Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 5335126, member: 40"]
I agree fundamentally.

But I do think that the narrative was a little bit different [or at least it was for me].  We didn't exactly have an optimized roster, and we had a new coach trying to implement new systems [allegedly] on both sides of the ball.  Although he did bring in a bunch of new faces, he inherited a bunch of guys -- several of whom didn't fully buy in [Mintz, Copeland, Bell].  He also had to deal with the absurdity of a projected contributor [Benny] who was so off the wall, he had to be dismissed in the middle of the season.  And he was a new head coach for the first time, so there was a learning curve that had to be expected.

And despite all that, we got to 20 wins.

Now personally, I think that the 20 win benchmark ain't what it used to be.  In 1998, that line of demarcation mattered; get to 20 wins, you are a shoe-in to make the NCAA tournament.  But that isn't the case anymore.

And it also should be mentioned that there were a lot of red flags.  Blowout losses, players acting up on the court, dysfunction in the locker room, etc.  The offense was stagnant, and there should have been alarm bells ringing about the offense being generally the same, Red using the same inbounds plays, etc. with zero adjustments.

But the "narrative" was that for all of those challenges, Red did ok in his first year.  Not great, but ok.  And with some of those malcontents gone, that we'd see improved buy-in and improved results.

Hasn't worked out that way.  We miss Brown a lot more than many want to believe.  And Mintz, frustrating as he was at times, was a borderline NBA talent.  We don't have anyone like that this year.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?