Consistency - Syracuse is just one of three college basketball programs...

[orangenirvana]

CORRECTION: One of FOUR college basketball programs that have won at least one NCAA Tournament game over the last four seasons (can you name the other two?).

That's pretty good.

That's been the brilliance of Boeheim over his career...consistency. Syracuse is always good. Even in their worst seasons, they're on the bubble - and that is very rare.

Granted, his teams are rarely great. But consistency is very underrated, imo. A program like uconn for example is either great or really freakin' bad. They seem to alternate year after year. That's gotta be frustrating.

I like supporting a program that you know will win at least 25 games and has a chance of a run every single season.

There aren't many programs like that.

Thank you, JB. Let's keep it going...

 

[arbitragegls]

great statement and question...and I cannot. Unfortunately, it is not consistency that usually is rewarded and/or talked about...it is going above the expected or falling below the expected. Without naming a couple of certain players on our team...consistency is not gettng them the praise they deserve. It is those that have a terrific game and then plays that cost a game...which is better as a fan, sportscaster, evaluator. I personally like the consistent...whether it be consistently very good or not so much...at least you know what to expect...and when it is consistently good, like JB...our expectations continue to increase and therefore that consistent output does not meet our rising expectations.

 

[Millhouse]

that has won at least one NCAA Tournament game over the last four seasons (can you name the other two?).

That's pretty good.

That's been the brilliance of Boeheim over his career...consistency. Syracuse is always good. Even in their worst seasons, they're on the bubble - and that is very rare.

Granted, his teams are rarely great. But consistency is very underrated, imo. A program like uconn for example is either great or really freakin' bad. They seem to alternate year after year. That's gotta be frustrating.

I like supporting a program that you know will win at least 25 games and has a chance of a run every single season.

There aren't many programs like that.

Thank you, JB. Let's keep it going...

i for one would gladly accept more risk for more reward. i think it goes back to man v zone. zone is always good low risk but great man teams are better than great zone teams.

 

[WT716]

What are the other two schools?

 

[Eric15]

that has won at least one NCAA Tournament game over the last four seasons (can you name the other two?).

That's pretty good.

That's been the brilliance of Boeheim over his career...consistency. Syracuse is always good. Even in their worst seasons, they're on the bubble - and that is very rare.

Granted, his teams are rarely great. But consistency is very underrated, imo. A program like uconn for example is either great or really freakin' bad. They seem to alternate year after year. That's gotta be frustrating.

I like supporting a program that you know will win at least 25 games and has a chance of a run every single season.

There aren't many programs like that.

Thank you, JB. Let's keep it going...

Let's see, it's not Duke, it's not UConn, UNC went to the NIT in 2010 and I think Kentucky went to the NIT in 2009.

I'm going to say Kansas and Michigan State.

 

[orangenirvana]

i for one would gladly accept more risk for more reward. i think it goes back to man v zone. zone is always good low risk but great man teams are better than great zone teams.

Maybe. It's hard to tell. The basketball meatheads will tell you that man-to-man is the only real defense, and the only one you can win championships with. I'm skeptical of that mindset. We had a damn good defense this season, and could have easily won it all.

There's not much difference between a national champion and a team that loses in the Sweet 16. More often than not, you not only have to be good, but lucky as well. Syracuse hasn't had much of that dumb luck lately.

(I know many think "luck" is a cop-out and should be ignored - like referees - but it's still worth noting when looking at the big picture.)

 

[TheRoyalIveyFund]

i for one would gladly accept more risk for more reward. i think it goes back to man v zone. zone is always good low risk but great man teams are better than great zone teams.

I'm the opposite. I'll take a steady growing stock with a 3-4% annual dividend every year instead of landing the apple and google in between pets.com and worldcom.

I also disagree with the zone, too. Two of the last three years, the zone was good enough to win us the title. In each of those years, we lose the anchor to that zone. With Fab anchoring the zone this year, this year is a different story. Sullinger does run over Fab like he did Baye on two consecutive possessions, or Thomas push Fab out of the way like he did Rak. We needed more offense this year vs OSU, not D.

