Don't act like nothing has happened

[HoopS]

Pel's record was brought up and when you looked at it you saw that he was under 40% in SEC games while Anderson is just under 55%.

Really those two are nowhere near the same. This is so silly to even debate.

And I know that NCAAT appearances is what some use to determine success. But the record talk doesn't do any favors to the pro-Pel discussion.

[Atlhogfan1]

Pel's record was brought up and when you looked at it you saw that he was under 40% in SEC games while Anderson is just under 55%.

Really those two are nowhere near the same. This is so silly to even debate.

And I know that NCAAT appearances is what some use to determine success. But the record talk doesn't do any favors to the pro-Pel discussion.

Pro-Pel discussion? 

What other determination is there besides NCAAT appearances and wins in it?  Do we pretend grad rates or conference records really matter? 

[HoopS]

Pro-Pel discussion? 

What other determination is there besides NCAAT appearances and wins in it?  Do we pretend grad rates or conference records really matter? 

all I'm saying is the records aren't even close. Anderson would have deservedly been fired with the same record as Pel.

[rzrbackramsfan]

That is the point though, in a pathetic SEC, where it should be easy to win enough games to make the NCAAT, by just being a good team, the Hogs have made it once in 5 seasons.

No actually cause recruits want to go to the better schools, and the rpi situation when playing bad teams.  If you are one in the better teams in the sec, teams are going to be overly psyched to beat you.  It would be so much easier for us to make the tourney in the big 12 or acc.

[Biggus Piggus]

Please. Let's continue to miss the point.

[ShadowHawg]

That is the point though, in a pathetic SEC, where it should be easy to win enough games to make the NCAAT, by just being a good team, the Hogs have made it once in 5 seasons.

The fact that we have made it once in 5 seasons is proof of just how low this program had sunk PRIOR to MA. You act like this was a plug n play rebuild or something.

AT MOST, there should have been ONE more NCAA appearance. That's it.

As far as winning enough games goes, South Carolina won 24 games in this conference and still didn't get in the tournament just this season. When are you going to come into the present and quit acting as if it is still the 90s in terms of the ease of making the tournament. It is far more difficult to make it from the SEC right now. 24 wins isn't even a guarantee.

You complain that others are living in the past when clearly it's you who fails to recognize the current climate of college basketball and that playing in a weak conference actually LESSENS your chances of making the tournament, not enhances it. Your assertion was true clear in to the early 2000s. Using today's standards for making the tournament, Heath never makes it even once and Pel barely makes it once.

Are you still using dial up for your internet also?

[Pork Twain]

I'm excited to see this upgraded roster play some basketball. I'd watch 'em play pickup games.

The best Arkansas basketball teams in history had loads of basketball skill. This team has accumulated a lot of skilled players. The team is talented and diverse enough that we should enjoy sitting back and letting them play. Give them a chance to surprise us.

I'm pleased that Mike Anderson has shaken up his coaching staff and has stepped up overall recruiting activity. He seems to be really going for "it" now. A strong flow of in-state talent is the bedrock for this move. MA isn't settling for Arkansas-born players alone, but they make a great base for elevating everything.

MA already has done things I did not expect to see. I don't want to go back to the position we were in during late Nolan days. We had a subset of fans who hated Nolan, wanted the Hogs to lose so Nolan could be fired, were disappointed when anything good happened and did everything they could to diminish the significance of good developments.

I guess we fans starting thinking we had something to do with firing coaches back when Nutt was football coach. Banners, T-shirts and darn. Well, let's just sit back and see how this plays out. MA really is fighting to improve the Razorbacks. I can see it, and it took a lot to persuade me. Next season is going to be good, I'm guessing.

I am very excited to see the product on the floor next year and if MA can follow it up with more solid recruiting, he will have won me over.  Your take on MA though...very bipolar.

[GuvHog]

The fact that we have made it once in 5 seasons is proof of just how low this program had sunk PRIOR to MA. You act like this was a plug n play rebuild or something.

AT MOST, there should have been ONE more NCAA appearance. That's it.

As far as winning enough games goes, South Carolina won 24 games in this conference and still didn't get in the tournament just this season. When are you going to come into the present and quit acting as if it is still the 90s in terms of the ease of making the tournament. It is far more difficult to make it from the SEC right now. 24 wins isn't even a guarantee.

You complain that others are living in the past when clearly it's you who fails to recognize the current climate of college basketball and that playing in a weak conference actually LESSENS your chances of making the tournament, not enhances it. Your assertion was true clear in to the early 2000s. Using today's standards for making the tournament, Heath never makes it even once and Pel barely makes it once.

