Did You Know? Sans Pitt & Cuse, We Rid Ourselves

[whaler11]

I know basketball takes a hit, and said so in another thread where I also noted football gets better

maybe a wash sort of

Well you started a thread under the premise that the basketball league is better off without Syracuse and Pittsburgh. So which is it?

 

[willie99]

Well you started a thread under the premise that the basketball league is better off without Syracuse and Pittsburgh. So which is it?

actually, I said no such thing. What I did say is we lose two of the worst performing teams in the NCAA tournament

I also said this in another thread I started

BEIII >>>> BEII, in football anyways.

BEAST III will fall back into the pack for hoops. We'll be a top conference, just not heads and shoulders above the rest

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/beast-iii-beast-ii.6048/

in both instances, my words have a very different meaning than you suggest

 

[whaler11]

actually, I said no such thing. What I did say is we lose two of the worst performing teams in the NCAA tournament

I also said this in another thread I started

BEIII >>>> BEII, in football anyways.

BEAST III will fall back into the pack for hoops. We'll be a top conference, just not heads and shoulders above the rest

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/beast-iii-beast-ii.6048/

How do you know how good the league is in any sport without knowing who is even in it?

I know it's crazy that I interpreted a thread that used the words 'rid ourselves' in the title to assume you meant that the league was better off.

 

[willie99]

How do you know how good the league is in any sport without knowing who is even in it?

I know it's crazy that I interpreted a thread that used the words 'rid ourselves' in the title to assume you meant that the league was better off.

next time, just read the written words, then those crazy interpretations won't happen

furthermore, my comments about improving in football are based on the most recent speculation, the only thing we can do at this point in time.

 

[freescooter]

Pitt 19-18, advanced beyond the S16 one time, 5 one and dones, 0 FF
Cuse 43-24, 4-13 in the S16, 4 one and dones, 3 FF, 1 NC
CT 48-14 (more wins despite taking the 80's off) 9-4 S16, 4 FF, 3 NC (1 one and done)

Pitt simply has no tournament success, none.
Cuse has some success, but 4-13 in the S16 is ugly.

In ranking tournament performance vs expectations, JC is top 3 after 2011, Dixon is one of the worst in the modern era while JB meets expectations based on seedings despite his S16 record

while my intention was to poke fun at Pitt & Cuse, there is some truth behind my arguments

I've been saying both are badly over-rated for a while. Syracuse is top 10 all time my Aunt Hattie! As lon gas you ignore everyone else, I guess they are. I think UCONN fans have a bit of a soft spot for syracuse, so we hold them in higher regard than they really deserve. They aren't UCONN by any means...heck, they aren't even Michigan State. As I said in another thread on this subject, when you are talking about highlevel basketball programs, regular season wins are just not that important. Pitt can have all the 27-3 seasons they want. When they lose to md-majors in the second round it doesn't really convince anyone they are a major power. Pretty much the same with Syracuse. they get extra points for having won in 2003, but it was 2003. They haven't gotten near the finals since. and I'm not sure their 1986 appearance holds much more relevance than LaSalle's 1954 appearance does any more. Yeah, it happened, but it happened more than a quarter century ago.

 

[ctchamps]

I've been saying both are badly over-rated for a while. Syracuse is top 10 all time my Aunt Hattie! As lon gas you ignore everyone else, I guess they are. I think UCONN fans have a bit of a soft spot for syracuse, so we hold them in higher regard than they really deserve. They aren't UCONN by any means...heck, they aren't even Michigan State. As I said in another thread on this subject, when you are talking about highlevel basketball programs, regular season wins are just not that important. Pitt can have all the 27-3 seasons they want. When they lose to md-majors in the second round it doesn't really convince anyone they are a major power. Pretty much the same with Syracuse. they get extra points for having won in 2003, but it was 2003. They haven't gotten near the finals since. and I'm not sure their 1986 appearance holds much more relevance than LaSalle's 1954 appearance does any more. Yeah, it happened, but it happened more than a quarter century ago.

These discussion, like most discussions, depend on what parameters are weighted in our evaluations. You and Willie99 obviously weigh post season success very strongly in determining strength of programs. And this thread demonstrates that other people do not.

Suffice it to say, the success that Syracuse and Pitt enjoyed during the regular season was not demonstrated in the NCAA tournaments.

I would say some of my brightest employees struggled in test taking, and there were several employees who tested well, but just didn't succeed.

 

[freescooter]

I get what you're saying, though I'm not sure your example is the best. I think it is more like a case of an employee who does fine when he is dealing with day to day clients, but when you send him out to land a big new deal he can't do it. As I've said multiple places and many times, when you're a major hoop power you don't get evaluated by how you did from November through February. Your season begins in March. Nobody cares if you went unbeaten during the regular season, nobody cares if you won the Big East tournament, if you get knocked off the first weekend of the NCAA tournament. It is different if your Faifield or Central Connecticut. Heck, I'd even say its different if your Providence or St Johns, but if you want to be seen as one of the elites as both Syracuse and Pitt like to see themselves, you need to perform once the tournament starts. Syracuse has a little bit. Pitt hasn't at all.

 

[willie99]

I've been saying both are badly over-rated for a while. Syracuse is top 10 all time my Aunt Hattie! As lon gas you ignore everyone else, I guess they are. I think UCONN fans have a bit of a soft spot for syracuse, so we hold them in higher regard than they really deserve. They aren't UCONN by any means...heck, they aren't even Michigan State. As I said in another thread on this subject, when you are talking about highlevel basketball programs, regular season wins are just not that important. Pitt can have all the 27-3 seasons they want. When they lose to md-majors in the second round it doesn't really convince anyone they are a major power. Pretty much the same with Syracuse. they get extra points for having won in 2003, but it was 2003. They haven't gotten near the finals since. and I'm not sure their 1986 appearance holds much more relevance than LaSalle's 1954 appearance does any more. Yeah, it happened, but it happened more than a quarter century ago.

thank you

I gave you both a like and a quote for this one


not too much love for me in this thread. Maybe they're concerned I'm hurting our chances for an ACC invite

 

[freescooter]

LOL, thanks, willie! It really aggrevates me when people seem to equate Syracuse's program in particular with the really elite ones in the country. And when they try to do it with Pitt it is just sad.