SU's Record in the NCAA Tournament - Broken Down

[orange2win]

Number of appearances: 30 of 37

Record: 52-29

Final appearances: 3 times (87, 96, 03); 1 win (03)

Bad Losses: (to teams 4 seeds lower or more): 8 times (80, 84, 86, 88, 90, 05, 06, 11)

Big wins: (to teams 4 seeds higher or more): 1 time (13)

Lost 1st Round: 5 times (78, 91, 99, 05, 06)

Blowout Losses (beaten by 20+ points): 1 time (01)

Blowout Wins (by 20+ points): 7 times (86, 89, 90, 96, 10 - twice, 13)

Beat a #1 seed: 3 times (87 - UNC; 03 - Texas; 13 - Ind.)

#1 Seed in the tournament: 3 times (80, 10, 12)

#2 Seed in the tournament: 5 times (86, 87, 89, 90, 91)

 

[CusefanATL]

we made final 4 in 13, fyi.

we didnt beat a team 4 seeds higher in 13... we were the 4 seed.

 

[orange2win]

we made final 4 in 13, fyi.

we didnt beat a team 4 seeds higher in 13... we were the 4 seed.

Thanks. Changed it to "final appearances."

As for the #4 seed comment. I initially had zero big wins, but as a 4 seed last year, we beat the #1 seed Indiana, so I changed it to one.

 

[tbonezone]

if you still have the data up could you give us our average seeding for those 30 tourneys? thanks.

 

[007]

Number of appearances: 30 of 37

Record: 52-29

Final appearances: 3 times (87, 96, 03); 1 win (03)

Bad Losses: (to teams 4 seeds lower or more): 8 times (80, 84, 86, 88, 90, 05, 06, 11)

Big wins: (to teams 4 seeds higher or more): 1 time (13)

Lost 1st Round: 5 times (78, 91, 99, 05, 06)

Blowout Losses (beaten by 20+ points): 1 time (01)

Blowout Wins (by 20+ points): 7 times (86, 89, 90, 96, 10 - twice, 13)

Beat a #1 seed: 3 times (87 - UNC; 03 - Texas; 13 - Ind.)

#1 Seed in the tournament: 3 times (80, 10, 12)

#2 Seed in the tournament: 5 times (86, 87, 89, 90, 91)

Made the FF in 1975 under Danforth (Jimmy Lee, Rudy Hackett)

 

[orange2win]

if you still have the data up could you give us our average seeding for those 30 tourneys? thanks.

Yes I have it. There was no seeding the first year, so we have played in 29 seeded tournaments. Our average seeding works out to be 3.7.

Because of our typically good performance during the regular season, our seeding is usually respectable. Worst was #8 in 1999.

 

[orange2win]

Made the FF in 1975 under Danforth (Jimmy Lee, Rudy Hackett)

Yes indeed. The great Roy and his rolled up newspaper

The NCAA tournament goes all the way back to 1939, so my analysis just covers the JB era.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Thanks. Changed it to "final appearances."

As for the #4 seed comment. I initially had zero big wins, but as a 4 seed last year, we beat the #1 seed Indiana, so I changed it to one.

If I may make a suggestion... I would consider a "big win" to be any win against a team seeded 1-4, regardless of our own seed.

 

[OrangeDW]

So an actual good program like SU that's often a top 4 seed can only get a "big win" when they are a 5 seed or lower? That's the only way you'd have a chance to play someone seeded 4 spots higher. That doesn't make any sense.

Also, add Oklahoma in 2003 to the list of 1 seeds we've beaten.

 

[SBU72]

Win and advance = big win.

 

[orange2win]

So an actual good program like SU that's often a top 4 seed can only get a "big win" when they are a 5 seed or lower? That's the only way you'd have a chance to play someone seeded 4 spots higher. That doesn't make any sense.

Also, add Oklahoma in 2003 to the list of 1 seeds we've beaten.

Remember now, I am just reporting data, to see what it shows.

The most interesting stat is the one above where you comment, for it has dogged JB his whole career. A 27% (current) bad loss figure is very high (improved a bit because of better performance in recent years). Critics say rigidity holding the 2-3 zone and shortening the bench as the season progresses, assures a strong regular season (by increasing routine wins) which is good for business, but under elevated tournament pressure and the associated one and done conditions, it is less effective. They also say this is evidenced by the fact that SU has won a 64 event tournament only once in 30 tries, which is less than even odds and that a Willy Nilly system with the same players could easily match that record.

I figured if I listed the number of losses we had over the years to lower ranked teams and it was low, then that would put this criticism to rest. But the number is not low. Of course, if you list the number of times you lose to lower rank teams, then you have to offset that number by listing the number of upsets you achieved. As you say though, unless you are ranked 5 or higher, it is hard to meet the criteria for an upset. Nevertheless in defense of that stat, we have been ranked #5 and higher 10 times, so we have had plenty of chances to pull an upset, but never were able.

And yes, the 2003 team did beat a #1 seed twice in a row. Missed that. They must have had some special talent on that team or something!

