Some stats to ponder

[syrBossHogg]

Agreed [with all due respect to Consigliere].

The program slippage is palpable. But I think a segment of the fanbase has adjusted their expectations, and are rationalizing this level of performance as being "acceptable," when in actuality we aren't competitive -- in conference or nationally.

My fear is this mediocre run is going to create apathy in the fanbase which will put more pressure to get the next HC hire right.

 

[RF2044]

My fear is this mediocre run is going to create apathy in the fanbase which will put more pressure to get the next HC hire right.

IMO, getting the next HC hire right will be the most important move that John Wildhack will make as the Syracuse University AD.

He's got to hire the best candidate he can, period. None of the other stuff matters -- and why he won't emphasize "nice to have" criteria over "need to have" criteria.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Doesn't everybody?

Seems like there are few too many who are willing to accept less if we 1) make the ncaa tournament and 2) make the second weekend. ’Almost’ results appear to be good enough for them.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Postseason runs have been awesome but a reason they were awesome is because they weren’t expected. We haven’t had a championship level team for sometime. And most teams don’t, I get it. But it’s just a bummer, mannnn.

If you are good then you believe that you can make a title run. You go into the season thinking this could be the year you get over the hump. So most of the time the NCAAT is a disappointment. When you aren't good any success in the NCAAT is an achievement.

Since 2013 would people rather have had...


1 Final Four
2 Elite 8s
1 Sweet 16

or

2 Final Fours
2 Sweet 16s

The 2nd option looks pretty good but it ignores the regular season. No one would trade the last 10 seasons of Kansas Basketball for SU. Heck I would probably trade Pitt's Big East 10 year run for our last 10 years. They went to...

0.0 Final Fours
1 Elite 8
4 Sweet 16s
NCAAT appearances 10/10 years
2 regular season champs
2 conference tournament champs
Top 10 finish 6/10 years
avg 27.3 Ws and 7.1 Ls

Our miracle 2016 Final Four run does not make up for the past 8 regular seasons.

 

[Orangezoo]

1979-2014. 13 loss seasons- 1
2015 thru 2022 13 loss seasons- 7

The only season we didn’t lose 13 was last year and we only played 26 games not 31.

Amazing.

Hater!!!

 

[Orangezoo]

So we have a winning record (.500 against FSU) against every since ACC school except the top 3 since we joined? That’s honestly not too bad.

I am totally unhappy with how things are but the above doesn’t bother me as much I don’t think

Only those top 3 have been consistent programs from a winning perspective throughout. Arguably FSU as well. The .500 vs Ville is helped by them sucking profusely this year.

 

[mikemorg]

That's fair. And, listen, I've been as vocal as anyone with my issues with JB (I don't think anyone would argue that).

I think there are a lot of issues with JB as the GM, JB with blinders for his kids, JB settling for mediocrity during the regular season lately.

But when it just comes to sheer Xs and Os when he is in that situation, when he locks in, when he *knows* he has the team that can compete on the floor, I absolutely think he can still outcoach most guys in pressure situations, especially.

It's weird, because way back when, I used to think the opposite when he was younger: Dude can coach, get talent, but then would underachieve on the big stage. Now it seems to be the opposite. I truly think he can still throw fastballs if he has the right crew on the floor and still make other coaches look like fools. Truly, I do.

I have been watching SU intently since I was a freshman in 1989. I honestly don’t think that JB has ever been vastly superior in Xs and Os to other elite level coaches. He’s had his moments, but he’s had plenty of bad ones too. His end of game play designs have been mediocre at best, perhaps because he doesn’t really have an offensive system to rely on. Many of our worst tourney losses - Richmond (first 2 seed to ever lose to a 15), Vermont, Butler, Marquette - can all be chalked up in large part to poor Xs and Os. Anyone remember stall ball against Vermont? That’s coaching and there are myriad other examples.

And those are becoming more frequent in recent years. Just this year:
1. Having Benny box out that All American on Indiana in that late foul shot.
2. Putting Jimmy at the center of the zone again at Wake.
3. A staggering number of failed inbounds plays especially when taking Timeouts at the end of the first half that did not need to be taken. Some of which turned out to be huge momentum shifts.
4. Grinding Cole and JB into the ground and putting them against more athletic frontlines, when there are more athletic options on the bench. We saw what happened when he finally went more athletic against Duke with Benny and JBA - we were able to at least look like we belonged on the court a little bit with them. Not saying Benny and JBA should be getting more minutes than the starters but there have been plenty of times where we needed an injection of athleticism and yet they were glued to the bench.

