Are we still an elite program?

[Gregory Koch]

Not now. This ban has set us back a few years. But in a few years, we'll be back.

 

[Dogbreath2U]

The board has certainly become more avidly dickish this summer (waiting for Fishy to come along and dickishly tell me that this isn't true). This kind of post always draws the ire of the UConn faithful, but he does make some points. There is no doubt that UConn's dominance in the Big East has diminished. Our guys have not been "the power" in the league since 2006. The league has gotten so tough that it could be argued that no school would have shown dominance since that time, but a change did occur. 2009 was a strong year from start to finish, but there have been a higher percentage of mediocre (by UConn standards) regular seasons since 2006. I think that the Final Four and the 2011 NC are testaments to Jim Calhoun's will to win and some luck in 2011 to capture magic in the form of KW. I would agree, however, that such changes do not move UConn out of the elite status with 2 Final Fours in the last four years.

It would be dishonest to assert that there are not doubts about how things will go after JC retires, but that was not the main point of the dumbsh!t OP.

 

[Hoophound]

The board has certainly become more avidly dickish this summer (waiting for Fishy to come along and dickishly tell me that this isn't true). This kind of post always draws the ire of the UConn faithful, but he does make some points. There is no doubt that UConn's dominance in the Big East has diminished. Our guys have not been "the power" in the league since 2006. The league has gotten so tough that it could be argued that no school would have shown dominance since that time, but a change did occur. 2009 was a strong year from start to finish, but there have been a higher percentage of mediocre (by UConn standards) regular seasons since 2006. I think that the Final Four and the 2011 NC are testaments to Jim Calhoun's will to win and some luck in 2011 to capture magic in the form of KW. I would agree, however, that such changes do not move UConn out of the elite status with 2 Final Fours in the last four years.

It would be dishonest to assert that there are not doubts about how things will go after JC retires, but that was not the main point of the dumbsh!t OP.

I would argue that Jim Calhoun is better at building teams the old fashioned way and that high roster turnover has something to do with regular season performance in recent years.

 

[UCONNFAN179]

Oh, so you are saying that we are ONLY 10 games above 0.500 in the country's premier basketball conference; you know, the one that consistently sends almost half of its teams to the NCAA tournament every year? Oh, and you also are saying that if we didn't win THE ENTIRE THING in 2011 that we may not be considered elite? You're kidding, right? (I know that most Boneyarders are now asking, "Dan, why are you responding to him??" I don't know, everyone. I don't know.)

Perhaps you can help us by compiling a list of teams that have only won the entire thing, thus barely saving their reputation as an elite program? That would certainly help the discussion...

-------------
Oh, so you are saying that we are ONLY 10 games above 0.500 in the country's premier basketball conference; you know, the one that consistently sends almost half of its teams to the NCAA tournament every year?

No Dan, I'm saying in the last 6 years we've finished just 12th, 4th, 3rd, 12th, 9th, and 9th in conference. And next year isn't looking all that promising. It's a great conference but those are not elite numbers. They're mediocre. If you don't think so, you're wrong. I'll say it again because you're not getting it... Kemba's incredible 2011 run was awesome and it keeps us being thought of by most as elite. And in m mind it makes up for other years when we should have won it all. But reality is is it was a .500 conference team that got hot and ran the table and as much as we loved it and want to crow about it, it was a bit of a fluke. And for people like you, it is masking a noticeable drop off in our program's dominance. Without that improbable run, it'd be much more noticeable that we've had really just 1 semi-dominant team in 7 years. In fact in the majority of those years, by UConn/elite standards we've been extremely mediocre or poor both regular and post season. So my original point about people being worried about us dropping off post JC is perhaps we've already done it. Without that 1 run, we've been only slightly above average for 7 years. When we get new facilities and are forced into a new coach, I don't see us dropping all that far from where we've been recently.

