Jump to content

2020-21 Big XII Basketball Thread


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Machinator said:

Baylor wins and takes the Big 12 regular season title.

And it only took them 14 games. The rest of us suckers were too dumb and played more games.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the whole "conference tournament doesn't matter" in basketball line, but "CCG rematch determines Big 12 champ" in football line is the rest of the league just trying to fuck with ISU fans.

When we win the conference tournament in basketball it doesn't really count as a conference title because the regular season matters more and when we win the regular season in football but lose the CCG, it doesn't count because that's how the conference determines the champion.  When in reality, the winner of the basketball tournament is the champion in regards to NCAA tournament eligibility. 

Rant over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I think winning the regular season is a greater accomplishment in both.  It just annoys me that the narrative just seems to shift to discredit whatever we've done even though I realize that's not why it's happening.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

For the record, I think winning the regular season is a greater accomplishment in both.  It just annoys me that the narrative just seems to shift to discredit whatever we've done even though I realize that's not why it's happening.

Regular season is way more impressive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Regular season is way more impressive. 

I agree.

But we didn't get that treatment after winning the football regular season and losing to OU in the CCG.  After we'd already beaten them and finished with a better conference record.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I agree.

But we didn't get that treatment after winning the football regular season and losing to OU in the CCG.  After we'd already beaten them and finished with a better conference record.

Get what treatment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Get what treatment?

That having the best record in the round robin regular season was more impressive than winning a game in Jerry World against a team we already played (and beat).

I'm in Cyclone Conspiracy mode at the moment.  Don't put too much thought or stock into my grievance.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Homercles said:

Baylor shouldn’t even be allowed to have a basketball or football program, so should be a moot point 

Well in all honesty for many years they didn't. I think only TCU was worse athletically speaking (going back to SWC). 

Shit, I think Elon just fired up one of his rockets again. Short burn but it was a rumbler. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Regular season is way more impressive. 

Basically this. It's not that winning the tourney isn't a good accomplishment, it's just not as important or rewarding and mostly people just don't care about it, especially recruits. I couldn't really name the teams that won the Big 12 tourney the last few years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That having the best record in the round robin regular season was more impressive than winning a game in Jerry World against a team we already played (and beat).
I'm in Cyclone Conspiracy mode at the moment.  Don't put too much thought or stock into my grievance.

You’ve got a point. Take away divisions and you’re the conference champs. That’s how we won one in 2011. I guess knowing the set up in advance is the difference.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

And the NCAA tourney informs how we do things in basketball.

And you know who the Big 12 champ is when it comes to the NCAA tourney?  The conference tourney champs.

The difference is how these outcomes are treated.  Even though the official Big 12 champ is the team that wins the tourney, everyone agrees the regular season champ did something more impressive.  In football, winning the regular season is a footnote.

And the main reason I'm butt hurt is because my school has won the disregarded championship in each sport recently but not the credited one in either in two decades.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dirk X West said:

There is no "regular season champion" (as opposed to the CCG winner) in football.  That's the difference.

Well, there is.  

From 2011-2016 Iowa State would have been the Big 12 champion for doing what they did.  This was also the first time that the team who won the Big 12 regular season lost the CCG.

I would almost guarantee that at some point in the future, the Big 12 will start calling the team that wins the regular season in football the "regular season champion" if UT or OU do that but lose the CCG and are in playoff contention.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Well, there is.  

From 2011-2016 Iowa State would have been the Big 12 champion for doing what they did.  This was also the first time that the team who won the Big 12 regular season lost the CCG.

No, there has never been a separate regular season champ and a CCG game champ officially recognized in football like in basketball, in the years the Big 12 football has had a CCG.  

You are a good poster and seem like a good guy - and a can understand the travails of being a fan of a non-blue blood school (I'm a Tech fan) -  but these arguments are kinda sad, I have to say.  ISU didn't win a conference championship in football, period, by any standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, you are correct.  ISU has never been the "regular season" FB champ because we don't do that.  But we all know who the real champion is - the team that won regular season playing everyone.  

