The Ides of March

[PoppyHart]

The Michigan State teams who went out in the first round were ranked (writers/coaches) #15-#12, #3/#3, #4/#5 and #2/#2, respectively in the first poll of the season, so the expectations for those teams were pretty high.

Who is in your list of top coaches then? Nobody said Izzo walked on water, just that he's a great coach. And Jud Heathcote still feels slighted for his 1979 title.

 

[bpo57]

The Michigan State teams who went out in the first round were ranked (writers/coaches) #15-#12, #3/#3, #4/#5 and #2/#2, respectively in the first poll of the season, so the expectations for those teams were pretty high.

Your facts are wrong because you list four teams that went out in the first round but Izzo only had three teams lose in the first round. Comparing a team's NCAA tournament performance to a pre-season poll seems rather strange. Each of those teams lost 12 games so clearly they were not anywhere near his better squads.

 

[bpo57]

Who is in your list of top coaches then? Nobody said Izzo walked on water, just that he's a great coach. And Jud Heathcote still feels slighted for his 1979 title.

Good luck getting him to relent. He can come up with a stat that will explain to you why today isn't Thursday.

 

[BuffOrange]

I'm a big Izzo guy myself but if swc's point is that he'd have a choker label without the 1 title (regardless of whether the same could be said of lots of other guys), that's sorta hard to argue with given that they (media/fans) say it about well, every coach in every sport who ever who achieved a lot without a title. Doesn't mean those critics would be remotely right or justified (I would be calling them idiots) but you can't suggest they wouldn't exist in large numbers.

 

[bpo57]

I'm a big Izzo guy myself but if swc's point is that he'd have a choker label without the 1 title (regardless of whether the same could be said of lots of other guys), that's sorta hard to argue with given that they (media/fans) say it about well, every coach in every sport who ever who achieved a lot without a title. Doesn't mean those critics would be remotely right or justified (I would be calling them idiots) but you can't suggest they wouldn't exist in large numbers.

But SWC never said anything about choking. He was critical of Izzo's four first round losses. Problem is he has only had three in 15 years and those were easily overshadowed by tremendous success. What I read from SWC was that he couldn't understand why Izzo gets such acclaim. And I couldn't understand how SWC could come to that conclusion. The guy has the highest winning percentage in the NCAA tourney for any active coach and has basically been to a Final 4 every other year during his tenure at MSU.

And yeah I agree that if Izzo had been to six F4s and never won one he'd be taking heat. That's one of the strange aspects of American sporting culture. A team like the Bills in the 90s is ridiculed because they went winless in four straight Super Bowls while the idiots never get what a great achievement that was to get to four straight Super Bowls.

 

[DNABB5]

interesting how Georgetown and Cuse have identical records in the 1st round (Screw you Dayton!) and national title game. I mean, that's kind of coinkydinky isn't it?

 

[Madbiker]

SWC...here's a theory I have to explain SU's poor performance in the round of 16. I don't have the history data but it's my perception. Could be that SU has reached the round of 16 most frequently when we are a #4/5 seed and thus heavily skewed to playing #1 seeds. This is probably more so than other elite teams who are more frequently seeded as a #1,2 or 3 and are therefore playing either a lower seeded team or at worst a #2 and not a #1. I feel very certain this is the case with UConn. SU has very infrequently been a #1 or #2 and very rarely is lower than a #5. Maybe a good research project.

 

[PoppyHart]

SWC...here's a theory I have to explain SU's poor performance in the round of 16. I don't have the history data but it's my perception. Could be that SU has reached the round of 16 most frequently when we are a #4/5 seed and thus heavily skewed to playing #1 seeds. This is probably more so than other elite teams who are more frequently seeded as a #1,2 or 3 and are therefore playing either a lower seeded team or at worst a #2 and not a #1. I feel very certain this is the case with UConn. SU has very infrequently been a #1 or #2 and very rarely is lower than a #5. Maybe a good research project.

OTOH

S16 as #1: 1980, 2010, 2012
S16 as #2: 1987, 1989
S16 as #3: 1983, 1990, 2003, 2009
S16 as #4: 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000
S16 as #5: 2004

I don't know about pre-1980.

 

[FortyFourCT]

Great research SWC. I'm not going to over complicate things as to why...my theory is simple. If you lose in the Sweet 16, theoretically you are somewhere between the top 9th and top 16th team, and most years that is probably us. 10th best in the country on a very consistant basis. sometimes we are a bit down and lose in the 1st or 2nd round and sometimes we are top 8 or better and advance.

