I'm not being unobjective here, Texas beat Tech in the regular season both times last year. Texas does not annually struggle to beat the Baylors and A&M's of the world. They do get upset every once and a awhile, like the aggies beating UT at home a few years back or Baylor surprisingly keeping last years game in Waco close. Tech has been in dogfights(by dogfight I mean baylor or A&M had a great chance of winning with a minute or two left) with those teams both home and away, even under Knight. And I put no stock in any conference tournament games. I would abolish them if I was in charge, and that is just a general principle of mine. I've said the same of college football conference championship games. Also, I saw Tech-A&M last week and that game was a lot closer with 2 minutes left than it ever should be for a big 12 title contending team. And come on, Colorado has more talent in Harrison and Morandais than the entire Baylor roster. Comparing that score is like apples and oranges. I went to the New Orleans game. I went to the Wofford game. I was at Baylor. In my opinion Texas played mediocre to poor and still won handily. I'm not saying UT will go all the way, but I guess I'm not that impressed Knight has his team above Baylor, ISU, Nebraska, KSU, the Aggies, and Colorado if even that. Of those teams I listed, the one program that was difficult to pass was ISU, because they had a good run under Eustachy for awhile. But they still lag behind UT, OSU, OU, Kansas, and Missouri, just because Quin has had tourney success. And colorado is right on par with Tech at this point, both mid level possible NCAA teams in the conference, but I'll give Tech the edge for now. I'm sorry that I don't think much of Tech's 10 game winning streak earlier in the season, considering the level of competition they played(yes, the Big 10 is way down this year) and that I stand by my point that the reason Tech seems to be better in conference this year, is because the Big 12 elite lost key parts of their rosters and Missouri has decided to underperform as usual. I think the way Barnes even with a mediocre at best roster led by Chris Owens a few years back won a conference championship, is more impressive that what Knight has done. UT has played like crap at times, but you talk about those lucky plays against Missouri and Providence. Both were on the road in tough buildings to play, against much more talented foes than Baylor or A&M. And the fact is UT won in lubbock, and if Boddicker hadn't missed that free throw, UT wouldn't have needed that miracle by mouton in lubbock. But again, it was on the road, and against better competition than the aggies or especially baylor. There I admitted it, Tech is decent.(but I believed that all along, they just aren't elite in my opinion) And I'll give Knight some credit, he has made Tech a team one has to worry about if you are a Texas fan or a fan of any team in the big 12, but the fact is he still hasn't gotten them in the upper tier of the conference nor taken them past the 1st round of the NCAA tournament. Its also my own personal opinion that unless Knight changes his ways about recruiting and incorporates some long range bombers into Tech's arsenal, none of this is ever going to change. And on Texas, I think with all the parity in college basketball they could get upset in the 1st round, or even win it all, it's that wide open, and UT isn't that overly talented, but their experience(senior leadership) is why I think they should at least be a sweet 16 team. I just wanted to make it evidently clear they aren't my favorite: I think its Duke, then everyone else, with UConn and Stanford at the top of the pack for the everyone else.
Well I agree with all of that. Obviously Tech's not elite, but complaining because they're not at the level of Kansas, Texas, OU, and OSU? 3 of those teams are PROGRAMS and OSU is always close to a top 25 team. Anyway, I hate Duke. It sucks, they got their starting 5 all-americans, plus 2 more. I'm rooting for UNC tonight. Mike Montgomery doesn't get enough love for what he does in his situation. He has to be one of the top coaches considering the circumstances. I'd rather UConn win the NC than Duke, but I think it's pretty wide open.
DVaruthin manages to put his foot in his mouth once again ripping on Texas Tech - Wow what a HUGE surprise that is.... When are you just going to lay off?? Oh and Texas did another stellar job of recruiting this year by the way...... Have fun going 9-3 again, getting blown out by OU, having Mack Brown tell everyone that things are great, and end up back in San Diego singing the Holiday blues of how you were snubbed by the BCS. All of this wasted on yet another batch of bright prospects that are completely underutilized. Sorry guys but I love Texas Tech - I love what Bobby Knight has brought to our basketball program - And I love the fact that we are packing the United Center with rabid fans that are pumped up about our basketball team again. Its an exciting time for Tech sports. Love him or hate him - Bobby Knight knows how to win with whatever talent he has.
