I'm on the platform

[Dogdeacon]

By seed, and by expected wins by seed Historical Performance of NCAA seeds | mgoblog:
1990: #1 seed, Elite 8 (underperform by 1 round, -0.43 wins)
1991: #11 seed, Sweet 16 (overperform by 2 rounds, +1.51 wins)
1992: #9 seed, 2nd round (overperform by 1 round, +0.41 wins)
1994: #2 seed, Sweet 16 (underperform by 1 round, -0.43 wins)
1995: #2 seed, Elite 8 (perform to seed, +0.57 wins)
1996: #1 seed, Sweet 16 (underperform by 2 rounds, -1.43 wins)
1998: #2 seed, Elite 8 (perform to seed, +0.57 wins)
7 NCAAT appearances
2 overperform
2 perform to seed
3 underperform
+0.77 cumulative wins above expectation
So, overall, we performed about as expected in the NCAAT.

This is a ridiculous analysis by definition. UConn plays 30+ basketball games per year and is nationally relevant, competitive and entertaining in those games for an entire decade culminating in an NCAA championship at the end of the decade. Going thru those seasons, the NCAA successes and disappointments was a necessary part to building a program and reputation that led to the 1999 championship and the subsequent championships. To only look backwards at the end results of the season pre-99 is lunacy for how UConn got to winning and for how fun, entertaining, competitive and enjoyable that decade of basketball was. You don't define a decade of basketball with ".77", its defined by "its 16 to nothing", Nadav Henefeld sticking it to Mourning&Mutombo, Chris Smith getting killed yet killing it with his crossover, Donyell's mega-games, domination & 360 dunk, Ray Allen entering games & dominating as a frosh, etc... The decade didn't end when Khalid, RIP, Free & Ricky got beat by future NBA All-Stars playing a home game in Greensboro?! If the 90's were a play you missed the 1999 final act AND the epilogue exclamation point saying UConn went on to win an additional 3 national championships.

 

[August_West]

This is a ridiculous analysis by definition. UConn plays 30+ basketball games per year and is nationally relevant, competitive and entertaining in those games for an entire decade culminating in an NCAA championship at the end of the decade. Going thru those seasons, the NCAA successes and disappointments was a necessary part to building a program and reputation that led to the 1999 championship and the subsequent championships. To only look backwards at the end results of the season pre-99 is lunacy for how UConn got to winning and for how fun, entertaining, competitive and enjoyable that decade of basketball was. You don't define a decade of basketball with ".77", its defined by "its 16 to nothing", Nadav Henefeld sticking it to Mourning&Mutombo, Chris Smith getting killed yet killing it with his crossover, Donyell's mega-games, domination & 360 dunk, Ray Allen entering games & dominating as a frosh, etc... The decade didn't end when Khalid, RIP, Free & Ricky got beat by future NBA All-Stars playing a home game in Greensboro?! If the 90's were a play you missed the 1999 final act AND the epilogue exclamation point saying UConn went on to win an additional 3 national championships.

So you want to be Gonzaga.

 

[Waquoit]

So you want to be Gonzaga.

Or Kansas. Your post is just plain snide. Of course we want to be UConn. And the first step is to be the dominant program in our league like we were in the 90's when the best two teams in a given year was UConn and another team. I think your have argued yourself down a rat hole here.

 

[Dogdeacon]

So you want to be Gonzaga.

False equivalency, if you don't ultimately win or at least make a final four the process isn't rewarded. I.e. I wouldn't want to be Philly in the NBA and willfully give up 4-5 years of just losing for an as of yet unfulfilled chance/promise to win. The goal is to win, there is no disputing that.

 

[Tenspro2002]

This is a ridiculous analysis by definition. UConn plays 30+ basketball games per year and is nationally relevant, competitive and entertaining in those games for an entire decade culminating in an NCAA championship at the end of the decade. Going thru those seasons, the NCAA successes and disappointments was a necessary part to building a program and reputation that led to the 1999 championship and the subsequent championships. To only look backwards at the end results of the season pre-99 is lunacy for how UConn got to winning and for how fun, entertaining, competitive and enjoyable that decade of basketball was. You don't define a decade of basketball with ".77", its defined by "its 16 to nothing", Nadav Henefeld sticking it to Mourning&Mutombo, Chris Smith getting killed yet killing it with his crossover, Donyell's mega-games, domination & 360 dunk, Ray Allen entering games & dominating as a frosh, etc... The decade didn't end when Khalid, RIP, Free & Ricky got beat by future NBA All-Stars playing a home game in Greensboro?! If the 90's were a play you missed the 1999 final act AND the epilogue exclamation point saying UConn went on to win an additional 3 national championships.

Jesus, dude. I was responding to AW who asked for how we performed in the NCAAT relative to seed. Calm the ff*** down.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Jesus, dude. I was responding to AW who asked for how we performed in the NCAAT relative to seed. Calm the ff*** down.

I was calmly yet inspiringly speaking to the entire thread & obviously via subsequent posts August's premise. So to be clear though you are just the analyst

 

[Fishy]

That talk was ridiculous. Even if they'd lost to DePaul in the opening round they'd have been in the tournament, probably 9/10 line. Undefeated outside the Big East, not a chance they'd have been left out.

Absolutely no question they would have been in the tournament even with a first round loss.

Nova finished 9-9 (10th) and lost in the first round to USF - they went into the tournament as a 9 seed.

I suspect UConn would have been 7/8.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Absolutely no question they would have been in the tournament even with a first round loss.

Nova finished 9-9 (10th) and lost in the first round to USF - they went into the tournament as a 9 seed.

I suspect UConn would have been 7/8.

100%. As I'm reminded every time I see the Kemba game winner vs. Pitt, we were ranked something like 21st going into the Big East tournament.

If I told you that the 2011 champs won Maui, went undefeated out of conference, won the BE tournament, and was a 3 seed in the NCAA tournament, you wouldn't be the least bit surprised. The narrative that 2011 UConn was a mediocre team that got hot for 3 weeks is not even close to accurate. If you could somehow eliminate the month of February, they were the best team in the country without much debate.

 

[The Funster]

So you want to be Gonzaga.

Dude, you've let superjohn get in your head. You've gone off the rails. Take a step back and refocus.

 

[August_West]

Dude, you've let superjohn get in your head. You've gone off the rails. Take a step back and refocus.

I’m all good. Littlejohn knows the score

 

[sammydabiz]

Ok, I just got off the platform, gonna call an Uber instead...

Watching this UConn team is like having a colonoscopy

, something needs to change. We're seriously worse than UMass. Good showings against UCF & Tulane can't hide the ineptitude of this coaching staff and their recent recruiting efforts (or lack thereof)

Injuries... sm'injuries.... Getting blown out by a mediocre Memphis squad is just plain sad.

Good luck with Nova, it's gonna be a blood bath

 

[LIuconn]

And, ucf and Tulane are junk