2011-2012 Uconn team

[maineuconnfan]

I keep on thinking when seeing all of these highlights of drummond and lamb, how ridiculously talented that team was: Drummond, Lamb, Napier, Roscoe, Oriakhi, Boatright, giffey, daniels every single one of these are a top 100 except giffey, and about 4 of them were considered a top 30 on at least someones list...but the obvious problem besides Oriakhi's attitude that year, was the maturity of our ball-handlers. It didnt hurt that calhoun was not in a good position to coach that year because of the suspensions and injuries, which gave the team no continuity in the season. So when we look at this years team that may not be as talented as that team, this is a much better team because of the amount good ball handlers there are and the chemistry. But it kind of makes you sick thinking about how much talent we had on that team to go out so weak to hoiberg's heavers. But it also makes me laugh at all the recruiting comments about what this team needs before the season started.

 

[CTBasketball]

We've had too many talented teams underperform. 2011-2012, 2009-2010, 2007-2008, 2005-2006, 2004-2005, 2002-2003, 1995-1996....The list goes on and on.

 

[Scoe]

yeah we all know winning aint easy, alot of teams could say the same thing. It is what it is.

 

[aceboon]

We've had too many talented teams underperform. 2011-2012, 2009-2010, 2007-2008, 2005-2006, 2004-2005, 2002-2003, 1995-1996....The list goes on and on.

AJ blew his knee out in 07-08, even if they hang on against USD they weren't going anywhere. Same thing with 04-05, we had Marcus(who was playing on a sprained ankle himself) and basically just big men. Rashad was a shell of himself coming off the staph infection, Denham sprained his MCL in the BET, Kellog was kicked off the team, and Rudy's perimeter game was still developing.

 

[Inyatkin]

We've had too many talented teams underperform. 2011-2012, 2009-2010, 2007-2008, 2005-2006, 2004-2005, 2002-2003, 1995-1996....The list goes on and on.

This is a joke, right?
Let's start with '96 -- they went 32-3. Terrible ending. OK. Still, 32-3.
2008 underperformed? Based on what?
2003? That has to be a misprint.
Does a team underachieve if it doesn't win a title?

 

[caw]

05-06 underperformed by a game, they were a very good team. If you were expecting a NC, well it's hard to win one. I did expect a final four that yet though. It's only poorly remembered because of who beat them. They didn't underperform by much.

02-03 UConn lost in the sweet sixteen to a pretty good Texas squad on a stuck ball. They didn't really underperform (if Butler had come back, I would agree), or at least not by much. They were a yer away, as results showe

95-96 UConn was really hurt when Ricky was. Injuries happen it they also change expectations.

09-10 had zero depth. I mean it had four starters in Dyson, Walker, Robinson and Edwards. Then it had Oriakhi and Jamal Coombs-McDaniel who were not ready as freshmen. Not sure who else even got minutes in that team. Only 2 NBA guys (one of whom was only a cup so far).

11-12 was easily the most talented team that did the least at UConn. Drummond may end up an NBA superstar, Lamb is a solid rotation guy on a top NBA team. Napier may be the player of the year this year. Roscoe is leading college in boards. Giffey is the best shooter in college. Daniels is looking much improved and a matchup nightmare in college. Boatright is solid right now. That team was probably a year away in terms of maturity. But the talent is showing.

 

[Ts5034]

The 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 were probably the toughest seasons for a UConn basketball fan as far as teams underperforming. Funny thing is there was the national championship team wedged btw those two seasons. There has been a lot of speculation but the failures of the 2011-2012 team were probably more chemistry issues that hurt their play on the court.

 

[CTBasketball]

This is a joke, right?
Let's start with '96 -- they went 32-3. Terrible ending. OK. Still, 32-3.
2008 underperformed? Based on what?
2003? That has to be a misprint.
Does a team underachieve if it doesn't win a title?

Yes.

 

[Inyatkin]

Yes.

Well you might want to broaden your list, then. 2009, total choke job. And how bout that "Dream Season"? What a letdown, right?

 

[CTBasketball]

Well you might want to broaden your list, then. 2009, total choke job. And how bout that "Dream Season"? What a letdown, right?