Are you still using dial up for your internet also?

That is pure BS. The truth is Stan Heath left the program in a disastrous mess and Pel had it headed in the right direction when he was prematurely terminated. Mike inherited a good nucleus of players and had a top 10 recruiting class coming in his first year. The truth is the Hogs should have gone to the NCAA Tournament in at least 3 of the last 5 years with one NIT bid. Next years team will be talented enough to make it to the NCAA Tournament and maybe win a couple of games there so we'll see if Mike and his Hogs can pull it off.

[Deep Shoat]

The fact that we have made it once in 5 seasons is proof of just how low this program had sunk PRIOR to MA. You act like this was a plug n play rebuild or something.

AT MOST, there should have been ONE more NCAA appearance. That's it.

As far as winning enough games goes, South Carolina won 24 games in this conference and still didn't get in the tournament just this season. When are you going to come into the present and quit acting as if it is still the 90s in terms of the ease of making the tournament. It is far more difficult to make it from the SEC right now. 24 wins isn't even a guarantee.

You complain that others are living in the past when clearly it's you who fails to recognize the current climate of college basketball and that playing in a weak conference actually LESSENS your chances of making the tournament, not enhances it. Your assertion was true clear in to the early 2000s. Using today's standards for making the tournament, Heath never makes it even once and Pel barely makes it once.

Are you still using dial up for your internet also?

The point you are acutely missing in all of your obtuseness is that it should be easier to make the tourney in a weak conference because you should damn well win more games in a weak conference.

Please tell me you aren't really stupid enough to not understand that a team who doesn't win in a weak conference is a bad team.

[Deep Shoat]

Please. Let's continue to miss the point.

What, exactly, was your point?  Your op was disjointed and didn't seem to have one.

[hogsanity]

What, exactly, was your point?  Your op was disjointed and didn't seem to have one.

Go look at reply #63 on page 2 of this thread, he said his point was to forget the last 5 years, act like they never happened.

[rude1]

From a purely analytical viewpoint (i.e., accounting for schedule strength , conference strength , and other things) Years 1,2,3, and 5 of the CMA campaign all fall within the same statistical trend that John Pelphrey appeared to establish in his last season. That is not to say that Pelphrey would have improved upon his final season, but the numbers don't lie, and they are comparative. Presuming that Pelphrey had reached his apex at year 4, CMA has been exactly like him for 4 of his 5 years.

That implies that either Pelphrey got a raw deal, or that CMA is a mediocre coach. For the sake of the Razorback program I really hope that Pelphrey got a raw deal because CMA became available, and not that CMA is a mediocre coach.

Completely fabricated information. Continued the same trend? The only .500 or better conference record Pelphrey had was in his first season when he had Stan Heaths senior laden team, other than that he was 2-14, 7-9, 7-9.

Edit: I see others addressed that nonsense before I got to it. Stopped me in my tracks so bad that I didn't finish reading thread before having to respond to something so ridiculous.

[hogsanity]

Completely fabricated information. Continued the same trend? The only .500 or better conference record Pelphrey had was in his first season when he had Stan Heaths senior laden team, other than that he was 2-14, 7-9, 7-9.

Edit: I see others addressed that nonsense before I got to it. Stopped me in my tracks so bad that I didn't finish reading thread before having to respond to something so ridiculous.

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT. Even with those bad sec records, Pelphrey went to as many NCAAT's in 4 seasons as Mike has in 5. So what did the "improvement" in conf gain the program the last 5 seasons?

[Biggus Piggus]

Yeah, we don't need anybody pretending to do statistical analysis and throwing out stuff he made up. Too many people here actually know the numbers. Please don't be the idiot you are, if this is your idea of how to post on a message board.

[Biggus Piggus]

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT. Even with those bad sec records, Pelphrey went to as many NCAAT's in 4 seasons as Mike has in 5. So what did the "improvement" in conf gain the program the last 5 seasons?

YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS YOU [CENSORED] HOGSANITY.

Quit pretending you don't.

[Oklahawg]

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT. Even with those bad sec records, Pelphrey went to as many NCAAT's in 4 seasons as Mike has in 5. So what did the "improvement" in conf gain the program the last 5 seasons?

I will post slowly (lots of space between words) so you get a point you need to get:



QUIT.

[SuperSid4Ever]

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT.

Not the most well-thought-out comment I've read from you, let me just say that.  I guess I just expect better.