 

[Robertelamin]

I will definitely agree that intra conference has been disappointing for a few years now. However this 2011 fluke stuff needs to stop. How was it a miracle? They were a 3 seed not a 10 seed. No doubt it was an incredible run but it was not a fluke. They beat Kentucky twice, Michigan St., Texas, Pitt , Louisville, Arizona, Syracuse. How do you beat those teams without being really good?

 

[Huskies4ever]

I will definitely agree that intra conference has been disappointing for a few years now. However this 2011 fluke stuff needs to stop. How was it a miracle? They were a 3 seed not a 10 seed. No doubt it was an incredible run but it was not a fluke. They beat Kentucky twice, Michigan St., Texas, Pitt , Louisville, Arizona, Syracuse. How do you beat those teams without being really good?

Exactly. They were really good all year, it's just that they were really young all year. This resulted in ups and downs. Growing pains. But from the start of the season in Maui, to the Big East Tourney win over Pitt (and subsequent wins), they showed they could play with, and beat anybody. It still was an unexpected, magical ride.

 

[Adios]

I've got news for you, Butchy; we were elite BEFORE the run. The run was just more evidence as to how elite we really are. For more evidence of that, rewind to the time before 2011 and see which school had produced the most active NBA players. Also, 1999 and 2004 championships and you know all of the Big East accolades and NCAA tourney history.

I understand what you are saying. The University of Cincinnati is still doing well with two titles. Still helps to have a third title.

 

[willie99]

imagine if we didn't come back against Dook in the Final 3 minutes in 2004, or if Jimmy didn't school K in 1999

we'd still be looking for our first championship, damn

I'm sure we wouldn't be an elite program

did you know? about 320 out of 325 DI basketball programs would switch spots with us in a heartbeat, what does that make us?

the others have good arguments of their own

 

[Scot-e]

The board has certainly become more avidly dickish this summer (waiting for Fishy to come along and dickishly tell me that this isn't true). This kind of post always draws the ire of the UConn faithful, but he does make some points. There is no doubt that UConn's dominance in the Big East has diminished. Our guys have not been "the power" in the league since 2006. The league has gotten so tough that it could be argued that no school would have shown dominance since that time, but a change did occur. 2009 was a strong year from start to finish, but there have been a higher percentage of mediocre (by UConn standards) regular seasons since 2006. I think that the Final Four and the 2011 NC are testaments to Jim Calhoun's will to win and some luck in 2011 to capture magic in the form of KW. I would agree, however, that such changes do not move UConn out of the elite status with 2 Final Fours in the last four years.

It would be dishonest to assert that there are not doubts about how things will go after JC retires, but that was not the main point of the dumbsh!t OP.

I can not stand posts like the one that started this thread. Two years ago at the start of the season what would have been the answer? No one can take away what we have done and no one can predict what will happen down the road and WTF does elite even mean? No program outside of the UNCs and Dooks of the world have done more then UCONN in the last ten years- no one.

 

[Ts5034]

Sorry for the long post but i have to vent for a little. I think the "what if" arguments are the most pointless things when it comes to sports. Every year about 20 teams can say they would have won the championship "if only THIS happened". Hey If Gordon Hayward hits that last second 3 in the championship game vs Duke, does that change coach K's legacy??? Maybe but guess what it didnt happen. Thats why i cant understand why people put down 2011 saying it was luck. That team was a very tough out in the Big East and NCAA Tournament and they had the best player in college basketball.

Every championship team in the history of athletic competition experienced some kind of "luck" on the way to the top. Sometimes the favorite wins and sometimes the underdog pulls it out. Thats why they play the games because you never know. Another example would be the Washington game in 2006. That could have gone either way and if it wasnt for Rashad Anderson that game was probably a loss. My point is if we lost that game people would be talking to this day how if we only beat Washington that would have been a final four team because George Mason was the next step. We all know how that turned out.

UConn is an elite program without a doubt and whoever says otherwise is just blind. 3 National Championships and 4 Final Fours along with 7 Big East Tournament titles is a tremendous accomplishment considering what basketball was like here before Jim Calhoun. Not to mentoin all 3 championships came in the era of the 64+ team fields which i also think says a lot. Half of Kansas and Kentucky's championships came when it only took 3-4 games to win the tournament...

