uconn 2014

[CorduroyG]

I keep going back to that team. They went 12-6 in the crappy aac which is probably the equivalent of 10-8 in acc this year, or maybe even worse. They were a 7 seed in tournament, won first game in ot, then beat 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

I can see us in an 8/9 or 7/10 game in 1st round being a dogfight and then getting 1 seed or 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

 

[Delmar]

No matter who it is this year, the champion will be mediocre. There are no great teams this year; there aren't even any good teams.

 

[SUintheVille]

I keep going back to that team. They went 12-6 in the crappy aac which is probably the equivalent of 10-8 in acc this year, or maybe even worse. They were a 7 seed in tournament, won first game in ot, then beat 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

I can see us in an 8/9 or 7/10 game in 1st round being a dogfight and then getting 1 seed or 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

I agree. It was hard to give you a "like" though to any post that talks about past UConn success, but since this could have parallels to being SU's cinderella year in the NCAAT, then it's good.

 

[adk(roc)CUSE]

I keep going back to that team. They went 12-6 in the crappy aac which is probably the equivalent of 10-8 in acc this year, or maybe even worse. They were a 7 seed in tournament, won first game in ot, then beat 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

I can see us in an 8/9 or 7/10 game in 1st round being a dogfight and then getting 1 seed or 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

Yep. My thoughts exactly. That uconn run forever changed the way I'll look at college hoops. On one hand it cheapened the regular season for me but on the other it forever gave me hope Syracuse could do something similar any random so-so season.

 

[Jasoncuse]

No matter who it is this year, the champion will be mediocre. There are no great teams this year; there aren't even any good teams.

I know you were being a bit hyperbolic, but Kansas is a very, very good team. Michigan State might be too. But yeah, there's no great team that is expected to win it all, but KU is playing about as well as a team can at this point in the season.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I keep going back to that team. They went 12-6 in the crappy aac which is probably the equivalent of 10-8 in acc this year, or maybe even worse. They were a 7 seed in tournament, won first game in ot, then beat 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

I can see us in an 8/9 or 7/10 game in 1st round being a dogfight and then getting 1 seed or 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

True. One thing about UConn. G is a better overall player than Napier but one thing Napier (and Boatwright) had is speed and they attacked constantly. They could blow by anybody and create lots of havoc. Their perimeter on the ball D was excellent. DeAndre Daniels finally playing up to his ability was huge for them in the post season as well.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Don't ever bring that up again.

 

[djcon57]

I keep going back to that team. They went 12-6 in the crappy aac which is probably the equivalent of 10-8 in acc this year, or maybe even worse. They were a 7 seed in tournament, won first game in ot, then beat 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

I can see us in an 8/9 or 7/10 game in 1st round being a dogfight and then getting 1 seed or 2 seed nova in 2nd round.

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

Legit thought same thing yesterday when G was going off at the end and putting him in the Napier role. You can't tell me G, Cooney and Richardson couldn't get hot for 4 games and get us to a Final 4 in current cbb enviroment

 

[Eric15]

That uconn team changed my perspective on college hoops regular season, its like hockey now. With so much parity anything can happen, just get in and if you get hot you can make a run whatever seed u are. That uconn team was so mediocre but they got hot got some breaks and favorable matchups and won the whole thing. G is better than napier anyway!

It's the Catch 22 of the NCAA Tournament. It's unbelievably entertaining, but it's kind of a lousy way to determine a champion.

 

[Delmar]

I know you were being a bit hyperbolic, but Kansas is a very, very good team. Michigan State might be too. But yeah, there's no great team that is expected to win it all, but KU is playing about as well as a team can at this point in the season.

Hyperbolic is fair. Kansas is a nice team; so is Michigan State. Purdue looks pretty good. Oklahoma is fun. None of these teams compare to the best teams a decade ago. One and done has really depleted the skill base and wrecked havoc with the ability of even the high echelon schools building a team over time.

 

[Newhouser]

Their back court was great from the FT line, better handlers and much better at creating their own shot, and Daniels was better than any "big" we have.

 

[Knicks411]

I agree with this, it's also why the comments like we were definitely going to win the title in 2010 before AO got hurt make me laugh

 

[Eric15]

I agree with this, it's also why the comments like we were definitely going to win the title in 2010 before AO got hurt make me laugh

Our 2010 team would beat the 96 Bulls in a 7 game series if AO stays healthy -- everyone knows this.

 

[CorduroyG]

Our 2010 team would beat the 96 Bulls in a 7 game series if AO stays healthy -- everyone knows this.

Definitely. But would the 2010 team beat this years warriors? I think so but it would take at least 6 games, possibly 7. The splash brothers would give our zone fits.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Definitely. But would the 2010 team beat this years warriors? I think so but it would take at least 6 games, possibly 7. The splash brothers would give our zone fits.