Conference record doesn't matter?  Since when?  Seriously, how many times has the UA ever made it at-large into the NCAAT with a sub-.500 conference record in the 25 years we've been playing in the SEC?  Twice that I can count, the last time was 9 seasons ago.  Today, we are in the NIT by the skin of our teeth with anything even close to it.  That is how much NCAAT selections have changed.

[root_hawg]

SEC football best in the power 5 conferences, SEC basketball worse in power 5 conferences....big difference

[WilsonHog]

I will post slowly (lots of space between words) so you get a point you need to get:



QUIT.

On the plus side, he'll have more time for golf.

[Pork Twain]

Life is so much more enjoyable when so much time is not wasted arguing on fan boards

[wheelspigharvey]

Life is so much more enjoyable when so much time is not wasted arguing on fan boards

Logically I know this to be true, but I still check for updates here 10+ times a day.

[FineAsSwine]

Logically I know this to be true, but I still check for updates here 10+ times a day.

+1

[Atlhogfan1]

Not the most well-thought-out comment I've read from you, let me just say that.  I guess I just expect better.

Conference record doesn't matter?  Since when?  Seriously, how many times has the UA ever made it at-large into the NCAAT with a sub-.500 conference record in the 25 years we've been playing in the SEC?  Twice that I can count, the last time was 9 seasons ago.  Today, we are in the NIT by the skin of our teeth with anything even close to it.  That is how much NCAAT selections have changed.

Seems clear and obvious what sanity is saying.  Must win enough conference games in addition to accomplishing enough in the non conference to make the NCAAT and do so with a seed that somewhat matches the quality of the team.  The NCAAT is what really matters.  Conf championships on the way to it are nice additions.  We keep getting conference records thrown out as a sign of progression in our program and it is probably why we are getting such a strong argument for the conference records.  I don't know if it is the NCAAT selecting has changed or the SEC's depth and perceived strength has gotten worse.  Three 11-7 teams the last two seasons have not made the NCAAT.  12-6 UGa didn't make it in '14. 

.500 in the Pac 12 teams got in the tourney this season.  10-8 has in recent seasons.  9-9 in the ACC Syracuse went to the F4 this season.  .500 in the B1G IU made it in '15.  The Big 12 has had 8-10 in conference teams make the NCAAT.  They of course are benefitting from being a smaller conference without so much dead weight at the bottom and they play a balanced conference schedule unlike the bigger conferences.  Another reason to consider our record is who we played in the SEC vs what some other teams did.  The NCAAT selection and seeding certainly is affected by it.  They look beyond just the record. 

[ShadowHawg]

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT. Even with those bad sec records, Pelphrey went to as many NCAAT's in 4 seasons as Mike has in 5. So what did the "improvement" in conf gain the program the last 5 seasons?

Please come to the present times with the rest of us.

If the selection process were the same now as it was even during Pel's time here, MA would have made the tourney no less than twice.

You constantly assert that it should be easier to make the tourney from a weaker conference, then get shown we have been winning more than the previous two staffs in that same weak conference and claim it is nothing. (SEC has been Kentucky/Florida for nearly 15 years).

MA's SEC conf win pct is not that far off Nolan's. Different times than when Nolan was here in terms of conference depth, but when you take Nolan's last season and add it to Heath and Pel's conference records you only come up with around a 38% win pct. Take into account that encompasses a decade where the program scored a total of two winning conference records in a down league, and your "claim" that the conference record isn't a sign of improvement is total hogwash.

The real question about the conference record is if it is enough improvement? But not an improvement at all, are you kidding?

[SuperSid4Ever]

Seems clear and obvious what sanity is saying.  Must win enough conference games in addition to accomplishing enough in the non conference to make the NCAAT and do so with a seed that somewhat matches the quality of the team.  The NCAAT is what really matters.  Conf championships on the way to it are nice additions.  We keep getting conference records thrown out as a sign of progression in our program and it is probably why we are getting such a strong argument for the conference records.  I don't know if it is the NCAAT selecting has changed or the SEC's depth and perceived strength has gotten worse.  Three 11-7 teams the last two seasons have not made the NCAAT.  12-6 UGa didn't make it in '14. 

.500 in the Pac 12 teams got in the tourney this season.  10-8 has in recent seasons.  9-9 in the ACC Syracuse went to the F4 this season.  .500 in the B1G IU made it in '15.  The Big 12 has had 8-10 in conference teams make the NCAAT.  They of course are benefitting from being a smaller conference without so much dead weight at the bottom and they play a balanced conference schedule unlike the bigger conferences.  Another reason to consider our record is who we played in the SEC vs what some other teams did.  The NCAAT selection and seeding certainly is affected by it.  They look beyond just the record.

