NCAA Final Four Games for April 2

[bpo57]

No question. But it also fair to include in that great record that the way the game was played and I don't mean on the court, was different. 15 ships. The talent wasn't spread as far apart. Oh, and he cheated like a 2 dollar whore. For some reason, you get defensive about that. It's there. just like the 205-5 record. he was a great coach with a great record that also cheated.

I'm not at all defensive about it. I don't know the facts on Wooden's "cheating". Pretty sure you don't either. There are plenty of hoops fans across the country that think JB has been guilty of cheating. I'll take the same approach there. I don't know the facts. And of course there are various degrees of cheating for sure.

 

[dasher]

I know you're just repeating what others have said but I love that one about how Wooden only had to win four games. yeah he would have really struggled with a 16 seed.

The point is that he played the 16 seed as part of the 4 wins. That was a time when a league like the Big 10 or the ACC only got 1 bid. You do know that, right? The tournament wasn't near as strong.

 

[dasher]

I'm not at all defensive about it. I don't know the facts on Wooden's "cheating". Pretty sure you don't either. There are plenty of hoops fans across the country that think JB has been guilty of cheating. I'll take the same approach there. I don't know the facts. And of course there are various degrees of cheating for sure.

JB was guilty of cheating.

 

[dasher]

I'm not at all defensive about it. I don't know the facts on Wooden's "cheating". Pretty sure you don't either. There are plenty of hoops fans across the country that think JB has been guilty of cheating. I'll take the same approach there. I don't know the facts. And of course there are various degrees of cheating for sure.

Once again, how old are you? You made an issue that people weren't around for Wooden's run. Okay. Were you? Or is it old history that you read about?

 

[bpo57]

No question. But it also fair to include in that great record that the way the game was played and I don't mean on the court, was different. 15 ships. The talent wasn't spread as far apart. Oh, and he cheated like a 2 dollar whore. For some reason, you get defensive about that. It's there. just like the 205-5 record. he was a great coach with a great record that also cheated. You also made an issue of people that were talking weren't around for Woodens run. I was. So was Bees. I asked if you were. Were you?

Yeah I was around. In 1973 I told my father that Larry Kenon of Memphis State would eat Bill Walton up in the 1973 final. 21-22 by Walton. oops.

 

[bpo57]

Once again, how old are you? You made an issue that people weren't around for Wooden's run. Okay. Were you? Or is it old history that you read about?

lol

 

[dasher]

Yeah I was around. In 1973 I told my father that Larry Kenon of Memphis State would eat Bill Walton up in the 1973 final. 21-22 by Walton. oops.

I remember the game. In fairness, that was toward the end of the Wooden run. Sadly, I was around for the 60's runs.

 

[dasher]

lol

In fairness, you were the one that said that others in the thread weren't around for his era. I remember the Goodrich team. They didn't have a guy over 6-5 starting I think.

 

[bpo57]

Once again, how old are you? You made an issue that people weren't around for Wooden's run. Okay. Were you? Or is it old history that you read about?

I watched UCLA beat our very own Jimmy Collins and NM State in 1970. Is that proof enough for ya? I was a teenager back then.

 

[OrangeDW]

Jim Boeheim is the winningest active coach in college basketball.

 

[dasher]

I watched UCLA beat our very own Jimmy Collins and NM State in 1970. Is that proof enough for ya? I was a teenager back then.

LOL there is a difference between 13 and 19 isn't there? The tournament was so much more limited back then. When the power conferences only sent one team, you saw schools reach the final four that would never have made it if the leagues could have had more than one representative. Take a look at the final four schools back then.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[bpo57]

The point is that he played the 16 seed as part of the 4 wins. That was a time when a league like the Big 10 or the ACC only got 1 bid. You do know that, right? The tournament wasn't near as strong.

Yeah I'm well aware of that. Dude I've been a college hoops junky for more than 50 years. Other coaches had that same easy path to a title but somehow the same guy kept winning over and over.

 

[bpo57]

LOL there is a difference between 13 and 19 isn't there? The tournament was so much more limited back then. When the power conferences only sent one team, you saw schools reach the final four that would never have made it if the leagues could have had more than one representative. Take a look at the final four schools back then.

He beat kentucky, louisville and UNC in the final 4.

But arguing over whether I was 13 or 19 back in the 60s. C'mon man!!! You're better than that.

