<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Team of the 2000s: #8 &#8211; Memphis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/</link>
	<description>the ubiquitous college basketblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:11:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rush The Court &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Team of the 2000s: Wrap-Up and Honorable Mention</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-13617</link>
		<dc:creator>Rush The Court &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Team of the 2000s: Wrap-Up and Honorable Mention</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:21:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-13617</guid>
		<description>[...] UNC 2.  Kansas 3.  Florida 4.  Duke 5.  Michigan St. 6.  UConn 7.  UCLA 8.  Memphis 9.  Syracuse 10.  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] UNC 2.  Kansas 3.  Florida 4.  Duke 5.  Michigan St. 6.  UConn 7.  UCLA 8.  Memphis 9.  Syracuse 10.  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerne Blanston</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12945</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerne Blanston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12945</guid>
		<description>MTBlue, Cal didn&#039;t just mail it in with the Missouri game; he FedEx&#039;d it in.  He absolutely, positively had to have that Kentrucky job.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MTBlue, Cal didn&#8217;t just mail it in with the Missouri game; he FedEx&#8217;d it in.  He absolutely, positively had to have that Kentrucky job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1tigerfan</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12870</link>
		<dc:creator>1tigerfan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12870</guid>
		<description>and Doug, i wouldn&#039;t open my mouth if i were you, considering the way the tigers handled maryland and vasquez last year!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and Doug, i wouldn&#8217;t open my mouth if i were you, considering the way the tigers handled maryland and vasquez last year!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1tigerfan</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12869</link>
		<dc:creator>1tigerfan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:29:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12869</guid>
		<description>hey Doug,
ditto on the dumbest, most baseless post ever. folks can bash memphis all they want...doesn&#039;t matter much. plenty of great teams over the last decade.....but ask michigan state, texas and ucla (especially K. Love) how good that final four team was.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hey Doug,<br />
ditto on the dumbest, most baseless post ever. folks can bash memphis all they want&#8230;doesn&#8217;t matter much. plenty of great teams over the last decade&#8230;..but ask michigan state, texas and ucla (especially K. Love) how good that final four team was.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MTigerBlue</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12834</link>
		<dc:creator>MTigerBlue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12834</guid>
		<description>&quot;Seriously. Put them in the Big East or ACC and they might not even be .500 for the decade.&quot;

Prior to their four-year run of Elite 8, Elite 8, NC runner-up, and Sweet 16 (probably only because Cal was already itching to go to Lexington and phoned it in against Missouri), they were in a power basketball conference and had one sub .500 year. I don&#039;t really care whether they&#039;re ahead in this poll or not, but the &quot;put them in the Big East or ACC&quot; argument is truly baseless.

I believe that one of the points made against their inclusion was that they had no title. I&#039;d assume, from that, that the poster thinks that NCAA tournament performance is important. You can&#039;t have it both ways. Either their tournament performance indicated that they were a national power even when playing in a weak conference, or tournament performance (lacking a title) is irrelevant. Personally, I&#039;d have to agree with the others -- when you get past the top 5 or so, it&#039;s hard to fairly rank the next 10.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Seriously. Put them in the Big East or ACC and they might not even be .500 for the decade.&#8221;</p>
<p>Prior to their four-year run of Elite 8, Elite 8, NC runner-up, and Sweet 16 (probably only because Cal was already itching to go to Lexington and phoned it in against Missouri), they were in a power basketball conference and had one sub .500 year. I don&#8217;t really care whether they&#8217;re ahead in this poll or not, but the &#8220;put them in the Big East or ACC&#8221; argument is truly baseless.</p>
<p>I believe that one of the points made against their inclusion was that they had no title. I&#8217;d assume, from that, that the poster thinks that NCAA tournament performance is important. You can&#8217;t have it both ways. Either their tournament performance indicated that they were a national power even when playing in a weak conference, or tournament performance (lacking a title) is irrelevant. Personally, I&#8217;d have to agree with the others &#8212; when you get past the top 5 or so, it&#8217;s hard to fairly rank the next 10.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truth</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12833</link>
		<dc:creator>Truth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12833</guid>
		<description>Congrats Doug, you just won the dumbest college basketball post of the decade.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congrats Doug, you just won the dumbest college basketball post of the decade.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12809</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:05:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12809</guid>
		<description>No way Memphis is ahead of Syracuse &amp; Maryland.  You missed that one.

