Best Teams Not To Win A Title

[Gurleyman]

We went into the tournament on a loss, but we were still the #2 overall seed. But that's missing part of why were so so heavily regarded. The first loss was Marcus Williams' first game back. Most people just discounted that once he got his act together. The second loss was on the road to Villanova, another #1 seed which we then avenged with a double-digit loss weeks later. And the Syracuse loss looked a loss less bad once they won the BET. They were better losses than Duke's (who had lost the last two games before the ACCT), and they exposed what everyone knew about Duke: an athletic team would take them out. People didn't think that about us. We had a great PG, an AA in Gay, and the deepest (everyone thought) interior in the nation. And we went undefeated through a tough OOC largely without our top PG. Again, retrospect--and our own rationalizations, fair or now--have brought us to see this team's limitations. But I'm not shocked others didn't. Unfortunately, I can't find gambling odds, and all the old message boards don't have archives that go back that far, so I guess it is your word against mine. It's not like it's that big a deal, though.

No big deal. I might be remembering more about my own perception of the team at the time than the general one. I feared the Albany game all week - not my usual nervous Nellie stuff, but a genuine belief that we were fully capable of losing to a 16 seed. We were soundly outplayed by South Frakkin Florida for 30 solid minutes straight and they were hideous. And Syracuse was meh and outplayed us for most of the 45 minutes.

I also thought George Mason would give us a lot of problems because they started 3 guards who could create and we didn't have anyone who could guard any of them. I didn't think they'd hurt us inside as much as they did, though. That came as a surprise.

 

[Matrim55]

2004 (despite our seed) and 2006 were two years we went into the tournament as favorites.

But we were only favorites because the national college basketball media (read: ESPN) overrates NBA-projected talent, not because we were an overwhelmingly good team. Our 2006 team also had the 2004 title afterglow, and the "shot blockers!" narrative.

That team was packaged and sold. It was basically our year to see what it's like to be Duke or UNC or KU or UK fans.

The 1996 team, however... I think you underrate them. If Ricky doesn't get hurt we walk into the final with a dominant post presence (look at Travis's numbers from the Big East tourney or the Missisippi State game), the best player (Ray) and the better back court. We also have one more "clutch" answer - Ricky had 14 in the BET title game, and we all know what happened in 1999 vs. Duke.

We also played the one common opponent - MSU - better than UK did.

Goddammit, I still hate that game so much.

 

[johnhuskies95]

But we were only favorites because the national college basketball media (read: ESPN) overrates NBA-projected talent, not because we were an overwhelmingly good team. Our 2006 team also had the 2004 title afterglow, and the "shot blockers!" narrative.

That team was packaged and sold. It was basically our year to see what it's like to be Duke or UNC or KU or UK fans.

The 1996 team, however... I think you underrate them. If Ricky doesn't get hurt we walk into the final with a dominant post presence (look at Travis's numbers from the Big East tourney or the Missisippi State game), the best player (Ray) and the better back court. We also have one more "clutch" answer - Ricky had 14 in the BET title game, and we all know what happened in 1999 vs. Duke.

We also played the one common opponent - MSU - better than UK did.

Goddammit, I still hate that game so much.

The problem with including '96 on a list like this is that every year there is a team like that. Star player, #1 seed, great regular season, and then they get upset in the sweet 16. It's why I don't think 2010 Kansas should be on there either.

 

[Dmike]

In '96 we entered the tourney after defeating Iverson and G-town on Ray's iconic buzzer beater. I thought Sheffer and Ray would leas us to a national championship. MSU's McDyess and Dante Jones took us a part. This one hurt even worse then Donyell's missed free throws in '94. I think that team with knight and Kirk king was our best not to win the national championship

 

[selles]

The problem with including '96 on a list like this is that every year there is a team like that. Star player, #1 seed, great regular season, and then they get upset in the sweet 16. It's why I don't think 2010 Kansas should be on there either.

Wow, really? How many of those "every year there's a team like that" teams had been to the Elite 8 the year before? Heck, most of the "every year there's a team like that" teams in that era were SEC teams that randomly had a great year and got dumped as an easy upset pick before the Sweet 16.