 

[cuseattle]

I'm starting to get concerned that posters are pretending to be older than their years! I was 18 for the first 64 team field and those extra four teams still don't seem necessary.

 

[rrlbees]

Sam Gilbert (businessman) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Gilbert began his relationship with UCLA basketball sometime around 1966-1967" Wooden had won two national championships by then and already recruited the Alcindor group. The article suggested that Gilbert 'recruited' players not for Wooden but recruited Wooden's players for himself so he could become their agent. Wooden didn't win 10 national championships because of Sam Gilbert.

I assume some of that is your words? It’s not necessarily about “bags”. It’s also about knowing what you can get when you go there. There’s a reason Knight wasn’t afraid to speak up.

The dark side of the UCLA basketball dynasty

The dark side of the UCLA basketball dynasty

www.latimes.com

 

[cto]

I kind of know. 5 years ago in ObX, on a fishing charter, chatting w the first mate who is a Duke fan. Tells me Mrs k has dimentia...

That is absolutely untrue. I know Mickey, and she's as sharp as anyone on this forum (if not sharper).

 

[dasher]

Yeah I'm well aware of that. Dude I've been a college hoops junky for more than 50 years. Other coaches had that same easy path to a title but somehow the same guy kept winning over and over.

He didn't have to win a post season tournament just to get in the NCAA tournament. And as we have discussed, he had some major advantages. To his credit, he was playing black players when the bigoted southern schools would not. The ACC didn't have a black player until Charlie Scott. So Wooden does deserve a lot of creit for not playing that sick game.

He beat kentucky, louisville and UNC in the final 4.

But arguing over whether I was 13 or 19 back in the 60s. C'mon man!!! You're better than that.

You are the one that brought age in to this discussion about the posters on this thread. Not me. I didn't give it a second thought. You made it an issue. Since you did, it became fair game. And as I thought, you really weren't around for his titles in the 60's. That is when the run was it's most prolific.

 

[dasher]

I'm starting to get concerned that posters are pretending to be older than their years! I was 18 for the first 64 team field and those extra four teams still don't seem necessary.

kid

 

[cuseattle]

I almost assume that no other ACC team has a winning record against either in that same time period.

 

[bpo57]

He didn't have to win a post season tournament just to get in the NCAA tournament. And as we have discussed, he had some major advantages. To his credit, he was playing black players when the bigoted southern schools would not. The ACC didn't have a black player until Charlie Scott. So Wooden does deserve a lot of creit for not playing that sick game.

You are the one that brought age in to this discussion about the posters on this thread. Not me. I didn't give it a second thought. You made it an issue. Since you did, it became fair game. And as I thought, you really weren't around for his titles in the 60's. That is when the run was it's most prolific.

Why don't u question the Wooden critics to see if they meet your approval in terms of their age?

Btw Wooden won titles in 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973 and 1975 with a semi loss in 1974. I'd say that was rather prolific, no?

 

[orangefog]

That is absolutely untrue. I know Mickey, and she's as sharp as anyone on this forum (if not sharper).

She could have dementia and still be sharper than most here.

 

[longtimefan]

Plus, they got 15 ships. the talent wasn't nearly spread around as it is today.

It may have been 18 back then.

 

[dasher]

Why don't u question the Wooden critics to see if they meet your approval in terms of their age?

Btw Wooden won titles in 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973 and 1975 with a semi loss in 1974. I'd say that was rather prolific, no?

Gee, this is not a tough question. They didn't bring age up. You did. if you hadn't,we wouldn't be having this discussion. You need to ask yourself, why did I say such a dumb thing to Day? There is no question that the run was a fantastic accomplishment. I think it is a fair question however, to ask whether to be able to do what he did in that era is more of an accomplishment that what K has done. Winning 5 in a much tougher era to win in. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. I wouldn't be so quick to just say hey 10 is greater than 5. I think down the road, someone is going to be asking the same question about some other coach and Geno. It was a great advantage to only have to play in a tournament with one school each from the power conferences. And to only have to win 4 games. because we aren't comparing Wooden to the coaches he coached against when he coached. He won that battle. The question is how does his record, with the advantages he had, stack up against K. Or someone else that may come along and win 5 or 6.

 

[dasher]

It may have been 18 back then.

Really? I didn't know that. That would be even worse. When I entered Syracuse, it was 15. And we gave all 15. With a freshman team, you might be right.