Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

How did Carolina make it into the NIT?


  • Please log in to reply
144 replies to this topic

#91 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 07:49 PM

No, thanks for trying


Not wrong. The ACC had just three teams in the NCAA tourney a couple of years ago. And this isn't UNC's only NIT trip recently.

Bottomline: We were at the bottom of a down ACC, one of our worst years ever and still beat your little SEC team.


Bottom line...you are bragging about beating Mississippi State. Kentucky just beat Wake Forest by 30 points.

Not really sure what your point is here. Everyone knows the SEC is the better football conference. Pretty sure I said that myself. Thanks for repeating it.


My point is basketball is all you have to hang your hat on. The SEC is the predominant football conference and with the Pac 10 has been for 40 years. Most of our schools bring in the athletes in basketball, but don't pay the coaches to keep them. In fact, we get a lot of coaches who were successful in the ACC (Cliff Ellis, Dave Odom) but can't match that success in the SEC.

No brushing up necessary. I'm fully aware of the medicority that is SEC basketball outside of UK. Please don't try to prove the historical relevance of SEC basketball compared to the ACC. You're not close, never have been, never will be and you'll be wasting your time.


UK > UNC. Duke > Florida. Outside of that, it's pretty even.

#92 RockyTopVol

RockyTopVol

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,662 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 08:20 PM




This year the ACC is certainly not up to it's usually high basketball standards but SEC fans should never kid themselves by thinking you have ever or will ever be as good as ACC basketball. Maybe a random season here or there when we're down and you're up but consistantly you can't keep up and historically you're not even close.


That's fine. I'll grant you that the ACC is typically a tougher basketball conference from top to bottom. I was just responding to your comment that the SEC is a "pathetic conference." You I'm not arguing really that the SEC is better, I'm simply asking for a little credit. We did have a school win back-to-back titles a few years ago, and Kensucky, sadly, will win the NC this year. Also, the SEC has more Sweet 16 teams than the ACC. Even if it's a small amount of credit...still, just give us some.

#93 unicar15

unicar15

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,665 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:50 AM

UT, UK, UF is pretty much all the SEC has year in and year out. Other than that it is a mediocre basketball conference at best. I mean it took a full court miracle for UF (one of the SECs best) to beat NCSU (admittedly one of the ACCs worst). UK is far and away better than any team in the country this year so I'll give you that they are a great team. But SEC fans cannot hang their hat solely on UK when Duke or UNC is a #1 seed at least every other year. I think I heard a stat that was something like for the last 25 years either Duke or UNC has been a #1 seed every single year. That is UNBELIEVABLE.

Not to mention you have to factor in that GT went to the National Championship this decade and I think Maryland was this decade as well. When Chris Paul was at Wake they were ranked #1 and the list goes on of great ACC teams.

Then if you look at the middle to the bottom of the conference over the past 10 years you have teams like UVA, BC, Clemson, NC State (sadly), FSU that regularly knock off top 10 teams. There really isn't a comparison between those teams and teams like Auburn, Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina and Alabama IMO.

#94 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 02:32 AM

UT, UK, UF is pretty much all the SEC has year in and year out. Other than that it is a mediocre basketball conference at best. I mean it took a full court miracle for UF (one of the SECs best) to beat NCSU (admittedly one of the ACCs worst). UK is far and away better than any team in the country this year so I'll give you that they are a great team. But SEC fans cannot hang their hat solely on UK when Duke or UNC is a #1 seed at least every other year. I think I heard a stat that was something like for the last 25 years either Duke or UNC has been a #1 seed every single year. That is UNBELIEVABLE.

Not to mention you have to factor in that GT went to the National Championship this decade and I think Maryland was this decade as well. When Chris Paul was at Wake they were ranked #1 and the list goes on of great ACC teams.

Then if you look at the middle to the bottom of the conference over the past 10 years you have teams like UVA, BC, Clemson, NC State (sadly), FSU that regularly knock off top 10 teams. There really isn't a comparison between those teams and teams like Auburn, Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina and Alabama IMO.


I guess our main point is that for a conference that is so utterly dominant in the major money sport (football), the SEC certainly doesn't embarrass itself in basketball. Five national titles in the last 16 years and eight title game appearances in that span should prove that. And we're not talking flukes, either. Arkansas had Corliss Williamson and Scotty Thurmond. Those teams beat Carolina and Duke in the tourney. Florida had four players now starting in the NBA. They beat Carolina and Duke in the same tournament in 2000 when they lost to Mich. State. And Kentucky in 1996 was the best team of the last 30 years, with apologies to Vegas. Kentucky was deeper. If Pitino allows Derek Anderson to play in the 97 final, they might have had three straight titles.

#95 dimbee

dimbee

    Rabble Rouser

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,915 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 09:12 AM

These SEC vs ACC "debates" are so ghey.

#96 DWill

DWill

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:06 PM

Not wrong. The ACC had just three teams in the NCAA tourney a couple of years ago. And this isn't UNC's only NIT trip recently.


Again, no. You must be thinking about the SEC.