The 100% reliance on the zone is Xs and Os. It all goes back to the run in 1996 - JBs reputation in the national media changed from “Can’t win big with great talent” to “Defensive genius because of the zone.” He lapped it up and convinced himself that being a zone-only team was the way to go. And he has stubbornly stuck to this as the game changed and when his personnel were not always best suited to playing exclusively zone.

Add to that consistently playing players out of position - remember the Stevie as PG disaster? - and I just am not sure I see what everyone else sees that he has always been a genius. None of this is new. It’s just plainer to see when we don’t have great players to hide some of this.

Pitino dominated him.
Calhoun (once he got UConn going) had the upper hand
Jamie Dixon dominated him.
Coach K has dominated him.

I’m not trying to tear down his entire legacy, and watching SU basketball has been one of the great joys of my life. He is a deserving HOF coach. But in the past 8 years, the weaknesses that have always been there Al have been magnified even more and it has gotten to the point where mediocrity is the best we can hope for.

 

[Madbiker]

1979-2014. 13 loss seasons- 1
2015 thru 2022 13 loss seasons- 7

The only season we didn’t lose 13 was last year and we only played 26 games not 31.

Amazing.

Since our recruiting isn't down it must just be bad luck or bad officiating. LOL.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I have been watching SU intently since I was a freshman in 1989. I honestly don’t think that JB has ever been vastly superior in Xs and Os to other elite level coaches. He’s had his moments, but he’s had plenty of bad ones too. His end of game play designs have been mediocre at best, perhaps because he doesn’t really have an offensive system to rely on. Many of our worst tourney losses - Richmond (first 2 seed to ever lose to a 15), Vermont, Butler, Marquette - can all be chalked up in large part to poor Xs and Os. Anyone remember stall ball against Vermont? That’s coaching and there are myriad other examples.

And those are becoming more frequent in recent years. Just this year:
1. Having Benny box out that All American on Indiana in that late foul shot.
2. Putting Jimmy at the center of the zone again at Wake.
3. A staggering number of failed inbounds plays especially when taking Timeouts at the end of the first half that did not need to be taken. Some of which turned out to be huge momentum shifts.
4. Grinding Cole and JB into the ground and putting them against more athletic frontlines, when there are more athletic options on the bench. We saw what happened when he finally went more athletic against Duke with Benny and JBA - we were able to at least look like we belonged on the court a little bit with them. Not saying Benny and JBA should be getting more minutes than the starters but there have been plenty of times where we needed an injection of athleticism and yet they were glued to the bench.

The 100% reliance on the zone is Xs and Os. It all goes back to the run in 1996 - JBs reputation in the national media changed from “Can’t win big with great talent” to “Defensive genius because of the zone.” He lapped it up and convinced himself that being a zone-only team was the way to go. And he has stubbornly stuck to this as the game changed and when his personnel were not always best suited to playing exclusively zone.

Add to that consistently playing players out of position - remember the Stevie as PG disaster? - and I just am not sure I see what everyone else sees that he has always been a genius. None of this is new. It’s just plainer to see when we don’t have great players to hide some of this.

Pitino dominated him.
Calhoun (once he got UConn going) had the upper hand
Jamie Dixon dominated him.
Coach K has dominated him.

I’m not trying to tear down his entire legacy, and watching SU basketball has been one of the great joys of my life. He is a deserving HOF coach. But in the past 8 years, the weaknesses that have always been there Al have been magnified even more and it has gotten to the point where mediocrity is the best we can hope for.

Exaggerating is not a good way to make a point.

UConn never dominated us. Those games were always 50/50 and he won 6 out of his last 7 games against Calhoun.

And I never put that Vermont game on JB. His two stars(Gmac and Warrick) were awful.

 

[mikemorg]

Exaggerating is not a good way to make a point.

UConn never dominated us. Those games were always 50/50 and he won 6 out of his last 7 games against Calhoun.

And I never put that Vermont game on JB. His two stars(Gmac and Warrick) were awful.

You might be right about Calhoun- Might just be my perception.

But I disagree with the Vermont game. Our stars were struggling sure, but he did nothing to try to overcome that. We just sat back in our zone, letting a vastly less athletic team bleed the clock, and eventually we got beat. Great coaches adjust when their original plan doesn’t work. He didn’t.

