Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 2:22:00 PM (view original):
i always liked the idea of making baseline 50% dependent on HD performance, with the majority being from the last 30 seasons or so (so like in season 150 someone can still go build a program)

I've been supporting this same concept since I started playing this game. Baseline Prestige shouldn't be based on real life, otherwise, this would not be "WhatIf", or Hoops Dynasty. It's pretty much just race to the best teams. It's the sole reason I won't play D1.

well, while we agree on the baseline concept - i guess i don't find d1's 'race to the top' to be that bad, because there are *so* many viable teams relative to the number of humans per world. i really think people are overly concerned about the advantage of the kentuckys and north carolinas over the b- and b baseline schools. its more about the regional recruiting situation, and there's tons of solid programs that you can build. even the C baseline ones aren't that bad to get built into a solid program.

Posted by oldwarrior on 3/13/2020 1:24:00 PM (view original):
one of my pet peeves are people claiming Duke was nothing until Coach K arrived.

The three seasons before Coach K was hired they were ranked and made a Final Four in 1978. A 2-seed the following year.

I'll give you the early-mid 70's weren't impressive. But every program goes through 6-10 year poor stretches. Even Kentucky, and I don't hear people say they weren't anything until Calipari arrived.

In the 60's Duke probably were a top 2-3 team for the decade. 7 top 10's in 8 years between '61-'68. That also was a time when only the ACC conference tourney winner got a bid to the NCAA. Not unusual for a couple top 10 teams from the ACC not making the NCAA in given season. The ACC tourney was often played at a higher level than the NCAA's. The one bid per conf was a reason South Carolina left the ACC after failing to make the NCAA three straight seasons ranked in the top 6.
Duke was a nobody prior to the 60's. But that's more than 60 years ago and before the creation of the ACC.

i love claiming that, haha. i guess its a perspective thing, for me its more about hating duke than it is about them actually being 'nothing' before K.

but, bottom line, your example is terrible. before cal, kentucky had been the best program in country for 30 years under rupp, and had titles under 4 coaches - double any other program has to this day. they still had the best resume in the sport by most measures before cal, but were on a decade long slump - plus they'd just been team of the decade in the 90s, even with how good duke was in the early 90s. so of course nobody was saying it before cal.

duke had no titles and by your own description, which i won't really contest, 2 good title-less decades in their history before K came. i'll admit, they were definitely a good program before K - its been years since i looked at the numbers but they were definitely competitive, from what i saw, before he came along - but by no measure were they an elite one (correct me if i'm wrong there!). i just don't think that is a remotely viable comparison.

Posted by Benis on 3/13/2020 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Oh good, humble brag time!

My NMSU team with D baseline was A- for 10 straight seasons. It actually hopped up to A after the draft a couple times.

NMSU

wow... nice! that is one of the better d baseline performances i've seen. thats actually a really nice resume there, that joey dude (i think) at vermont was probably the most ridiculous, but i can't think of many else that were better. maybe some day if i ever get my **** together and fix that dynasty list generator program (i need to make it log in to the new website), maybe i'll do a D baseline list.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 5:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oldwarrior on 3/13/2020 1:24:00 PM (view original):
one of my pet peeves are people claiming Duke was nothing until Coach K arrived.

The three seasons before Coach K was hired they were ranked and made a Final Four in 1978. A 2-seed the following year.

I'll give you the early-mid 70's weren't impressive. But every program goes through 6-10 year poor stretches. Even Kentucky, and I don't hear people say they weren't anything until Calipari arrived.

