Jump to content
Want to remove all ads? ×

2009/10 NCAA basketball Thread

SouthernJet

By SouthernJet
in College Sports

Recommended Posts

SouthernJet

SouthernJet

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Soooooooooooooo

From the little I've seen so far...

- Cuse is a Top 5 team.

- GTown is the king of the Big East.

- Michigan is a tough, gritty bunch (hell yeah).

- UNC blows, compared to the last 5 years.

Yup on all points.............so far ;)

Lets see what happens in March :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 870
  • Created
  • Last Reply
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
There is NO team in the ACC with a good chance at a final four run.

Duke? No.

GATech? Don't see it. They do have talent though.

Clemson? 2nd half chokers like always, they'll make the tourney as a 7 seed.

Carolina? Forget it.

FSU? No.

VaTech? No.

NCST? No.

UVA? No.

BC? No.

Wake? No.

Maryland? No.

Miami? No.

I can't remember a year in which the ACC was THIS bad.

On the other hand, the Big East has a few good teams with potential for a FF run in March:

Cuse

Nova

Georgetown

WVU (weakest of the bunch)

I don't disagree that the ACC has possibly no teams capable of a FF run but I completely disagree w/ GU and WVU for the BE. The only teams I see w/ a legit chance to make a FF run are SU and 'Nova and Su never plays well w/ expectations. I wouldn't be surprised if neither conference is represented in the FF. For the ACC that's rare, for the BE it's back to business as usual.

See, I disagree with this logic. I think regular season supremacy is more impressive than NCAA tournament supremacy. Of course, you don't get hardwood by winning the regular season... But IMO it proves a greater body of work. In the tourney, one bad game against a good team, and you're toast. Even the best of teams have off days sometimes...

Just because a team doesn't win it all, doesn't mean they weren't the best team that year.

people get confused w/ "reg season supremacy" b/c the bottom half of the BE is so putrid the teams at the top pad their records and makes them look better. Who had a really impressive non conf run besides SU and let's be honesyt that sched isn't looking so tough right now w/ Cal missing 2 starters, Carolina stinks, UF isn't good,...

-'Nova lost to the only team they played that was ranked in non conf, their biggest win looks like beating Maryland in DC

-WVU finally got a good non conf win over OSU but that was at home, other than that they got crushed by Purdue and escaped over Cleveland State w/ a 2 pt win.

-GU beat duke at home, duke is a terrible road team- NC State crushed duke at home too. They also lost to ODU.

-Pitt was crushed by UT, lost by double digits to Indiana, they beat nobody in non conf.

Let's stop pretending the BE is great. it's one of the best conf's in a very down year for CBB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
I don't disagree that the ACC has possibly no teams capable of a FF run but I completely disagree w/ GU and WVU for the BE. The only teams I see w/ a legit chance to make a FF run are SU and 'Nova and Su never plays well w/ expectations. I wouldn't be surprised if neither conference is represented in the FF. For the ACC that's rare, for the BE it's back to business as usual.

people get confused w/ "reg season supremacy" b/c the bottom half of the BE is so putrid the teams at the top pad their records and makes them look better. Who had a really impressive non conf run besides SU and let's be honesyt that sched isn't looking so tough right now w/ Cal missing 2 starters, Carolina stinks, UF isn't good,...

-'Nova lost to the only team they played that was ranked in non conf, their biggest win looks like beating Maryland in DC

-WVU finally got a good non conf win over OSU but that was at home, other than that they got crushed by Purdue and escaped over Cleveland State w/ a 2 pt win.

-GU beat duke at home, duke is a terrible road team- NC State crushed duke at home too. They also lost to ODU.

-Pitt was crushed by UT, lost by double digits to Indiana, they beat nobody in non conf.

Let's stop pretending the BE is great. it's one of the best conf's in a very down year for CBB.

..UConn also crushed Texas. The Big East and Big 12 are the 2 best conf's this year... And I'd say the Big East is better. Look at the BE this year, even the "putrid" teams you describe are capable of pulling off an upset, and all have at least once this year. (DePaul beat Marquette, Rutgers beat Notre Dame, USF beat Pitt, etc). Although last year the Big East was more talented in the top 8...This year the talent is balanced unlike anytime I can remember.