 

[UConnDan97]

-------------
Oh, so you are saying that we are ONLY 10 games above 0.500 in the country's premier basketball conference; you know, the one that consistently sends almost half of its teams to the NCAA tournament every year?

No Dan, I'm saying in the last 6 years we've finished just 12th, 4th, 3rd, 12th, 9th, and 9th in conference. And next year isn't looking all that promising. It's a great conference but those are not elite numbers. They're mediocre. If you don't think so, you're wrong. I'll say it again because you're not getting it... Kemba's incredible 2011 run was awesome and it keeps us being thought of by most as elite. And in m mind it makes up for other years when we should have won it all. But reality is is it was a .500 conference team that got hot and ran the table and as much as we loved it and want to crow about it, it was a bit of a fluke. And for people like you, it is masking a noticeable drop off in our program's dominance. Without that improbable run, it'd be much more noticeable that we've had really just 1 semi-dominant team in 7 years. In fact in the majority of those years, by UConn/elite standards we've been extremely mediocre or poor both regular and post season. So my original point about people being worried about us dropping off post JC is perhaps we've already done it. Without that 1 run, we've been only slightly above average for 7 years. When we get new facilities and are forced into a new coach, I don't see us dropping all that far from where we've been recently.

This is why not many on this board are taking you seriously. Since you seem to be harping on about "Kemba's run" in 2011, let's examine it, shall we? It might help to add some insight into what you aren't getting about the Big East or about UConn:

Here is a list of the ranked teams that we beat in the regular season and BE tourney of that year and their ranking:

1) #2 Michigan State
2) #9 Kentucky (by 17 points!)
3) #12 Texas
4) #7 Villanova
5) #9 Georgetown
6) #22 Georgetown (BE tourney...by 17 points!)
7) #3 Pitt (BE tourney)
8) #11 Syracuse (BE tourney)
9) #14 Louisville (BE tourney)

Of our 9 losses that year, 6 were to ranked teams! And in the tourney, we beat a great Arizona team, a great Kentucky team (again), and a great SDSU team that many had winning it all (along with Arizona and Kentucky).

From that team that you allude to being "only Kemba", we have sent another person to the NBA as a lottery pick (Jeremy Lamb), and highly respected programs like UNLV and Mizzou were more than happy to grab players that left our school after the ban (Smith and Oriakhi, respectively) and by your account, weren't very meaningful to the team since it was only Kemba. THAT is the quality of our squads; the fact that the other "big programs" drool over our role players!

So the next time that you want to talk about "the numbers" or want to let someone know that they are not "getting it", do a little research first.

 

[UConnDan97]

I understand what you are saying. The University of Cincinnati is still doing well with two titles. Still helps to have a third title.

The University of Cincinnati is doing well, but they aren't a perennial NCAA tourney team, and they aren't a perennially ranked team. That's the difference. That, and the fact that we don't have to go back to the early 60's in order to talk about the other two championships.

 

[hungry husky]

I think we're still elite, but on the way down. My "elite" teams are...

UConn, Indiana, Michigan State, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Florida.

 

[jleves]

I think we're still elite, but on the way down. My "elite" teams are...

UConn, Indiana, Michigan State, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Florida.

Florida?

 

[Dann]

blue bloods:
duke/unc/ind/ucla/kan/uk - all are on top of the game or quickly coming back to life(ind). ucla is in a wierd stage right now.

new bloods:
uconn/michst/fl/zona(borderline)

in my eyes thats the top 10 all time, rank them how u want but i don't see a better school then these...

tier 3 : mix of historic programs and solid past 20 years programs)
gtown/cuse/texas/okst/bama/nova/unlv/md/gt/marq and a couple others...

 

[msgordon]

dont let a louisville fan see that last post

 

[Dann]

dont let a louisville fan see that last post

i mean lville/mich are also in the tier 3. its a big group of programs that talk alot of shit but aren't quite on our level.