In the 60's Duke probably were a top 2-3 team for the decade. 7 top 10's in 8 years between '61-'68. That also was a time when only the ACC conference tourney winner got a bid to the NCAA. Not unusual for a couple top 10 teams from the ACC not making the NCAA in given season. The ACC tourney was often played at a higher level than the NCAA's. The one bid per conf was a reason South Carolina left the ACC after failing to make the NCAA three straight seasons ranked in the top 6.
Duke was a nobody prior to the 60's. But that's more than 60 years ago and before the creation of the ACC.

i love claiming that, haha. i guess its a perspective thing, for me its more about hating duke than it is about them actually being 'nothing' before K.

but, bottom line, your example is terrible. before cal, kentucky had been the best program in country for 30 years under rupp, and had titles under 4 coaches - double any other program has to this day. they still had the best resume in the sport by most measures before cal, but were on a decade long slump - plus they'd just been team of the decade in the 90s, even with how good duke was in the early 90s. so of course nobody was saying it before cal.

duke had no titles and by your own description, which i won't really contest, 2 good title-less decades in their history before K came. i'll admit, they were definitely a good program before K - its been years since i looked at the numbers but they were definitely competitive, from what i saw, before he came along - but by no measure were they an elite one (correct me if i'm wrong there!). i just don't think that is a remotely viable comparison.

This is false:”had titles under 4 coaches - double any other program has to this day.”

UNC has 3 coaches w NCAA titles: McGuire ‘57, Smith ‘82 & ‘93, and Williams ‘05, ‘09, & ‘17... plus whoever was the coach in 1924 when they won the Helms Foundation title (just as valid as AP football titles teams claim all the time)

ah crap, i was thinking smith ad 3, and williams had 3. i wonder how i got that mixed up - my bad! TYVM for the correction, i've probably said that wrong 100 times

i've always looked at UNC as the only real competition to UK in the 'incredibly long awesomeness' and 'extremely high awesomeness' dual threat categories, so that sort of helps my feeling there. i knew they had at least 1 title from the early, pre NCAA days, which i do factor in to my thinking. duke and ucla and indiana have their periods of dominance, and kansas has been really great from beginning to end. but i look at uk and unc as the two top programs in terms of like, dynasty terms, i guess? where you really need both things (length and height of awesomeness) IMO. UK has i believe 2 helms titles outside the NCAA ones too but i think both were also rupp - one key reason i think its unfair to say coach K is clearly above him (that gives rupp 6 titles, i believe). just different times, but rupp has some pretty insane accomplishments - i still kinda hold rupp, k, and wooden together as the top 3 in college bball, although im probably missing someone. it would be wooden by himself if the player paying advantage didn't seem to be so significantly higher for him than his peers at the time, but that makes me hesitate.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 7:56:00 PM (view original):
i've always looked at UNC as the only real competition to UK in the 'incredibly long awesomeness' and 'extremely high awesomeness' dual threat categories, so that sort of helps my feeling there. i knew they had at least 1 title from the early, pre NCAA days, which i do factor in to my thinking. duke and ucla and indiana have their periods of dominance, and kansas has been really great from beginning to end. but i look at uk and unc as the two top programs in terms of like, dynasty terms, i guess? where you really need both things (length and height of awesomeness) IMO. UK has i believe 2 helms titles outside the NCAA ones too but i think both were also rupp - one key reason i think its unfair to say coach K is clearly above him (that gives rupp 6 titles, i believe). just different times, but rupp has some pretty insane accomplishments - i still kinda hold rupp, k, and wooden together as the top 3 in college bball, although im probably missing someone. it would be wooden by himself if the player paying advantage didn't seem to be so significantly higher for him than his peers at the time, but that makes me hesitate.

It might be Rupp all by himself if he could have gotten past himself and recruited black players like every other major college team began doing. No Mt. Rushmore of college coaches should EVER include that bigoted piece of garbage on it.

Give me K, Bob Knight, Dean Smith, John Wooden, Roy Williams, Bob Huggins, Jim Phelan, Jim Boeheim, hell anyone who didn't ask to have their scouting reports marked to indicate which players were "colored" over Rupp's piece of trash ***.

Alexander Wolff reported that Rupp called up a young sports reporter (Jimmy Breslin of the New York Journal-American) in New York in the early 60's and asked him to "kindly indicate 'colored' high school players with asterisks so Rupp would know where not to bother to send his recruiters."

Oh sure, he FINALLY recruited a black player to Kentucky......in his second to last season. Well, kudos to him.

P. S. One thing that NO other major D1 college basketball program can compare to when it comes to Kentucky is sketchiest program. They're the Gold Standard when it comes to that "feat". Sketchiest program and most bigoted coach......something to really be proud of for UK fans.