*Weakass conference
*No title
*Missed tourney several times
*sub .500 record 1 year

Seriously.  Put them in the Big East or ACC and they might not even be .500 for the decade.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No way Memphis is ahead of Syracuse &amp; Maryland.  You missed that one.</p>
<p>*Weakass conference<br />
*No title<br />
*Missed tourney several times<br />
*sub .500 record 1 year</p>
<p>Seriously.  Put them in the Big East or ACC and they might not even be .500 for the decade.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerne Blanston</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12793</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerne Blanston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12793</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think Memphis fans have unrealistic expectations for Pastner.  Barring a complete fall-off from relevance in the upcoming season (as in finishing 3rd or 4th in CUSA), Pastner should make the transition from assistant to head coach rather smoothly.  Why?  He&#039;s been after this since childhood and to help prepare himself for this moment mentored with some great coaches along the way, most with different approaches to playing the game....the whole game.  

For now, he&#039;s surrounded himself with people he knows and trusts and upon whom he&#039;ll rely more heavily than Cal did with HIS assistants (Robic aside).  We jokingly refer to Josh as the anti-Calipari, meaning a great big bundle of humility and positivity who talks TO people and not THROUGH them.  I believe he could have the Tigers in the Sweet Sixteen conversation by late winter/early spring of the &#039;10/&#039;11 season.   

In his brief time as head coach there, he has done a masterful job of keeping the program relevant on the national recruiting scene (the Bartons?!?), while at the same time rebuilding the program&#039;s relationship with the city&#039;s high school programs.  In his efforts to make Memphis a national recruiting power, Calipari opted to let the local ties slide a bit.  Can&#039;t fault his sucess, obviously.  I mean, if you study what Calipari previously had coming to Memphis this fall, there&#039;s a greater understanding of why it was so difficult for Memphis fans to stomach his abrupt departure.  The class he had coming to Memphis was better than the one he took to Kentucky.    

For that same reason, Josh won&#039;t get beat up by the media or the fans (well, at least not by the fans; Memphis print media tries too hard to inject itself into the discussion).  I say he won&#039;t get beat up by their fans, because their expectations were greatly tempered by the jolt of Calipari&#039;s leaving them.  They know that with Wall, Cousins, Henry, Coleman and Dennis added to a pretty solid roster of returning players that they were going to be a preseason favorite with KU to win it all.  Their fans were licking their chops for a rematch with the Jayhawks--their hopes were obviously dashed.