I should say, "teams that should have won it all."

 

[Inyatkin]

The 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 were probably the toughest seasons for a UConn basketball fan as far as teams underperforming. Funny thing is there was the national championship team wedged btw those two seasons. There has been a lot of speculation but the failures of the 2011-2012 team were probably more chemistry issues that hurt their play on the court.

They were tough years, but one thing I'll say in defense of 2010 is they seemed to have every possible bounce go against them all year. There were three or four potentially huge winnable games that were lost mostly to luck.
Sometimes they played terribly that year, but a few bounces and it's a tournament team.

 

[Tenspro2002]

We've had too many talented teams underperform. 2011-2012, 2009-2010, 2007-2008, 2005-2006, 2004-2005, 2002-2003, 1995-1996....The list goes on and on.

There's a difference between "underperform in the Tournament" and "underperform, period". Of the teams you listed, only 2010 and 2012 underperformed, period.

Most people forget that before becoming uninterested and coasting to a disappointing finish in March, the 2006 team lost 2 games over the entire regular season.

Most of those other teams were upset in the Tournament, but had fine regular seasons. I have no idea how 2003 ended up on your list. Perhaps you meant 2000 or 2001 instead?

 

[Inyatkin]

I should say, "teams that should have won it all."

The 2007-2008 UConn Huskies "should have won it all."
Now that's a new one.

 

[CTBasketball]

The 2007-2008 UConn Huskies "should have won it all."
Now that's a new one.

If I changed my original statement I would leave off a lot of those teams.

2008-2009 would have won it all with Dyson.
2005-2006...
1993-1994

 

[David 76]

I think UCONN has done a good job of living up to, and often beyond all expectations. Two exceptions that come to my mind are losing to an inferior Florida team with Donyell, and the immensely talented team with Gay, Villanueva, etc.

I think if you look at teams like Pittsburgh you would understand under-performing

 

[Ts5034]

They were tough years, but one thing I'll say in defense of 2010 is they seemed to have every possible bounce go against them all year. There were three or four potentially huge winnable games that were lost mostly to luck.
Sometimes they played terribly that year, but a few bounces and it's a tournament team.

Thats true but we thought that team finally turned the corner in late February with wins at Villanova who was ranked #3 at the time, a 20 point win at Rutgers, and a pretty convincing win vs West Virginia who was ranked in the top 10. Then things went downhill again when we lost that tough game to Louisville at Gampel by 2 pts and closed out the season with poor efforts at ND and USF. The loss to St Johns in the Big East Tournament was embarrassing. They put themselves in good position to make the tournament with a late push but it looked like they quit.

 

[ASweet3781]

Do you know how many teams Kansas, North Carolina, and Duke SHOULD HAVE won it all by this standard compared to UConn's over the years?

Those 3 programs have been National Powers compared to us by about 30-40 years. The title count goes UNC- 5, Duke-4, UConn and Kansas- 3. UConn has more than capitalized on it's chances when it had a team that could win looking how close we are to them in titles. Do you know how many teams they had loaded with All Americans and seeded 1st or 2nd that failed to win? How many "what ifs"? Like dozens.

The only team of UConn you can honestly say should have won but didn't looking at the field was 2006. Everything else regarding the tournament is a complete and total crap shoot that you can't predict. We've had good teams come up short in close games against very good teams(1990, 1995, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2009) and we've had good teams been upset by teams we should have beat ('94, '96, '05, and '06) and 2 teams who lost their starting PG during the tournament which means they can't be judged ('00, '08). Oh yeah we also have won the most National Titles in 15 years. And each year we won a close game we easily could have lost along the way to the title. That's the NCAA tournament. Some go your way. Some don't. We've had more go our way than most others in this decade.

I will agree that 2010 and especially 2012 underachieved greatly.

 

[msgordon]

^this pretty much sums it up

 

[Chelo]

The 2011-2012 squad was jinxed by the bank in shot. It seemed every big game, the opposing team would hit a wild bank in three and we would lose the game.

 

[UConn17]

We also have had teams who overachieved....