 

[hungry husky]

Florida?

I'm a bit partial being a UF grad but two natl titles and 3 FF since 2000 puts them in similar company to UConn. They always have solid recruiting classes and a top 10 coach. They are probably the last of my "elite" teams and you can easily make a case that they aren't.

 

[UConnDan97]

I'm a bit partial being a UF grad but two natl titles and 3 FF since 2000 puts them in similar company to UConn. They always have solid recruiting classes and a top 10 coach. They are probably the last of my "elite" teams and you can easily make a case that they aren't.

I actually don't have much of a problem with Florida being in there, based on the last decade or so of their performance. Donovan has certainly done a nice job there. The one I'm scratching my head on is....Indiana??? Is Bobby Knight back in town? They were okay under Davis and Sampson (and we know about Sampson). Crean had them playing pretty good last year (only last year, by the way), but he had a horrible time in his first three years (6-25, 10-21, 12-20), so.....Indiana???

If UConn ever had a three year stretch of 6-25, 10-21, and 12-20, I am pretty sure that half of the Boneyard would have already committed suicide...

 

[jleves]

If UConn ever had a three year stretch of 6-25, 10-21, and 12-20, I am pretty sure that half of the Boneyard would have already committed suicide...

One can only hope....

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I think we're still elite, but on the way down. My "elite" teams are...

UConn, Indiana, Michigan State, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, and Florida.

How the F#&K do you have Indiana as 'elite' if we are 'on the way down'?

One very good season after nearly ten years of nothing makes them elite again? If they were still elite even with the nearly ten years of nothing, there is no way anyone can refer to us as no longer elite for at least six or seven more years. Either that or in your eyes it takes very little to lose elite status and even less to gain it back.

 

[uconNYC]

After winning 3 NCs UConn will always be considered a basketball power. I see us similar to U of Miami in football - where if we do have a few down seasons, everyone will be asking not "if" but "when" UConn will return to prominence again.

 

[Gregory Koch]

How the F#&K do you have Indiana as 'elite' if we are 'on the way down'?

One very good season after nearly ten years of nothing makes them elite again? If they were still elite even with the nearly ten years of nothing, there is no way anyone can refer to us as no longer elite for at least six or seven more years. Either that or in your eyes it takes very little to lose elite status and even less to gain it back.

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year. And I really don't care about 1999 or 2004 in my definition of "elite". They were 13 and 8 years ago. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

Let's take a look at another team in the 2011 Tournament and who they beat

R64: Georgetown
R32: Purdue
Sweet 16: Florida State
Elite 8: Kansas
Final Four: Lost

So, they made it to the final four, defeating at least two premier opponents in Georgetown and Kansas. Purdue was a great team that year too. Florida State was a decent team as well.

That team is VCU. Are they Elite? Clearly not. And also, they did better than we did in the NCAA Tournament in 2012.

In 2010, neither of us made the tournament.

In 2009, we beat Chattanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri (hardly elite teams), before losing to Michigan State. VCU lost in the First Round, narrowly, to an excellent UCLA team. Nevertheless, we have an advantage there.

2008, we lost in the first round to a mediocre San Diego team and VCU failed to qualify.

2007, we didn't make the tournament, and VCU shocked Duke before narrowly losing to Pitt in Overtime.

2012, of course, they made the second round and we lost in the first round.

Therefore, from 2007-2012, excluding VCU's "First Four" win in 2011, the Rams have 6 wins in 4 appearances in the tournament. 2 of those came against teams seeded 3 or higher. They also beat a Duke team seeded 6th, an unusually low seed for Duke, and lost to #3 seed Pitt in OT, a game they played very well. They have 1 Final Four appearance

From 2007-2012, we have 10 wins in 4 appearances, 2 against seeds 3 or higher, and lost to San Diego, a #13 seed, in the first round. We have 2 final fours, but on the way to them, have beaten Bucknell, Cincinnati, San Diego State, Arizona, Chatanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri.
In 2009, we lost once we were in the Final Four, to Michigan State. In 2011, we won after beating Kentucky and Butler in the Final Four.