Ha, I guess I'm sort of in between you two. Not going to be deluded with what's going on at UT but not that impressed with Tech either. I think Knight's done an impressive job. He can't really do much more but bring the program to being ranked between #20-25 like OSU or something. You shouldn't be talking crap about UT considering your program isn't any better regardless of talent. I think many people are pretty much expecting the same crap to go on with football but will be pleasantly surprised if it's any better.
Yeah I knew I would get ripped about that (UT) - but its a personal thing between me and DV - thats why I went off like I did. Apparently he thinks that our football program doesnt stand a chance when we play you guys - I beg to differ.
Oh you all stand a great chance. Hopefully the new defense will cost us one less game a year (Arkansas, almost Tech last season; Tech 2 seasons ago).
If Bob Knight can be considered suspension by making a scene at Salad bar, shoul done consider the same for the chancellor?
1. This is basketball not football. I'm sorry, but the Tech basketball team is just decent. No size=poor rebounding. No shooters=trouble scoring. Please dispute both of those points, I'm waiting. They are Kansas lite, with a weaker post game, but better mid range game and weaker athletically. And if you think a team that will have trouble keeping up in up tempo games and rebounding will be a threat come March, it won't. You seem to think I enjoy laughing at Tech athletics, but it's not true. I like analyzing things, and I sure as hell know what I'm talking about here. I was wrong on Tech football, sure, but it has nothing to do with my opinion in basketball. I happened to catch the Tech-Baylor, Tech-Aggie basketball games the last few weeks, and jesus, your beloved team almost lost BOTH. To the worst two teams in the conference it came down to the wire. Then Baylor was tied with Tech at the United Spirit Arena at halftime this week. For your information, I feel the same way about UT athletics as you do about Tech: it's called being a fan. But if Texas sucked at basketball or was just a solid team but overhyped, I would call them on it. Earlier in this thread, I even said UT could easily go out in the first round, but they do have the shooters, size, seniors, and defense to go a long way in the dance. I don't see how that classifies me as being a homer. If I was I would say UT is winning it all no matter who they play. As I already stated earlier in this thread, Duke, Uconn and Stanford are my favorites, but its really wide open this year. I just happen to think that Tech doesn't have shooters or size, and teams can gameplan to shut down Emmett, just like UT did successfully in Lubbock, which will make it tough on them come March. You couldn't even use Basketball to back up your point. Instead you resorted to potshots about the football program which has no bearing what so ever on the argument at hand. And when did I knock Tech the school? All I am discussing is the basketball program. But fine, I'll judge Kansas objectively just for you, and OU too. Kansas has size and good low post play, but no outside shooting. They should be out of the NCAA's by the round of 16, if that late. OU has very little size, poor shooting, and not great mid range game. They have a bleak tournament future as well. You make it out like my sole mission in this thread was to rip Tech sports, and if you really think that, I don't know what to say, but it couldn't be further from the truth. I'm sorry that I don't find being better than Baylor(who you were better than in the first place), A&M(since when have they been competitive in basketball), Nebraska(again, when have they been competitive in basketball), KSU(another team that has never done much basketball wise), much of an accomplishment. Those are bad programs, and were that way when Knight took over. I already gave Knight credit for passing Iowa State, because Eustachy, the former Cyclones coach forced to resign after his alcohol problems, had a really good run with jammal tinsley, now of the pacers, for awhile. And Tech is neck and neck with Colorado, who has had similar conference and NCAA success since Knight took over, but I still gave Tech the edge. Still, I don't think Tech is in OU, UT, KU, OSU, or Missouri's program class, but they have improved. I already said that... I just don't find Knight to be a better coach than most out there today, and personally, even if he was at Texas, I wouldn't want him representing my school. His baggage outweighs his coaching as far as I'm concerned and that was my entire point with the very first post I made in this thread. And truth be told, I don't expect Tech to ever get much higher than they are right now in the conference even with Knight because of his recruiting, and the fact the upper tier of the conference is so damn strong. Finally, I'll admit I was homeristic on UT-Tech football, and it bit me in the ass. But traditionally UT owned Tech in Austin, and I didn't think Tech could stop Young(which they couldn't). I just didn't expect UT to allow 40 points at home, no matter how good the Tech dink and dunk offense is. I'm sure I'm not the only prognosticator that looked stupid after that game. But it has absolutely NOTHING to do with my feelings on college basketball and you really have no clue if you think I deliberately hate Tech or have made them my personal whipping boy. It just isn't true, so get over it.