Also, please god no, the Big 12 will never not differentiate regular season/conference champ game champion.  We don't need another Baylor/TCU "true champion" bullshit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

No, there has never been a separate regular season champ and a CCG game champ officially recognized in football like in basketball, in the years the Big 12 football has had a CCG.  

You are a good poster and seem like a good guy - and a can understand the travails of being a fan of a non-blue blood school (I'm a Tech fan) -  but these arguments are kinda sad, I have to say.  ISU didn't win a conference championship in football, period, by any standard.

When we had 12 teams, division winners got trophies but only the winner of the title game was conference champ (unless you have an aggy wall apparently). Now that we play a round robin it makes sense to recognize the regular season winner as a legitimate champion. Our CCG is a joke, we all know that, but it is what it is. No reason you can't recognize both.

I think in basketball the tourney champ is just as important and prestigious as the regular season champ. The whole "we don't care about the tournament" comes from KU who often had their 1 seed wrapped up before the tournament so if they lost in the conference tourney they used that excuse. I noticed techsters picked up on it too when they didn't win the conference title but made their run to the national championship game. It's sort of like boxing, to be the "unanimous" conference champ, win both. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 'stache said:

When we had 12 teams, division winners got trophies but only the winner of the title game was conference champ (unless you have an aggy wall apparently). Now that we play a round robin it makes sense to recognize the regular season winner as a legitimate champion. Our CCG is a joke, we all know that, but it is what it is. No reason you can't recognize both.

We're talking about two different things.  I'm talking about what is officially recognized.  You and Al are arguing what *should* be officially recognized.

There is, in fact, official recognition in basketball for both the regular season and tournament champ. There has never been official recognition of two championships in football.  Division winners in football in the 12 team Big 12 era were recognized as division champs, not conference champs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

No, there has never been a separate regular season champ and a CCG game champ officially recognized in football like in basketball, in the years the Big 12 football has had a CCG.  

You are a good poster and seem like a good guy - and a can understand the travails of being a fan of a non-blue blood school (I'm a Tech fan) -  but these arguments are kinda sad, I have to say.  ISU didn't win a conference championship in football, period, by any standard.

In the broadcast of the past 3 Big 12 CCGs, they referred to Oklahoma as the regular season champ, and they referred to us as such this year, but that's pretty much where it ends.

In the old days, there were 2 divisions and you didn't play everyone.

On a round robin schedule, there's a clear team that has the best record or holds head to head on the field tiebreakers.  That was ISU this year.  My whole point is how semantical this is.  From 2011-2016, the Big 12 champion was the team that had the best record + head to head tiebreakers off the round robin schedule.  Then we added a CCG to appease the playoff committee and make money.  Now they call the winner of that game the champion.  This is analogous to basketball and it's subsequent tournament.  I realize the league isn't using the term, but it's the same fucking thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

In the broadcast of the past 3 Big 12 CCGs, they referred to Oklahoma as the regular season champ, and they referred to us as such this year, but that's pretty much where it ends.

Who's they?  Unless you're referring to officials representing the Big 12 conference, it doesn't matter what "they" say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

We're talking about two different things.  I'm talking about what is officially recognized.  You and Al are arguing what *should* be officially recognized.

There is, in fact, official recognition in basketball for both the regular season and tournament champ. There has never been official recognition of two championships in football.  Division winners in football in the 12 team Big 12 era were recognized as division champs, not conference champs.

Because they didn't play the entire conference.