 

[orangenirvana]

Let's see, it's not Duke, it's not UConn, UNC went to the NIT in 2010 and I think Kentucky went to the NIT in 2009.

I'm going to say Kansas and Michigan State.

Kansas - correct
Michigan State - incorrect (lost to UCLA in the first round as a 10 seed last year)

But you're close (hint: it's a Big Ten school)

 

[Eric15]

Kansas - correct
Michigan State - incorrect (lost to UCLA in the first round as a 10 seed last year)

But you're close (hint: it's a Big Ten school)

My initial thought was Ohio St. but I think Siena knocked them off in the first round a couple years ago. The only other choice is Purdue so I'll say them.

 

[orangenirvana]

My initial thought was Ohio St. but I think Siena knocked them off in the first round a couple years ago. The only other choice is Purdue so I'll say them.

Purdue is correct, but I missed one. There's actually four (another Big Ten team).

And since I screwed that up, there might actually be more than four.

I probably should have said Syracuse is one of TWO basketball programs to have won at least one Tournament game over the last four seasons AND finished in the Top 20 during that time.

Regardless, the point remains - Syracuse is good.

 

[Millhouse]

Purdue is correct, but I missed one. There's actually four (another Big Ten team).

And since I screwed that up, there might actually be more than four.

I probably should have said Syracuse is one of TWO basketball programs to have won at least one Tournament game over the last four seasons AND finished in the Top 20 during that time.

Regardless, the point remains - Syracuse is good.

does purdue's inclusion in that list make you rethink how much that list means?

purdue is like the 80s seahawks. pretty forgettable but always there.

i don't think fans of the teams we are surprised aren't on the list would change places with us.

(that sentence would be way better if it were in English but it's not, I know)

 

[orangenirvana]

does purdue's inclusion in that list make you rethink how much that list means?

purdue is like the 80s seahawks. pretty forgettable but always there.

i don't think fans of the teams we are surprised aren't on the list would change places with us.

(that sentence would be way better if it were in English but it's not, I know)

Nah, not really. That's still only four programs out of 344. Putting Syracuse in the 1.16 percentile over a four-year stretch.

And again...you can also take the perspective that Syracuse and Kansas are the only two programs in the nation to finish in the Top 20 in each season over the last four years.

 

[Czar]

Wisconsin.

 

[orangenirvana]

Wisconsin.

Bing!

1. Kansas - Sweet 16, 2nd Round, Elite 8, Final Four
2. Syracuse - Sweet 16, Sweet 16, 2nd Round, Elite 8
3. Wisconsin - 2nd Round, 2nd Round, Sweet 16, Sweet 16
4. Purdue - Sweet 16, Sweet 16, 2nd Round, 2nd Round

 

[br801]

CORRECTION: One of FOUR college basketball programs that have won at least one NCAA Tournament game over the last four seasons (can you name the other two?).

That's pretty good.

That's been the brilliance of Boeheim over his career...consistency. Syracuse is always good. Even in their worst seasons, they're on the bubble - and that is very rare.

Granted, his teams are rarely great. But consistency is very underrated, imo. A program like uconn for example is either great or really freakin' bad. They seem to alternate year after year. That's gotta be frustrating.

I like supporting a program that you know will win at least 25 games and has a chance of a run every single season.

There aren't many programs like that.

Thank you, JB. Let's keep it going...

That post is soft.

 

[suthrills]

Syracuse is a very good program and not elite. It's an argument this board has been having since the start of the board.
It's amazing to know that we will finish with a winning record in the BE (no small feat), 20+ wins overall, make the tournament and have a chance every year. It's disappointing to know that the likelihood of us making a deep run is minimal. It's all part of being a Syracuse fan.

One quibble: As much as I hate Uconn, they are rarely "really freakin' bad". Their lows are certainly lower than JB's but they haven't had a losing record I believe since Calhouns first year. They make the NIT in their bad years except for one year. Really freakin' bad is what Nova went thru this year.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I'm the opposite. I'll take a steady growing stock with a 3-4% annual dividend every year instead of landing the apple and google in between pets.com and worldcom.