To sit here and pretend that if we had a losing conference record in a weak conference, but somehow managed to win 20-24 games in that same season wouldn't have a negative impact on our chances to be announced in the tournament field on Selection Sunday is a pretty big reach.  It's not like the SEC is on the same level as the ACC, PAC-10 or Big 10, I'll give you that.  We simply are not going to get the boost of quality wins in the SEC as the teams you just named have in conference play, but having a losing record against opponents in a weak conference is most definitely going to hurt your chances of getting into the big dance regardless of what your overall record is.

[rzrbackramsfan]

Yea and despite ms. St and all them being bad for rpi and not quality wins, it's still tough to get those wins.  If you're a good team the underdog will be out for blood, and so many teams play to their competition, plus I think the gap between your bubble teams and ms. St. Level teams probably narrows as the year goes on.

^^all pretty qualitative, subjective stuff.  Take it or leave it.

[Nipsey Mussle]

Conf record does not matter if you are not winning enough games to get in the NCAAT. Even with those bad sec records, Pelphrey went to as many NCAAT's in 4 seasons as Mike has in 5. So what did the "improvement" in conf gain the program the last 5 seasons?

Stopped reading after that. If you think that a 1-17 conference record is the same as 11-7, then we just can't even begin to talk basketball at this point. You've always let your initial impression of the Anderson hire cloud your view on things, but you're getting well out of hand with your bias at this point.

Sadly, you do precisely the opposite for football. It's the same as saying, "If Bielema hasn't gotten us to a New Year's 6 Bowl, nothing else matters. Otherwise, how much did those bowl wins matter as far as improvement if we haven't made a New Year's 6 Bowl?" It's just pure stupidity.
I truly hope you limit this type of perception bias to Razorback sports b/c it could seriously mess you up in life. You're one of the most cognitively twisted I've seen on here and the saddest part is that you completely believe none of this to be true.

[Pork Twain]

Stopped reading after that. If you think that a 1-17 conference record is the same as 11-7, then we just can't even begin to talk basketball at this point. You've always let your initial impression of the Anderson hire cloud your view on things, but you're getting well out of hand with your bias at this point.

Sadly, you do precisely the opposite for football. It's the same as saying, "If Bielema hasn't gotten us to a New Year's 6 Bowl, nothing else matters. Otherwise, how much did those bowl wins matter as far as improvement if we haven't made a New Year's 6 Bowl?" It's just pure stupidity.
I truly hope you limit this type of perception bias to Razorback sports b/c it could seriously mess you up in life. You're one of the most cognitively twisted I've seen on here and the saddest part is that you completely believe none of this to be true.

Honestly what he is saying is true.  If you go 4-14 in conf and win all the rest of your games or if you go 14-4 in conf lose all the rest of your games, you are likely still watching the NCAA tourney from the couch.

At the end of the day, making it to the NCAA and actually doing something there is all that matters.

[HoopS]

These arguements just keep going no matter what.

Somebody brought up that if you take out Anderson's best season and Pel's worst, their conference records would be similar. You can't do that but even if could Anderson has won at a better clip. But once folks saw that then it shifts to "well conference record doesn't matter anyway". So it mattered if it said what some wanted it to say but since it doesn't, then let's make sure to change that angle.

Anderson will never be accepted by some and that's fine. Just know that. As for hogsanity, he never wanted Anderson hired. He has also said that he doesn't watch many games anyhow. But he is constant in his critiquing of our team and college basketball even though he doesn't watch half the games most here do. But argues 10x as much. Do the math.

[Pork Twain]

Up to this point, I have not been satisfied with the performance of any coach we have had since Nolan.  Maybe that changes this year.

[HoopS]

Up to this point, I have not been satisfied with the performance of any coach we have had since Nolan.  Maybe that changes this year.

there have been moments of good things with them but nothing near consistent enough. This season needs to be very strong or we will need to move on. Crucial season ahead.

[Atlhogfan1]

To sit here and pretend that if we had a losing conference record in a weak conference, but somehow managed to win 20-24 games in that same season wouldn't have a negative impact on our chances to be announced in the tournament field on Selection Sunday is a pretty big reach.  It's not like the SEC is on the same level as the ACC, PAC-10 or Big 10, I'll give you that.  We simply are not going to get the boost of quality wins in the SEC as the teams you just named have in conference play, but having a losing record against opponents in a weak conference is most definitely going to hurt your chances of getting into the big dance regardless of what your overall record is.