Poor Rudy Johnson was left alone in that Miss St game to miss open jumper after open jumper. Give Calhoun a healthy Ricky Moore and that doesn't happen. Nor does the pace bog down the way it did.

I agree with Matrim, that '96 team - when healthy - was one of the best teams we've ever had.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Wow, really? How many of those "every year there's a team like that" teams had been to the Elite 8 the year before? Heck, most of the "every year there's a team like that" teams in that era were SEC teams that randomly had a great year and got dumped as an easy upset pick before the Sweet 16.

Poor Rudy Johnson was left alone in that Miss St game to miss open jumper after open jumper. Give Calhoun a healthy Ricky Moore and that doesn't happen. Nor does the pace bog down the way it did.

I agree with Matrim, that '96 team - when healthy - was one of the best teams we've ever had.

WTF does the prior year have to do with anything? Putting aside your UConn colored glasses, can it really be argued that '96 UConn is absolutely better than 2011 Ohio State?

 

[UConNation]

Duke was the heavy favorites to win it all in 2006 - they were the No. 1 overall seed, it was Redick's senior year and they won the ACC Tournament, while we flopped out in the quarters to Syracuse after playing like ass in the final two weeks of the regular season. Then we were down by 12 to Albany in the second half, eked by a pretty pedestrian Kentucky team, and we almost certainly lose to Washington if they don't give Brandon Roy his fourth on a cheap double tech.

At no point did we look like the favorites to win it all, and only one guy has stuck in the NBA. If we had lost to Washington like we should have, we would be on nobody's list of great teams not to win. But since we lost to George Mason, we're remembered as the Tyson to their Buster Douglass.

Under no way shape or form does that team belong on the list of best anythings.

I agree with your assessment that down the stretch the 2006 team played absolutely terribley. That being said, they were nothing short of dominant during the regular season. They entered the BET at 27-2 with losses to Marquette and Nova. And that's a Nova team that we turned around and played 13 days later on campus and destroyed (that is the best sporting event I've ever been to btw). We also had 6 wins over Top 25 schools. I agree that they didn't play well down the stretch, but that team was MUCH better than you're giving them credit for. I remember Jalen Rose (I believe it was him) saying that not only was Rudy Gay the best player in college going into the tourney, but that if UConn didn't wind the tournament, it would be the biggest wast of talent in college basketball recent history. I'm not saying I totally agree with that statement either, but I am willing to say, that we arguably had the best team in the country during the regular season, and then Qused ourselves in March.

 

[tzznandrew]

One other thing: not that I'm discounting the signs of struggles near the end of the season, but our 1999 team, for instance, lost to Miami at home senior night, and then nearly lost to Seton Hall in the first round of the BET, and we needed a herculean effort from Kevin Freeman to get through that round. Every great team has games that bounce one way or another--sometimes you lose them, sometimes you don't.

And, I'm not discounting how good that 1996 team was--it was a great team. But the 1996 UK team was far more heralded than us, and was the overwhelming favorite to win the title.

 

[Gurleyman]

I agree with your assessment that down the stretch the 2006 team played absolutely terribley. That being said, they were nothing short of dominant during the regular season. They entered the BET at 27-2 with losses to Marquette and Nova. And that's a Nova team that we turned around and played 13 days later on campus and destroyed (that is the best sporting event I've ever been to btw). We also had 6 wins over Top 25 schools. I agree that they didn't play well down the stretch, but that team was MUCH better than you're giving them credit for. I remember Jalen Rose (I believe it was him) saying that not only was Rudy Gay the best player in college going into the tourney, but that if UConn didn't wind the tournament, it would be the biggest wast of talent in college basketball recent history. I'm not saying I totally agree with that statement either, but I am willing to say, that we arguably had the best team in the country during the regular season, and then Qused ourselves in March.