 

[OrangeDW]

Remember now, I am just reporting data, to see what it shows.

The most interesting stat is the one above where you comment, for it has dogged JB his whole career. A 27% (current) bad loss figure is very high (improved a bit because of better performance in recent years). Critics say rigidity holding the 2-3 zone and shortening the bench as the season progresses, assures a strong regular season (by increasing routine wins) which is good for business, but under elevated tournament pressure and the associated one and done conditions, it is less effective. They also say this is evidenced by the fact that SU has won a 64 event tournament only once in 30 tries, which is less than even odds and that a Willy Nilly system with the same players could easily match that record.

I figured if I listed the number of losses we had over the years to lower ranked teams and it was low, then that would put this criticism to rest. But the number is not low. Of course, if you list the number of times you lose to lower rank teams, then you have to offset that number by listing the number of upsets you achieved. As you say though, unless you are ranked 5 or higher, it is hard to meet the criteria for an upset. Nevertheless in defense of that stat, we have been ranked #5 and higher 10 times, so we have had plenty of chances to pull an upset, but never were able.

And yes, the 2003 team did beat a #1 seed twice in a row. Missed that. They must have had some special talent on that team or something!

Again, when you are usually a high seed, you have VERY few chances to pull an upset(by how you define it). On the other hand, you have a lot more chances to be "upset" because you're playing a lot more games against teams that are lower seeds.

I have no idea why you decided on those parameters but any system that doesn't have the 1996 win over Kansas as a "big win" needs to be rethought and revamped.

 

[anomander]

I know this would take a lot of work, but I would be curious to the average seed of other historically great coaches like K, Izzo, Roy, Pitino etc, and see their related #'s

 

[CiceroCuse]

If I may make a suggestion... I would consider a "big win" to be any win against a team seeded 1-4, regardless of our own seed.

I agree. The fact that our average seed is 3.7 this somewhat prohibits us from having any big wins In most years. As long as we are a 4 seed or above, we could win the NC without any big wins.

 

[anomander]

I agree. The fact that our average seed is 3.7 this somewhat prohibits us from having any big wins In most years. As long as we are a 4 seed or above, we could win the NC without any big wins.

I agree I would call a big win any win over a 4 seed or better, which would mean it would at earliest occur in round of 16.

 

[nnyorange]

Number of appearances: 30 of 37

Record: 52-29

Final appearances: 3 times (87, 96, 03); 1 win (03)

Bad Losses: (to teams 4 seeds lower or more): 8 times (80, 84, 86, 88, 90, 05, 06, 11)

Big wins: (to teams 4 seeds higher or more): 1 time (13)

Lost 1st Round: 5 times (78, 91, 99, 05, 06)

Blowout Losses (beaten by 20+ points): 1 time (01)

Blowout Wins (by 20+ points): 7 times (86, 89, 90, 96, 10 - twice, 13)

Beat a #1 seed: 3 times (87 - UNC; 03 - Texas; 13 - Ind.)

#1 Seed in the tournament: 3 times (80, 10, 12)

#2 Seed in the tournament: 5 times (86, 87, 89, 90, 91)

SU beat #1 seed Oklahoma in 03 as well

 

[Gabjon]

SU beat #1 seed Oklahoma in 03 as well

and kansas...in '03 we beat 3 number 1 seeds first and only time it has been done.

 

[strumpfasaurus]

Interesting stat about Boeheim is that he's been to the sweet 16 17 times but is only 6-11 there. I am curious as t if there is a logical explanation. Dude has also had the worst luck ever, buzzer beater 87, injury costed us a great shot in 2010 and then grades in 2012.

 

[strumpfasaurus]

and kansas...in '03 we beat 3 number 1 seeds first and only time it has been done.

Kansas was a 2.

 

[OrangeDW]

Interesting stat about Boeheim is that he's been to the sweet 16 17 times but is only 6-11 there. I am curious as t if there is a logical explanation. Dude has also had the worst luck ever, buzzer beater 87, injury costed us a great shot in 2010 and then grades in 2012.

Not to mention OT losses with controversial circumstances/plays that went against SU every single year for awhile.

The wrong out of bounds call, followed by UMass's center chucking up a deep prayer 3 that went in and beat the shot clock buzzer in 92. The Autry shot from his knees being disallowed against Missouri in 94 with 1 minute left in regulation. The Moten timeout in 95. We would've won all 3 of those games without those bad calls/flukes.

Though it did make the '96 run all the more enjoyable, because we were actually winning the types of tourney games that we kept losing in the previous years.

 

[anomander]

Not to mention OT losses with controversial circumstances/plays that went against SU every single year for awhile.

The wrong out of bounds call, followed by UMass's center chucking up a deep prayer 3 that went in and beat the shot clock buzzer in 92. The Autry shot from his knees being disallowed against Missouri in 94 with 1 minute left in regulation. The Moten timeout in 95. We would've won all 3 of those games without those bad calls/flukes.

