Online Now 81

Basketball & Recruiting Board

The place for discussion for Kansas athletics

Online now 210
Record: 1689 (1/20/2014)

Boards ▾

Basketball & Recruiting Board

The place for discussion for Kansas athletics

Football & Recruiting Board

The place to talk Kansas football and recruiting

Jayhawk Central

The place for off topic discussion

Reply

Get so sick of articles like this...

  • http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/16/4126249/kus-dominance-not-best-thing-for.html

    I am not even sure how to respond to this sort of nonsense anymore. I have no idea what MU not being around has to do with how KU basketball is perceived.

  • Also this Dodd article is just kind of baffling.

    The quotes from the KSU players are particularly odd. What basis does Martavius Irving have to assess KU's talent? Who cares who we lost to Rodney?

  • It's not like the BXII fields a bunch of bad teams year after year... KU just get's it done.... Is that the jayhawks fault that no other team can seem to push itself over the hump?

    People are indifferent to lsers and love to hate the winners, that's just the way it is.

    Live to love, love to live

  • It goes deeper than that where KU is concerned though.

    I'm not one for conspiracy theories. I also try not to care about this stuff too much, because in the end it's just a bunch of fluff. But after covering the team for two years, I came out of that experience with a simple yet firm belief that Kansas will always get the short end of the stick in the media. It's just the way it is.

    Now, of course, everything is relative. We get plenty of love, too. At times, writers have no choice but to praise the second-winningest program of all time, who happens to be in the midst of a period of historic success even by its own lofty standards. But there is no strong pro-KU presence in the national, or even regional, media.

    There are guys who are typically neutral where KU is concerned but push the agendas of their own favorites - guys like Jeff Goodman with his Kentucky love - and a couple of guys who seem to like us well enough (Gottlieb and Jay Bilas). But the KU alums in the media locally - guys like Bukaty and Mellinger - are so self-loathing, and let their strongly opinioned counterparts either dictate their own opinion or just run roughshod over them. Then you've got guys like Keitzman, Harry, Boal, etc. who dominate KC media and absolutely loathe the Jayhawks.

    Go to the national level, and you still have a very strong MU presence. Dodd and Forde are MU alums and shills, for example, which is why you get articles like the one above from Dodd. The closest thing KU has to a friend among the national writers is Jason King, and even he is more of a neutral party, being a Baylor alum and fan. He just doesn't have a problem giving credit where credit is due.

    As far as exposure goes, we're just not as sexy as the teams on the east coast. We don't have the (slimy) sex appeal Calipari has brought to Lexington. We just win. Without a whole lot of fanfare or anything, we keep winning. Our best players are always team-first guys, which differs so greatly from other high-profile players in the game. We're the college analogue of the Spurs in the NBA. It infuriates Stern that the Spurs keep on winning and beating teams from bigger media markets, and it's kind of the same way here. They'd rather cover Kentucky, the ACC and the Big East. But they're stuck with us.

    It's not really that onerous a cross to bear, fellas. I mean, I'd rather have the wins. But it's not some great conspiracy or anything to acknowledge that we don't have a lot of friends in the media - local or national. It's just the way it is.

  • I think the last two years have slowly started to turn the tide towards us getting better national coverage, but it's been pretty crazy that it's taken so long IMO.

    I personally think one of the biggest problems for us is that the national media likes to have their narrative for virtually everything, and it's really hard to change the narrative. The narrative for us used to be early tournament exits. I thought this would change in 2008, and that once we showed we could win it all that the losses wouldn't be magnified so much. The UNI loss brought that all back, and then the VCU loss made it worse. The VCU loss was horrible, but the way it was magnified as some inability to win in the tournament against mid-majors was nuts. We murdered Richmond the game before, and they played much more like a typical mid-major. And our loss was in the Elite Eight, and I can't think of a single other program who got so ridiculed for an Elite Eight loss.

    I think when Roy won in 2005 coming off the two Final Fours here, he completely obliterated his personal tournament demons. After the Bucknell/Bradley losses, I always felt like Self got stuck with all of Roy's bad tournament losses. Self has somewhat consistently made the Elite Eight when you look at the trend, and that round seems to be his big weakness. His Sweet Sixteen record, which is Coach K's cryptonite, is excellent and an underrated stat IMO. It wasn't until we made the championship game last year that our narrative finally changed from "early tournament exit" to "consistent winner (in a mediocre conference)."

    If we make a Final Four run this year, I think we might see the tide turn a bit next year, especially because I think the media will love the narrative of whether or not we can get our 10th Big 12 title in a row in what would be expected to be a massive rebuilding year if our coach weren't Bill Self.

  • If you gave KU's resume to any east coast team you would never hear the end of it. Let's say Villinova had the second most wins and had won their conference 9 years in a row, half the country would be wearing Villinova Tshirts. Duke has won anything in a long time, got put out in the first round last year and their still regarded higher than KU.

    It's easy to bitch about, but I would rather have the wins too.

    Live to love, love to live

  • Just an excellent response overall. Beats my assessment of the media being full of morons to be sure.

    I think the problem really all stems from the strange KC media situation. Any national media for KU would come out of the KC market really. But the KC market has been under an anti-KU grip for a long time. With that being the case no one pro KU is going to get work and have a chance to move up.

    I have lost most of my respect for the KU guys who are in the media. The only one with any backbone is the producer for the 810 morning show. The rest are all pretty sad and pathetic figures. Mellinger is just flat not talented at his job.

  • I should also point out that I think most of this pertains to the coumnists/radio/tv personalities. I actually think we've got very good coverage from the beat writers right now - Tait, Bedore, Rustin Dodd and Austin Meek. I think they all do an excellent job.

  • I totally agree that the beat writers are excellent, and the crop of beat writers that just left was actually really good as well. However, the national bias is palpable and it's more than just articles like this. As you pointed out, it's that the Dodds and Fordes of the world have a national stage, and there's no counter voice. The Big 12 has a higher winning percentage in the NCAA Tournament than everyone but the ACC and more NBA draft picks than any other conference in the last nine years. Additionally, of the ten current members, five have been to a Final Four since 2002, five of the ten coaches have been to a Final Four as well, and seven of the ten programs have been to the Elite Eight since 2004.

  • Continuing on with this... We really must not draw a national audience because I believe we have been in the last group of FRIDAY tips in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2011, 2012, and 2013, and in the first slot on in 2008 and 2009. I remember being in the prime time slot in 2010, and maybe in 2002 or 2006.

  • Really that is just an artifact of being a 1 or 2 seed. Most play in those slots because 8-9 and 7-10 matchups generally feature name schools in what should be fairly close games. They want to put those in prime time so you will end up with the late games.

  • Really? In the last two years, for a total of 16 teams, ten of the ones and twos have been either the second or third game at the site, with five of them tipping off in prime time (third game at the site, 6:00 CST / 7:00 EST). Four ones or twos have been in the fourth game at the site, and Kansas is two of those four (Ohio State and Michigan State last year being the other two). I think it's not quite so obvious as "high seeds don't get prime time slots."

  • I hate asking a question that I could figure out myself, but since it appears you've done the analysis, what is the breakdown of 1 seeds where the school is located in the Central or Pacific time zones? That combines the likely blowout effect with the easier viewing of late games when in an earlier time zone.

    Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/WestCoastHwk247

  • Your numbers basically say that 11 out of 16 times the 1's and 2's were not in the prime time slot, which makes sense. The money slot is the 7PM one on those first weekends I think. That means that about 70% of the time a 1 or 2 does not get a prime slot. For KU in particular I think it goes a bit further in that we are more west than most schools that make the tourney (way more schools east than west) so it is either a 9PM start for people here or a 10PM one for people on the East coast.

    This year it made particular sense. All the other early games in the two pods are pretty boring.

    What they need to do is decouple the pod schedule. That way they could schedule a prime time game then give the best other times to the highest seed. But they won't.

  • In the last 10 tournaments (2004-2013), there have been 27 one seeds from the Eastern timezone, 9 from the Central (five of them Kansas and three Memphis), and only 4 Pacific. I don't know what the breakdown of those tip times are, but this year's PST-based school tips at...4:10PM EDT, 1:10PM PDT.