In the current era, every Big 12 team plays every team.  The CCG is essentially an exhibition game to gain standing for the playoffs (like the basketball tournament), and there is no reason the conference couldn't recognize both (like it does in basketball).  And I'm going so far as to say that a day will come when the conference does do exactly that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

On a round robin schedule, there's a clear team that has the best record or holds head to head on the field tiebreakers.  That was ISU this year.  My whole point is how semantical this is.  From 2011-2016, the Big 12 champion was the team that had the best record + head to head tiebreakers off the round robin schedule.  Then we added a CCG to appease the playoff committee and make money.  Now they call the winner of that game the champion.  This is analogous to basketball and it's subsequent tournament.  I realize the league isn't using the term, but it's the same fucking thing.

A one off game is not analogous to a tournament, at least not for me.  It's subjective, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Technically, you are correct.  ISU has never been the "regular season" FB champ because we don't do that.  But we all know who the real champion is - the team that won regular season playing everyone.  

Also, please god no, the Big 12 will never not differentiate regular season/conference champ game champion.  We don't need another Baylor/TCU "true champion" bullshit. 

The Baylor/TCU situation was totally different.  Baylor was the champion and everyone knew it.

Football could treat this identical to basketball, and it would be totally different than the TCU debacle.  The CCG is an analog for the Conference Tournament.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Because they didn't play the entire conference.

In the current era, every Big 12 team plays every team.  The CCG is essentially an exhibition game to gain standing for the playoffs (like the basketball tournament), and there is no reason the conference couldn't recognize both (like it does in basketball).  And I'm going so far as to say that a day will come when the conference does do exactly that.

I agree with you. When Texas or OU win the regular season but lose the title game to a non UT/OU team, they'll present them to the playoff committee as "Regular Season Champs." I'll bet a pizza on it when and if that scenario arrives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Because they didn't play the entire conference.

In the current era, every Big 12 team plays every team.  The CCG is essentially an exhibition game to gain standing for the playoffs (like the basketball tournament), and there is no reason the conference couldn't recognize both (like it does in basketball).  And I'm going so far as to say that a day will come when the conference does do exactly that.

The system may be stupid, but it is what it is and all the teams play the season out with the same set of expectations about how the the champion of the league is determined.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dirk X West said:

A one off game is not analogous to a tournament, at least not for me.  It's subjective, though.

When you compare the volume of games played in football vs basketball, I'd argue it is.  In football you play everyone once.  In basketball you play everyone twice.  The CCG is one game.  The winner of the regular season has to play 3 games to win the conference tourney.  It's very comparable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I agree with you. When Texas or OU win the regular season but lose the title game to a non UT/OU team, they'll present them to the playoff committee as "Regular Season Champs." I'll bet a pizza on it when and if that scenario arrives.

And they wouldn't even be wrong in doing it.  The team on top of the standings at the end of the season had the best conference season.  The team that wins the CCG had the second best conference season, and won that game.  Just like a team can in theory win the conference tournament without having won a regular season game and still be conference champions in regards to NCAA tournament participation.

I promise I won't change my tune if we're 2nd next year but win the CCG, because my point stands regardless of who is in those shoes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

When you compare the volume of games played in football vs basketball, I'd argue it is.  In football you play everyone once.  In basketball you play everyone twice.  The CCG is one game.  The winner of the regular season has to play 3 games to win the conference tourney.  It's very comparable.

Unless you’re Baylor 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck Baylor, but this run we're on feels too magical to be true, so I expect serious disappointment tonight. But I'm pumped at the possibility of a win, because we have the players, the coaching, and because fuck baylor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Unless you’re Baylor 

I must have missed something here.  Did they reformat the tournament this year?  I've been paying very little attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I must have missed something here.  Did they reformat the tournament this year?  I've been paying very little attention.

It was a shot at Baylor's lack of... um...participation this season.  In other words, who the fuck know how many games those clowns will play?

Edited by slorch
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, slorch said:

It was a shot at Baylor's lack of... um...participation this season.  In other words, who the fuck know how many games those clowns will play?

Oh yeah.  I figured those were mostly getting made up this week, but I guess they were down for like 2 weeks or whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

√ó
√ó
  • Create New...