They did have a couple stretches where they looked dominant - the week they crushed Syracuse and Seton Hall, they looked the part of a national title team. Some solid wins in there too, yes (at Indiana, in particular). There were times I thought they were coming around and proving they could mask their weaknesses, but invariably, it wouldn't last. They struggled with too many mediocre teams for me to call them dominant (LSU, Georgetown, Notre Dame and Louisville at home were lousy performances against non-tournament teams, and South Florida on the road was just ridiculous to be in a one-point game with them midway through the second half). The Villanova game at home was the one time we played well in our last 11 games, which makes it the outlier, not the norm. I think I give a fair amount of credit to a team that was down 12 to Albany in the second half of a 1-16 game.

I should admit the caveat that my disgust with Marcus Williams, and allowing him back, soured me on that team at the time, so my opinions are shaped by that lens and not without some bias. I wanted us to just go to war with Austrie and scratch and claw like we did in Maui and see where that took us. Of course, there was nothing to be learned morally from the George Mason loss, because the other team's point guard punched a guy in the nuts in his conference tournament and was allowed back too.

 

[Gurleyman]

One other thing: not that I'm discounting the signs of struggles near the end of the season, but our 1999 team, for instance, lost to Miami at home senior night, and then nearly lost to Seton Hall in the first round of the BET, and we needed a herculean effort from Kevin Freeman to get through that round. Every great team has games that bounce one way or another--sometimes you lose them, sometimes you don't. And, I'm not discounting how good that 1996 team was--it was a great team. But the 1996 UK team was far more heralded than us, and was the overwhelming favorite to win the title.

Miami was a top 10 team. Should have defended home court, of course, but it wasn't like being tied with 12-17 Louisville in 2006 with a minute to go.

Seton Hall is an excellent point - a flat, uninspired performance from a veteran team in the postseason that was very puzzling. Blame the noon start, but it was pretty inexcusable. Had we lost, maybe it puts a cloud over the team's head going into the NCAAs and that year turns out different. In a way, very similar to the Syracuse loss in 2006, except for the breaks going our way in 1999 and not in 2006.

But here's the thing - how did the 1999 team respond to that? They were up 38-18 at the half to Cuse in the semis and then pimped St. John's in the finals. They blew the doors off of their 16 seed and led New Mexico 17-0 in the second round. It was similar to how we responded to the Cuse loss by winning at Stanford. That team wasn't necessarily dominant all the time, but it was resilient and would fight.

The 2006 team responded to its pupu platter against Syracuse by being down 12 in the second half to Albany. That's the difference between a truly great team and a pretty good one. The dry spells/flat efforts for a great team are the outliers. I put 2006 in there with 1994 (I still say our most talented team). Very good team, but didn't have that extra ingredient that separates the great from the almost great. The 1994 team also lost to PC in the BET and struggled with Rider in the opening round before the upset loss to a senior-laden Florida.

 

[CallMeBruce]

And that's a Nova team that we turned around and played 13 days later on campus and destroyed (that is the best sporting event I've ever been to btw).

Not really the issue, but this was my last year with the pep band, and it's one of the most fun games I ever attended. I still vividly remember Denham dunking on that break over Sheridan. What an awesome game.

 

[UConNation]

Not really the issue, but this was my last year with the pep band, and it's one of the most fun games I ever attended. I still vividly remember Denham dunking on that break over Sheridan. What an awesome game.

I was a sophomore that year. Most incredible game I went to as a student. I remember the ridiculous number of signs that were comphiscated prior to the game for being "inappropriate." The crowd was absolutely deafening, and it only got louder each time Rashad hit another 3. I believe he was 5-7 that day. I know we've had this discussion on this board before, but Rashad "the knife" Anderson is far and away my favorite player ever.

 

[tcf15]

Not really the issue, but this was my last year with the pep band, and it's one of the most fun games I ever attended. I still vividly remember Denham dunking on that break over Sheridan. What an awesome game.

I was a sophomore that year. Most incredible game I went to as a student. I remember the ridiculous number of signs that were comphiscated prior to the game for being "inappropriate." The crowd was absolutely deafening, and it only got louder each time Rashad hit another 3. I believe he was 5-7 that day. I know we've had this discussion on this board before, but Rashad "the knife" Anderson is far and away my favorite player ever.

We just uploaded that game here: http://uconnhuskygames.com/2005-2006-mens-basketball-games-replays/

 

[CallMeBruce]

Well, there goes my night.