I also disagree with the zone, too. Two of the last three years, the zone was good enough to win us the title. In each of those years, we lose the anchor to that zone. With Fab anchoring the zone this year, this year is a different story. Sullinger does run over Fab like he did Baye on two consecutive possessions, or Thomas push Fab out of the way like he did Rak. We needed more offense this year vs OSU, not D.

Agreed. Bad offense has derailed us the last few tourneys.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm the opposite. I'll take a steady growing stock with a 3-4% annual dividend every year instead of landing the apple and google in between pets.com and worldcom.

how many florida or uconn fans would've traded places with us? (uconn fans might going forward with the acc and calhoun and all that but i'm talking about past seasons)

 

[NKR1978]

Syracuse is a very good program and not elite. It's an argument this board has been having since the start of the board.
It's amazing to know that we will finish with a winning record in the BE (no small feat), 20+ wins overall, make the tournament and have a chance every year. It's disappointing to know that the likelihood of us making a deep run is minimal. It's all part of being a Syracuse fan.

One quibble: As much as I hate Uconn, they are rarely "really freakin' bad". Their lows are certainly lower than JB's but they haven't had a losing record I believe since Calhouns first year. They make the NIT in their bad years except for one year. Really freakin' bad is what Nova went thru this year.

What is elite?

There are roughly 344 D1 basketball programs. Sweet 16 is the top 4.65% of programs. A final four in lacrosse only puts you in the top 8% of men's lacrosse programs for a particular year (assuming roughly 50 D1 programs).

Over the last 10 years we're better than all but UConn, UNC, Duke, Florida, MSU, Kansas and Kentucky.
We're on par with OSU, Louisville and UCLA. Maybe we can put Memphis and Butler there. I think these are the only programs that wouldn't trade their last 10 seasons for our last ten. Everyone else in the country would trade with us in a heartbeat. That would put us in the top 3.5% of all programs in D1 basketball within the last 10 years. I think that's elite, but without a Final Four next year I think we drop pretty far if you only go back 10 years from 2013.

 

[orangenirvana]

What is elite?

There are roughly 344 D1 basketball programs. Sweet 16 is the top 4.65% of programs. A final four in lacrosse only puts you in the top 8% of men's lacrosse programs for a particular year (assuming roughly 50 D1 programs).

Over the last 10 years we're better than all but UConn, UNC, Duke, Florida, MSU, Kansas and Kentucky.
We're on par with OSU, Louisville and UCLA. Maybe we can put Memphis and Butler there. I think these are the only programs that wouldn't trade their last 10 seasons for our last ten. Everyone else in the country would trade with us in a heartbeat. That would put us in the top 3.5% of all programs in D1 basketball within the last 10 years. I think that's elite, but without a Final Four next year I think we drop pretty far if you only go back 10 years from 2013.

Good question. Everyone has their own definition of 'elite' when it comes to college basketball.

 

[br801]

Anything of substance to add to this thread, newbie? If not, then your best bet is to just continue lurking.

It was intended as sarcasm, what with all the posts around here claiming that this player or that player is soft, or that the program is underachieving if it fails to win a title.

Sorry to ruffle your feathers. Next time I'll use the winking emoticon.

 

[orangenirvana]

It was intended as sarcasm, what with all the posts around here claiming that this player or that player is soft, or that the program is underachieving if it fails to win a title.

Sorry to ruffle your feathers. Next time I'll use the winking emoticon.

Consider my feathers unruffled.

 

[br801]

Consider my feathers unruffled.

It's a all good, man. Pretty sure we're on the same side of things for the most part.

 

[omniorange]

We are not yet "elite". We need two more NCs to become "elite". Which is why the 2010 year is such a crushing blow, because that was our best bet for getting that 2nd.

However, elite is more than just having won 3 NCAAs. UConn with their three championships and Florida with their two (if they were to get their third soon), still come up short of being "elite" in my eyes. Louisville joins elite status with their third championship, but Cincinnati does not.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[BlueCurtain]

You can theoretically win a title in spite of a zone defense -- provided you have a steady offense to withstand the Wisconsins and Vermonts when they are feeling good.