 

[SWC75]

Who is in your list of top coaches then? Nobody said Izzo walked on water, just that he's a great coach. And Jud Heathcote still feels slighted for his 1979 title.

Izzo would certainly be on my list of top coaches. But people need to be aware that even he has had his failures, just like the rest of them.

 

[SWC75]

Your facts are wrong because you list four teams that went out in the first round but Izzo only had three teams lose in the first round. Comparing a team's NCAA tournament performance to a pre-season poll seems rather strange. Each of those teams lost 12 games so clearly they were not anywhere near his better squads.

Tom Izzo became Michigan State's coach for the 1996-97 seasons. His 2001-02, 2003-04, 2005-06 and 2010-2011 teams lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament. That's four times. You were talking about expectations so comparing end results to a pre-season poll is not strange at all.

 

[SWC75]

Good luck getting him to relent. He can come up with a stat that will explain to you why today isn't Thursday.

It isn't.

 

[SWC75]

I'm a big Izzo guy myself but if swc's point is that he'd have a choker label without the 1 title (regardless of whether the same could be said of lots of other guys), that's sorta hard to argue with given that they (media/fans) say it about well, every coach in every sport who ever who achieved a lot without a title. Doesn't mean those critics would be remotely right or justified (I would be calling them idiots) but you can't suggest they wouldn't exist in large numbers.

He's not a choker. But his post-season success is more erratic than people realize. That's all I was pointing out.

 

[bpo57]

Tom Izzo became Michigan State's coach for the 1996-97 seasons. His 2001-02, 2003-04, 2005-06 and 2010-2011 teams lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament. That's four times. You were talking about expectations so comparing end results to a pre-season poll is not strange at all.

Actually he started at MSU in the 1995/1996 season.

I think a coach's record in the NCAAs should be evaluated based upon how he did versus seed not some pre-season poll. I'm sure there were several times where MSU made the F4 and weren't even ranked in the top 20 of the pre-season poll. But who cares? In those years where Izzo went out in the 1st round he had so-so teams. Losing 12 games shows those teams were just ok. The reason why they were highly ranked in the pre-season poll those years is because they made a very deep run the previous year in the NCAAs. I believe we all know how that works in that voters have the last F4 fresh in their minds. But you shouldn't fall for that and then say he underperformed expectations because the expectations themselves were formed with faulty logic by some poll voters.

 

[bpo57]

He's not a choker. But his post-season success is more erratic than people realize. That's all I was pointing out.

You were asked before but you dodged it- tell me which coaches out there have a better record in the NCAAs?

 

[SWC75]

You were asked before but you dodged it- tell me which coaches out there have a better record in the NCAAs?

He ranks pretty high.
http://www.dbwoerner.com/basketball/hofframe.html

He's a great coach but, as I pointed out, his record has some failures in it as well. Many people forget that. I was just trying to balance out the perceptions. It's often said that his technique of "toughening up" his teams with a difficult early schedule is the reason for his post season success. But it hasn't always worked. As I said, (and you agreed), there's no "magic formula" for success.

 

[SWC75]

Actually he started at MSU in the 1995/1996 season.

I think a coach's record in the NCAAs should be evaluated based upon how he did versus seed not some pre-season poll. I'm sure there were several times where MSU made the F4 and weren't even ranked in the top 20 of the pre-season poll. But who cares? In those years where Izzo went out in the 1st round he had so-so teams. Losing 12 games shows those teams were just ok. The reason why they were highly ranked in the pre-season poll those years is because they made a very deep run the previous year in the NCAAs. I believe we all know how that works in that voters have the last F4 fresh in their minds. But you shouldn't fall for that and then say he underperformed expectations because the expectations themselves were formed with faulty logic by some poll voters.

You're right. It was 1995-96. I do think pre-season rankings indicate that there was plenty of talent on those teams because they had key guys coming back from teams that have done well. If they'd lost a lot of guys, they would not have been ranked so high.

 

[bpo57]

You're right. It was 1995-96. I do think pre-season rankings indicate that there was plenty of talent on those teams because they had key guys coming back from teams that have done well. If they'd lost a lot of guys, they would not have been ranked so high.

Fair point.