I didn't think they did when UT was playing front of 80,000 plus screaming rabid longhorn fans, with a BCS bowl berth possibility riding on the line, especially factoring in revenge for last year. Also Tech historically has sucked in Austin but given UT fits in Lubbock. Tech lost 45-7 the time prior in Austin, and that was with Klingsbury. Symons was also hurt going into the game, and you and I both know Tech has serious defensive issues. That's why I saw the game like I did. I didn't think Tech would come into Austin and keep it close, and they did, congratulations, I was wrong. So were numerous prognosticators. I'm impressed with the Tech offense, happy. Annoyed by teams inability to stop it, but impressed by it nonetheless. And why can't you just let it go? You seem to think I have a vendetta against you and Tech, but it's not the case, I can assure you of that. I also didn't expect UT to lose in lubbock last year, you're right. But again, I certainly wasn't the only one, and the logic behind the pick wasn't faulty at the time. I should have seen that one coming though, because Tech had always given Texas great games in Lubbock. Finally if you look at the Texas-Tech game thread this year, I already took care of this issue. I apologized and gave Tech plenty of credit. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68160&perpage=30&pagenumber=1
Knight defenders, please answer me this. Would you have a problem with a student-athlete yelling at their coach/professor/dean, etc. with nothing but a worthless reprimand as punishment? If Royal Ivey yelled at Rick Barnes at a grocery store, I doubt we'd even have heard about it. No one would care. 1. This is basketball not football. I'm sorry, but the Tech basketball team is just decent. No size=poor rebounding. No shooters=trouble scoring. Please dispute both of those points, I'm waiting. They are Kansas lite, with a weaker post game, but better mid range game and weaker athletically. And if you think a team that will have trouble keeping up in up tempo games and rebounding will be a threat come March, it won't. You seem to think I enjoy laughing at Tech athletics, but it's not true. I like analyzing things, and I sure as hell know what I'm talking about here. Tech is supposed to be a decent team - that's the point. They were HORRID before Bobby Knight got there. He's a system coach - he needs his type of players. That means it takes time to build a program like that. It's amazing he's done what he has with the crap talent he inherited. Tech has improved each of Knight's 3 years, and that's exactly what they want and expect. Is he some kind of miracle worker who's going to take a no-talent team and make them comparable to Top15 teams like Kansas, OU, OSU, UT, etc? Hell no - no one will do that. Is he a damn good coach who gets the most out of his players? Absolutely.
I disagree 100%. If Royal Ivey yelled at Rick Barnes in a grocery store in front of a lot people, followed him out to the parking lot while continuing to yell at him, you really don't think anything would happen? He be suspended in the very least, if not kicked off the team outright.
Kicked off the team. hahaha, you all have no idea. He might be suspended. It depends on the coach, his relationship with players, and the circumstances. Now if a player got in a fight with a coach he'd almost definitely be dismissed. I agree that Knight has done almost as good a job as you can realistically ask. The only thing he could further do is get the team into the NCAA and win a 1st rounder or in a couple of years get ranked in between #20-25 and sneak into the sweet 16.