"Su always chokes with high expectations". Oh okay, if thats the case, theres no chance of them ever winning a championship or even making a FF. Good to know, thanks in advance for the insight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
..UConn also crushed Texas. The Big East and Big 12 are the 2 best conf's this year... And I'd say the Big East is better. Look at the BE this year, even the "putrid" teams you describe are capable of pulling off an upset, and all have at least once this year. (DePaul beat Marquette, Rutgers beat Notre Dame, USF beat Pitt, etc). Although last year the Big East was more talented in the top 8...This year the talent is balanced unlike anytime I can remember.

"Su always chokes with high expectations". Oh okay, if thats the case, theres no chance of them ever winning a championship or even making a FF. Good to know, thanks in advance for the insight.

Texas has really been struggling. Uconn also easily lost big to duke, lost to Michigan and lost back to back games to Marquette and providence(Marquette lost to NC State and FSU). I think UT is really good and that was a great win for UConn BUT UT has lost 3 of 4 games so they are struggling.

All those putrid teams beat BE teams. depaul beat Marquette? Marquette is one of those putrid teams. RU beat ND? So? ND isn't a good team. ND lost to Loyola Marymount and last I checked hank Gathers and Bo Kimble weren't playing. USF did beat UVa but UVa has been a different team since they beat UAB. You can call it balanced but it's not very good after the top 4-5 teams.

When they have expectations they tend to bow out early in the tourney, when they aren't expected to make a run to the FF they usually have a deep run. That's the way it has tended to go for them, nothing is set in stone but would you be shocked if SU doesn't make it out of the first weekend? I wouldn't. They have a team that SHOULD be a serious contender for the FF but I have seent his happen to many times before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
Texas has really been struggling. Uconn also easily lost big to duke, lost to Michigan and lost back to back games to Marquette and providence(Marquette lost to NC State and FSU). I think UT is really good and that was a great win for UConn BUT UT has lost 3 of 4 games so they are struggling.

All those putrid teams beat BE teams. depaul beat Marquette? Marquette is one of those putrid teams. RU beat ND? So? ND isn't a good team. ND lost to Loyola Marymount and last I checked hank Gathers and Bo Kimble weren't playing. USF did beat UVa but UVa has been a different team since they beat UAB. You can call it balanced but it's not very good after the top 4-5 teams.

When they have expectations they tend to bow out early in the tourney, when they aren't expected to make a run to the FF they usually have a deep run. That's the way it has tended to go for them, nothing is set in stone but would you be shocked if SU doesn't make it out of the first weekend? I wouldn't. They have a team that SHOULD be a serious contender for the FF but I have seent his happen to many times before.

Really? Last I checked the one time they were a 1 seed they lost in the national championship game... in 1986 with Derrick Coleman (as a Sr) and Billy Owens (as a Frosh). They were a 2 seed once and lost in the 1st round to richmond... were a 3 seed twice, won the tourney the 1st time and got to the sweet 16 the next (last year). They were also lost in '05 as a 4 seed in rd 1 to Vermont and as a 6 seed the following year to Texas A&M. Neither of those years did I expect a final four... Sweet 16, maybe. Final Four? No.

The two times ('96 and '03) since Ive been following Cuse that I really thought we had a chance at the FF we got there...and the 2nd time we won it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
Really? Last I checked the one time they were a 1 seed they lost in the national championship game... in 1986 with Derrick Coleman (as a Sr) and Billy Owens (as a Frosh). They were a 2 seed once and lost in the 1st round to richmond... were a 3 seed twice, won the tourney the 1st time and got to the sweet 16 the next (last year). They were also lost in '05 as a 4 seed in rd 1 to Vermont and as a 6 seed the following year to Texas A&M. Neither of those years did I expect a final four... Sweet 16, maybe. Final Four? No.

The two times ('96 and '03) since Ive been following Cuse that I really thought we had a chance at the FF we got there...and the 2nd time we won it.

You'll need to check again. Coleman was a freshman in 1987 when they made the FF and they were a 2 seed not a 1 seed.

