during the slide when did you first start to think...

[Ryand877]

Georgia Tech is when reality set in. However, I first got really concerned when Keita got hurt (Vs. Clemson I believe). I saw him limping off and said to myself , we're gonna have problems the rest of the year. I know we beat Pitt and NC, but the fatigue started to set in and the cumulative effect on the other players started to rise really fast. Keita is one of my favorites, but he wasn't the same when he came back.

 

[Garbs]

Cornell. (Not really, only kidding). No offense but anyone who says they knew from the St. Francis game is full of it. Every good team has a game like that at least once early in a season, there was no way to tell anything from that game and no way to believe it was an omen of doom, especially considering right afterwards we beat a bunch of good to pretty good teams--Minnesota, Cal, Baylor, Indiana, St John's, Villanova--all of which likely would have killed St. Francis.

The game that made me go hmmmm... was the first BC game when we couldn't defend the 3 and had no way to score, and the reason I noticed that game was because it was a league game. If BC can give us trouble, we can lose to anyone I thought.

Frankly, I never thought this was one of JB's better coaching jobs. It's one thing to believe in what you're doing not to want to change it up, but when Coleman went down and Baye got hurt, the coaches should have had a plan B in place but they didn't. This team could have used a plan B. It might have maximized what they had rather than shrunk them like plan A did.

agreed, that game @BC created the blueprint of how to beat this team

 

[retro44]

Early January when Kenpom had our offensive pace rated near the very bottom. You could tell right then Boeheim had no intentions of using his bench and just trying to conserve the players energy and wear and tear.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

At no point did I think that was who we were.

Still don't.

 

[SoBeCuse]

At no point did I think that was who we were.

Still don't.

Living in denial?

 

[NashvilleOrange]

I was so confused. I went back and forth and I really thought we could make the Final 4 or lose in the first round. I guess it really dawned on me that we weren't the undefeated force we saw early in the season when UVA blew us out.

 

[RF2044]

At no point did I think that was who we were.

Still don't.

I'm with you. I knew that the team had offensive limitations, but I never expected the collapse to be so swift nor absolute.

Its easy in retrospect to condemn the team as flawed and inadequate, but they were better than their postseason [this year reminds me a lot of '91 in that regard].

 

[OttoMets]

NC St. at home. They had some crazy travel scenario and flew in a few hours before the game. Barely won that game and that was the third game in a row scoring in the 50s. Those were the 'bad' wins and there obviously is such a thing.

Yeah. One couldn't dream up a better opponent -- one decent offensive player, small and unathletic point guard, turnover-prone, undisciplined and loose defensively -- or game scenario for SU, and we played horribly again.

The first Miami game concerned me; subsequent poor performances against middle-of-the-pack (at best) opponents fueled the concern; State provided confirmation.

We had a lot of warning. It was disappointing to see so few changes made in February and March.

 

[Jack Hall]

holy c.rap, this isnt just a little shooting slump, this is really who we are (which is not very good) and we could easily get bounced in the 1st weekend?

for me it was the nc state game in acc tourny. i was able to make excuses for every loss. BC? egh, pressure of being undefeated got to them, they were bound for a stinker. duke? bs charge call, should have won. virginia? yea we got blitzed in 2nd half but were winning at halftime and was a 1 pt game with 12 minutes left. and no grant in 2nd half, final score wasnt as bad as it looked. ga tech? ok at this point i started really worrying but still no grant, at full strength we'll be fine. and the fsu game really restored my faith in the team, grant and bmk were back, we played well, scored above 70, we're gonna get our 2nd wind at the right time...then the nc st game happened and that convinced me we just arent that good. there were zero excuses that game. well rested, full strength, mediocre opponent, first acc tourny game in our history, coming off a big win where we seemed to get back on track, and we're gonna play like that? had low expectations for a deep tourny run after that game.

To me it was the ncst win. JB said after that game that CJ didnt have his legs on his jumper, and i felt that applied to 2-3 key guys. Problem w that statement, when you are playing 37-40 mins per game, your legs might not come back. That game, even tho we won and i loved the ending, got me very concerned. Altho i did not see us losing in first weekend, i was just worried we werent nearly as good as we had hyped the team up as the team looked spent.

 

[OttoMets]

Cornell. (Not really, only kidding). No offense but anyone who says they knew from the St. Francis game is full of it. Every good team has a game like that at least once early in a season, there was no way to tell anything from that game and no way to believe it was an omen of doom, especially considering right afterwards we beat a bunch of good to pretty good teams--Minnesota, Cal, Baylor, Indiana, St John's, Villanova--all of which likely would have killed St. Francis.

The game that made me go hmmmm... was the first BC game when we couldn't defend the 3 and had no way to score, and the reason I noticed that game was because it was a league game. If BC can give us trouble, we can lose to anyone I thought.