Obviously, VCU is not an "Elite" team. Anyone who thinks they are is an idiot.

Our Tournament performance is only slightly better than VCU over the last 6 years. They have made one Final Four, we have made 2. Butler has also made 2, and has two semifinal wins. Obviously, Butler is not elite.
We had a miracle run in 2011, so did VCU. So did Butler, for that matter. Nobody would argue that VCU was good enough to beat Georgetown, Purdue, Florida State, or Kansas on a regular basis. Perhaps FSU, but even then I don't think so.
Butler may have been on par with Old Dominion, who they beat in the first round, but nobody would argue they could beat Pitt, Wisconsin, or Florida on a regular basis. They both got lucky. So did we. The only reason we were a 3 was because we won 5 games in 5 days in the Big East Tournament. Prior to that, we were 21-9. You figure DePaul was an easy win, that gets us to 22-9, even without miracle run. If things had gone by seed, we'd have been 22-10. Big East teams with similar records were Villanova at 21-11 who got a #9 seed, Georgetown, 21-10, who got a #6 seed, and St. John's, 21-11, who also got a #6 seed. With our SOS, we'd have probably gotten a 6. Considering there was also a #8 and a #11 in the Final Four, we might have made it, but it would have been a surprise. Without the 5 games in 5 days at the BET, we would never have gotten the #3 that you guys claim made our Championship not unlikely. That was probably the best conferene-NCAA Tournament run in the history of the NCAA, but without it, it would have been another mediocre season. And not only was there one other team with a miracle tournament run that year, but there were TWO. Nobody is claiming they're Elite teams.

Yes, we were once an Elite team. But those times have gone. And this NCAA ban will hurt us even more. Maybe in 5-10 years, we will be Elite again. I hope so. But we're not now.

Edit to respond to the cross-posted post above: Do you really think Miami U football is "elite" right now? I don't. Oh, by the way, they had a recent scandal too. They'll recover. So will we. But not right now.

 

[msgordon]

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

 

[uchusky32]

Dud is to young to know what elite is. One year of good grades doesn't make you a road scholar!

 

[Dann]

wtf is going on here lol.

 

[uchusky32]

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

that last post is just so awful. i dont even know where to start or why im responding but . that is some of the worst logic ive ever seen. you give no credit to our 2004 title and base elite status on very recent performance, which i disagree with but whatever--but then you somehow decide that despite this, a team that won a NC 15 months ago is not elite. you then say anyone who thinks VCU is elite is an idiot(newsflash, youre an idiot) and that butler is obviously not elite. so you supposedly place extreme emphasis on the last couple of years, but then conclude that a team that made the title game 2 of the last 3 years is obviously not elite? you also use ridiculously twisted and biased logic when comparing us to VCU, seemingly giving them credit for beating traditional powerhouses, which contradicts your entire 'premise' of only weighing the last few years. You say stupid things like 'Purdue was a great team that year too' when VCU beat them and then when Uconn beat them you call them 'hardly elite'. You talk about VCU losing narrowly to an 'excellent' UCLA team (a 6 seed that got smacked by 20 in the next round), etc etc.

cliffs: your post sucks

Dud just started watching last year, so ofcourse, that's when elite status starts. He back himself into a corner and doesn't know how to back out.

 

[Adios]

Dud is to young to know what elite is. One year of good grades doesn't make you a road scholar!

Dude*. Rhodes*.

 

[specialisthusky]

. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

That line was all the indication I needed to not waste my time reading that post.

 

[Robertelamin]

I base "Elite" on recent performance. Not 10 years ago's performance. So I don't think we're Elite anymore. In the last 3 years, we didn't make the tournament 1 year, happened to have a miraculous run the second year after doing mediocre for most of the season, and then lost in the first round the third year. And I really don't care about 1999 or 2004 in my definition of "elite". They were 13 and 8 years ago. I don't consider Maryland "Elite" and they won in 2002. That was 8 years ago. They were "Elite" then, but they're not now. Plain and simple.