No darn.  We are saying the same thing.  I'm not saying a losing SEC record would.  Neither is sanity.  Nobody is pretending. 

This part of the discussion is in regards to what is most important.  In college basketball, the NCAAT is the most important accomplishment.  Making it, winning in it and winning it depending on the state of your program.  Non conf and conf are the means to get there.  If you win a conf or conf tourney to get there(power conf team), I'm sure it would be satisfying to the team and its fans and probably help the seeding although not a given. 

Right now, all some have to hold onto is our improving conference record and feel the need to remind us of what it was under Pelphrey.  It has improved.  What I think we can agree on though is the expansion of the SEC and the resulting scheduling is not helping the "numbers" which affect the RPI and the perceived achievements of conference teams.  As far as the record, it does matter to an extent.  But it is only part of the picture as with the teams I mentioned earlier like 12-6 UGa or the 11-7 teams.  And why it only matters to an extent is because it isn't the most important accomplishment and has to be combined with the non conf.  Again, means to an end which is making the NCAAT.  And in the current weaker, little depth SEC, we agree we have to have a stronger conference record than teams from other conferences. 

Sanity wasn't saying anything different.  It didn't matter when combined with the non conf this season when LSU and S Car had the same conf record as Vandy and were higher seeds in the SECT.  It didn't matter with 12-6 UGa.  They didn't get in the NCAAT which is the goal.  This bringing up losing records is taking it to an extreme and shouldn't be a part of the discussion. 

[Atlhogfan1]

For those of you who want to tout winning conference championships, use a link like this instead of going scorched earth "you can't have a losing record in the SEC" obvious.  Again, that is a no darn "revelation" we can all agree on right now. 

This link states regular season power conference champs are most likely to have success including reaching the F4.

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/112805406/ncaa-tournament-regular-season-champions-conference-winners

This is a discussion of teams outperforming in conf tournament as a predictor of NCAAT success:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/do-conference-tournament-surprises-carry-over-into-the-ncaa-bracket/

[ShadowHawg]

For those of you who want to tout winning conference championships, use a link like this instead of going scorched earth "you can't have a losing record in the SEC" obvious.  Again, that is a no darn "revelation" we can all agree on right now. 

There was a time when you could though and there are still people lost in those days in this very thread.

[ShadowHawg]

No darn.  We are saying the same thing.  I'm not saying a losing SEC record would.  Neither is sanity.  Nobody is pretending. 

This part of the discussion is in regards to what is most important.  In college basketball, the NCAAT is the most important accomplishment.  Making it, winning in it and winning it depending on the state of your program.  Non conf and conf are the means to get there.  If you win a conf or conf tourney to get there(power conf team), I'm sure it would be satisfying to the team and its fans and probably help the seeding although not a given. 

Right now, all some have to hold onto is our improving conference record and feel the need to remind us of what it was under Pelphrey.  It has improved.  What I think we can agree on though is the expansion of the SEC and the resulting scheduling is not helping the "numbers" which affect the RPI and the perceived achievements of conference teams.  As far as the record, it does matter to an extent.  But it is only part of the picture as with the teams I mentioned earlier like 12-6 UGa or the 11-7 teams.  And why it only matters to an extent is because it isn't the most important accomplishment and has to be combined with the non conf.  Again, means to an end which is making the NCAAT.  And in the current weaker, little depth SEC, we agree we have to have a stronger conference record than teams from other conferences. 

Sanity wasn't saying anything different.  It didn't matter when combined with the non conf this season when LSU and S Car had the same conf record as Vandy and were higher seeds in the SECT.  It didn't matter with 12-6 UGa.  They didn't get in the NCAAT which is the goal.  This bringing up losing records is taking it to an extreme and shouldn't be a part of the discussion.

The title of this thread is don't pretend nothing has happened.

Hogsanity is absolutely acting as if nothing has happened and so is anyone else who poo poos the improvement in conference performance.

[SuperSid4Ever]

No darn.  We are saying the same thing.  I'm not saying a losing SEC record would.  Neither is sanity.  Nobody is pretending. 

This part of the discussion is in regards to what is most important.  In college basketball, the NCAAT is the most important accomplishment.  Making it, winning in it and winning it depending on the state of your program.  Non conf and conf are the means to get there.  If you win a conf or conf tourney to get there(power conf team), I'm sure it would be satisfying to the team and its fans and probably help the seeding although not a given. 