Frankly, I never thought this was one of JB's better coaching jobs. It's one thing to believe in what you're doing not to want to change it up, but when Coleman went down and Baye got hurt, the coaches should have had a plan B in place but they didn't. This team could have used a plan B. It might have maximized what they had rather than shrunk them like plan A did.

Good points.

Many teams have a game like St. Francis -- especially in the first couple weeks while integrating a number of new players. Further, SU always has difficulty with opponents who slow the game down and play tight man defense.

A game like that is to be expected.

 

[Millhouse]

holy c.rap, this isnt just a little shooting slump, this is really who we are (which is not very good) and we could easily get bounced in the 1st weekend?

for me it was the nc state game in acc tourny. i was able to make excuses for every loss. BC? egh, pressure of being undefeated got to them, they were bound for a stinker. duke? bs charge call, should have won. virginia? yea we got blitzed in 2nd half but were winning at halftime and was a 1 pt game with 12 minutes left. and no grant in 2nd half, final score wasnt as bad as it looked. ga tech? ok at this point i started really worrying but still no grant, at full strength we'll be fine. and the fsu game really restored my faith in the team, grant and bmk were back, we played well, scored above 70, we're gonna get our 2nd wind at the right time...then the nc st game happened and that convinced me we just arent that good. there were zero excuses that game. well rested, full strength, mediocre opponent, first acc tourny game in our history, coming off a big win where we seemed to get back on track, and we're gonna play like that? had low expectations for a deep tourny run after that game.

for me it was the maryland game (had to check the archives to be sure)

after that game when i started obsessing over cooney and gbinije's shooting

 

[sufandu]

I had concerns before our first loss. We weren't shooting well but still winning, but was afraid it would catch up with us at some point. My fandom kept me optimistic, however. I decided it was who we were during the Ga Tech loss.

 

[RF2044]

Cornell. (Not really, only kidding). No offense but anyone who says they knew from the St. Francis game is full of it. Every good team has a game like that at least once early in a season, there was no way to tell anything from that game and no way to believe it was an omen of doom, especially considering right afterwards we beat a bunch of good to pretty good teams--Minnesota, Cal, Baylor, Indiana, St John's, Villanova--all of which likely would have killed St. Francis.

The game that made me go hmmmm... was the first BC game when we couldn't defend the 3 and had no way to score, and the reason I noticed that game was because it was a league game. If BC can give us trouble, we can lose to anyone I thought.

Frankly, I never thought this was one of JB's better coaching jobs. It's one thing to believe in what you're doing not to want to change it up, but when Coleman went down and Baye got hurt, the coaches should have had a plan B in place but they didn't. This team could have used a plan B. It might have maximized what they had rather than shrunk them like plan A did.

Years from now, when people look at the schedule and the highlighted teams above as "Ws" it is going to seem like we beat some damn good teams. On paper, those are solid wins against major conference teams. Unfortunately, none of those teams ended up being all that great [I know, I know--Villanova was ranked fairly high most of the year].

Great on paper wins, but I'm not sure that they were great barometers. BTW, where did the offense go after that Villanova game? We saw intermittent flashes only the rest of the way--against Duke, against FSU, against Western Michigan. That might be about it for the ENTIRE rest of the year.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Yeah. One couldn't dream up a better opponent -- one decent offensive player, small and unathletic point guard, turnover-prone, undisciplined and loose defensively -- or game scenario for SU, and we played horribly again.

The first Miami game concerned me; subsequent poor performances against middle-of-the-pack (at best) opponents fueled the concern; State provided confirmation.

We had a lot of warning. It was disappointing to see so few changes made in February and March.

Yeah, well said. Miami was a bit of a red flag but I thought their size and unorthodox zone screwed us up a bit. Yeah, and as someone else mentioned NC St was playing poorly at that stage of the season and outplayed us. That was the third 50 point scoring game in a row!! Proof is in the pudding as they say. GoHam nailed it too...FSU was the fluke.

 

[manleyzoo]

Early January when Kenpom had our offensive pace rated near the very bottom. You could tell right then Boeheim had no intentions of using his bench and just trying to conserve the players energy and wear and tear.

Agreed. When Coleman went down and Baye got hurt, instead of shortening the bench to 5.5 guys, Boeheim could have taken the longer view of the season, bit his tongue and played the freshman, realizing that he needed to give the team more opportunities to score off loose balls, steals, etc. and doing that could make a huge difference in how the team fared late in the season. His job is to put the players in the best possible situations to be successful--can't really say he did that this year.

The stuck idea that you can't win with more than one defense is just complete BS. And, the idea that you can't play guys who aren't ready because they just hurt you is also hogwash. It's hard to believe that the three sons couldn't have contributed more--not just to give the stars a rest (another old idea that players these days don't need subs)--but also to change up the same look we gave each team. Those guys couldn't run around and create havoc for a few mins each game? It's one thing to play the same way when you've got better players than the next guy. It's quite another to stick to a non-working plan just because that's how you do things.