Let's take a look at another team in the 2011 Tournament and who they beat

R64: Georgetown
R32: Purdue
Sweet 16: Florida State
Elite 8: Kansas
Final Four: Lost

So, they made it to the final four, defeating at least two premier opponents in Georgetown and Kansas. Purdue was a great team that year too. Florida State was a decent team as well.

That team is VCU. Are they Elite? Clearly not. And also, they did better than we did in the NCAA Tournament in 2012.

In 2010, neither of us made the tournament.

In 2009, we beat Chattanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri (hardly elite teams), before losing to Michigan State. VCU lost in the First Round, narrowly, to an excellent UCLA team. Nevertheless, we have an advantage there.

2008, we lost in the first round to a mediocre San Diego team and VCU failed to qualify.

2007, we didn't make the tournament, and VCU shocked Duke before narrowly losing to Pitt in Overtime.

2012, of course, they made the second round and we lost in the first round.

Therefore, from 2007-2012, excluding VCU's "First Four" win in 2011, the Rams have 6 wins in 4 appearances in the tournament. 2 of those came against teams seeded 3 or higher. They also beat a Duke team seeded 6th, an unusually low seed for Duke, and lost to #3 seed Pitt in OT, a game they played very well. They have 1 Final Four appearance

From 2007-2012, we have 10 wins in 4 appearances, 2 against seeds 3 or higher, and lost to San Diego, a #13 seed, in the first round. We have 2 final fours, but on the way to them, have beaten Bucknell, Cincinnati, San Diego State, Arizona, Chatanooga, Texas A&M, Purdue, and Missouri.
In 2009, we lost once we were in the Final Four, to Michigan State. In 2011, we won after beating Kentucky and Butler in the Final Four.

Obviously, VCU is not an "Elite" team. Anyone who thinks they are is an idiot.

Our Tournament performance is only slightly better than VCU over the last 6 years. They have made one Final Four, we have made 2. Butler has also made 2, and has two semifinal wins. Obviously, Butler is not elite.
We had a miracle run in 2011, so did VCU. So did Butler, for that matter. Nobody would argue that VCU was good enough to beat Georgetown, Purdue, Florida State, or Kansas on a regular basis. Perhaps FSU, but even then I don't think so.
Butler may have been on par with Old Dominion, who they beat in the first round, but nobody would argue they could beat Pitt, Wisconsin, or Florida on a regular basis. They both got lucky. So did we. The only reason we were a 3 was because we won 5 games in 5 days in the Big East Tournament. Prior to that, we were 21-9. You figure DePaul was an easy win, that gets us to 22-9, even without miracle run. If things had gone by seed, we'd have been 22-10. Big East teams with similar records were Villanova at 21-11 who got a #9 seed, Georgetown, 21-10, who got a #6 seed, and St. John's, 21-11, who also got a #6 seed. With our SOS, we'd have probably gotten a 6. Considering there was also a #8 and a #11 in the Final Four, we might have made it, but it would have been a surprise. Without the 5 games in 5 days at the BET, we would never have gotten the #3 that you guys claim made our Championship not unlikely. That was probably the best conferene-NCAA Tournament run in the history of the NCAA, but without it, it would have been another mediocre season. And not only was there one other team with a miracle tournament run that year, but there were TWO. Nobody is claiming they're Elite teams.

Yes, we were once an Elite team. But those times have gone. And this NCAA ban will hurt us even more. Maybe in 5-10 years, we will be Elite again. I hope so. But we're not now.

Edit to respond to the cross-posted post above: Do you really think Miami U football is "elite" right now? I don't. Oh, by the way, they had a recent scandal too. They'll recover. So will we. But not right now.

The only reason they were a 3 seed was because they won 5 games in 5 days? Well they did right? That has to count for something. That's why they play the games on the court and not Gregory Koch's head.