I can’t believe we lost again. We are terrible. 0-18 here we come.

[jncuse]

Seton Hall did not make the tournament last year. In our season last year we matched how many tournament games they have won this millennium. That has to count for something.

I am counting it for something.

They have made the tournament 4 of the last 5 years, with a far better peak year then we have sniffed .. I include 2020 because we know they were getting in as a high seed (#3 per the bracket matrix). We are 3 of 5, with better tournament performance.

The fact that I call the programs on par over the last 5 years, considers our tournament performance. If I didn't the Hall would have the edge.

 

[Day2]

They have made the tournament 4 of the last 5 years, with a far better peak year then we have sniffed .. I include 2020 because we know they were getting in as a high seed (#3 per the bracket matrix). We are 3 of 5, with better tournament performance.

The fact that I call the programs on par over the last 5 years, considers our tournament performance. If I didn't the Hall would have the edge.

Why wouldn’t you consider tournament performance, though?

 

[Fly Rodder]

Why wouldn’t you consider tournament performance, though?

Because it is kind of a crapshoot?

Why doesn't the NBA go to a single game elimination tournament to crown a champion?

 

[jncuse]

Why wouldn’t you consider tournament performance, though?

I did. I don't understand your question.

1. His original premise some posts back was that Seton Hall had not been at Syracuse's level recently.
2. I challenged him on that, noting that Seton Hall had done more in the regular season. But in that post I did put them on par because we did better in the tourney.
3. He responded that I did not consider the tourney.
4. I responded that I did consider the tourney, and that is why I put them at par.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I am counting it for something.

They have made the tournament 4 of the last 5 years, with a far better peak year then we have sniffed .. I include 2020 because we know they were getting in as a high seed (#3 per the bracket matrix). We are 3 of 5, with better tournament performance.

The fact that I call the programs on par over the last 5 years, considers our tournament performance. If I didn't the Hall would have the edge.

It clearly counts for something. If it didn’t Jamie Dixon would have never left Pittsburgh.

 

[Day2]

Because it is kind of a crapshoot?

Why doesn't the NBA go to a single game elimination tournament to crown a champion?

Because they have the time and resources for a three-month postseason.

 

[jncuse]

Because it is kind of a crapshoot?

Why doesn't the NBA go to a single game elimination tournament to crown a champion?

I generally agree.

If the differences between programs in regular season are not huge (like Syracuse and Seton Hall) I am fine with citing the tournament as an equalizer or even giving the other team the edge.

I don't have any specific example on the spot, but I am sure there are programs that have averaged a seed of 5 or above the last 5 years that have accomplished less than us in the tourney. I would generally be comfortable in claiming the team that did much better in the regular season is in much better health as a program. (Of course there are always a few things going on in the program at the specific time that need to be considered as well).

 

[Fly Rodder]

Because they have the time and resources for a three-month postseason.

so a single elimination tourney isn't really the best metric, but all we have. Got it.

 

[Day2]

I did. I don't understand your question.

1. His original premise some posts back was that Seton Hall had not been at Syracuse's level recently.
2. I challenged him on that, noting that Seton Hall had done more in the regular season. But in that post I did put them on par because we did better in the tourney.
3. He responded that I did not consider the tourney.
4. I responded that I did consider the tourney, and that is why I put them at par.

At first glance, I just didn’t think it needed to be said. I now see why you did, though.

 

[Day2]

so a single elimination tourney isn't really the best metric, but all we have. Got it.

All you’ve got is a strawman.

 

[jncuse]

It clearly counts for something. If it didn’t Jamie Dixon would have never left Pittsburgh.

I have said for two posts it counts for something, and considered it in my analysis.
Not sure what you are going on about.

 

[TheHaze315]

I’m not sure why we played today. We are terrible. We are just a bunch of in athletic white boys who are lazy on defense.

0-18 in the ACC here we come just like 2017.

Sorry, but the board last night and this morning was absolutely pathetic. I’m not saying we are anything great, but the trash posted here last night and this morning on this board and social media was absolutely MORONIC by our fans and I will fight anyone who disagrees Including some popular bloggers.

If you said the season was over after yesterday do everyone a favor and don’t show up like you said you wouldn’t.

Have some perspective. We will at least be competitive.

We beat a bad ASU team and now all the sudden we will be competitive? Colgate put up 100 points on our zone, ASU 84. We’ll compete with lower end teams, but any competent team will blow us out of the water, starting with Auburn tonight.

 

[Fly Rodder]

I generally agree.

If the differences between programs in regular season are not huge (like Syracuse and Seton Hall) I am fine with citing the tournament as an equalizer.

I don't have any specific example on the spot, but I am sure there are programs that have averaged a seed of 5 or above the last 5 years that have accomplished less than us in the tourney. I would generally be comfortable in claiming the team that did much better in the regular season is in much better health as a program. (Of course there are always a few things going on in the program at the specific time that need to be considered as well).

