Having a discussion with Ole Miss bud at work - what would you rather have?...
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
WWSW
=What Would Stans Want? Clearly SEC championships don't translate into tournament runs.
Sweet 16 gives the team another weekend and high profile game. Unless you're an upset, nobody remembers the first two rounds.
=What Would Stans Want? Clearly SEC championships don't translate into tournament runs.
Sweet 16 gives the team another weekend and high profile game. Unless you're an upset, nobody remembers the first two rounds.
I can't believe that's even a question. The SEC tournament is pretty much just an exhibition event. The only time it matters for anything is the rare times a team wins it to get a bid to the NCAA tournament. I would argue that an SEC regular season title would be about equal to a Sweet 16, and I know I'm in the minority on that one. But an SEC tourney title isn't even close.
Sweet 16 without a doubt. The school gets so much more pub with a sweet 16. An SECT title gets you one minute on Sportscenter.
Easy to judge the metrics of a successful season for an SEC team.....
...in basketball or baseball.
1) National Championship
2) Final Four or CWS (national postseason milestone step 2)
3) Regular season conference championship (hard earned)
4) Sweet Sixteen or Super Regionals (national postseason milestone step 1)
5) Conference tournament championship (championship nonetheless)
6) At-large NCAA berth
7) NIT in bball
8) CBI in bball
9) Loserville
...in basketball or baseball.
1) National Championship
2) Final Four or CWS (national postseason milestone step 2)
3) Regular season conference championship (hard earned)
4) Sweet Sixteen or Super Regionals (national postseason milestone step 1)
5) Conference tournament championship (championship nonetheless)
6) At-large NCAA berth
7) NIT in bball
8) CBI in bball
9) Loserville
I can't imagine that any rational Ole Miss fan would prefer the SEC Tournament Championship to the Sweet 16, the operative word being "rational."
He's actually a pretty rational guy. He used the logic of having been to the Sweet 16 more recently than winning the SEC.
I'm with you. Sweet 16 over regular season championship, any day. If you go the sweet 16, you've had a good year. Even if your regular season wasn't great, a sweet 16 is a big accomplishment and is fun. If you win a regular season championship (which is also a great accomplishment and fun), but don't even make the sweet 16, I am going to be hugely disappointed with the season. A team that wins the regular season, should be a championship contender. To not even make the sweet 16 would be a huge, huge let down.
I don’t believe you. If I’ve learned anything on SPS it’s that all Bears At Work are inherently bumbling dipshits or condescending douchebags who say things like “Marshall Henderson is a role model,” “UM’s 2013 basketball season was magical,” or similar nonsense that I’ve never heard anyone actually say.
But seriously, since the question is framed in terms of personal preference, I guess everyone has their own unique preferences; although the Sweet 16 is undoubtedly the greater and more prestigious achievement.
I'm a Rebel and I'd prefer the Sweet 16. Last time we were in the Sweet 16,
I believe we finished in the top 10 in some post-tournament polls. A Sweet 16 and a top 10 finish trumps the SEC Tourney.
That said, you get a trophy and a championship from winning the SEC Tourney and that's a rare thing for us. Still rather have a Sweet 16, but the trophy is something for which we can be proud. I like having hardware and rings.
I believe we finished in the top 10 in some post-tournament polls. A Sweet 16 and a top 10 finish trumps the SEC Tourney.
That said, you get a trophy and a championship from winning the SEC Tourney and that's a rare thing for us. Still rather have a Sweet 16, but the trophy is something for which we can be proud. I like having hardware and rings.
It's not quite that cut and dried. Duke, for example, did not win the ACC or ACC tournament this year. Yet based off their body of work they were an at large team with a 2 seed. I daresay that's a better season than Gerogia's 2008 season or our 2009 one, both of which ended with SEC tournament championships and one and done appearances in the NCAAs. All in all I think #6 depends on a lot of other factors and is therefore impossible to place.
Ranking #3 and #4 is hard. Our real life example is 2004. We won the SEC at 14-2, went undefeated on the road, and had amazing comebacks at South Carolina (I was there) and Alabama (ditto). We bowed out in the SEC tournament, then lost to Xavier on a miserable Sunday morning. Alabama on the other hand, sputtered through the regular season at 17-12. They won the 8/9 game by a point, knocked off a #1 seed Stanford and #5 Syracuse before losing to #2 UConn in the Elite Eight. I would love to have had an Elite Eight appearance that year even though I would have had to pull against Duke. But would I trade my 2004 memories for a 17-12 season with an Elite Eight loss? I just don't know........ I suppose if I was Kentucky and winning the SEC was old hat, I would want more postseason runs. But when you're Mississippi State (or Mississippi), any occasion in which you can conquer the rest of the conference should be savored for a long, long time.
And don't forget about the CIT! It comes in at #9 for non power conference schools.
Ranking #3 and #4 is hard. Our real life example is 2004. We won the SEC at 14-2, went undefeated on the road, and had amazing comebacks at South Carolina (I was there) and Alabama (ditto). We bowed out in the SEC tournament, then lost to Xavier on a miserable Sunday morning. Alabama on the other hand, sputtered through the regular season at 17-12. They won the 8/9 game by a point, knocked off a #1 seed Stanford and #5 Syracuse before losing to #2 UConn in the Elite Eight. I would love to have had an Elite Eight appearance that year even though I would have had to pull against Duke. But would I trade my 2004 memories for a 17-12 season with an Elite Eight loss? I just don't know........ I suppose if I was Kentucky and winning the SEC was old hat, I would want more postseason runs. But when you're Mississippi State (or Mississippi), any occasion in which you can conquer the rest of the conference should be savored for a long, long time.
And don't forget about the CIT! It comes in at #9 for non power conference schools.
I guess I'm an idiot then because I'd take SEC Tourn. any day of the week
You may get a momentary bump in attention that particular week from being in the Sweet 16 but it is short lived. I can't name all 16 teams in this year's Sweet 16, much less Sweet 16 teams from years past. In my mind, once you make the tourney, if you don't make the Final Four, you are pretty much in the same boat as everyone else that didn't make the Final Four regardless of which round you go out in. The difference between being in the Rd. of 32 and the Sweet 16 is winning one game.. which to me is not much of a difference at all.
With the SEC Tournament, there is only one winner and you get a trophy for it. Give me a trophy any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I'm curious if people would feel differently if the SEC were better in basketball.
You may get a momentary bump in attention that particular week from being in the Sweet 16 but it is short lived. I can't name all 16 teams in this year's Sweet 16, much less Sweet 16 teams from years past. In my mind, once you make the tourney, if you don't make the Final Four, you are pretty much in the same boat as everyone else that didn't make the Final Four regardless of which round you go out in. The difference between being in the Rd. of 32 and the Sweet 16 is winning one game.. which to me is not much of a difference at all.
With the SEC Tournament, there is only one winner and you get a trophy for it. Give me a trophy any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I'm curious if people would feel differently if the SEC were better in basketball.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. Ole Miss fans under 40 probably don't remember winning a championship of any kind in basketball. They had a sweet sixteen in 2001, a year before the bottom fell out of their program. It's a rational argument, but I'm with you on preferring a sweet sixteen for us.
"at work" = mancave with wall-to-wall, sixpack financed big screens?
Or has the great recession hit the sixpack coffers so much you have had to stoop to having a real job on the side?
Or has the great recession hit the sixpack coffers so much you have had to stoop to having a real job on the side?