Right now, all some have to hold onto is our improving conference record and feel the need to remind us of what it was under Pelphrey.  It has improved.  What I think we can agree on though is the expansion of the SEC and the resulting scheduling is not helping the "numbers" which affect the RPI and the perceived achievements of conference teams.  As far as the record, it does matter to an extent.  But it is only part of the picture as with the teams I mentioned earlier like 12-6 UGa or the 11-7 teams.  And why it only matters to an extent is because it isn't the most important accomplishment and has to be combined with the non conf.  Again, means to an end which is making the NCAAT.  And in the current weaker, little depth SEC, we agree we have to have a stronger conference record than teams from other conferences. 

Sanity wasn't saying anything different.  It didn't matter when combined with the non conf this season when LSU and S Car had the same conf record as Vandy and were higher seeds in the SECT.  It didn't matter with 12-6 UGa.  They didn't get in the NCAAT which is the goal.  This bringing up losing records is taking it to an extreme and shouldn't be a part of the discussion.

In the case of LSU, they would have been in the NCAAT if they hadn't stumbled so mightily down the stretch.  That last stretch of games, conference or not, makes or breaks the seasons of more tourney-bound and bubble teams than just about anything else, as it either strengthens or destroys RPI's and a whole host of other factors.  Most of the time, it involves conference play, so yes, it does matter.

In conferences like the SEC, the league's members are considered to have greater latitude in scheduling.  It's literally expected of us to schedule more difficult teams, including mid-majors, outside of conference play.  Failing that, we are our own worst enemy.

[azhog10]

In the case of LSU, they would have been in the NCAAT if they hadn't stumbled so mightily down the stretch.  That last stretch of games, conference or not, makes or breaks the seasons of more tourney-bound and bubble teams than just about anything else, as it either strengthens or destroys RPI's and a whole host of other factors.  Most of the time, it involves conference play, so yes, it does matter.

In conferences like the SEC, the league's members are considered to have greater latitude in scheduling.  It's literally expected of us to schedule more difficult teams, including mid-majors, outside of conference play.  Failing that, we are our own worst enemy.

While this is expected it's a lot harder for an SEC team to schedule a good mid major than it is for a lot of the east coast schools and BIG 10 schools. I'll use Syracuse and Pitt as an example. Pitt played 8 games against teams that ranked from 160 to 339 in RPI in their OOC schedule. Syracuse played 7 games in which teams ranked from 162-258 and 4 of those 7 were in the 220-258 range. Arkansas had 5 games in their ooc schedule in teams that ranked over 150. Obviously we can't control our conference strength and if we took care of business there it wouldn't matter. But we do play a harder OOC schedule than a lot of eastern schools but we have to schedule home and homes to do it.  Other conferences don't have to go as heavy in their OOC schedule bc they have the ability to fall back on their stronger conferences.

[Nipsey Mussle]

Honestly what he is saying is true.  If you go 4-14 in conf and win all the rest of your games or if you go 14-4 in conf lose all the rest of your games, you are likely still watching the NCAA tourney from the couch.

At the end of the day, making it to the NCAA and actually doing something there is all that matters.

"Nothing else matters" is just an absurd way to look at things. In the 4 seasons under MA that we have not made the NcaaT, our conference record has been 36-36. You're telling me that your view of MA would be exactly the same if our conference record was 4-68 during those 4 years? Seriously? Ncaat is not all that matters in college basketball.

If we had made the Ncaat in 4 of MA's 5 years here, do you truly, I mean really think about this, truly believe Hogsanity would be repeatedly spouting off that everyone should support MA to no end b/c Ncaat is all that matters? Seriously? He would be repeatedly saying that getting to Ncaat doesn't matter if you can't make the Elite 8, etc ad nauseam. I study human behavior for a living and can tell you with a great deal of certainty that would be the case.

[rzrbackramsfan]

"Nothing else matters" is just an absurd way to look at things. In the 4 seasons under MA that we have not made the NcaaT, our conference record has been 36-36. You're telling me that your view of MA would be exactly the same if our conference record was 4-68 during those 4 years? Seriously? Ncaat is not all that matters in college basketball.

If we had made the Ncaat in 4 of MA's 5 years here, do you truly, I mean really think about this, truly believe Hogsanity would be repeatedly spouting off that everyone should support MA to no end b/c Ncaat is all that matters? Seriously? He would be repeatedly saying that getting to Ncaat doesn't matter if you can't make the Elite 8, etc ad nauseam. I study human behavior for a living and can tell you with a great deal of certainty that would be the case.

Better change your name from hogsanity to hogcognitivebiases

[Pork Twain]

"Nothing else matters" is just an absurd way to look at things. In the 4 seasons under MA that we have not made the NcaaT, our conference record has been 36-36. You're telling me that your view of MA would be exactly the same if our conference record was 4-68 during those 4 years? Seriously? Ncaat is not all that matters in college basketball.