So you expected the FF as a 3 seed in '03 and a 4 in '96 but not as a 2 seed in '91 or a 4 seed in '05,...? and it's not just about expecting FF's. if you are a 4 seed you are expected to reach a Sweet 16 not lose in rd 1, if you are a 2 seed you are expected to reach the elite 8 not lose in rd 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
You'll need to check again. Coleman was a freshman in 1987 when they made the FF and they were a 2 seed not a 1 seed.

So you expected the FF as a 3 seed in '03 and a 4 in '96 but not as a 2 seed in '91 or a 4 seed in '05,...? and it's not just about expecting FF's. if you are a 4 seed you are expected to reach a Sweet 16 not lose in rd 1, if you are a 2 seed you are expected to reach the elite 8 not lose in rd 1.

LOL, I was born in '84. Forgive me if I dont have all my facts right about that season, LOL. Anyway, I never said Syracuse hasn't had several disappointments in my lifetime as a fan, but the notion that we never live up to high expectations isnt true either. As for '05... No, my expectations were never really that high for that season. I did expect us to get farther than we did obviously, but I was never really thinking championship...I probably had similar expectations of that team as I did the team last season... Anything short of sweet 16 would be a disappointment, anything more would be great. As for '06, I was expecting more once the brackets were announced and we got the 6th seed, but a week before that I was fully expecting us to be in the NIT... If it weren't for a historic run in the Big East by McNamara, thats where we would've been. So yes I was disappointed by the loss, but considering we were never supposed to be there in the 1st place...I dont know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
LOL, I was born in '84. Forgive me if I dont have all my facts right about that season, LOL. Anyway, I never said Syracuse hasn't had several disappointments in my lifetime as a fan, but the notion that we never live up to high expectations isnt true either. As for '05... No, my expectations were never really that high for that season. I did expect us to get farther than we did obviously, but I was never really thinking championship...I probably had similar expectations of that team as I did the team last season... Anything short of sweet 16 would be a disappointment, anything more would be great. As for '06, I was expecting more once the brackets were announced and we got the 6th seed, but a week before that I was fully expecting us to be in the NIT... If it weren't for a historic run in the Big East by McNamara, thats where we would've been. So yes I was disappointed by the loss, but considering we were never supposed to be there in the 1st place...I dont know.

I'm not trying to insult or anything so I apologize if it came across like that. Maybe I am touchy w/ how horrible the heels are playing. I truly hope for you SU fans that your team makes a FF run. I have alot of friends who are alumni/fans and I wish you guys luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
I'm not trying to insult or anything so I apologize if it came across like that. Maybe I am touchy w/ how horrible the heels are playing. I truly hope for you SU fans that your team makes a FF run. I have alot of friends who are alumni/fans and I wish you guys luck.

I wasnt offended at all. And you certainly arent the only one to accuse Cuse' (say that 10 times fast) of "always" disappointing" when expectations are highest. Fact is, going by seedings, expectations are rarely that high to begin with. In 32 NCAA tournament appearances in Syracuse history, I believe only one, if even one, time were we a 1 seed. We were a 2 seed twice... And once we lost the national championship due to a heartbreaking last second three pointer by Keith Smart of Indiana. In '96 we lost in the national championship as a 4 seed... In '03 we won it all as a 3 seed. We had one horrible loss as a 2 seed in '92... but other then that Id say we have had just as many successes as a "lower" (3,4 seed) as we have had failure and disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
I wasnt offended at all. And you certainly arent the only one to accuse Cuse' (say that 10 times fast) of "always" disappointing" when expectations are highest. Fact is, going by seedings, expectations are rarely that high to begin with. In 32 NCAA tournament appearances in Syracuse history, I believe only one, if even one, time were we a 1 seed. We were a 2 seed twice... And once we lost the national championship due to a heartbreaking last second three pointer by Keith Smart of Indiana. In '96 we lost in the national championship as a 4 seed... In '03 we won it all as a 3 seed. We had one horrible loss as a 2 seed in '92... but other then that Id say we have had just as many successes as a "lower" (3,4 seed) as we have had failure and disappointment.

It appears they don't play as well w/ expectations, all their FF runs they were not favorites to reach them and they have lost too many 1st/2nd rd games when they have been a higher seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
NYJUNC;

What u hearing?

I am hearing there is a turd or two who just dont get the TEAM thing.

May not be suited to The Hill.

They will be gone or will sit next year when the stars come in.

