Boeheim most unlucky coach ever? | Page 4 | Syracusefan.com

Boeheim most unlucky coach ever?

DSyR440 said:
At the end of the day this is all moot.
Expand...


yup. nobody remembers or cares (outside of us). bottom line is our reputation is that of an underachieving tournament team. "yea theyre getting great recruits, yea theyre a top 10 team every year, but theyll flame out before the final 4 just like every year." only way to change that is to make a couple final four runs and win another title. thats why this year im going "all in" for the tournament this year. recruiting has been off the charts last few years, regular season success has been off the charts last few years, but we gotta at least make a final 4 run to be considered with the big boys.
 
BuffOrange said:
Maybe. The whole Marquette thing is an excuse. So we lost to them in a tight game on their home court when they threw in a bunch of miracle 3's. That's supposed to be an unusually dangerous 2nd round opponent because they're a conference foe (which is really a technicality given that we played them only once, just like a bunch of non-conf. teams)? Yah, not buying it.
Expand...

You rarely see rematches between non-conference opponents in the second round either.
 
CorduroyG said:
yup. nobody remembers or cares (outside of us). bottom line is our reputation is that of an underachieving tournament team. "yea theyre getting great recruits, yea theyre a top 10 team every year, but theyll flame out before the final 4 just like every year." only way to change that is to make a couple final four runs and win another title. thats why this year im going "all in" for the tournament this year. recruiting has been off the charts last few years, regular season success has been off the charts last few years, but we gotta at least make a final 4 run to be considered with the big boys.
Expand...

With all due respect, what are you smoking? "To be considered with the big boys?" We are one of the big boys. Our head coach will most likely be the second-winningest coach in NCAA history by season's end. A day or so ago, someone said that 2004-2008 was one of the worst periods in SU sports history. While I realize that was including football, we still had great success in the BET, including one of the greatest individual efforts in any conference tournament ever. Fans at other BCS schools would kill for our resume.

Our reputation is that we win 20 games every year, make the tournament just about every year, and usually get to the Sweet 16. Oh, and our zone is tough to match up against. Hardly anyone on the national stage views us as an underachiever anymore. Various experts pick us for the Final Four year after year, before and after the regular season. Guys like Bob Knight and Jay Bilas prop us up all year. If our rep was still that of an underachiever, we wouldn't be getting that kind of respect.

As for the post you responded to, no one's forcing anyone to read this thread or participate. There's nothing wrong with fans having discussions like this.
 
KingOtis said:
With all due respect, what are you smoking? "To be considered with the big boys?" We are one of the big boys. Our head coach will most likely be the second-winningest coach in NCAA history by season's end. A day or so ago, someone said that 2004-2008 was one of the worst periods in SU sports history. While I realize that was including football, we still had great success in the BET, including one of the greatest individual efforts in any conference tournament ever. Fans at other BCS schools would kill for our resume.

Our reputation is that we win 20 games every year, make the tournament just about every year, and usually get to the Sweet 16. Oh, and our zone is tough to match up against. Hardly anyone on the national stage views us as an underachiever anymore. Various experts pick us for the Final Four year after year, before and after the regular season. Guys like Bob Knight and Jay Bilas prop us up all year. If our rep was still that of an underachiever, we wouldn't be getting that kind of respect.

As for the post you responded to, no one's forcing anyone to read this thread or participate. There's nothing wrong with fans having discussions like this.
Expand...

Given the regular season success we are an underachieving tournament team. Do you disagree? Spare me the six paragraph answer too.
 
KingOtis said:
With all due respect, what are you smoking? "To be considered with the big boys?" We are one of the big boys. Our head coach will most likely be the second-winningest coach in NCAA history by season's end. A day or so ago, someone said that 2004-2008 was one of the worst periods in SU sports history. While I realize that was including football, we still had great success in the BET, including one of the greatest individual efforts in any conference tournament ever. Fans at other BCS schools would kill for our resume.

Our reputation is that we win 20 games every year, make the tournament just about every year, and usually get to the Sweet 16. Oh, and our zone is tough to match up against. Hardly anyone on the national stage views us as an underachiever anymore. Various experts pick us for the Final Four year after year, before and after the regular season. Guys like Bob Knight and Jay Bilas prop us up all year. If our rep was still that of an underachiever, we wouldn't be getting that kind of respect.

As for the post you responded to, no one's forcing anyone to read this thread or participate. There's nothing wrong with fans having discussions like this.
Expand...


when i say "big boys" i mean teams like duke and kansas and north carolina and kentucky and ucla and indiana, etc. 4 finals fours and 1 national championship doesnt come close to the resumes of those teams. we're an elite regular season team, but when it matters most we're not elite. elite teams get to final 4's more than once a decade.

and when did i say i have a problem with these discussions? i love these discussions, my point was nobody outside of the hardcore syracuse fans give a crap that we were underseeded in 2005, or played michigan st in michigan in the sweet 16 in 2000, or that we lost our starting center before the tourny in 2010 and 2012. we at least need a final 4 run to put an exclamation point on the success we've had the last 4-5 years.
 
