Winning two or more conference tourney games, by decade

[Eric15]

Here are the seasons we have won at least two games in a single conference tourney, meaning we were able to enjoy at least three consecutive glorious days of March SU hoops.

1980s (6): 1981, 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989
1990s (6): 1990, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1998, 1999
2000s (4): 2001, 2005, 2006, 2009
2010s (1), 2013

What the heck is going on lately? We have to be due for one of those legendary 3 or 4 day runs, right?

 

[adk(roc)CUSE]

As one of those fans who does put a lot of stock in conference tournament titles and runs, this depresses me. Let's win Wednesday and knock off Duke, Carolina and Virginia in order for our first ACC title. That would elevate the mood!

 

[Cusefan0307]

Pretty crazy those teams from 2010-2012 didn't do more damage.

Also pretty apparent that conference tourney success/failure does not correlate to the NCAA's.

 

[CorduroyG]

Pretty crazy those teams from 2010-2012 didn't do more damage.

Also pretty apparent that conference tourney success/failure does not correlate to the NCAA's.

yea that is surprising. plus the 2014 team. those 3 teams combined lost 8 regular season games i think, and combined only won 1 conference tourny game. and that was a pretty ugly win against uconn in 2012

 

[Brooky03]

Where the 'at least two games' criteria hurts is in seasons where we had a bye or double bye in the conference tournament. In most of those cases, the second game would be against a team equally good or better (edit: and a highly ranked, NCAAT contender).

We all know how bad we've been in the ACCT though.

 

[Eric15]

In most of those cases, the second game would be against a team equally good or better.

True, but even if we have a bye or double bye we're still the higher-rated and favored team in that scenario and should be taking care of business.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I didn't realize people put so much stock into conference tourney's. I'd rather win the following weekends.

 

[Eric15]

I didn't realize people put so much stock into conference tourney's. I'd rather win the following weekends.

Well duh.

I love a good steak (NCAA tourney) but I still don't want my appetizer beforehand (conference tourney) to suck.

 

[Day2]

I didn't realize people put so much stock into conference tourney's. I'd rather win the following weekends.

Yeah, when it comes to conference tourneys, my concerns are always injuries and fatigue. While they’ve given us some entertainment value over the years, that usually comes at the expense of the NCAAs.

 

[Brooky03]

True, but even if we have a bye or double bye we're still the higher-rated and favored team in that scenario and should be taking care of business.

I didn't really think that through this morning. In just about every scenario (including no bye), the 2nd game will be against a team as good or better. Doh!

I think what I was getting at is that the equally good/better team would likely be top 25 in bye-scenarios and a legit NCAAT contender, so losing at that point wouldn't be much of a negative.

 

[Eric15]

Also pretty apparent that conference tourney success/failure does not correlate to the NCAA's.

We would need to look at thousands of results to be able to make that conclusion. But my guess would be over the course of college basketball history, that conference tourney success almost certainly does correlate with NCAA tourney success.

Teams that win major conference tourneys get higher seeds in the NCAA tourney, and the higher seed you get in the NCAA tourney is directly linked to your percentage chance of making the Final Four.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Yeah, when it comes to conference tourneys, my concerns are always injuries and fatigue. While they’ve given us some entertainment value over the years, that usually comes at the expense of the NCAAs.

Yeah. I would have rather skipped the 2010 BET altogether knowing what I know now.

Also the ACC tournament sucks. Went to Brooklyn two years ago and that place was dead.

 

[Cusefan0307]

We would need to look at thousands of results to be able to make that conclusion. But my guess would be over the course of college basketball history, that conference tourney success almost certainly does correlate with NCAA tourney success.

Teams that win major conference tourneys get higher seeds in the NCAA tourney, and the higher seed you get in the NCAA tourney is directly linked to your percentage chance of making the Final Four.

I don't have the time to do this analysis, but in Syracuse's case you would be wrong. Sometimes I think you look for data points to correlate too much.

We received 1 seeds after losing in the conference tournaments early in 2010 and 2012. We received a 3 seed after winning 1 game in 2011.

Unless you win 4 games like we did in 2012 it doesn't appear the committee uses the conference tournaments as a way to seed.

Case in point:

We lost in the first round back to back years after winning the tournaments and were underseeded in 2004 IMO.

How many times did Pitt win the BET and people declared them FF favorites?

Duke won the ACC tourney just 2 years ago and everyone declared them the best team in America only to flame out early.

I don't know why someone would say the tournament is a crapshoot, but conference tournaments aren't.

 

[Eric15]

Sometimes I think you look for data points to correlate too much.

