Nova = the new Pitt?? | The Boneyard

Nova = the new Pitt??

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

uconngb

Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
6,850
Reaction Score
25,371
Great regular season, you watch them play a few times and wonder how they can lose....and then they flame out early in the tourney, ruining brackets everywhere. Two combined wins off of a 1-seed and a 2-seed in back to back years is not very impressive. NBE is lucky they took Xavier, otherwise that conference is a total flame-out (and BTW, they were dramatically over-seeded this year).
 
Cincy is the new Pitt. Tough ugly basketball, gives teams in conference fits, struggles to score in tournament and goes home early.

Nova is a different kind of tournament suckitide. Looks great in regular season playing four shooters and a big, but if their shooters have an off night they get killed on the boards and go home early.
 
I was thinking Virginia may be the new pitt if they get bounced early this year.
 
noeynox said:
Cincy is the new Pitt. Tough ugly basketball, gives teams in conference fits, struggles to score in tournament and goes home early.

Nova is a different kind of tournament suckitide. Looks great in regular season playing four shooters and a big, but if their shooters have an off night they get killed on the boards and go home early.
Expand ...
They lost to Harvard last year. But it's not like they get consistently high seeds and go home. They beat Purdue...they weren't going to beat UK.

They went to the S16 as a 6 seed in 2012.

They lost to us as a 6 seed in 2011.

And before 2011, they hadn't been there since 2005.

One year of underachieving, 1 year of overachieving, 2 years of playing to their seed. That ain't Pitt.
 
Nova isn't the new anything. They've struggled to get far in the tourney since the '85 game of perfection v Georgetown. Their issue has always been the same: they don't recruit big men very well at all.
 
.-.
I can see the point of the thread, but let's not forget that Nova actually made Pitt "Pitt", taking the Panthers out of what appeared to be a certain FF appearance on a last second shot in the 2008 Elite 8. And Nova did make the FF as a result of that shot, so Nova > Pitt.

Additionally, Nova has come through on upsets (1985) and actually has made the tourney field more than we have. Pitt manages to blow its opportunities in painful, memorable ways. So no... Pitt has this contest locked up.
 
storrsroars said:
I can see the point of the thread, but let's not forget that Nova actually made Pitt "Pitt", taking the Panthers out of what appeared to be a certain FF appearance on a last second shot in the 2008 Elite 8. And Nova did make the FF as a result of that shot, so Nova > Pitt.

Additionally, Nova has come through on upsets (1985) and actually has made the tourney field more than we have. Pitt manages to blow its opportunities in painful, memorable ways. So no... Pitt has this contest locked up.
Expand ...
If the officials made the right call in 2005, they would have beaten UNC. It was such a bad call...and helped UNC to the title.

Nova at least can say they consistently lose to the national champion: they did in 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009
 
Pitt=Cuse=Nova

Can't tell the difference. Bunch of programs who thinks they're elite (Cuse especially) but they have few hardware to show for when it's done.
 
Orc said:
Pitt=Cuse=Nova

Can't tell the difference. Bunch of programs who thinks they're elite (Cuse especially) but they have few hardware to show for when it's done.
Expand ...
Syracuse > Vilanova >>>>>>>>>> Pitt

Those other two have titles and final fours.

Pitt has nothing.
 
Nova is the Gonzaga of the East. Similar play style, Catholic, gaudy conference numbers, though Gonzaga has been recruiting some impressive big men of late.
 
.-.
Yes, Gtown was overseeded by 2-3 spots, St Johns by 1 or 2, PC by one or two. They are 1-5.....that is a horrible performance no matter how you slice it.
White Dwarf said:
Over-seeded? They were 12-1 vs tourney teams, and 32-2 overall
Expand ...
 
You can make an argument that their resume deserved a 2 seed.

That sure is a dramatic difference.
 
Nova seems to be built for the long haul(the season). Not so much for the sprint(tourney play). If they don't shoot it from 3 they have few other ways to score.

I've never like Nova ever. Couldn't stand Massamino. And I had NC State to knock them off in my bracket this year so I'm a happy guy about Nova getting bounced.
 
tzznandrew said:
If the officials made the right call in 2005, they would have beaten UNC. It was such a bad call...and helped UNC to the title.

Nova at least can say they consistently lose to the national champion: they did in 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009
Expand ...
Pretty sure they lost one other time recently to the eventual national champion
 
noeynox said:
Cincy is the new Pitt. Tough ugly basketball, gives teams in conference fits, struggles to score in tournament and goes home early.

Nova is a different kind of tournament suckitide. Looks great in regular season playing four shooters and a big, but if their shooters have an off night they get killed on the boards and go home early.
Expand ...
Nah, I would say Gonzaga is the new Huggins's era Cincinnati. After the 1996 Elite 8, Huggins only made 1 Sweet 16 despite getting many high seeds. Under Mick we are 3-1 vs lower seeded teams (beat 11 Missouri, 11 Texas and 9 Purdue lost to 12 Harvard) and 1-4 vs higher seeded teams (beat 3 Florida State and lost to 3 UConn, 2 Ohio State, 7 Creighton and 1 Kentucky). That is pretty much reaching expectations.
 
.-.
tzznandrew said:
They lost to Harvard last year. But it's not like they get consistently high seeds and go home. They beat Purdue...they weren't going to beat UK.

They went to the S16 as a 6 seed in 2012.

They lost to us as a 6 seed in 2011.

And before 2011, they hadn't been there since 2005.

One year of underachieving, 1 year of overachieving, 2 years of playing to their seed. That ain't Pitt.
Expand ...
I was thinking more style of play. Tough, rugged, ugly, basketball seldom advances in tournament.
 
noeynox said:
I was thinking more style of play. Tough, rugged, ugly, basketball seldom advances in tournament.
Expand ...
Yeah, fair enough. You need to have some offense. Sadly, they had little.

Hopefully for the conference they pick up a guard or two who can consistently hit 3s, and I think they'll be a Top 15 team all year.
 
I don't think they're overrated but when I watched them the last two years my reaction always was "college basketball as a whole is really in a crappy situation if THIS team is good enough to be a 1/2 seed and go 32-2." They always strike me as a team that can lose to anyone if even they're 32-2, the talent level and coaching never scares you. Just like Virginia.
 
Teams to never pick in your bracket, Nova, Kansa, Virginia and Duke. They will always let you down
 
polycom said:
Teams to never pick in your bracket, Nova, Kansa, Virginia and Duke. They will always let you down
Expand ...
Virginia isn't even worth talking about. Johnny-come-lately.

Recently, Villanova definitely fits this.

Kansas did in 2013 and 2014, but they were in the title game in 2012.

Duke has had some recent notable failures (Lehigh and Mercer!), but they also won a title in 2010, and were in the E8 in 2013. And they're already a S16 team this year. Would be surprised, with the way the East bracket fell apart, if they more or less walk into the title game.
 
.-.
I swear KU either makes it all the way to the Finals or goes down in flames on the opening weekend.
 
Virginia destroyed my bracket. The platitudes about them this year and last, amazing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,172
Messages
4,555,764
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom