Just to discuss this line of reasoning...
Those teams will all still finish at the top of the league. Whether they lost playing m2m is irrelevant, since no one is suggesting m2m is the formula for an undefeated season. I didn't watch all those games, but what was the defense played AGAINST those losing teams? If it was zone, then there's something to think about.
"Why does anyone think we'll have success." I don't think it's reasonable to think we'll have "success" by switching to man this year. We haven't been able to play it for a long time for some reason. We used to be pretty successful playing, so i don't know what changed other than a complete philosophy change. But, why might we have success? It's not a matter of a thousand forum 'experts' saying we should do it. If (guessing) 92% of college coaches—people who spend their entire lives playing, learning, then coaching, and have their livelihoods dependent upon their successes—have 'studied/assessed' the matter and decided that m2m is the best 'foundation' defense for their programs, then why is it so ludicrous for us to suggest that it's possibly better for us, as well? Because our identity has morphed into us being zone-exclusive? Our identity wasn't forged by zone. Our brand became that, after we had already built and established ourselves.
It's not even a matter of in-game stats. There's a more global effect to what defense we play. We used to be a fast, show-time, up and down, high-flying, scoring team. Gradually, we've become a slow, low-scoring, half-court-inept team. Sorta coincided with the switch to being exclusively zone. And our recruiting, where we used to be in the mix for top 10 kids has slipped to where we're grateful for a 25th-ranked kid, and surprised to still be on a list for someone higher. What changed? With recent final fours, we still aren't a major player for the bigger names? We get kids like Lydon and convince ourselves that we're skilled at finding diamonds in the rough, or that we want who the staff wants, or that our kids are downgraded and Kentucky/Duke kids get ratings boosts. Or, that ratings don't matter at all. Until we get smacked in the mouth, and we can't score from under the hoop, or we can't beat anyone off the dribble, or we aren't athletic enough to switch to man to man, or we can't finish, or we no longer fast break, or we don't dunk, or we don't alley-oop anymore... Zone affects recruiting. It just does. No, there are no links, stats, or whitepapers to prove it. Even if there were, denyers would deny.
Our brand is not what it was. I wish i had the kind of memory that allowed me to reflect back to 2013(?) and how fantastic we were and how we shoulda won it all... But, i still wouldn't see how that helps us. How that's constructive, toward recognizing problems that exist now. Gratitude and perspective are great. Maybe they help some of us through rough patches. And maybe some people take past success as a predictor of future success. But, we are in flux, and whatever there was that 'ensured' consistency in a relative sense over the past years is either no longer a given, or is nothing to take for granted going forward.
Whatever is happening, we're struggling as a team, the fanbase is suffering, and we're all just here commiserating. Luckily, this isn't football. One player/recruit can transform 'the franchise.' We have an arena that is an asset rather than a liability. We have a more recent history of success, and a prominent alum. But, even Carmelo isn't paying off as much as i would hope. Maybe his time of influence is done/waning. Which also concerns me. When he's done, if we don't have NBAers starting and playing important minutes for prime teams, that'll be another recruiting negative. Lots of considerations factor into a 16-17 year old kid's decisions. I'm not suggesting that any one of these things is a death knell. But, if you're a top recruit, and you take the simple Pro/Con or Plus/Minus checklist as a map toward choosing a college, it's hard for me to see how we're not fighting a bit more uphill than we've been used to.