SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,531
- Like
- 64,547
The subject of JB's NCAA record, and especially in the Sweet 16 came up, (yet again, even though it's December).
Jim Boeheim’s record in the NCAAs, (1977-2012):
Round of 64: 20-4 Lost: 1991, 1999, 2005 and 2006
Round of 32: 16-9 Lost: 1978, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1992, 1995, 2001 and 2011
Sweet 16: 5-11 Lost 1977, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2009, 2010
Elite 8: 3-2 Lost: 1989, 2012
Semi-Finals: 3-0
Finals: 2-1 Lost: 1987. 1996
It’s interesting that we complain about the Sweet 16 record now but through the end of the 80’s the problem was the Round of 32, (We were 5-5 in that round through 1988 and have been 11-4 since). That suggests that it’s an anomaly that we have struggled in the Sweet 16 since: that the reasons for the losses are varied and have little to do with the point in the tournament in which they come.
Here are our Sweet 16 losses under JB:
3/17/77 UNC CHARLOTTE 81 SYRACUSE 59. A real shocker. There were no seedings in those says but we were 26-3 and ranked #6. They were 24-3 against a lesser schedule and had slipped into the rankings at #17. The real difference in the game was in the backcourt. We went 5-9, (Jim Williams) and 5-11 (Larry Kelly) and they went 6-4, 6-5. Our guys could not shoot or pass over their guys and their guys could do so at will. The main problem was: MATCH-UPS.
3/16/79 PENNSYLVANIA 84 SYRACUSE 76 Another upset We were again 26-3 and ranked #8 and seeded #4. Penn was 23-5 and ranked #14, (having just upset UNC) and seeded #9. Again, the problem was in the backcourt. I recall that Eddie Moss, our point guard, was sick or hurt and Marty Headd, a slow-footed shooter was our starting backcourt. They couldn’t keep up with the Penn guards and we fell behind 34-50 at the half. A second half comeback fell short. Again, the main problem was: MATCH-UPS.
3/14/80 IOWA 88 SYRACUSE 77 SU was again 26-3 and ranked #6 and seeded #1. Iowa was 23-8, unranked and seeded #5, so this was another upset. It was a close game until SU pulled ahead by 5-7 points midway through the second half. JB, uncharacteristically, slapped on a press proactively to try to put the game away. It did- for Iowa. They got a series of fast-break lay-ups and dunks, took the lead and pulled away in the final minutes to win by 11. This game may be a big reason why JB doesn’t like to use the press. The problem was: STRATEGY.
3/22/80 VIRGINIA 63 SYRACUSE 55 We were 23-8 and ranked #18-16 in the two polls and seeded #3. Virginia, (the first year of the Ralph Sampson era) was 21-10, unranked and seeded #7. Still another upset. Both teams stunk. They put together five minutes of decent ball late in the first half to take a 26-16 halftime lead and held onto that lead through the second half. The main factor was: PERFORMANCE.
3/23/90 MINNESOTA 82 SYRACUSE 75 We were 26-6, ranked #6 and seeded #2. The Golden Gophers were 22-8, ranked #20 and seeded #6. All I remember from this game is that Tony Scott jacked up a couple of 30 footers and threw the ball out of bounds in the final minute of a close and very winnable game. The main factor was: TONY SCOTT.
3/24/94 MISSOURI 98 SYRACUSE 88 (OT) We were 23-6, ranked #15/14 and seeded #4. Missouri was 28-3, ranked #5 and seeded #1. I didn’t see this game, (I was hiking up a volcano in Hawaii with my brother). What I’ve heard about it is that we made a miracle comeback in the second half to tie it and would have won had a shot Adrian Autry made while flat on his back been allowed to count. But it’s clear that the main factor was that we were playing a BETTER TEAM.
3/20/98 DUKE 80 SYRACUSE 67 We were 26-8, ranked #21/19 and seeded #5. Duke was 31-3, ranked #3 and seeded #1. We again fell behind and made a comeback to tie it but couldn’t stay in it. Again, clearly a BETTER TEAM.
3/23/00 MICHIGAN STATE 75 SYRACUSE 58 We were 26-5, ranked #16/14, (which seems pretty low) and seeded #4 (ditto: the #3 seed was 24-9 Maryland team that got blown out by 35 vs. UCLA in the second round). Michigan State was 28-7but ranked #2 and seeded #1. We led 40-26 at one point but they cracked the zone and we didn’t have an alternative defense. Our one reliable outside shooter, Preston Shumpert, had been hit upside the head, (no call) and was out of the game. I’ve always believed that good teams are not as affected by the location of the game but, as we know, this was played in the Spartan’s back yard. And it’s the only time Izzo has beaten Boeheim in 4 tries. Main Factors: STRATEGY, INJURY, LOCATION but mostly BETTER TEAM.