It wasn't the players who fell apart at the end, it was the coaches with a flawed blueprint.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Years from now, when people look at the schedule and the highlighted teams above as "Ws" it is going to seem like we beat some damn good teams. On paper, those are solid wins against major conference teams. Unfortunately, none of those teams ended up being all that great [I know, I know--Villanova was ranked fairly high most of the year].

Great on paper wins, but I'm not sure that they were great barometers. BTW, where did the offense go after that Villanova game? We saw intermittent flashes only the rest of the way--against Duke, against FSU, against Western Michigan. That might be about it for the ENTIRE rest of the year.

Good post. Just a strange season. A combination of many things like you say. Duke was a hoax though. That is clear. They don't defend well especially on the interior and sometimes they give up dribble penetration easy. Would not have wanted to play Mercer.

I think it is hard to accept but fairly simple to diagnose what happened. The team started to get scouted well and could not improve. Shooting went south. Coleman gone. Not enough playmakers emerged. Not enough general ballhandling as a whole team. Bench was nothing. Boeheim admits playing Ennis/Cooney too much. Ennis was the only guy who could pass. Rak could but he never got the ball much. They just weren't good enough to overcome all of this. Perhaps Boeheim could've used the bench more but if they truly weren't ready then I'm not sure what all of that means. Lots of underdeveloped skills I suppose. Still a very good season, obviously. Just a strange one.

 

[Cowtown]

Yeah, well said. Miami was a bit of a red flag but I thought their size and unorthodox zone screwed us up a bit. Yeah, and as someone else mentioned NC St was playing poorly at that stage of the season and outplayed us. That was the third 50 point scoring game in a row!! Proof is in the pudding as they say. GoHam nailed it too...FSU was the fluke.

The NC State / BC back to back home games had "something's not right here" written all over them. The first Miami game was easily shrugged off by all of us as a "What" at the time, however in retrospect it easily could have been the first real warning something was amiss in Orangetown.

 

[Knicks411]

There were warning signs for a lot of the season, as people have pointed out here, but the Ga Tech game really slammed it home for me. Basically got outplayed the entire 40 minutes at home, on senior night, by a bad team.

 

[CorduroyG]

Anyone saying the st francis game is giving themselves way too much credit. After we won in Maui and spanked Indiana and beat up nova and embarrassed unc and beat duke in 1 of the best regular season games ever I don't remember anyone saying "hold on fellas, we're not that good, we barely beat st francis".

 

[Knicks411]

Anyone saying the st francis game is giving themselves way too much credit. After we won in Maui and spanked Indiana and beat up nova and embarrassed unc and beat duke in 1 of the best regular season games ever I don't remember anyone saying "hold on fellas, we're not that good, we barely beat st francis".

Yeah that was definitely a concerning performance at the time, but it was very early in the season, we were integrating some new pieces, and then we played really well for the next 6-8 weeks or whatever it was.

 

[pearl31]

Anyone saying the st francis game is giving themselves way too much credit. After we won in Maui and spanked Indiana and beat up nova and embarrassed unc and beat duke in 1 of the best regular season games ever I don't remember anyone saying "hold on fellas, we're not that good, we barely beat st francis".

Exactly.

 

[cuseincincy]

St Francis game. That was the beginning of a string of really lucky wins. People would say to me: "Wow, Syracuse is undefeated and Number 1." And I would reply that we weren't as good as our record might suggest. Seriously, I had no delusions about the team all season. The flaws were so apparent.

Agree 100%. Not even a tough answer.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Anyone saying the st francis game is giving themselves way too much credit. After we won in Maui and spanked Indiana and beat up nova and embarrassed unc and beat duke in 1 of the best regular season games ever I don't remember anyone saying "hold on fellas, we're not that good, we barely beat st francis".

Because how would that have been taken here? Not well. Not even worth opening that can of worms.

We play to our level of competition very often. The zone helps this occur, imo.

 

[retro44]

The reason why I picked early January is our pre conference games were easier than our league schedule and our offensive pace was anemic. We dropped about 80 spots from the year before and really looking at our past history of being a scoring team this falls squarely on the staff, whether by recruiting or strategy.

And by looking at the times when the freshmen were in I think their offensive game was better than what the starters brought as whole...they wanted to score in a faster pace game.

 

[ClamOtto]

Anyone saying the st francis game is giving themselves way too much credit. After we won in Maui and spanked Indiana and beat up nova and embarrassed unc and beat duke in 1 of the best regular season games ever I don't remember anyone saying "hold on fellas, we're not that good, we barely beat st francis".

After the St. Francis game a friend asked me what happened and I said "I think we're just not that good this year." And I continued to be nagged by doubts throughout the pre-conference because we couldn't blow anybody out. I know a W is W but I still think it says something when you can't put up 30+ point wins against lower-tier schools. But I'll admit that by the Nova game I had drunk the Kool-Aid and started to believe our slow pace just didn't lead to blow-outs. First Duke game was the peak of confidence. By the Clemson game I was back to thinking we had some real problems.