Games of interest

[jocoshock]

How far does WSU have to go before we quit hearing "there are no dominant teams this year?" Seems like a silly thing to say when a team is entering the tournament undefeated for the first time in 23 years. Just because the dominant team doesn't wear a UK or Duke jersey doesn't mean they don't exist.

There were no dominant teams during the regular season across Division 1. We we find out if there is a dominant team n the Dance.

[Cdizzle]

34-0 with a MoV over 15 sounds "average" to me too.

[pie n eye]

There were no dominant teams during the regular season across Division 1. We we find out if there is a dominant team n the Dance.

Sorry, but this statement makes no sense to me. If 31-0 isn't considered dominant then nothing ever could be.

[1972Shocker]

I know what you mean. About 3 weeks ago on the B&B show some clown (I would call him an ass hat but I don't know him at all) called after they were comparing bob davis to Mike Kennedy and "KU Pat" told B&B to never compare the great bob davis to MK. I mean the guy almost took it as a personal insult that his bob davis would even be mentioned in the same breath with MK. He calls in fairly regularly but this time he was such a pompous ass. I mean he wouldn't even to need to be called "KU Pat" because you would know who he pulls for just from his whiney little girl attitude.

Everytime KU Pat calls in I get the following image:

[jocoshock]

Sorry, but this statement makes no sense to me. If 31-0 isn't considered dominant then nothing ever could be.

Dominant in the Valley yes. That doesn't mean we would dominate the rest of D1. Maybe we will in the tourney. Time will tell.

[Cdizzle]

Dominant in the Valley yes. That doesn't mean we would dominate the rest of D1. Maybe we will in the tourney. Time will tell.

That's fine. In which case, there have never been any dominant teams.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

That's fine. In which case, there have never been any dominant teams.

lol

[jocoshock]

That's fine. In which case, there have never been any dominant teams.

UCLA 1964 - 1975. Dominated for nearly a decade, but that was a different time. That won't happen ever again.

[Cdizzle]

UCLA 1964 - 1975. Dominated for nearly a decade, but that was a different time. That won't happen ever again.

They won a lot of games, but they didn't beat everybody, every year, so I don't think you could call them dominant.

[The Mad Hatter]

UCLA 1964 - 1975. Dominated for nearly a decade, but that was a different time. That won't happen ever again.

So it won't happen again because there is so much more parity in NCAA basketball now then back then, but they get to be called dominant because they did nothing but win against a weak schedule.

How does this line of reasoning argue against WSU being considered dominant again?

[jocoshock]

They won a lot of games, but they didn't beat everybody, every year, so I don't think you could call them dominant.

You don't have to perfect to be dominant. Winning 10 National Championships in 12 years is definitely dominant.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Double and Triple lols. Quadruple lols. Too funny, but I think I'll just let this one go. Still though. lol.

[jocoshock]

So it won't happen again because there is so much more parity in NCAA basketball now then back then, but they get to be called dominant because they did nothing but win against a weak schedule.

How does this line of reasoning argue against WSU being considered dominant again?

If you are saying every team in D1 compared to UCLA was weak for an entire decade, then yes they were dominant. That was not the case, but they did dominate. The PAC 8 conference and the NCAA tourney. They proved their dominance. We have not proven ours yet.

[HenryMuto]

Sorry didn't mean to start a war here forget I said anything.

[Jeffrey Korchek]

Sorry didn't mean to start a war here forget I said anything.

Everything's a war here when we have to sit idle for this long.