Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Knicks411, post: 199929, member: 767"]
2006: #1 seed, lost to a 2 seed
2007: #2 seed, lost to 1 seed
2008: #1 seed, lost in the finals
2009: #2 seed, lost to a 3 seed
2010: #1 seed, lost to a 1 seed
2011: #4 seed, lost to a 3 seed
 
Twice they lost to a lower seed, and both times it was to a team 1 seed line worse than them. (in 2006, for example, they lost to second seeded UCLA in Oakland. I bet UCLA was a favorite in that game). They don't have anything in there like losing as a 3 to an 11, or as a 5 to a 12, or as a 4 to a 13, or as a 5 to an 8.
 
I dunno, the guy looks like a pretty good coach, tournament and regular season, to me. (Just to avoid a debate about vacated wins, etc, I'll amend to say he has a lot of success in both the tournament and the regular season).
 
Also; just using the losing to a lower seed method of evaluation seems a bit unfair to the coaches who are great during the regular season.
 
Using the Performance against Seed expectation numbers, over the last 6 years, Calipari was "expected" to win 16.46 games.  He has won 20.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?