With all this curious "unlucky" talk, I'm thinking that maybe our perception is skewed by comparing recent years to our previous long stretches of tremendous luck.

In my first two decades of following Syracuse basketball, we had virtually no one miss time with an injury. Rautins got hurt in 1982 or '83, Raf Addision sprained his ankle and was hobbled (but didn't miss too many - if any - games) in 1986. Scott McCorkle broke his hand in '92 or '93 and missed a month. After that, I don't remember a Syracuse player (much less a starter) missing time until Shumpert's eye problem in 2001 (that cost us the Big East championship, but he only missed half a game, I think). Mookie Watkins hurt his hand in '04-'05. Then we had another clean season before Devendorf/Rautins/Onuaku and others started to go down.

We had two decades of nearly perfect attendance. That's good luck, not bad luck. Just about any other fanbase would love to have had as few injuries as we've had over the years.
 
CorduroyG said:
and when did i say i have a problem with these discussions?
Expand...

That wasn't directed at you.

Until this year's #1 ranking, Indiana hasn't been relevant for a while.
 
KingOtis said:
With all due respect, what are you smoking? "To be considered with the big boys?" We are one of the big boys. Our head coach will most likely be the second-winningest coach in NCAA history by season's end. A day or so ago, someone said that 2004-2008 was one of the worst periods in SU sports history. While I realize that was including football, we still had great success in the BET, including one of the greatest individual efforts in any conference tournament ever. Fans at other BCS schools would kill for our resume.

Our reputation is that we win 20 games every year, make the tournament just about every year, and usually get to the Sweet 16. Oh, and our zone is tough to match up against. Hardly anyone on the national stage views us as an underachiever anymore. Various experts pick us for the Final Four year after year, before and after the regular season. Guys like Bob Knight and Jay Bilas prop us up all year. If our rep was still that of an underachiever, we wouldn't be getting that kind of respect.

As for the post you responded to, no one's forcing anyone to read this thread or participate. There's nothing wrong with fans having discussions like this.
Expand...

I live in Charlotte for almost 20 years now. In fairness to both of you, the answer lies in the middle. You both have a little too microscopic view of the program. JB is a respected coach, and SU is a respected program.

BUT - in the Big Picture, until the last year or two, we were not yet among the very elite programs, the ones that seem to contend virtually every year or nearly so. We may have arrived with these last few recruiting classes. But the TOP shelf teams remain Duke, UNC, UK, KU, and probably Ohio State and Florida, maybe UCLA. Was UConn until Calhoun left and maybe and the Big East was crippled. We are likely there now, but we weren't 5 years ago.
 
HarrisonJBounel said:
BUT - in the Big Picture, until the last year or two, we were not yet among the very elite programs, the ones that seem to contend virtually every year or nearly so. We may have arrived with these last few recruiting classes. But the TOP shelf teams remain Duke, UNC, UK, KU, and probably Ohio State and Florida, maybe UCLA. Was UConn until Calhoun left and maybe and the Big East was crippled. We are likely there now, but we weren't 5 years ago.
Expand...

Ohio State?

If anything, Michigan State should be on your list. And if it's as simple as Calhoun leaving to bring down UConn, I don't think Florida or UCLA belong either. (Although UCLA is one of the top five programs of all time, no question.)
 
HarrisonJBounel said:
I live in Charlotte for almost 20 years now. In fairness to both of you, the answer lies in the middle. You both have a little too microscopic view of the program. JB is a respected coach, and SU is a respected program.

BUT - in the Big Picture, until the last year or two, we were not yet among the very elite programs, the ones that seem to contend virtually every year or nearly so. We may have arrived with these last few recruiting classes. But the TOP shelf teams remain Duke, UNC, UK, KU, and probably Ohio State and Florida, maybe UCLA. Was UConn until Calhoun left and maybe and the Big East was crippled. We are likely there now, but we weren't 5 years ago.
Expand...

I don't think we're there till we get to a final 4. Its been 10 years.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk 2
 
KingOtis said:
Ohio State?

If anything, Michigan State should be on your list. And if it's as simple as Calhoun leaving to bring down UConn, I don't think Florida or UCLA belong either. (Although UCLA is one of the top five programs of all time, no question.)
Expand...

Yes - Michigan State should be on the list. But it's like what was discussed on another thread. A sign of an elite program is it's ability to create NBA players. Right now, SU has 4 (Carmelo, Dion, Warrick (barely), and Wesley Johnson (barely)). The other schools on that list have two or three times that each.
 
HarrisonJBounel said:
Yes - Michigan State should be on the list. But it's like what was discussed on another thread. A sign of an elite program is it's ability to create NBA players. Right now, SU has 4 (Carmelo, Dion, Warrick (barely), and Wesley Johnson (barely)). The other schools on that list have two or three times that each.
Expand...