 

[MikeSU02]

I have been watching SU intently since I was a freshman in 1989. I honestly don’t think that JB has ever been vastly superior in Xs and Os to other elite level coaches. He’s had his moments, but he’s had plenty of bad ones too. His end of game play designs have been mediocre at best, perhaps because he doesn’t really have an offensive system to rely on. Many of our worst tourney losses - Richmond (first 2 seed to ever lose to a 15), Vermont, Butler, Marquette - can all be chalked up in large part to poor Xs and Os. Anyone remember stall ball against Vermont? That’s coaching and there are myriad other examples.

And those are becoming more frequent in recent years. Just this year:
1. Having Benny box out that All American on Indiana in that late foul shot.
2. Putting Jimmy at the center of the zone again at Wake.
3. A staggering number of failed inbounds plays especially when taking Timeouts at the end of the first half that did not need to be taken. Some of which turned out to be huge momentum shifts.
4. Grinding Cole and JB into the ground and putting them against more athletic frontlines, when there are more athletic options on the bench. We saw what happened when he finally went more athletic against Duke with Benny and JBA - we were able to at least look like we belonged on the court a little bit with them. Not saying Benny and JBA should be getting more minutes than the starters but there have been plenty of times where we needed an injection of athleticism and yet they were glued to the bench.

The 100% reliance on the zone is Xs and Os. It all goes back to the run in 1996 - JBs reputation in the national media changed from “Can’t win big with great talent” to “Defensive genius because of the zone.” He lapped it up and convinced himself that being a zone-only team was the way to go. And he has stubbornly stuck to this as the game changed and when his personnel were not always best suited to playing exclusively zone.

Add to that consistently playing players out of position - remember the Stevie as PG disaster? - and I just am not sure I see what everyone else sees that he has always been a genius. None of this is new. It’s just plainer to see when we don’t have great players to hide some of this.

Pitino dominated him.
Calhoun (once he got UConn going) had the upper hand
Jamie Dixon dominated him.
Coach K has dominated him.

I’m not trying to tear down his entire legacy, and watching SU basketball has been one of the great joys of my life. He is a deserving HOF coach. But in the past 8 years, the weaknesses that have always been there Al have been magnified even more and it has gotten to the point where mediocrity is the best we can hope for.

Hey, if you've read any of my posts lately, you'll notice I'm prob not on JB's holiday card list.

And I am on board that he has a terrible blind spot with the teams where he has his kid or kids on it. No argument there and that we've been on a downturn for a while. And there have definitely been games where he should have changed strategy, for sure. That Vermont game is one of the worst days of my life.

All of that is true. But, Pitino, Calhoun and especially K are HoF coaches as well. K may be the greatest college coach, ever. K dominated most peers.

The dude has almost 1100 wins. Five final fours and a chip. You have to know basketball to achieve that.

He has many, many faults. And lately things have been bad, no doubt. But come on, the dude knows basketball.

 

[sufandu]

Next year’s recruiting class being the best ever.

He can't honestly think a class with no MAA's is better than a class with two, can he?

 

[pearl31]

It's a good, solid recruiting class, no doubt - quantity and every position covered. But it's simply not a class capable of what JB apparently is going to try and make it do.

 

[sufandu]

Honestly don't understand the tendancy to minimize post season success as a series of anomalies. Making it to the Sweet Sixteen 7 of the last 10 times we have been eligible for the tournament is more of a trend than an anomaly. Actually 8 of 11 but I didn't want to use an arbitrary cut off.

Yes we'd rather be 25-6 at the end of the regular season. Yes we'd rather have a protected seed. Yes, we'd rather not be sweating out selection Sunday on the bubble. But there is something to And if it were an either/or situation I would take the tournament success every day.

It's not minimizing so much as putting it in perspective. Winning two consecutive games (three in the case of a play in game) and losing the next does not (or should not) overshadow a subpar regular season. I think we need to be careful to not go the other way. Let's not let an end of season run erase the truth of the regular season. The same should be said when the team has a great regular season and then a disappointing march.

 

[orangecuse]

It's not minimizing so much as putting it in perspective. Winning two consecutive games (three in the case of a play in game) and losing the next does not (or should not) overshadow a subpar regular season. I think we need to be careful to not go the other way. Let's not let an end of season run erase the truth of the regular season. The same should be said when the team has a great regular season and then a disappointing march.

Indeed!

I would just add that it's incredibly interesting how winning back to back games in March is considered an 'end of season run'...a two game winning streak! Would anyone qualify a two game winning streak during any other part of the regular season as a "run?"

When we were actually good, ranked during the regular season, higher NCAA seeding, etc., winning that first game was almost thought of as a given, especially considering the significantly lessor opponent faced. Moreover, the way the NCAA tournament seeding plays out sometimes, being an 8 seed and drawing a 9 ends up being a considerably more difficult game than a 10 playing a 7. My point...sometimes winning in the tournament has just as much to do with the good fortune in whom you draw vs. how you may actually be playing at the time, especially in those earlier rounds.

 

[MDCuse]

Honestly don't understand the tendancy to minimize post season success as a series of anomalies. Making it to the Sweet Sixteen 7 of the last 10 times we have been eligible for the tournament is more of a trend than an anomaly. Actually 8 of 11 but I didn't want to use an arbitrary cut off.

Yes we'd rather be 25-6 at the end of the regular season. Yes we'd rather have a protected seed. Yes, we'd rather not be sweating out selection Sunday on the bubble. But there is something to And if it were an either/or situation I would take the tournament success every day.

I'm sorry, but 2 wins against SDSU and WVU mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme. And saying that they've made it 7 of 10 times they went to the tourny while ignoring the ever-increasing years they don't, is just willful ignorance.

 

[sufandu]

Indeed!

I would just add that it's incredibly interesting how winning back to back games in March is considered an 'end of season run'...a two game winning streak! Would anyone qualify a two game winning streak during any other part of the regular season as a "run?"

When we were actually good, ranked during the regular season, higher NCAA seeding, etc., winning that first game was almost thought of as a given, especially considering the significantly lessor opponent faced. Moreover, the way the NCAA tournament seeding plays out sometimes, being an 8 seed and drawing a 9 ends up being a considerably more difficult game than a 10 playing a 7. My point...sometimes winning in the tournament has just as much to do with the good fortune in whom you draw vs. how you may actually be playing at the time, especially in those earlier rounds.

Yes. I hesitated to say "end of season run" but decided to roll with it.

It's also significant to point out that making the sweet sixteen used to be expected, now some point to it like an accomplishment. It should be considered an accomplishment for some programs. Not ours.

 

[mikemorg]

Hey, if you've read any of my posts lately, you'll notice I'm prob not on JB's holiday card list.

And I am on board that he has a terrible blind spot with the teams where he has his kid or kids on it. No argument there and that we've been on a downturn for a while. And there have definitely been games where he should have changed strategy, for sure. That Vermont game is one of the worst days of my life.

All of that is true. But, Pitino, Calhoun and especially K are HoF coaches as well. K may be the greatest college coach, ever. K dominated most peers.

The dude has almost 1100 wins. Five final fours and a chip. You have to know basketball to achieve that.

He has many, many faults. And lately things have been bad, no doubt. But come on, the dude knows basketball.

I fully acknowledge his Hall of Fame career - no one can dispute this - he is one of the greatest college coaches of all time. Although it could be argued he is the greatest college coach who only ever won 1 NCAA chip.

. But I’ve seen a lot of posts about what a genius and how brilliant he has always been as a coach, and I just think that’s a bit overstated. I’m sure if I watched other teams as closely as SU I would find similar faults in other legendary coaches.

My point simply is a lot of these faults have been there for decades they are only being exposed more by the lack of talent that we have had in the program lately.

 

[djcon57]

I fully acknowledge his Hall of Fame career - no one can dispute this - he is one of the greatest college coaches of all time. Although it could be argued he is the greatest college coach who only ever won 1 NCAA chip.

. But I’ve seen a lot of posts about what a genius and how brilliant he has always been as a coach, and I just think that’s a bit overstated. I’m sure if I watched other teams as closely as SU I would find similar faults in other legendary coaches.

My point simply is a lot of these faults have been there for decades they are only being exposed more by the lack of talent that we have had in the program lately.

I'd say his coaching strategy has also covered up a lack of talent at a high end level. Many times.

 

[MikeSU02]

I fully acknowledge his Hall of Fame career - no one can dispute this - he is one of the greatest college coaches of all time. Although it could be argued he is the greatest college coach who only ever won 1 NCAA chip.

. But I’ve seen a lot of posts about what a genius and how brilliant he has always been as a coach, and I just think that’s a bit overstated. I’m sure if I watched other teams as closely as SU I would find similar faults in other legendary coaches.