But that's what determining correlation is. You have to look at tons of data points over a long time period to make a conclusion about something. We can't just cherry pick a few examples here and there.

For every example you provided, I could give many corresponding example of a team finishing the season strong, winning it's conference tourney, and going on to the Final Four.

 

[OrangeDW]

Yeah. I would have rather skipped the 2010 BET altogether knowing what I know now.

Also the ACC tournament sucks. Went to Brooklyn two years ago and that place was dead.

Yeah, it seems like it’s been dead more often than not, unless it’s a UNC-Duke matchup in Greensboro or something.

I would have to think if we made a run in Brooklyn and had a matchup with one of the name schools that the place would be rocking.

 

[Fat tire 13]

People tell me the regular season doesn't matter as long as we go on a run in March Madness. People say the conference tournament doesn't matter because there is no correlation with March Madness.

I get the point. Recruits like when you go on a run. History remembers the tournament more than the regular season. That is how it works

However, I still like to watch all the games. And even the best team can run into a hot team in March Madness, and exit early.

This isn't a direct reply to anything on the thread, but more of a comment that it would be nice to have a talented team that is enjoyable to watch every game. That is why the stinker vs. Clemson sucks. We had too many games like that this year. I know we are not on the bubble, but who is really happy if we lose the first round as a 9 seed, or get the doors blown off in the 1-9 game??

 

[Cusefan0307]

Don’t have time to check other conferences, but of the last 8 ACC champions exactly one made the FF and that was UNC two years ago.

 

[OrangeDW]

People tell me the regular season doesn't matter as long as we go on a run in March Madness. People say the conference tournament doesn't matter because there is no correlation with March Madness.

I get the point. Recruits like when you go on a run. History remembers the tournament more than the regular season. That is how it works

However, I still like to watch all the games. And even the best team can run into a hot team in March Madness, and exit early.

This isn't a direct reply to anything on the thread, but more of a comment that it would be nice to have a talented team that is enjoyable to watch every game. That is why the stinker vs. Clemson sucks. We had too many games like that this year. I know we are not on the bubble, but who is really happy if we lose the first round as a 9 seed, or get the doors blown off in the 1-9 game??

I’m of the opinion that everything matters.

But of the 3, I think the conference tournament matters the least. But to say it doesn’t matter...that’s something people say when they lose early in it.

Same with regular season. It only “doesn’t matter” when you’re mediocre.

I want to compete for regular season titles often, make some conference tourney runs, and keep making our share of deep NCAA runs. It all matters.

 

[adk(roc)CUSE]

I didn't realize people put so much stock into conference tourney's. I'd rather win the following weekends.

Why not both?

 

[Day2]

We would need to look at thousands of results to be able to make that conclusion. But my guess would be over the course of college basketball history, that conference tourney success almost certainly does correlate with NCAA tourney success.

Teams that win major conference tourneys get higher seeds in the NCAA tourney, and the higher seed you get in the NCAA tourney is directly linked to your percentage chance of making the Final Four.

Except it doesn’t matter how UConn and UNC perform in their respective conference tournaments. All that matters is how we perform, so that’s all you need to check.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Why not both?

Oh sure I agree. I want to win every game, but I still think conference tournaments are the least important part of the season.

In fact I think it is stupid conferences use their tournament champion as the recipient of the auto bid. It should be the regular season champion. Especially for these non P5 conferences.

 

[djorange1989]

the conference tourney matters only when you are on the bubble and need it to get in. besides that it is money grab bullsh**

 

[joct]

Will never happen, but I've always thought the conference tourneys would at least feel more important if there was at least a few days between them ending and the NCAA selections. Now it feels like win or lose, instantly it's on to the NCAAs, and they are forgotten quickly. There are exceptions like 2006 which last for a while, but even that one felt empty by going out in the first round 5 days later. 2013 felt good to go on a run to the BET finals, and I think that momentum helped launch the FF run that year. But those feel like exceptions. With the selections show Sunday, they feel instantly forgotten in most cases IMO.

 

[Eric15]

the conference tourney matters only when you are on the bubble and need it to get in. besides that it is money grab bullsh**

I mean, isn't all sports money grab BS at the end of the day? The BET was an unbelievably fun sporting event. And I feel like once we make our first ACCT deep run, we will feel better about it.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I rather win an ACCT as the 5th place team vs finishing 2nd in the ACC and losing our first ACCT game. Both IMO would get us a 3 seed in the NCAAT. Rather have the trophy and a fun week than have 2 more conference regular season Ws.