Wishes aside, Pastner&#039;s connections in Texas, out west and via his father&#039;s AAU leadership should help Memphis remain a prominent national player, sooner rather than later.  I foresee Josh having his Tigers once more annoying folks all over the country within twenty four months.  I wouldn&#039;t be too surprised to see a conference change for the Tigers within the next two years, too, something that could kill the &quot;overrated&quot; talk once and for all, should they keep it rolling.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think Memphis fans have unrealistic expectations for Pastner.  Barring a complete fall-off from relevance in the upcoming season (as in finishing 3rd or 4th in CUSA), Pastner should make the transition from assistant to head coach rather smoothly.  Why?  He&#8217;s been after this since childhood and to help prepare himself for this moment mentored with some great coaches along the way, most with different approaches to playing the game&#8230;.the whole game.  </p>
<p>For now, he&#8217;s surrounded himself with people he knows and trusts and upon whom he&#8217;ll rely more heavily than Cal did with HIS assistants (Robic aside).  We jokingly refer to Josh as the anti-Calipari, meaning a great big bundle of humility and positivity who talks TO people and not THROUGH them.  I believe he could have the Tigers in the Sweet Sixteen conversation by late winter/early spring of the &#8216;10/&#8217;11 season.   </p>
<p>In his brief time as head coach there, he has done a masterful job of keeping the program relevant on the national recruiting scene (the Bartons?!?), while at the same time rebuilding the program&#8217;s relationship with the city&#8217;s high school programs.  In his efforts to make Memphis a national recruiting power, Calipari opted to let the local ties slide a bit.  Can&#8217;t fault his sucess, obviously.  I mean, if you study what Calipari previously had coming to Memphis this fall, there&#8217;s a greater understanding of why it was so difficult for Memphis fans to stomach his abrupt departure.  The class he had coming to Memphis was better than the one he took to Kentucky.    </p>
<p>For that same reason, Josh won&#8217;t get beat up by the media or the fans (well, at least not by the fans; Memphis print media tries too hard to inject itself into the discussion).  I say he won&#8217;t get beat up by their fans, because their expectations were greatly tempered by the jolt of Calipari&#8217;s leaving them.  They know that with Wall, Cousins, Henry, Coleman and Dennis added to a pretty solid roster of returning players that they were going to be a preseason favorite with KU to win it all.  Their fans were licking their chops for a rematch with the Jayhawks&#8211;their hopes were obviously dashed.</p>
<p>Wishes aside, Pastner&#8217;s connections in Texas, out west and via his father&#8217;s AAU leadership should help Memphis remain a prominent national player, sooner rather than later.  I foresee Josh having his Tigers once more annoying folks all over the country within twenty four months.  I wouldn&#8217;t be too surprised to see a conference change for the Tigers within the next two years, too, something that could kill the &#8220;overrated&#8221; talk once and for all, should they keep it rolling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kiff</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12780</link>
		<dc:creator>Kiff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:34:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12780</guid>
		<description>Fair enough - I&#039;ll grant you the sub-.500 argument.  I clearly tried to make one last argument to round out my comment and failed miserably at making it at all compelling,  ha ha.  I also think (with a reminder from Wikipedia) that another good argument against my original statement is that Memphis&#039;s losing season was under an interim coach, taking over for a coach who had a 2-year stint - all before Calipari.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair enough &#8211; I&#8217;ll grant you the sub-.500 argument.  I clearly tried to make one last argument to round out my comment and failed miserably at making it at all compelling,  ha ha.  I also think (with a reminder from Wikipedia) that another good argument against my original statement is that Memphis&#8217;s losing season was under an interim coach, taking over for a coach who had a 2-year stint &#8211; all before Calipari.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rtmsf</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12778</link>
		<dc:creator>rtmsf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12778</guid>
		<description>Kiff - needless to say, but as Nvr and JStev alluded to, the differences between 8-12 were statistically almost nil.  You make a good argument for Syracuse and Maryland over Memphis, and believe me when I say it was very tough to rank all three of those teams (+ the two left out in that cohort).  But I do have one disagreement, which is the sub-.500 rule.  If you have 8-9 really good years with multiple F4s and possibly even championships, having one really poor year shouldn&#039;t necessarily disqualify you from contention for team of the decade.  I&#039;m thinking back to the 90s, when Duke had two titles, two runner-ups and of course a slew of other great seasons, but they did have one losing year in 1995.  No way that Duke wasn&#039;t one of the top two teams of the 90s, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kiff &#8211; needless to say, but as Nvr and JStev alluded to, the differences between 8-12 were statistically almost nil.  You make a good argument for Syracuse and Maryland over Memphis, and believe me when I say it was very tough to rank all three of those teams (+ the two left out in that cohort).  But I do have one disagreement, which is the sub-.500 rule.  If you have 8-9 really good years with multiple F4s and possibly even championships, having one really poor year shouldn&#8217;t necessarily disqualify you from contention for team of the decade.  I&#8217;m thinking back to the 90s, when Duke had two titles, two runner-ups and of course a slew of other great seasons, but they did have one losing year in 1995.  No way that Duke wasn&#8217;t one of the top two teams of the 90s, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kiff</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12763</link>
		<dc:creator>Kiff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:38:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12763</guid>
		<description>Interesting pick.  Initially, I&#039;ll say that the guys at RTC always do a better job of looking objectively at the numbers over time than is usually seen in historical rankings (everyone typically gives a huge edge to the most recent event - see any voting results for Best Movies of All Time).  I am an admitted Cuse fan, but I still think that the relative conference strengths give Cuse the edge here - and maybe even UMD over Memphis.  Part of the issue is that they only made the Tourney 6/10 years - and missed the NIT in one of the other years.  That has to be taken into account when calculating thir average NCAA Seed (e.g. give teams a &quot;17 seed&quot; for years they miss the tournament or something like that).  Final point - I think a sub-.500 year should be an almost instant disqualification from the Top 10 Teams of the Decade list - like requiring a .500 record to get into a bowl game.  I am interested to see the rest of the list - looking forward to the debate regarding who was &quot;last out.&quot;  Nice work overall - love this analysis during the downtime while I wait for the NFL to start up again....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting pick.  Initially, I&#8217;ll say that the guys at RTC always do a better job of looking objectively at the numbers over time than is usually seen in historical rankings (everyone typically gives a huge edge to the most recent event &#8211; see any voting results for Best Movies of All Time).  I am an admitted Cuse fan, but I still think that the relative conference strengths give Cuse the edge here &#8211; and maybe even UMD over Memphis.  Part of the issue is that they only made the Tourney 6/10 years &#8211; and missed the NIT in one of the other years.  That has to be taken into account when calculating thir average NCAA Seed (e.g. give teams a &#8220;17 seed&#8221; for years they miss the tournament or something like that).  Final point &#8211; I think a sub-.500 year should be an almost instant disqualification from the Top 10 Teams of the Decade list &#8211; like requiring a .500 record to get into a bowl game.  I am interested to see the rest of the list &#8211; looking forward to the debate regarding who was &#8220;last out.&#8221;  Nice work overall &#8211; love this analysis during the downtime while I wait for the NFL to start up again&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jstevrtc</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12758</link>
		<dc:creator>jstevrtc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12758</guid>
		<description>TMNJ...

