipari and Izzo the stern an unapologetic message board beatings they deserve. THEY BLEW IT!

I'm really pumped to see which coach blows it tonight.

 

Starman with a burning .hottake.

 

Calipari kinda did blow it, though, right? The not-watching-film thing is pretty insane.

I don't know if he "blew it" in that there was a certain strategic error he made. (Personally I thought they could have driven the lane all day long against an interior defense that plays soft to avoid fouls.) But by just having two units sub in and out all season, Calipari didn't do a whole lot in the way of alternate personnel combinations that might have helped.

But he really isn't a coach anyway, he is an agent, so I guess none of that is surprising.

 

Maybe. It certainly happens from time to time. But not nearly as often as some people here want you to think. I'm not enough of an Xs and Os expert to know, though, so we'll let those experts let us know. I think that's best.