I don't agree with that at all. It's college basketball, not the pros.
 
CorduroyG said:
I don't think we're there till we get to a final 4. Its been 10 years.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk 2
Expand...

I guess it took the 89th time making the same comment before I understood your position. :bang:
 
KingOtis said:
I don't agree with that at all. It's college basketball, not the pros.
Expand...

The discussion at this point has morphed into whether SU is an "elite" team. "Elite" is a very subjective term. To me, an elite team gets 5-star recruits, truly contends for the NC, and puts quality players in the NBA, year-in, year-out. That is the pulse of an elite program.

To me, it's not enough to get a 5-star recruit once a decade, have a 20 win season most of the time, make a final four once a decade, and have a couple players in the NBA. To me that is not elite. It's not enough to be the best team in New York or even in the Northeast- it's a whole big world out there.
 
HarrisonJBounel said:
The discussion at this point has morphed into whether SU is an "elite" team. "Elite" is a very subjective term. To me, an elite team gets 5-star recruits, truly contends for the NC, and puts quality players in the NBA, year-in, year-out. That is the pulse of an elite program.

To me, it's not enough to get a 5-star recruit once a decade, have a 20 win season most of the time, make a final four once a decade, and have a couple players in the NBA. To me that is not elite. It's not enough to be the best team in New York or even in the Northeast- it's a whole big world out there.
Expand...

Then we differ on some of the qualifications, most notably developing players for the NBA. I couldn't care less about whether or not our players make it to the NBA. I don't think the ability to recruit 5-star athletes translates into elite status either. JB has developed 3-star recruits into All-Americans. That's elite. It's a lot easier to win games with the most talented HS players in the country than it is with players that you actually need to teach. Yet JB has won 20 games every season with just two exceptions. Some with top five recruiting classes, sure, and others with a collection of projects.

Would it be fair to say that the top ten programs in college basketball are all elite? I'm not talking about this week's rankings, I'm talking about the perennial powerhouses. If we're not on that list, which ten programs are ahead of us?
 
KingOtis said:
Then we differ on some of the qualifications, most notably developing players for the NBA. I couldn't care less about whether or not our players make it to the NBA. I don't think the ability to recruit 5-star athletes translates into elite status either. JB has developed 3-star recruits into All-Americans. That's elite. It's a lot easier to win games with the most talented HS players in the country than it is with players that you actually need to teach. Yet JB has won 20 games every season with just two exceptions. Some with top five recruiting classes, sure, and others with a collection of projects.

Would it be fair to say that the top ten programs in college basketball are all elite? I'm not talking about this week's rankings, I'm talking about the perennial powerhouses. If we're not on that list, which ten programs are ahead of us?
Expand...

Strengthening my point from earlier that we underachieve in the tournament. That is fact.

Would love to see where this next argument about elite programs goes. Sometimes it's hard for people here to remove orange colored glasses. Plus, what's the criteria for elite? For example: Uconn has three championships, Florida has back to back championships, we have one.
 
DSyR440 said:
Strengthening my point from earlier that we underachieve in the tournament. That is fact.

Would love to see where this next argument about elite programs goes. Sometimes it's hard for people here to remove orange colored glasses. Plus, what's the criteria for elite? For example: Uconn has three championships, Florida has back to back championships, we have one.
Expand...

Hasn't Boeheim pretty much achieved what you would have expected based on his seedings, through his history. There have been some early exits, but he also won a title as a 3 seed and made the title game as a 4.
 
KingOtis said:
Then we differ on some of the qualifications, most notably developing players for the NBA. I couldn't care less about whether or not our players make it to the NBA. I don't think the ability to recruit 5-star athletes translates into elite status either. JB has developed 3-star recruits into All-Americans. That's elite. It's a lot easier to win games with the most talented HS players in the country than it is with players that you actually need to teach. Yet JB has won 20 games every season with just two exceptions. Some with top five recruiting classes, sure, and others with a collection of projects.

Would it be fair to say that the top ten programs in college basketball are all elite? I'm not talking about this week's rankings, I'm talking about the perennial powerhouses. If we're not on that list, which ten programs are ahead of us?
Expand...

Developing 3-star recruits into All-Americans is very commendable. But it is what 40 or 50 coaches in America do. That doesn't make it elite.

Winning 20 games most years is very commendable. But it is what 40 or 50 coaches in America do. That doesn't make it elite.
 
MyMeloMyMan said:
Like everything else we discuss each day...
Expand...

............

If you don't understand the point I was making [sitting here day dreaming about what could have been if this or that happened/didn't happen in the PAST], well, god bless you.

No question there have been unlucky moments. Like someone else said, dozens of teams can make similar arguments though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Monday for Basketball
Replies
7
Views
636
sutomcat
sutomcat

Forum statistics

Threads
169,471
Messages
4,833,198
Members
5,978
Latest member
newmom4503

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
1,535
Total visitors
1,667
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom