Having to win the conference tourney to make NCAA

[Eric15]

Between 1979-1980 and 2018-2019 (40 seasons), we only had one single season where we probably had to win the BET/ACCT to make the NCAA Tournament, and that was 1981-82 when we finished 16-13.

Between 2019-20 and 2022-23 (4 seasons), we will probably have three seasons where that was the case.

That's triple the number of times in 10 times fewer seasons. Depressingly extraordinary.

 

[Brooky03]

Between 1979-1980 and 2018-2019 (40 seasons), we only had one single season where we probably had to win the BET/ACCT to make the NCAA Tournament, and that was 1981-82 when we finished 16-13.

Between 2019-20 and 2022-23 (4 seasons), we will probably have three seasons where that was the case.

That's triple the number of times in 10 times fewer seasons. Depressingly extraordinary.

What are the qualifiers for this? For instance, the GMac 2006 year came to mind right away.

Wouldn’t any year where we missed the NCAAT count as a year we had to win the conference tournament to get in?

 

[Eric15]

What are the qualifiers for this? For instance, the GMac 2006 year came to mind right away.

Wouldn’t any year where we missed the NCAAT count as a year we had to win the conference tournament to get in?

Not sure I follow you.

In the 1997, 2002 and 2007 seasons for instance, the committee indicated that we were one of if not the first team out of the field. So that translates into probably having needed one more conference tourney win.

In 2006, we were probably in after beating Cincy, and were an absolute lock after beating #1 UConn. The Georgetown and Pitt games were just icing on the seeding cake (as evidenced by the fact that we were a 5 seed and not a 10 seed.)

 

[Brooky03]

Not sure I follow you.

In the 1997, 2002 and 2007 seasons for instance, the committee indicated that we were one of if not the first team out of the field. So that translates into probably having needed one more conference tourney win.

In 2006, we were probably in after beating Cincy, and were an absolute lock after beating #1 UConn. The Georgetown and Pitt games were just icing on the seeding cake (as evidenced by the fact that we were a 5 seed and not a 10 seed.)

In 2006 we went into the BET tournament not even on the bubble, or at least barely on the bubble. I guess we got bailed out by UConn being ranked so highly. I would have said going into that tournament that we needed to win it to get in. We had a few bad losses and very few good wins (ND and L’ville maybe?).

Edit: ND and L’ville sucked that year. WVU was the only good regular season win that I see.

 

[CuseCPT]

Yeah, if you are on the Bubble, you don't need to win the conference tourney to get a bid, it means you just need an extra win here and there, whether it be in the regular season or the conference tournament.

 

[Eric15]

In 2006 we went into the BET tournament not even on the bubble, or at least barely on the bubble. I guess we got bailed out by UConn being ranked so highly. I would have said going into that tournament that we needed to win it to get in.

We didn't have to win the 2006 BET in order to make the NCAA Tourney -- we only had to win 1-2 games at most, not four. That's the point I'm making.

 

[chiefcurrey]

In 2006 we went into the BET tournament not even on the bubble, or at least barely on the bubble. I guess we got bailed out by UConn being ranked so highly. I would have said going into that tournament that we needed to win it to get in. We had a few bad losses and very few good wins (ND and L’ville maybe?).

Edit: ND and L’ville sucked that year. WVU was the only good regular season win that I see.

Almost got kicked out of high school for cutting class early to watch those games. Don't regret a thing.

 

[Brooky03]

Almost got kicked out of high school for cutting class early to watch those games. Don't regret a thing.

I got detention for skipping out of Spanish class to watch it on the TVs in the weight room. The Vice Principal asked if it was worth it. Um yeah dude, it was.

 

[Brooky03]

We didn't have to win the 2006 BET in order to make the NCAA Tourney -- we only had to win 1-2 games at most, not four. That's the point I'm making.

Which is a function of one of those games happening to be against an elite team that year. I suppose this is more of an indictment on the strength of the ACC lately than the Syracuse teams. They’re intertwined, of course, but the fact that we can’t play an elite team in the ACCT to get a shot at a big upset is really the only difference between needing a couple wins in the ACCT or needing to win the whole thing.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

No good win OOC would have killed us on Selection Sunday. And you can't blame JB we looked brutal against St Johns even though we almost won and Illinois. Every metric would have trended against us and a good ACC record this year doesn't mean much.

We can beat anyone in the league the ACCT will be worth watching just like 2020 before the lockdown when we blew the doors off UNC.

Whats really bad/sad is that this might actually be our best ACC regular season since 2014. Can anyone definitively tell me another year we were better in the league?

 

[MSOrange]

I got detention for skipping out of Spanish class to watch it on the TVs in the weight room. The Vice Principal asked if it was worth it. Um yeah dude, it was.

Buena elección

 

[Brooky03]

Buena elección

Much gracios

 

[orangecuse]

Which is a function of one of those games happening to be against an elite team that year. I suppose this is more of an indictment on the strength of the ACC lately than the Syracuse teams. They’re intertwined, of course, but the fact that we can’t play an elite team in the ACCT to get a shot at a big upset is really the only difference between needing a couple wins in the ACCT or needing to win the whole thing.

No, that's not the only difference. We are currently way off the bubble, not only because of a weak ACC, but moreover, because of how pathetic we were in the OOC. Even if there was an elite team or two in our conference, not having any Q1 wins and only one Q2 W, we'd still likely have to win the conference tourney.

Look no further than Texas A&M last year. They got all the way to the SEC conference final beating some elite teams along the way and only losing to #2 Tennessee in the finals and still didn't get in the Dance. And, they even had some good Q1 wins during the regular season, but had that bad stretch of losing games, some to rather inferior opponents.

 

[Eric15]

Which is a function of one of those games happening to be against an elite team that year. I suppose this is more of an indictment on the strength of the ACC lately than the Syracuse teams. They’re intertwined, of course, but the fact that we can’t play an elite team in the ACCT to get a shot at a big upset is really the only difference between needing a couple wins in the ACCT or needing to win the whole thing.

You're realllllllly reaching there, my man. The reason we aren't on the bubble right now is that we played like a JV High School Team for the first third of the season.

 

[MSOrange]

You're realllllllly reaching there, my man. The reason we aren't on the bubble right now is that we played like a JV High School Team for the first third of the season.

Agree. I thought the ACC would be stronger this year. But when looking at our non-conference schedule, I knew we would be in trouble if we slipped up against what I felt was a pretty weak slate and we slipped up multiple times.

 

[Brooky03]

You're realllllllly reaching there, my man. The reason we aren't on the bubble right now is that we played like a JV High School Team for the first third of the season.

We were bad in 2006 and you said the win against UConn was enough to get that team in the tournament. If that’s the case and we were somehow on the bubble going into the BET then so be it; I’m just trying to reconcile that. Yeah, that team avoided bad losses I guess but they didn’t beat hardly anybody in the regular season. A non-tournament Cinci team, WVU, and Texas Tech were the landmark wins that year. That DePaul team that slaughtered us was ranked 1,782nd I think. Community colleges wanted a piece of them.

That team had to have been saved by SOS/RPI. They got credit for losing to really good teams. We can’t get credit for losing to really good teams this year because we don’t play many/any. That was part of my point about it being an indictment of the conference.

I’m aware our bad losses are worse than the 2006 losses. But they’re not THAT much worse. Colgate has a really good shot at winning their conference. Idk what the metrics say, but that shouldn’t count as a bad loss. Bryant and St. John’s are the two bad losses.

Edit: I’m also not in agreement with including the 2020 season in this. COVID bastardized that season. Write that one off like it didn’t happen, as far as I’m concerned.

 

[Brooky03]

No, that's not the only difference. We are currently way off the bubble, not only because of a weak ACC, but moreover, because of how pathetic we were in the OOC. Even if there was an elite team or two in our conference, not having any Q1 wins and only one Q2 W, we'd still likely have to win the conference tourney.

Look no further than Texas A&M last year. They got all the way to the SEC conference final beating some elite teams along the way and only losing to #2 Tennessee in the finals and still didn't get in the Dance. And, they even had some good Q1 wins during the regular season, but had that bad stretch of losing games, some to rather inferior opponents.

If that’s the case, then conference tourney upsets not mattering speaks to the fact that the 2006 team needed to win the whole thing to get in, imo.

 

[Eric15]

If that’s the case, then that speaks to the fact that the 2006 team needed to win the whole thing to get in, imo.

We were a 5 seed in the 2006 tourney! You're saying that one game was the difference between not getting in and being a 5 seed?

 

[Brooky03]

We were a 5 seed in the 2006 tourney! You're saying that one game was the difference between not getting in and being a 5 seed?

Idk, maybe the selection committee was on crack cocaine that year.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Almost got kicked out of high school for cutting class early to watch those games. Don't regret a thing.

Also left class to watch the games. Or listened on my walkman radio.

 

[NineOneSeven]

If that’s the case, then that speaks to the fact that the 2006 team needed to win the whole thing to get in, imo.

Can't help yourself huh

 

[NKR1978]

Almost got kicked out of high school for cutting class early to watch those games. Don't regret a thing.

While my allegiances have changed, one of many nice things about going to high school in Connecticut in the 90s - most UConn BET and NCAA games were turned on to the tvs in our classrooms.

 

[Brooky03]

Can't help yourself huh

What’d I do?

 

[Cusefan0307]

Idk, maybe the selection committee was on crack cocaine that year.

We went 12-2 on the OOC that year. We also beat the 14th ranked team in the country who finished second in the Big East Standings(West Virginia) before the tournament and Louisville/Cincinnati who we were competing for the last spot with.

Not to mention that Big East conference that season would run circles around this seasons ACC.

 

[CorduroyG]

If that’s the case, then conference tourney upsets not mattering speaks to the fact that the 2006 team needed to win the whole thing to get in, imo.

i dont remember the details as far as the 2006 team’s rpi/sos etc, but i do remember the 1st round game against cincinnati being considered as pretty much a play in game. winner is in, loser is out. once we beat uconn the next day, who i believe was ranked #1 at the time, we were solidly in.