3/25/04 ALABAMA 80 SYRACUSE 71 We were 23-7, ranked #20/24 and seeded #5. Alabama was 19-12, unranked and seeded #8. I really don’t remember much about this game. I was just looking forward to meeting Connecticut in the regional final. I think the SU players probably were, too. I think the main factor was simply PERFORMANCE.
3/27/09 OKLAHOMA 84 SYRACUSE 71 We were 28-9, ranked #18-20 and seeded #3. Oklahoma was 29-5, ranked #6/7 and seeded #2. I didn’t think we played very well in this game but Oklahoma, with Blake Griffin, was clearly the BETTER TEAM.
3/25/10 BUTLER 63 SYRACUSE 59 We were 29-4, ranked #3 and seeded #1. Butler was 27-4, ranked #12 and seeded #5. People think Butler came out of the blue this year but they were already recognized as a quality team. I still think we would have beaten them with Arinze Onuaku, whose presence would mean that we wouldn’t have tried to force the ball to Rick Jackson so much in the first half, (which produced 8 turnovers). We might have won anyway if we’d gotten an out-of-bounds call that should have gone our way in the final minute. Butler was a certainly a very good team but I think the main factors were INJURY and, as a secondary factor, OFFICIATING.
I don’t see any trend there. We lost games for the same reasons any team loses NCAA games: BETTER TEAM, (4 times), MATCH-UPS, STRATEGY, PERFORMANCE, INJURY, (2 each), LOCATION, OFFICIATING, TONY SCOTT, (1 each). Six of the 11 teams we lost to went on to the Final Four. Two played for the national title and one won it. Seven of the 11 losses were upsets but four of the last six were not. The Sweet 16 upsets and the Round of 32 losses are mostly from the first decade and a half of his career.
The major complain about Jim Boeheim comparing him to other elite coaches is that they go to the Final Four more time and win more National Championships. The main reason for that is what happened in the Sweet 16. And yet there’s no trend here that suggests that there is any one reason why Jim is 5-11 in the Sweet 16 or that that record is a true measure of his coaching ability.
Jim Boeheim’s record in the NCAAs, (1977-2012):
Round of 64: 20-4 Lost: 1991, 1999, 2005 and 2006
Round of 32: 16-9 Lost: 1978, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1992, 1995, 2001 and 2011
Sweet 16: 5-11 Lost 1977, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2009, 2010
Elite 8: 3-2 Lost: 1989, 2012
Semi-Finals: 3-0
Finals: 2-1 Lost: 1987. 1996
It’s interesting that we complain about the Sweet 16 record now but through the end of the 80’s the problem was the Round of 32, (We were 5-5 in that round through 1988 and have been 11-4 since). That suggests that it’s an anomaly that we have struggled in the Sweet 16 since: that the reasons for the losses are varied and have little to do with the point in the tournament in which they come.
Here are our Sweet 16 losses under JB:
3/17/77 UNC CHARLOTTE 81 SYRACUSE 59. A real shocker. There were no seedings in those says but we were 26-3 and ranked #6. They were 24-3 against a lesser schedule and had slipped into the rankings at #17. The real difference in the game was in the backcourt. We went 5-9, (Jim Williams) and 5-11 (Larry Kelly) and they went 6-4, 6-5. Our guys could not shoot or pass over their guys and their guys could do so at will. The main problem was: MATCH-UPS.
3/16/79 PENNSYLVANIA 84 SYRACUSE 76 Another upset We were again 26-3 and ranked #8 and seeded #4. Penn was 23-5 and ranked #14, (having just upset UNC) and seeded #9. Again, the problem was in the backcourt. I recall that Eddie Moss, our point guard, was sick or hurt and Marty Headd, a slow-footed shooter was our starting backcourt. They couldn’t keep up with the Penn guards and we fell behind 34-50 at the half. A second half comeback fell short. Again, the main problem was: MATCH-UPS.
3/14/80 IOWA 88 SYRACUSE 77 SU was again 26-3 and ranked #6 and seeded #1. Iowa was 23-8, unranked and seeded #5, so this was another upset. It was a close game until SU pulled ahead by 5-7 points midway through the second half. JB, uncharacteristically, slapped on a press proactively to try to put the game away. It did- for Iowa. They got a series of fast-break lay-ups and dunks, took the lead and pulled away in the final minutes to win by 11. This game may be a big reason why JB doesn’t like to use the press. The problem was: STRATEGY.
3/22/80 VIRGINIA 63 SYRACUSE 55 We were 23-8 and ranked #18-16 in the two polls and seeded #3. Virginia, (the first year of the Ralph Sampson era) was 21-10, unranked and seeded #7. Still another upset. Both teams stunk. They put together five minutes of decent ball late in the first half to take a 26-16 halftime lead and held onto that lead through the second half. The main factor was: PERFORMANCE.
3/23/90 MINNESOTA 82 SYRACUSE 75 We were 26-6, ranked #6 and seeded #2. The Golden Gophers were 22-8, ranked #20 and seeded #6. All I remember from this game is that Tony Scott jacked up a couple of 30 footers and threw the ball out of bounds in the final minute of a close and very winnable game. The main factor was: TONY SCOTT.
3/24/94 MISSOURI 98 SYRACUSE 88 (OT) We were 23-6, ranked #15/14 and seeded #4. Missouri was 28-3, ranked #5 and seeded #1. I didn’t see this game, (I was hiking up a volcano in Hawaii with my brother). What I’ve heard about it is that we made a miracle comeback in the second half to tie it and would have won had a shot Adrian Autry made while flat on his back been allowed to count. But it’s clear that the main factor was that we were playing a BETTER TEAM.
3/20/98 DUKE 80 SYRACUSE 67 We were 26-8, ranked #21/19 and seeded #5. Duke was 31-3, ranked #3 and seeded #1. We again fell behind and made a comeback to tie it but couldn’t stay in it. Again, clearly a BETTER TEAM.
3/23/00 MICHIGAN STATE 75 SYRACUSE 58 We were 26-5, ranked #16/14, (which seems pretty low) and seeded #4 (ditto: the #3 seed was 24-9 Maryland team that got blown out by 35 vs. UCLA in the second round). Michigan State was 28-7but ranked #2 and seeded #1. We led 40-26 at one point but they cracked the zone and we didn’t have an alternative defense. Our one reliable outside shooter, Preston Shumpert, had been hit upside the head, (no call) and was out of the game. I’ve always believed that good teams are not as affected by the location of the game but, as we know, this was played in the Spartan’s back yard. And it’s the only time Izzo has beaten Boeheim in 4 tries. Main Factors: STRATEGY, INJURY, LOCATION but mostly BETTER TEAM.
3/25/04 ALABAMA 80 SYRACUSE 71 We were 23-7, ranked #20/24 and seeded #5. Alabama was 19-12, unranked and seeded #8. I really don’t remember much about this game. I was just looking forward to meeting Connecticut in the regional final. I think the SU players probably were, too. I think the main factor was simply PERFORMANCE.
3/27/09 OKLAHOMA 84 SYRACUSE 71 We were 28-9, ranked #18-20 and seeded #3. Oklahoma was 29-5, ranked #6/7 and seeded #2. I didn’t think we played very well in this game but Oklahoma, with Blake Griffin, was clearly the BETTER TEAM.
3/25/10 BUTLER 63 SYRACUSE 59 We were 29-4, ranked #3 and seeded #1. Butler was 27-4, ranked #12 and seeded #5. People think Butler came out of the blue this year but they were already recognized as a quality team. I still think we would have beaten them with Arinze Onuaku, whose presence would mean that we wouldn’t have tried to force the ball to Rick Jackson so much in the first half, (which produced 8 turnovers). We might have won anyway if we’d gotten an out-of-bounds call that should have gone our way in the final minute. Butler was a certainly a very good team but I think the main factors were INJURY and, as a secondary factor, OFFICIATING.
I don’t see any trend there. We lost games for the same reasons any team loses NCAA games: BETTER TEAM, (4 times), MATCH-UPS, STRATEGY, PERFORMANCE, INJURY, (2 each), LOCATION, OFFICIATING, TONY SCOTT, (1 each). Six of the 11 teams we lost to went on to the Final Four. Two played for the national title and one won it. Seven of the 11 losses were upsets but four of the last six were not. The Sweet 16 upsets and the Round of 32 losses are mostly from the first decade and a half of his career.
The major complain about Jim Boeheim comparing him to other elite coaches is that they go to the Final Four more time and win more National Championships. The main reason for that is what happened in the Sweet 16. And yet there’s no trend here that suggests that there is any one reason why Jim is 5-11 in the Sweet 16 or that that record is a true measure of his coaching ability.
;$ing had that game and the remaining path would have been Iowa State, Wisconsin (who we beat earlier) and five seed Florida.