Yup, it sure is and we have not consistently made it in a very long time.  I am not really sure how you are missing such an obviously simple point.  Maybe your bloodlust is up from arguing with HS.  If we were consistently in the NCAA, it would be impossible for us to have a record of 4-68, so point proven.

In college basketball, getting to March Madness and what you accomplish once you are there, is what determines where you rank in coaching and as a team.

[Nipsey Mussle]

Yup, it sure is and we have not consistently made it in a very long time.  I am not really sure how you are missing such an obviously simple point.  Maybe your bloodlust is up from arguing with HS.  If we were consistently in the NCAA, it would be impossible for us to have a record of 4-68, so point proven.

In college basketball, getting to March Madness and what you accomplish once you are there, is what determines where you rank in coaching and as a team.

I'm afraid you are missing a simple point. If we won two games all of last season, you don't think the heat on MA would be 100 times higher from the fan base? I'm not sure what is complicated about that? There's a difference in two wins and 16 wins. Making the Ncaat matters a ton, but it's far from the only thing that matters.

[Hawg Red]

I'm afraid you are missing a simple point. If we won two games all of last season, you don't think the heat on MA would be 100 times higher from the fan base? I'm not sure what is complicated about that? There's a difference in two wins and 16 wins. Making the Ncaat matters a ton, but it's far from the only thing that matters.

To most fans, winning 16 games (losing a bunch of close ones in the process) is going to be a byproduct of having lost the entire starting 5 from the previous season. A season that, mind you, we won 27 games, finished second in the conference, made it to the SECT tournament final, and won a game in the tournament. We can, and have, argued about just how impressive of a season that really was, but we'll hold off on that this time. We're thinking as the majority of the fanbase right now, not the very small minority of fans that post in Jumpball. So, yes, most fans probably understood and accepted that we wouldn't be nearly as good this past season. Everyone is surely happy with how Moses and Dusty played, but no one could have honestly predicted they've have produced like that. They're back for this season, along with a diverse recruiting class. That's going to be encouraging. Jimmy Whitt disappointed by almost everyone's standards. He's gone, though. I don't think he's viewed as a major loss by the majority of fans because the majority of fans are going to judge him almost solely on freshman-year production. So, to your point about pressure/heat on Anderson from the fans, you're right. We had a down year by everyone's standards, but I think most fans expected a down year and are willing to give a pass when considering how we played at times last season and looking forward to the pieces coming back and into the program. Jumpball posters are a different animal. Jeff Long is a different animal. This year will be an indictment on MA if we don't have at least a "good" season (meaning, basically, back in the NCAA tournament in the top 3-4 of the conference). He'll lose fan support at that point, probably in droves. For the most part, the fanbase has been patient. I think everyone involved understands the time is now to get this thing going.

[ArkansasI]

To most fans, winning 16 games (losing a bunch of close ones in the process) is going to be a byproduct of having lost the entire starting 5 from the previous season. A season that, mind you, we won 27 games, finished second in the conference, made it to the SECT tournament final, and won a game in the tournament. We can, and have, argued about just how impressive of a season that really was, but we'll hold off on that this time. We're thinking as the majority of the fanbase right now, not the very small minority of fans that post in Jumpball. So, yes, most fans probably understood and accepted that we wouldn't be nearly as good this past season. Everyone is surely happy with how Moses and Dusty played, but no one could have honestly predicted they've have produced like that. They're back for this season, along with a diverse recruiting class. That's going to be encouraging. Jimmy Whitt disappointed by almost everyone's standards. He's gone, though. I don't think he's viewed as a major loss by the majority of fans because the majority of fans are going to judge him almost solely on freshman-year production. So, to your point about pressure/heat on Anderson from the fans, you're right. We had a down year by everyone's standards, but I think most fans expected a down year and are willing to give a pass when considering how we played at times last season and looking forward to the pieces coming back and into the program. Jumpball posters are a different animal. Jeff Long is a different animal. This year will be an indictment on MA if we don't have at least a "good" season (meaning, basically, back in the NCAA tournament in the top 3-4 of the conference). He'll lose fan support at that point, probably in droves. For the most part, the fanbase has been patient. I think everyone involved understands the time is now to get this thing going.

Just to add to your post - Anthlon Bell absolutely blew our socks off.  Hats off to that senior.  He outperformed my expectations and will be missed.  I think that Anthlon is a terrific example of how much a guard can improve under Mike's tuteledge.  I hope he graduates.

