I think he's saying that we're extremely inconsistent for a self-proclaimed Blue Blood. His error was including 2008 in that discussion, where our first round exit was more a function of luck or circumstance.
Overall, the fact is we're at risk of heading towards another ho-hum regular season out of the spotlight, which we can ill afford given our conference situation (recent championship or otherwise). We haven't had a truly dominant season end to end -- the kind of season befitting a national power, and one that garners sustained media/recruit interest -- since 2009. One could argue that the future health of our program is dependent more on consistent, sustained dominance, than with a few spirited Tournament runs that, while incredible to experience, don't hold people's (recruits') attention over the long run.
Really? Four National Championships (and five Final Fours) in 15 years qualifies as "extremely inconsistent" and "a few spirited Tournament runs"?I think he's saying that we're extremely inconsistent for a self-proclaimed Blue Blood. ...One could argue that the future health of our program is dependent more on consistent, sustained dominance, than with a few spirited Tournament runs that, while incredible to experience, don't hold people's (recruits') attention over the long run.
By this standard, the only consistent blue bloods are Duke and Kansas. A lot of wins and high seeds nearly every year. Kentucky? They lost in the first round of the NIT two years ago. UNC? They're all over the place. UCLA and Indiana? Funny.
And nice to discount two titles by calling them "spirited tournament runs."
It might have been beneficial to have a couple of the p5 games sprinkled later into our schedule when we have had a chance to improve which I think we will, but we needed those games whenever. Let's just beat Duke and stop all this talk about schedule.
By this standard, the only consistent blue bloods are Duke and Kansas. A lot of wins and high seeds nearly every year. Kentucky? They lost in the first round of the NIT two years ago. UNC? They're all over the place. UCLA and Indiana? Funny.
And nice to discount two titles by calling them "spirited tournament runs."
If SMU continues to play as bad as they've played we're going to have serious problems come selection day. They were expected to be 2 - 3 more top 25 games for us and if they fall off like this we have SERIOUS problems. I just don't see the AAC getting more than 1 - 2 bids max. That's a problem if we don't win our OOC games. Plain and simple… we have to go 2 - 1 against Duke, Stanford and Florida. Going 1 - 2 isn't going to cut it. Hopefully someone else can step up in the AAC… Cincy, Temple maybe? Someone else has to fill that void or what does it matter at the end of the season if you have 25 wins against top 100+ competition? We got hammered last year for our schedule, i can't imagine what's going to happen this year.