I always liked the idea of the baseline prestige moving with how the team IRL does over the last 20-25 seasons. Every June the furthest back season result is removed and the last season's result is added. That way a team that is becoming a new power IRL starts moving up in baseline prestige while historical powerhouses that are no longer relevant begin to drop. That gives the baselines more movement and gives those looking to recreate the same success as the new hot team IRL a chance to replicate that success. Also teams like Oregon and Gonzaga would rise on the west coat while UCLA slips a bit. Teams like DePaul would drop while teams like Wichita State and Dayton would rise....

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 5:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oldwarrior on 3/13/2020 1:24:00 PM (view original):
one of my pet peeves are people claiming Duke was nothing until Coach K arrived.

The three seasons before Coach K was hired they were ranked and made a Final Four in 1978. A 2-seed the following year.

I'll give you the early-mid 70's weren't impressive. But every program goes through 6-10 year poor stretches. Even Kentucky, and I don't hear people say they weren't anything until Calipari arrived.

In the 60's Duke probably were a top 2-3 team for the decade. 7 top 10's in 8 years between '61-'68. That also was a time when only the ACC conference tourney winner got a bid to the NCAA. Not unusual for a couple top 10 teams from the ACC not making the NCAA in given season. The ACC tourney was often played at a higher level than the NCAA's. The one bid per conf was a reason South Carolina left the ACC after failing to make the NCAA three straight seasons ranked in the top 6.
Duke was a nobody prior to the 60's. But that's more than 60 years ago and before the creation of the ACC.

i love claiming that, haha. i guess its a perspective thing, for me its more about hating duke than it is about them actually being 'nothing' before K.

but, bottom line, your example is terrible. before cal, kentucky had been the best program in country for 30 years under rupp, and had titles under 4 coaches - double any other program has to this day. they still had the best resume in the sport by most measures before cal, but were on a decade long slump - plus they'd just been team of the decade in the 90s, even with how good duke was in the early 90s. so of course nobody was saying it before cal.

duke had no titles and by your own description, which i won't really contest, 2 good title-less decades in their history before K came. i'll admit, they were definitely a good program before K - its been years since i looked at the numbers but they were definitely competitive, from what i saw, before he came along - but by no measure were they an elite one (correct me if i'm wrong there!). i just don't think that is a remotely viable comparison.

Why were they the "team of the decade" in the 90's? UK had, what, 2 National Titles, 1 Runner-up, and 1 other Final Four? Duke also had 2 National Titles and 3 Runner-ups. I'd say that calling UK the "team of the 90's" is open to some very serious debate.

UK went from 1978 until 1996 between titles, almost two decades between championships. But somehow I bet you don't consider them just "competitive" and a "good" program in that time frame, you probably still consider them "elite" for those 18 years, right? So if winning titles is the end-all-be-all of elite programs, what was Kentucky's "status" between '78 and '96? In fact, between 1979 and 1991, the "elite" UK basketball program only made it past the first weekend of the NCAA tourney 5 times in 13 seasons. In fact, in 1979, they followed up their 1978 NCAA title......by losing in the first round of the NIT. Almost forgot, Calipari followed up his 2012 title........by losing in the first round of the NIT. Elite.

In fact, outside of Rick Pitino's brief tenure (and one season of Tubby Smith using Pitino's players), UK had been on the better part of a 30+ YEAR slump until Calipari arrived. Not saying much for such an "elite" program. Those that have been around long enough probably know that I'm a Duke fan (as if you couldn't tell from my posts anyway, ha) but even I have to admit for sustained success UNC is THE standard (this season notwithstanding. Oh, and Matt Doherty's debacle of a couple of seasons of a coaching "career").

At least UK has a good coach now though.

Coach K does everything Calipari does, but Coach K has better PR and his ESPN-Vitale (and Bilas) mouthpiece in place.