My point simply is a lot of these faults have been there for decades they are only being exposed more by the lack of talent that we have had in the program lately.

Fair take. Maybe I'm being a bit too sentimental with my POV. Dunno.

 

[sufandu]

I'd say his coaching strategy has also covered up a lack of talent at a high end level. Many times.

It's interesting. There are a number of times I thought we overachieved and he has to be given credit for that. At the same time there were some of our most talented teams that I felt underachieved. And both things can be true.

 

[CU44SE]

1979-2014. 13 loss seasons- 1
2015 thru 2022 13 loss seasons- 7

The only season we didn’t lose 13 was last year and we only played 26 games not 31.

Amazing.

I stated these facts last year. I was told, but the NCAA tournament runs (yawn).

 

[Consigliere]

I'm sorry, but 2 wins against SDSU and WVU mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme. And saying that they've made it 7 of 10 times they went to the tourny while ignoring the ever-increasing years they don't, is just willful ignorance.

To be fair I said 7 out of 10 times they were eligible. That includes the one NIT year in that span. It does not include the Covid year when there was no tournament or 2015 when we were banned from the post seaason. And getting to the second weekend cements a team's status as being relevant in the Big Dance.

I guess it is a matter of personal perspectives but to me once you've been to multiple Final Fours and won a national championship success in the Tournament is all that really matters to me. Look at the reverse scenario. Is the 1990-91 team judged by a terrific 26-5 regular season, or a single bad game against Richmond?

Look, as I said in my OP, we all want to see teams challenging for ACC titles with 25-6 records, but saying that disappointment in the regular seasons is sugar coated by a clear pattern of post season success ( name 10 other teams that have been to 7 Sweet Sixteens and 2 Final Fours during this period) ignores the ultimate goal of a program with our pedigree.

 

[djcon57]

To be fair I said 7 out of 10 times they were eligible. That includes the one NIT year in that span. It does not include the Covid year when there was no tournament or 2015 when we were banned from the post seaason. And getting to the second weekend cements a team's status as being relevant in the Big Dance.

can we stop with this? Its dishonest debate.

we weren’t going to get to the tourney in 2020 or 2015.

im with you that sweet 16s are great and have said it many times before. No reason they should be downplayed.

 

[MDCuse]

To be fair I said 7 out of 10 times they were eligible. That includes the one NIT year in that span. It does not include the Covid year when there was no tournament or 2015 when we were banned from the post seaason. And getting to the second weekend cements a team's status as being relevant in the Big Dance.

I guess it is a matter of personal perspectives but to me once you've been to multiple Final Fours and won a national championship success in the Tournament is all that really matters to me. Look at the reverse scenario. Is the 1990-91 team judged by a terrific 26-5 regular season, or a single bad game against Richmond?

Look, as I said in my OP, we all want to see teams challenging for ACC titles with 25-6 records, but saying that disappointment in the regular seasons is sugar coated by a clear pattern of post season success ( name 10 other teams that have been to 7 Sweet Sixteens and 2 Final Fours during this period) ignores the ultimate goal of a program with our pedigree.

But see, you're cutting out all the negatives to build a narrative. This time frame allows you to include the 2 F4 appearances but yet you neglect the missed tournament due to Jim getting whacked with sanctions for a second time (we all have our opinions on it, but it's happened, twice). You disregard the COVID year because there was no tournament, which allows you to cast off what was a BAD team. The line in the sand should be the move to the ACC. They had a FANTASTIC team their first year in the league, but it has been mediocre, at best, since then. They had the 1 F4 run in 16 that we need to be honest about. They caught a MASSIVE break with MTSU beating MSU in the first round. I get that's how the tourney goes, but that plays to my point. The tourney is a crapshoot of matchups. Including this year, they will have made the tourney 5 of 9 times (and I'm absolutely counting the COVID year, that team existed and was bad). They haven't finished higher than 6th since that inaugural year. They haven't been higher than an 8 seed since the initial season in the ACC. They have had to sweat our Selection Sunday in 2 of their last 3 seasons. I have a hard time accepting the fact that some fans will boil down the season to a 2 game sample season in March that is as much about timing and matchup as it is about how good your team actually is. Meanwhile, they'll cast off a 30 game sample they just watched. I'm sorry, but this program has become irrelevant in the national landscape. They are now the "plucky underdog" that snuck in and won a game or 2. That's what this program has become. They're Butler and trending more and more towards where Butler is now.