ACC SEC
'10- 6 4
'09- 7 3
'08- 4 6
'07- 7 5


Bottom line...you are bragging about beating Mississippi State. Kentucky just beat Wake Forest by 30 points.


Your reading comprehension fails you sometimes. The point that's being made is that the ACC is a much better basketball conference. A UNC team that finished at the bottom of a down ACC beating a mid to upper tier SEC team at home helps prove that. Not bragging just proving the point that's being debated.

You on the other hand saying UK (by far the best team in the SEC) beat Wake (a bubble team from the ACC) by 30 does nothing to discount the point I'm making. Thanks again for bringing up facts that are completely irrelevant to the discussion.



My point is basketball is all you have to hang your hat on.



You're not very familiar with the ACC are you?

The SEC is the predominant football conference and with the Pac 10 has been for 40 years. Most of our schools bring in the athletes in basketball, but don't pay the coaches to keep them. In fact, we get a lot of coaches who were successful in the ACC (Cliff Ellis, Dave Odom) but can't match that success in the SEC.



Agreed

UK > UNC. Duke > Florida. Outside of that, it's pretty even.


Nice try but UNC and UK pretty much cancel each other out. So when you take those two out the ACC still has Duke which the rest of the SEC combined can't match Duke's individual history.

Edited by DWill, 23 March 2010 - 07:04 PM.


#97 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:13 PM

the rest of the SEC combined can't match Duke's individual history.


It's comments like this that make you the Wake Forest of this argument.

#98 DWill

DWill

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:16 PM

I guess our main point is that for a conference that is so utterly dominant in the major money sport (football), the SEC certainly doesn't embarrass itself in basketball. Five national titles in the last 16 years and eight title game appearances in that span should prove that. And we're not talking flukes, either. Arkansas had Corliss Williamson and Scotty Thurmond. Those teams beat Carolina and Duke in the tourney. Florida had four players now starting in the NBA. They beat Carolina and Duke in the same tournament in 2000 when they lost to Mich. State. And Kentucky in 1996 was the best team of the last 30 years, with apologies to Vegas. Kentucky was deeper. If Pitino allows Derek Anderson to play in the 97 final, they might have had three straight titles.


I agree that they were not flukes but I would say those teams were simply a flash in the pan. I'll be shocked if any SEC team outside UK wins a title over the next 10 years.

#99 DWill

DWill

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:21 PM

It's comments like this that make you the Wake Forest of this argument.


I will give you that I may have been a little over agressive with that comment but only slightly. Arkansas and Florida have never been major factors before or since their title seasons. Combined they do have the same number of titles as Duke but nowhere near the history.

#100 DWill

DWill

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:23 PM

These SEC vs ACC "debates" are so ghey.


Kind of agree with this.

#101 Porn Shop Clerk

Porn Shop Clerk

    Honky

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,247 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:37 PM

I can't stand the Tarheels or their fans, but I think last year's NCAA champion should a least be guaranteed the last seed in next year's tourney, regardless of who it is.

#102 TyHillPanthers

TyHillPanthers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:59 PM

Beating Wake by 30 doesnt mean much considering Miami blew them out by 20ish in the ACC Tournament. Wake didnt deserve to be in the tournament, they were a joke at the end of this season..VT was much better(different argument).

Edited by TyHillPanthers, 22 March 2010 - 01:03 PM.


#103 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 01:02 PM

Beating Wake by 30 doesnt mean much considering Miami blew them out by 20ish in the ACC Tournament. Wake didnt deserve to be in the tournament..VT was much better.


This is what happens when you drink Big Blue Haterade...

Before the game: UK is going to lose to Wake and I'm going to laugh my ass off

After the game: Wake sucks. Don't know how they even got in.

#104 TyHillPanthers

TyHillPanthers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 01:38 PM

This is what happens when you drink Big Blue Haterade...

Before the game: UK is going to lose to Wake and I'm going to laugh my ass off

After the game: Wake sucks. Don't know how they even got in.


Maybe for some. But, i never made that statement. I have stated WVU will win out of that bracket and anyone who picked Wake over Kentucky should look at Wakes last 6 games..big joke. So back to it.. Beating wake isnt that big of an accomplishment. Kentucky finally gets their first test with Cornell. Which has shocked me.


::Also its tough to compare champions in football and basketball cause Football has no playoff and the teams in the championship arent always the best team. We could say the same for Basketball but in Basketball its that teams to lose..everyone gets a shot..cant in Football.

Edited by TyHillPanthers, 22 March 2010 - 01:49 PM.


#105 Britneck

Britneck

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,485 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 01:51 PM

It's comments like this that make you the Wake Forest of this argument.


This is not as far fetched as you might think. You should go do some research. Outside of Kentucky there are 3 titles. Arkansas and Florida(TWICE). Im not sure why you keep talking about Arkansas in your argument because they haven't been relevant since 95. It wouldn't surprise me if Duke has just as many Final Fours as the entire SEC besides UK of course. If they don't the SEC probably doesn't have them by much.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com