Coach K in a nutshell, paraphrased: "Look over there at Calipari!!! He's crooked with all his 1-and-dones!!! What do you mean i also do one-and-dones, how dare you question my program, we do things right!!! Look at the crooked Italian guys, Calipari and Pitino, or that abrasive Boston guy Calhoun!!! I'm Coach K, i'm 143 years old, squeaky clean, i run USA Basketball which helps recruit top players to Duke, but i run my program right, and don't you dare criticize my program!!! What, Zion was not paid nor do my players' uncles get sweetheart jobs, how dare you!!! Quick, look over there at what Calipari is doing!!! He's Italian so you know he's crooked!!!"

Also, if Wooden had coached into his 70's like Coach K, he'd have had another 5+ titles, up to around 15+.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 5:38:00 PM (view original):
well, while we agree on the baseline concept - i guess i don't find d1's 'race to the top' to be that bad, because there are *so* many viable teams relative to the number of humans per world. i really think people are overly concerned about the advantage of the kentuckys and north carolinas over the b- and b baseline schools. its more about the regional recruiting situation, and there's tons of solid programs that you can build. even the C baseline ones aren't that bad to get built into a solid program.

Ehhh....

Hi gillespie,
You have an amazing 14 national championships.

1 at Howard Payne.
1 at Texas A&M.
1 at South Carolina.
8 at Kansas (A+ prestige).
3 at UConn (A+ prestige).

You are a HOF coach who could win anywhere, on Mount Rushmore of HD for sure, but to be honest... coaching at A+ prestige schools can be... pretty... pretty... pretty.... pretty good.

:o)

Posted by npb7768 on 3/15/2020 10:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 5:38:00 PM (view original):
well, while we agree on the baseline concept - i guess i don't find d1's 'race to the top' to be that bad, because there are *so* many viable teams relative to the number of humans per world. i really think people are overly concerned about the advantage of the kentuckys and north carolinas over the b- and b baseline schools. its more about the regional recruiting situation, and there's tons of solid programs that you can build. even the C baseline ones aren't that bad to get built into a solid program.

Ehhh....

Hi gillespie,
You have an amazing 14 national championships.

1 at Howard Payne.
1 at Texas A&M.
1 at South Carolina.
8 at Kansas (A+ prestige).
3 at UConn (A+ prestige).

You are a HOF coach who could win anywhere, on Mount Rushmore of HD for sure, but to be honest... coaching at A+ prestige schools can be... pretty... pretty... pretty.... pretty good.

:o)

I don't know. Was he "co-coaching"? Much less value for that. ;)

Posted by poncho2799 on 3/14/2020 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/14/2020 2:22:00 PM (view original):
i always liked the idea of making baseline 50% dependent on HD performance, with the majority being from the last 30 seasons or so (so like in season 150 someone can still go build a program)

I've been supporting this same concept since I started playing this game. Baseline Prestige shouldn't be based on real life, otherwise, this would not be "WhatIf", or Hoops Dynasty. It's pretty much just race to the best teams. It's the sole reason I won't play D1.

Throw the EE issue in there and we're on the same page poncho!

Posted by npb7768 on 3/15/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
Coach K does everything Calipari does, but Coach K has better PR and his ESPN-Vitale (and Bilas) mouthpiece in place.

Coach K in a nutshell, paraphrased: "Look over there at Calipari!!! He's crooked with all his 1-and-dones!!! What do you mean i also do one-and-dones, how dare you question my program, we do things right!!! Look at the crooked Italian guys, Calipari and Pitino, or that abrasive Boston guy Calhoun!!! I'm Coach K, i'm 143 years old, squeaky clean, i run USA Basketball which helps recruit top players to Duke, but i run my program right, and don't you dare criticize my program!!! What, Zion was not paid nor do my players' uncles get sweetheart jobs, how dare you!!! Quick, look over there at what Calipari is doing!!! He's Italian so you know he's crooked!!!"

Also, if Wooden had coached into his 70's like Coach K, he'd have had another 5+ titles, up to around 15+.

No argument here whatsoever, except maybe for the 5+ more titles for Wooden. Bob Knight, Denny Crum, and Dean Smith (among others) would have had a lot to say about that in Wooden's final few seasons.

Was Zion paid? Probably. Are all the big time one and dones in college today "compensated"? Yep. Every. Last. One.