Is Ditka coaching the Warriors?

 

[CorduroyG]

Is Ditka coaching the Warriors?

Mini ditka vs full size boeheim

 

[creatorsgam]

Mini ditka vs full size boeheim

Trick question. Ditka is Boeheim.

 

[Roll Cuse]

I know you were being a bit hyperbolic, but Kansas is a very, very good team. Michigan State might be too. But yeah, there's no great team that is expected to win it all, but KU is playing about as well as a team can at this point in the season.

agree with this. The whole "no one is good" narrative goes too far most of the time. Kansas is a 26-4 and hasent lost since january playing in the best conference, and is led by upper classmen. MSU as you mentioned is very good and on par if not better than many of the teams that have made legit runs in march. UNC is as deeply talented as they have been in any of the past few seasons. Nova, while a possible early flop as is so often the case, is better than they have been since the scotty reynolds team, and they were a #1 seed just last year.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Hyperbolic is fair. Kansas is a nice team; so is Michigan State. Purdue looks pretty good. Oklahoma is fun. None of these teams compare to the best teams a decade ago. One and done has really depleted the skill base and wrecked havoc with the ability of even the high echelon schools building a team over time.

What would you call Duke, Wisconsin, and Kentucky from last year? How soon people forget these things.

Kentucky had one of the best teams of all-time last year.

 

[Delmar]

What would you call Duke, Wisconsin, and Kentucky from last year? How soon people forget these things.

Kentucky had one of the best teams of all-time last year.

No they didn't. Not nearly. If they had had Anthony Davis as a senior on their team, then they would have been one of the best teams of all time.

 

[NineOneSeven]

No they didn't. Not nearly. If they had had Anthony Davis as a senior on their team, then they would have been one of the best teams of all time.

39-1.

But okay. "Not nearly". Classic.

 

[Roll Cuse]

39-1.

But okay. "Not nearly". Classic.

Personally think wiscy was a better team and that wasn't just some fluke "best team doesn't always win it all" typa thing. Duke also. Sec was so weak lasts year, UK had their close calls. Even though they were undefeated going in I really was equally impressed w wiscy and duke resumes playing better schedules and having what 3-4 losses? All 3 of them would be the favorite this year but Kansas is legit.

 

[Jasoncuse]

Hyperbolic is fair. Kansas is a nice team; so is Michigan State. Purdue looks pretty good. Oklahoma is fun. None of these teams compare to the best teams a decade ago. One and done has really depleted the skill base and wrecked havoc with the ability of even the high echelon schools building a team over time.

I think it's more than the 1-and-dones ruining the game.

There are more turning pro early, but not enough to significantly impact the game, IMO. So maybe 10-15 more, at most, per season going pro now? That's not a major issue, unless you want to say that kids should be required to stay at least 2 or 3 years if they go to college. That would probably help the college game and cohesion within it.

2002: 48 college/high school early entrants; international
2003: 29 college/high school early entrants; 17 international
2004: 31 college/high school early entrants; 10 international
2005: 49 ; 11
2006: 37 ; 10
2007: 32 ; 6
2008: 39 ; 5
2009: 39 ; 10
2010: 50 ; 5
2011: 42; 6
2012: 49; 7
2013: 45 ; 19
2014: 44 ; 13
2015: 47 ; 11

I think it's the AAU game that's really impacting the college game. Kids aren't developing a full range of skills playing in these glorified pickup tourneys.

I have no idea if it's the case, but I would assume there are probably more international opportunities than there were 10-15 years ago, as well. That's probably lead to more turning pro than should.

 

[Delmar]

39-1.

But okay. "Not nearly". Classic.

39-1 is an incredible feat, and if you measure a team against how much better they were than their competition, then Kentucky's team last year was one of the all time greats. If that's your point, I can't argue with that. However, the current time is not a good one for college basketball. The real talent has one foot out the door the day they arrive on campus. If Kentucky had Davis as a senior, Nerlins as a Junior, that would have been one of the greatest teams ever.

 

[NineOneSeven]

39-1 is an incredible feat, and if you measure a team against how much better they were than their competition, then Kentucky's team last year was one of the all time greats. If that's your point, I can't argue with that. However, the current time is not a good one for college basketball. The real talent has one foot out the door the day they arrive on campus. If Kentucky had Davis as a senior, Nerlins as a Junior, that would have been one of the greatest teams ever.

What about Syracuse 2011-2012? Syracuse 2009-2010? Both better than 2002-2003.

I agree with what you say, in that great teams don't last multiple years OFTEN due to turnover, but there have still been some pretty incredible teams the last decade that have both the seniors and the one and doners.