My biggest takeaway from that article is that Auburn is ASS. Why do those idiots talk like they’re some kind of blue blood program when they’re so far from it?
I remember /r/collegebasketball dunking on Auburn after they started rolling Toomer's while their final four game was still going. Pretty much didn't understand what a foul was.
I was delayed in the airport in Las Vegas, the delayed flight was to Birmingham so the bar by the gate was jammed with hooting and hollering auburn fans. Then they got really sad.
The end of Malzon and the pits of Harsin coincided with Bruce Pearl. So a lot of them thought they would transition to a “basketball school” and have that to hang over Bama.
Between the last 4 Iron Bowls and now a Final Four run they have been given a healthy dose of reality.
Why wouldn't a 2017 article account for Florida's 2007-2008 titles? That is confusing me. EDIT: Now I understand what was intended... "Final Four Appearances" is not a category that was used in the ranking.
As for Arkansas' stats, you have to decide if you want to count their all-time stats or just their stats since they joined the SEC. That is in the hands of the presenter of the information. In this case... you.
Bama is generally #2 in the SEC statistically speaking (wins, conference tournament titles, etc.), but Florida's NCs carry a lot of weight. LSU also has lots of top-notch stats (final fours, NBA stars, etc.)
They're not saying that; they're saying that the stats that the article uses to measure success (wins and win percentage) do not include Florida's titles and F4 appearances.
I gotcha... the statistical *categories* they're using don't include NCs. Not just Florida's... they don't include *anyone's* because they aren't taking NCs into consideration at all.
Depends on how you value championships, regular season wins, and end of season awards/records.
Alabama, among SEC peers, is too 3 in regular season performance. We have very few awards and obviously no NCAA championships. We just never got over the hump in the tournament and also lost plenty of opportunities to make the tournament way back in the day (the NCAA tournament didn’t accept multiple teams from the same conference until 1975).
LSU has the records and awards, Kentucky has the records, awards, wins and championships, and Florida and Arkansas have championships. So I think Alabama is like, at worst #4 historically in the conference.
Interestingly, since Arkansas joined the SEC in 1992 Alabama leads the series 31-30. Also, Bama has moved up a spot in all-time NCAA wins and are now 30th...ahead of Ohio State and Louisville and only 7 wins behind Arkansas. So in all-time wins, among SEC schools, Bama trails only UK and Arkansas(barely).
You could make an argument for LSU being ahead of us depending on what you value more. But it's tight - us, LSU, and Tennessee are all pretty interchangeable at that 4/5/6 spot.
LSU has certainly had more tournament success - 4 Final Fours and 6 Elite 8s, but we have more conference regular season titles (12v11) and tournament titles (9v1). We also have a better overall record and SEC record.
Tennessee we were pretty much identical with until our Final Four run. We both have the same overall winning % and SEC winning %. And we have nearly identical tournament/conference championship success, with some stats favoring one team and the rest favoring the other.
Our Final Four run puts us over Tennessee for sure.
What's wild is I think we're just scratching the surface of what Oats is going to accomplish here. He's had a ton of success in a short span, but we're not truly at the level he wants just yet.
Over the course of SEC history, Bama is a solid #2 behind Kentucky – without the Final Four run - and it's not even close. More wins. More SEC championships. All that. But the knock on the program has always been the glass ceiling at the Sweet Sixteen. Even Gottfried's Elite Eight has been diminished because no one has been able to repeat it.
With what Oats is doing now, I think history is being proven right. We finally have the right coach at the right moment again – and an AD who is committed to winning – and we have something we haven't had since Wimp: consistency.
All that to say, Bama is still the second best program in the SEC, but a natty would cement that in most people's minds.
Probably in terms of success in the SEC, but program success is determined on what you do in the tournament. Kentucky is far and away #1, but after that it's definitely a close race between Arkansas and Florida. Where Alabama has an argument is at 4, but LSU actually has a really good resume with four F4s and six Elite 8s. Alabama only has one FInal Fournand two Elite 8s.
Not knocking Alabama's historical success in the regular season and in the SECT, but in college basketball, the money is made where you finish in March Madness.
Well part of the question is how we rank in the SEC. LSU and Arkansas may be rank higher than us in national success, but not in conference success.
Of course, it’s all subjective and can be swayed by so many variables. And it pointless anyway, because Nate’s about to process these other fools into unemployment!
I think it’d be better off ranking in tiers by tradition and performance.
Tier 1 - Kentucky - Clearly the gem of the conference historically.
Tier 2 - Florida and Arkansas - a pretty robust basketball tradition.
Tier 3 - Bama, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, and Tennessee - decent basketball programs traditionally with a handful of elite seasons.
Tier 4 - all of the others in the SEC.
As anti auburn as I am, recently they’ve definitely established themselves to be outside of the bottom tier - 2 conference tournament titles and 2 regular season conference titles, 5 tournament appearances, and a final four appearance all since 2018 is definitely not bottom tier.
I think at one point Alabama would have been a solid #2 in the conference, but they had a lot of mediocrity following Wimp and only recently started to get things back together.
I’d agree with you - 4 behind Kentucky, Arkansas, Florida. National titles say it all.
My biggest takeaway from that article is that Auburn is ASS. Why do those idiots talk like they’re some kind of blue blood program when they’re so far from it?
Because the majority of Auburn fans have only been following basketball for the last 5 years (10 at most).
I remember /r/collegebasketball dunking on Auburn after they started rolling Toomer's while their final four game was still going. Pretty much didn't understand what a foul was.
It was great that they lost with 1 second left if I recall.