Yeah, it's all part of a total evaluation. Talented coaches find ways to win. But, I'm not writing someone off as potential hire because they don't have a great tourney record in limited trips with a small school. It's tough to develop a good sample size of tourney games to make any generalizations with heft.

 

[Fly Rodder]

All you’ve got is a strawman.

Not quite, but feel free to die on this hill.

 

[Day2]

Not quite, but feel free to die on this hill.

By definition.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I have said for two posts it counts for something, and considered it in my analysis.
Not sure what you are going on about.

I was just making a point that there’s some schools that seem to win in the tournament and some programs that lose in the tournament regardless of record. It’s not all luck based.

UConn and Sparty have always been that way As have we the last half of JBs career.

The coaches who end up continuously lose early with high winning percentages usually end up getting canned or moving on. Jamie Dixon at Pitt. Tom Crean at Indiana.

 

[Fly Rodder]

It’s not all luck based.

Of course not, but small sample sizes skew perception. It's hard to rely on that as an indicator of anything other than that one team was better for that game - especially when extenuating circumstances dictate the outcome (e.g., Fab Melo being suspended, Arinze getting hurt, referees swallowing their whistles with Sullinger and Craft etc).

 

[Day2]

Of course not, but small sample sizes skew perception. It's hard to rely on that as an indicator of anything other than that one team was better for that game - especially when extenuating circumstances dictate the outcome (e.g., Fab Melo being suspended, Arinze getting hurt, referees swallowing their whistles with Sullinger and Craft etc).

Given all of your logic, why do you even follow college basketball?

 

[Sherman20]

UConn and Seton Hall have won nothing. They are sht. Our fans act like they are good after 5 games this season. They’ve been WORSE than us for 5 years. Maybe the blind squirrels will find a nut and we will suck this year, but UCONN and Seton Hall are not a healthier program than us just because they’ve been good for 5 games.

Mediocrity does not mean we aren’t competitive. And UConn and Seton Hall being better for 5 games don’t mean sht.

Don’t you have higher expectations for Syracuse though? I think a lot of us still do and that’s where the frustration comes from. We used to be a near annual top 25 team and usually a 1-5 seed in the tourney. For the past several years, we’ve just been squeaking into the tourney or not making it. That’s frustrating for the fan base. There are some fundamental roster construction issues with this team, and I don’t think JB maximized the talent he could have had on the roster with the options in the transfer portal. Player retention was also poor. All that said, I’m still hopeful this year’s team can learn and grow and get better and hopefully make the tourney.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Don’t you have higher expectations for Syracuse though? I think a lot of us still do and that’s where the frustration comes from. We used to be a near annual top 25 team and usually a 1-5 seed in the tourney. For the past several years, we’ve just been squeaking into the tourney or not making it. That’s frustrating for the fan base. There are some fundamental roster construction issues with this team, and I don’t think JB maximized the talent he could have had on the roster with the options in the transfer portal. Player retention was also poor. All that said, I’m still hopeful this year’s team can learn and grow and get better and hopefully make the tourney.

I said I want to win another title. Read my posts from the start.

 

[RF2044]

I’m not sure why we played today. We are terrible. We are just a bunch of in athletic white boys who are lazy on defense.

0-18 in the ACC here we come just like 2017.

Sorry, but the board last night and this morning was absolutely pathetic. I’m not saying we are anything great, but the trash posted here last night and this morning on this board and social media was absolutely MORONIC by our fans and I will fight anyone who disagrees Including some popular bloggers.

If you said the season was over after yesterday do everyone a favor and don’t show up like you said you wouldn’t.

Have some perspective. We will at least be competitive.

Thanks for weighing in, pollyanna.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Thanks for weighing in, pollyanna.

It’s still moronic the sht that was said here this weekend. There were posts we were going to get blown out all 3 games. We will find a way to be competitive. People can bump the thread at the end of the year if I’m wrong for all I care.

 

[RF2044]

It’s still moronic the sht that was said here this weekend. There were posts we were going to get blown out all 3 games. We will find a way to be competitive. People can bump the thread at the end of the year if I’m wrong for all I care.

No, it isn't moronic at all. This team is underachieving relative to expectations, and appears to have limited upside overall.

What's truly moronic is the pendulum swing, I told you so posts then ensue one way or the other after every outcome. If you're not concerned about how this team is performing, you're not paying attention.

 

[Cusefan0307]

No, it isn't moronic at all. This team is underachieving relative to expectations, and appears to have limited upside overall.

What's truly moronic is the pendulum swing, I told you so posts then ensue one way or the other after every outcome. If you're not concerned about how this team is performing, you're not paying attention.

That’s not what I said at all. I said we were nothing great. I said we would be competitive. Read my posts.