Overall, Mike has done little to prove that he is a special coach.  I certainly don't believe he has performed up to his contract.  In his defense, I'm not sure anyone could have saved Arkansas from the race card that was played and the demographics of the State.  That lethal combination put the Hogs in a perpetual death spiral.  As the program has fallen, apathy has set in making calls for the Head Coach's job far less enthusiastic.

Stan had the misfortune of being first in line after Nolan, and his record simply didn't compare.  He got fired for a number of good and bad reasons.

John's firing came with something of a shoulder shrug - could have kept him or let him go.  Firing him gave the outward indication that Arkansas still considered itself a player in college basketball.  That impression is now MIA - as hiring Mike has proved that either he, or we, are not relevant.

Back to the OP's point...  What has happened is Mike appears to have won the 2016 juco recruiting battle.  That's great, but losing Jimmy Whitt isn't good.  Mike has struggled to recruit prepsters, and he now appears to be unable to retain the few he lands.

Like many here, I am excited to see how well the new players mesh.  Hopefully, they'll inject some enthusiasm into a once proud program.  If the jucos are ineligible or don't win, our experiment with Mike will have failed miserably.

[Biggus Piggus]

"If the jucos are ineligible" seems to be the last hope for some of you guys.

[SuperSid4Ever]

While this is expected it's a lot harder for an SEC team to schedule a good mid major than it is for a lot of the east coast schools and BIG 10 schools. I'll use Syracuse and Pitt as an example. Pitt played 8 games against teams that ranked from 160 to 339 in RPI in their OOC schedule. Syracuse played 7 games in which teams ranked from 162-258 and 4 of those 7 were in the 220-258 range. Arkansas had 5 games in their ooc schedule in teams that ranked over 150. Obviously we can't control our conference strength and if we took care of business there it wouldn't matter. But we do play a harder OOC schedule than a lot of eastern schools but we have to schedule home and homes to do it.  Other conferences don't have to go as heavy in their OOC schedule bc they have the ability to fall back on their stronger conferences.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this.  An SEC school has a lot more latitude to schedule opponents outside their conference.  Do you honestly think teams like Akron, Wichita State, Northern Iowa, etc. can go out and schedule anyone in the country to a home & home series more quickly than Arkansas?  Heck no, they cannot, but in a very real way, it's what the NCAA committee expects us to do because they KNOW we can do so.  For those smaller schools, it nearly always ends up with some BS proposal like 3 games in the bigger school's court in exchange for some neutral site game.  I honestly believe we could get some neutral site or home & home with someone like KU, K State or Duke, but truthfully speaking we won't do so.  It winds up hurting our image over time to fill our non-conference schedule with bottom feeder school after bottom feeder school, and when we wind up losing to an Appalachian State, Mercer, etc., it really hurts our chances at post season play.

[ArkansasI]

"If the jucos are ineligible" seems to be the last hope for some of you guys.

Not hope. Worry.

Is it unreasonable to be concerned about juco eligibility matters?

[HOGINTENNESSEE]

Not hope. Worry.

Is it unreasonable to be concerned about juco eligibility matters?

We will see. It's possible one never finished all the required courses.

But considering they have all already graduated and the coach said he expects them the first summer session. I consider that highly unlikely

[ArkansasI]

We will see. It's possible one never finished all the required courses.

But considering they have all already graduated and the coach said he expects them the first summer session. I consider that highly unlikely

Good. I didn't know this.

Thanks.

[Pork Twain]

I'm afraid you are missing a simple point. If we won two games all of last season, you don't think the heat on MA would be 100 times higher from the fan base? I'm not sure what is complicated about that? There's a difference in two wins and 16 wins. Making the Ncaat matters a ton, but it's far from the only thing that matters.

Sweat baby Jesus...  No, you cannot make the NCAA with only two wins, so that point does not matter.  If you consistently make the NCAA, it means you are OBVIOUSLY taking care of the W/L issue.  You must win games to make it to the NCAA, but if you only win more than you lose and still fail to make the NCAA then people do not care about that.  We could have been 17-15 or 18-14 last year and nobody would care.  We were 21-11 In 13/14 and nobody cares.  It is about making the NCAA and doing something there, not just winning more than you lose.  Nobody wants to be an NIT team.

[HOGINTENNESSEE]

Good. I didn't know this.

Thanks.

RD has updates on 5 of the 6 and there report dates. Cook is the only one missing in the update.

http://www.wholehogsports.com/news/2016/may/19/thursday-recruiting-tidbits-hogs-make-cut-bayou-st/