Though it did make the '96 run all the more enjoyable, because we were actually winning the types of tourney games that we kept losing in the previous years.

The Moten OT was especially brutal since Arkansas was coming off a NCAA championship, and went on to win another one that season. I believe they were favorites to win it before the tournament started.

 

[OrangeDW]

The Moten OT was especially brutal since Arkansas was coming off a NCAA championship, and went on to win another one that season. I believe they were favorites to win it before the tournament started.

Yeah, we played so well that game. It would've been such a great win, and though that team had a bad finish to the regular season they also had the talent to beat anybody and could've made a run.

Arkansas actually lost in the finals to UCLA that year though. But they were big favorites before the year as they had basically everybody back from their championship team.

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

Yeah, we played so well that game. It would've been such a great win, and though that team had a bad finish to the regular season they also had the talent to beat anybody and could've made a run.

Arkansas actually lost in the finals to UCLA that year though. But they were big favorites before the year as they had basically everybody back from their championship team.

I was over the top pissed. I remember dialing into the old AOL board and screaming for JBs head for not making sure every player knew we were out of timeouts. The more ironic part is that I'm pretty sure we had the possession arrow...

 

[SWC75]

I posted this after our loss to Michigan last year:

Our loss to Michigan was the first time we’ve played a team with the same seed in the NCAA tournament as us. Here is a history of SU’s record in the tournament since they started seeding teams in 1979:


1979 We were seeded 4th and beat Connecticut (5) but lost to Pennsylvania (9)

1980 SU (1) beat Villanova (8) lost to Iowa (5)

1983 SU (6) beat Morehead State (11) lost to Ohio State (3)

1984 SU (3) beat Virginia Commonwealth (6) lost to Virginia (7)

1985 SU (7) beat DePaul (10) lost to Georgia Tech (2)

1986 SU (2) beat Brown (15) lost to Navy (7)

1987 SU (2) beat Georgia Southern (15) Western Kentucky (10) Florida (6) North Carolina (1) and Providence (6) lost to Indiana (1)

1988 SU (3) beat North Carolina A&T (14) lost to Rhode Island (11)

1989 SU (2) beat Bucknell (15), Colorado State (10) and Missouri (3) lost to Illinois (1)

1990 SU (2) beat Coppin State (15) Virginia (7) lost to Minnesota (6)

1991 SU (2) lost to Richmond (15)

1992 SU (6) beat Princeton (11) lost to Massachusetts (3)

1994 SU (4) beat Hawaii (13) and Wisconsin-Green Bay (12), lost to Missouri (1)

1995 SU (7) beat Southern Illinois (10), lost to Arkansas (2)

1996 SU (4) beat Montana State (13), Drexel (12), Georgia ((8), Kansas (2) and Mississippi State (5) lost to Kentucky (1)

1998 SU (5) beat Iona (12) and New Mexico (4) lost to Duke (1)

1999 SU (8) lost to Oklahoma State (9)

2000 SU (4) beat Sanford (13) Kentucky (5), lost to Michigan State (1)

2001 SU (5) beat Hawaii (12) lost to Kansas (4)

2003 SU (3) beat Manhattan (14), Oklahoma State (6), Auburn (10), Oklahoma (1), Texas (1) and Kansas (2)

2004 SU (5) beat Brigham Young (12) and Maryland (4) lost to Alabama (8)

2005 SU (4) lost to Vermont (13)

2006 SU (5) lost to Texas A&M (12)

2009 SU (3) beat Stephen . Austin (14) and Arizona State (6), lost to Oklahoma (2)

2010 SU (1) beat Vermont (16) and Gonzaga (8) lost to Butler (5)

2011 SU (3) beat Indiana State (14), lost to Marquette (11)

2012 SU (1) beat UNC Ashville (16), Kansas State (8) and Wisconsin (4) lost to Ohio State (2)

2013 SU (4) beat Montana (13), California (12), Indiana (1) and Marquette (3) lost to Michigan (4)


We are 42-17 as the favorite and 10-12 as an underdog. We are 0-1 when the seeds are even.


We are:

4-6 vs. #1 seeds (including wins in the last three)

2-4 vs. #2 seeds (but one was 4/7/03)

2-2 vs. #3 seeds

3-2 vs. #4 seeds

3-2 vs. #5 seeds

5-1 vs. #6 seeds

1-2 vs. #7 seeds

4-1 vs. #8 seeds

0-2 vs. #9 seeds

5-0 vs. #10 seeds

2-2 vs. #11 seeds

6-1 vs. #12 seeds

5-1 vs. #13 seeds

4-0 vs. #14 seeds

4-1 vs. #15 seeds

2-0 vs. #16 seeds

 

[tbonezone]

I know this would take a lot of work, but I would be curious to the average seed of other historically great coaches like K, Izzo, Roy, Pitino etc, and see their related #'s

certainly the argument could be made that that carrying a team with an overall avg. seed of 3.7 into the tourney 37 times and emerging with just 4 final fours and one championship is not exactly stellar.