I have been hearing the same type of rumblings w/o hearing which specific players they are. it's extremely disappointing but we have to take the bad w/ the good. Better times are certainly ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
It appears they don't play as well w/ expectations, all their FF runs they were not favorites to reach them and they have lost too many 1st/2nd rd games when they have been a higher seed.

Yes, we have lost too early sometimes as a 3 and 4 seed...And we've exceeded expectations and gotten to a couple of champ games as a 3 and 4 seed as well. Meaning our record as a 3/4 seed is probably very similar too many teams that have been 3 or 4 seeds the same amount of times as we have. As for all out FF runs not being favorites... We have NEVER been a 1 seed, a 2 seed twice and lost a heartbreaker in the championship game (definitely at least living up to expectations), and the 2nd time we lost in round 1. Yeah, we've disappointed in a big way as a 2 seed and Elite Eight/Final Four favorite ONCE. Not always like you and many others make it seem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
I have been hearing the same type of rumblings w/o hearing which specific players they are. it's extremely disappointing but we have to take the bad w/ the good. Better times are certainly ahead.

That type of stuff seems to come fairly commonly when a team is not living up to its standards and underachieving... Not sure if its a cause of the losing or if its caused by the losing... Its like a chicken or the egg question as to which happened first...But usually I'd say its a little of both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gangreenman

gangreenman

Posted
Posted
Villanova loses as called by me. :-D

http://jetnation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88135

Allow me to describe the game in a sentence:

Villanova looked lost at times against Georgetown's 2-3 zone.

Yes, Ill let you read that again

Villanova looked lost at times against Georgetown's 2-3 zone.

Georgetown plays a 2-3 zone? Huh. Would you look at that? How unfortunate for Villanova. :Nuts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uart

uart

Posted
Posted
Syracuse and Georgetown have the inside players to really hurt Nova, especially if Nova is not hitting from the outside!

It wasn't really the inside players, it was the fact that Georgetown shot an obscene percentage from the floor, and particularly from three. Georgetown is unlikely to ever shoot that well again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uart

uart

Posted
Posted
Allow me to describe the game in a sentence:

Villanova looked lost at times against Georgetown's 2-3 zone.

Yes, Ill let you read that again

Villanova looked lost at times against Georgetown's 2-3 zone.

Georgetown plays a 2-3 zone? Huh. Would you look at that? How unfortunate for Villanova. :Nuts:

Notre Dame plays a 2-3 zone too. Didn't look lost there...

It had nothing to do with the zone. Villanova lost because:

1) Sloppy play. We didn't protect the ball, turned it over 17 times.

2) Georgetown shot better than they have all season. Our trapping D leaves some shots open. Usually they are low percentage shots, but yesterday Georgetown was hitting those shots every time.

3) Lots of fouls. Villanova wasn't getting the calls on the other side of the court all the time, but Georgetown got almost everything close on their end.

4) Georgetown actually hit their free throws. They are the #5 team in the Big East in FT%, 142nd nationally. They were averaging 69.4% from the charity stripe going into the game, but connected on 78% of their FTs yesterday. Normally, a team that couldn't punish us for fouling, did exactly that.

It also had nothing to do with size. Villanova outrebounded Georgetown, as they have almost every opponent this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SouthernJet

SouthernJet

Posted
  • Author
Posted
someone asked a while back if I was worried about the heels and at the time I wasn't but now barring a complete turnaround the heels will not be going to the Tourney. A shocking, disappointing year.

they may not be going to NITs either :(

Problem is that the veterans (who were backups last year) just arent that starter quality good.

Time for Roy to make them depth and play all the young kids

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nyjunc

nyjunc

Posted
Posted
they may not be going to NITs either :(

Problem is that the veterans (who were backups last year) just arent that starter quality good.

Time for Roy to make them depth and play all the young kids

I want to see more of Strickland and henson, when they are on the floor good things seem to be happening. They got that lead down to 3 and Drew took over w/ bad shots and bad turnovers. I hope kendall Marshall is rwady to play next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company

Site Sponsor

MetLife Stadium Tailgate

NY Jets Podcast

NY Jets Podcast

DMCA Page

  • -- DMCA Page
    • ×
    ×
    • Create New...