I&#039;ll be honest, when each of the RTC writers did our individual rankings before this series was started, I had Memphis in the 9-13 range.  I probably moved them 3 or 4 times before I turned in my official rankings to the others.  I think this is because once you get to that 8th team, there&#039;s little difference between them and, say, team #13.  To be sure, there&#039;s enough there in the numbers to put Memphis here in my opinion, but if you wanted to make that argument for a few other squads I probably wouldn&#039;t disagree with you, depending on who you nominated.  I agree with NVR that Memphis had a heck of a run there in the late part of the decade and, by the numbers, it&#039;s tough to beat.  I&#039;ll be interested to hear what you think of the list when it&#039;s complete in a week or so, and where you would have put everyone, including any teams that didn&#039;t make it onto our list.  Many thanks for the comment.

John Stevens (who, like Rush The Court, is now on Facebook)
RTC</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TMNJ&#8230;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll be honest, when each of the RTC writers did our individual rankings before this series was started, I had Memphis in the 9-13 range.  I probably moved them 3 or 4 times before I turned in my official rankings to the others.  I think this is because once you get to that 8th team, there&#8217;s little difference between them and, say, team #13.  To be sure, there&#8217;s enough there in the numbers to put Memphis here in my opinion, but if you wanted to make that argument for a few other squads I probably wouldn&#8217;t disagree with you, depending on who you nominated.  I agree with NVR that Memphis had a heck of a run there in the late part of the decade and, by the numbers, it&#8217;s tough to beat.  I&#8217;ll be interested to hear what you think of the list when it&#8217;s complete in a week or so, and where you would have put everyone, including any teams that didn&#8217;t make it onto our list.  Many thanks for the comment.</p>
<p>John Stevens (who, like Rush The Court, is now on Facebook)<br />
RTC</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nvr1983</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12757</link>
		<dc:creator>nvr1983</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:56:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12757</guid>
		<description>TMNJ,
I think the stronger argument may be how weak Memphis was at the beginning of the decade becaue in the past 4 years they have been a top 5 program at the very least. Very few teams have put together a stretch during that time period that matches 1 Sweet 16, 2 Elite 8s, and 1 national runner-up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TMNJ,<br />
I think the stronger argument may be how weak Memphis was at the beginning of the decade becaue in the past 4 years they have been a top 5 program at the very least. Very few teams have put together a stretch during that time period that matches 1 Sweet 16, 2 Elite 8s, and 1 national runner-up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TMNJ</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2009/08/11/team-of-the-2000s-8-memphis/comment-page-1/#comment-12752</link>
		<dc:creator>TMNJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=10835#comment-12752</guid>
		<description>SHENANIGANS!!! No National titles + 1 final four +crappy conference = waaaaaaaaayyyy overrated. Although I think that everyone always overrated those Memphis teams, so I don&#039;t think that you are the only one who is guilty of this crime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SHENANIGANS!!! No National titles + 1 final four +crappy conference = waaaaaaaaayyyy overrated. Although I think that everyone always overrated those Memphis teams, so I don&#8217;t think that you are the only one who is guilty of this crime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