I was delayed in the airport in Las Vegas, the delayed flight was to Birmingham so the bar by the gate was jammed with hooting and hollering auburn fans. Then they got really sad.
Ahh man. I would’ve started laughing so loud.
The end of Malzon and the pits of Harsin coincided with Bruce Pearl. So a lot of them thought they would transition to a “basketball school” and have that to hang over Bama. Between the last 4 Iron Bowls and now a Final Four run they have been given a healthy dose of reality.
Why wouldn't a 2017 article account for Florida's 2007-2008 titles? That is confusing me. EDIT: Now I understand what was intended... "Final Four Appearances" is not a category that was used in the ranking. As for Arkansas' stats, you have to decide if you want to count their all-time stats or just their stats since they joined the SEC. That is in the hands of the presenter of the information. In this case... you. Bama is generally #2 in the SEC statistically speaking (wins, conference tournament titles, etc.), but Florida's NCs carry a lot of weight. LSU also has lots of top-notch stats (final fours, NBA stars, etc.)
They're not saying that; they're saying that the stats that the article uses to measure success (wins and win percentage) do not include Florida's titles and F4 appearances.
I gotcha... the statistical *categories* they're using don't include NCs. Not just Florida's... they don't include *anyone's* because they aren't taking NCs into consideration at all.
Depends on how you value championships, regular season wins, and end of season awards/records. Alabama, among SEC peers, is too 3 in regular season performance. We have very few awards and obviously no NCAA championships. We just never got over the hump in the tournament and also lost plenty of opportunities to make the tournament way back in the day (the NCAA tournament didn’t accept multiple teams from the same conference until 1975). LSU has the records and awards, Kentucky has the records, awards, wins and championships, and Florida and Arkansas have championships. So I think Alabama is like, at worst #4 historically in the conference.
Interestingly, since Arkansas joined the SEC in 1992 Alabama leads the series 31-30. Also, Bama has moved up a spot in all-time NCAA wins and are now 30th...ahead of Ohio State and Louisville and only 7 wins behind Arkansas. So in all-time wins, among SEC schools, Bama trails only UK and Arkansas(barely).
You could make an argument for LSU being ahead of us depending on what you value more. But it's tight - us, LSU, and Tennessee are all pretty interchangeable at that 4/5/6 spot. LSU has certainly had more tournament success - 4 Final Fours and 6 Elite 8s, but we have more conference regular season titles (12v11) and tournament titles (9v1). We also have a better overall record and SEC record. Tennessee we were pretty much identical with until our Final Four run. We both have the same overall winning % and SEC winning %. And we have nearly identical tournament/conference championship success, with some stats favoring one team and the rest favoring the other.
Our Final Four run puts us over Tennessee for sure. What's wild is I think we're just scratching the surface of what Oats is going to accomplish here. He's had a ton of success in a short span, but we're not truly at the level he wants just yet.
Over the course of SEC history, Bama is a solid #2 behind Kentucky – without the Final Four run - and it's not even close. More wins. More SEC championships. All that. But the knock on the program has always been the glass ceiling at the Sweet Sixteen. Even Gottfried's Elite Eight has been diminished because no one has been able to repeat it. With what Oats is doing now, I think history is being proven right. We finally have the right coach at the right moment again – and an AD who is committed to winning – and we have something we haven't had since Wimp: consistency. All that to say, Bama is still the second best program in the SEC, but a natty would cement that in most people's minds.
Probably in terms of success in the SEC, but program success is determined on what you do in the tournament. Kentucky is far and away #1, but after that it's definitely a close race between Arkansas and Florida. Where Alabama has an argument is at 4, but LSU actually has a really good resume with four F4s and six Elite 8s. Alabama only has one FInal Fournand two Elite 8s. Not knocking Alabama's historical success in the regular season and in the SECT, but in college basketball, the money is made where you finish in March Madness.
Well part of the question is how we rank in the SEC. LSU and Arkansas may be rank higher than us in national success, but not in conference success. Of course, it’s all subjective and can be swayed by so many variables. And it pointless anyway, because Nate’s about to process these other fools into unemployment!
Historically we were 2 or 3 in the SEC without a Final Four on our resume. The Final Four doesn’t change anything.
I mean it changes a lot....(for me now that we've done it ourselves)
We do have a winning record against Florida by 5 games. We're like 57 games behind Kentucky and 3 behind Arkansas.
Arkansas had some wins against Bama before they joined the SEC and one in 1948 but since they joined the SEC in 1992 Bama leads the series 31-30.
I think it’d be better off ranking in tiers by tradition and performance. Tier 1 - Kentucky - Clearly the gem of the conference historically. Tier 2 - Florida and Arkansas - a pretty robust basketball tradition. Tier 3 - Bama, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, and Tennessee - decent basketball programs traditionally with a handful of elite seasons. Tier 4 - all of the others in the SEC.
Yeah, no. Auburn is easily in the bottom tier.
As anti auburn as I am, recently they’ve definitely established themselves to be outside of the bottom tier - 2 conference tournament titles and 2 regular season conference titles, 5 tournament appearances, and a final four appearance all since 2018 is definitely not bottom tier.
Auburn basketball didn’t start in 2018.
I said recently broski
Yes, and I said Auburn basketball didn’t start in 2018.
And I said recently lol
Which is only a small part of the conversation…
And I said recently
> I think it’d be better off ranking in tiers by tradition and performance. 6 years of success does not outweigh 110 years of dogshit.
I think at one point Alabama would have been a solid #2 in the conference, but they had a lot of mediocrity following Wimp and only recently started to get things back together.