For a good time check out these UK threads...

[Walker11]

The fluke that year was that we went 9-9 in conference. Whether it was the freshman wall, Kemba getting beat up, us just not playing well, etc., we played below our abilities in the grind of league play. The long haul of the entire season proved that.

In tourney play, we were 14-0, with only two of those 14 opponents soft wins (DePaul, Bucknell). And Bucknell was a trendy upset pick, with the "UConn is tired" logic. Put a trophy at stake, and we were bringing the hurt.

I think the way tournament games are officiated played a huge role that season. The Big East was always known for letting guys play and tournament games are usually whistled much tighter. No one in the country could stay in front of Kemba without fouling him, therefore, we win all tournaments.

 

[huskiesnyc]

"I agree. Wow. Just Wow." - BY poster who believes we have a 50% chance of repeating.
"Inconceivable." - BY poster who believes Boatright may be a lottery pick.
"They're nuts over there." - BY poster who believes Nolan may go pro early.

You are the first BY member I've put on ignore. Not HFD not Chpgw, you win the smug d--bag award. Congratulations.

 

[Strummer]

You are the first BY member I've put on ignore. Not HFD not Chpgw, you win the smug d--bag award. Congratulations.

I think you're missing the whole "ignore" concept.

 

[UconnBoston]

My take on 2011 has always been that we had an exceptionally talented but young team that lost a disproportionate amount of games in conference in January and February when everyone went zone. By early march the team had learned how to run offense against a zone (evidenced by wins over Cuse and Louisville in BET on consecutive nights) and they went back to winning the games they had won in November and December

 

[Danzz]

We had the best player on the floor in the last two championships and they both happened to be PGs who had the ball in their hands.

 

[DogMania]

Used basketball reference for the win totals but the lineups/commentary is all from memory.

Big time impressed!!! Even immediately after reading it, I wouldn't be able to recall all that. I watched just about every minute of those games and I can only recall a fraction of what happened. When I read about such, most of it comes back to me. Do others have the same lack of recall as I do?

 

[Dmike]

Fluke? We didn't lose a single non-conference game in 2011. Let's not forget that the BE sent 11 of 16 teams to the Tourney that year. It wasn't just us beating the tar out of the rest of college basketball it was the whole damn big east. As Pitino once said, we used to play in Camelot. The 2011 win was no fluke, the big east regular season and tournament was tougher competition then the NCAA Tournament. When we won the Big East Tournament, we were the best team in the Country. Just took another 6 games against non-Big East competition to show the rest of the country what we knew a few weeks earlier in MSG.

I really miss the Big East

 

[willie99]

"if it wasn't for UConn" thread is a must read

 

[dsturdy5]

OkaFor, great post. One nit to pick. BG and Okafor were sophs in 03.

 

[boba]

Here's the thing, why oh why if you think you are the best thing since sliced bread, do you say that the team who beat you was a fluke? The Giants beating the Patriots in the Super Bowls wasn't a fluke, it was the better team winning. (FTR: I'm a Pats fan.) Even if you lose by 1 point on a lucky half court heave, the other team was better just by being able to parlay that luck into a win. It's not just about talent, or previous opponents, or anything else, it's about being able to maximize the talent you have, to adapt to the game (ref's call it tight, loose, are erratic, etc.) and use all the advantages you have (underdog cache, favorable seeding, whatever) to survive and advance.

 

[OkaForPrez]

OkaFor, great post. One nit to pick. BG and Okafor were sophs in 03.

You know I was re-reading the post (I do that, its sad) and I figured out I had messed that up, but was too lazy to correct Thanks.

 

[intlzncster]

Here's the thing, why oh why if you think you are the best thing since sliced bread, do you say that the team who beat you was a fluke? The Giants beating the Patriots in the Super Bowls wasn't a fluke, it was the better team winning. (FTR: I'm a Pats fan.) Even if you lose by 1 point on a lucky half court heave, the other team was better just by being able to parlay that luck into a win. It's not just about talent, or previous opponents, or anything else, it's about being able to maximize the talent you have, to adapt to the game (ref's call it tight, loose, are erratic, etc.) and use all the advantages you have (underdog cache, favorable seeding, whatever) to survive and advance.

No way, this is being incredibly myopic. The better team can lose all the time. The lesser team might have played better that day or in a few phases of the game, but if you take the original point as fact, you completely discount all important extraneous factors (and you do), most prominently luck, cheating, weather, in game injury, crowd favoritism (UCONN 2014 MSG), inconsistent referees, etc. There's no "adapting" to blown referee calls that hand the other team the game. It's making up a definition of 'better team' and ignoring pertinent context to fit your narrative.

For instance, in your example, the Giants did indeed outplay the Pats at the line of scrimmage, and this is predominantly what kept them in the game. Then they required a true gift from god (Tyree catch) in order to win, (not to mention a ball hawk Samuel drop). I know the team that won will always think they are the better team, but that's just not always the case.

No one would argue that 1985 Villanova was a better team than Georgetown that year. But they did indeed manage to outplay the Hoyas on one night. If those teams play 100 times, Georgetown wins 98-99. Villanova just happened to have 'their night' when it counted.

Or in a more fictitious example: Say a (superior) team is up by 3 with the ball with .3 seconds left in Basketball. They inbound, time runs out, but the ref calls a phantom foul (where there was no contact at all) on the team that was leading. At the same time, they asses a bench tech for another phantom violation that did not occur. The team that was behind hits all 4 free throws and wins the game with no time left. They better team did not win, as the ref hands the lesser team the win. Perhaps he was betting/point shaving the game and needed the win to cover.

 

[intlzncster]

You know I was re-reading the post (I do that, its sad) and I figured out I had messed that up, but was too lazy to correct Thanks.

I have to reread my posts 10 times or so (OCD issues), or it's usually a complete disaster.

 

[Robertelamin]

Uh UK's runs were just as 'flukey' as ours in those years but I'm sure their fans wouldn't see it that way.

 

[UconnU]

We're 16 - 2 the last 5 years in the tournament by pure luck

 

[dsturdy5]

You know I was re-reading the post (I do that, its sad) and I figured out I had messed that up, but was too lazy to correct Thanks.

Oh I re-read mine too. There are a few people who I wonder, though, if they re-read their own. If they do, and stick with what they write, well, that speaks volumes.