guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 20, 2012 9:08:01 GMT -5
Please go root for Kentucky or Syracuse. The standard of success is different around here, and - gasp! - it actually goes beyond a one game elimination tournament in March. Yes, I wish the results in the tourney were better recently, but I wouldn't want to root for any other team or coach. If you didn't enjoy following and rooting for this year's team, you really shouldn't bother with Georgetown basketball anymore. Honestly. And I say that as someone bitterly disappointed and angry that the season is over, but still proud of what was accomplished. Accept who we are. An underachieving program that bombs out in the 1st or 2nd round. Just stop all this talk about next year. It happens every spring, and most here aren't realizing next spring never comes. I disagree that a team that was a complete afterthought in the preseason and ended up ranked in the top 15 for the entire meaningful portion of the season is "underachieving."
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Mar 20, 2012 9:11:07 GMT -5
Enj, The only fair metric is to compare tourney results since 2006; as we all know our system hasn't changed in the past few years. Since that time, among Big East teams, only Marquette has been in more NCAA Tournaments, and we have won two more NCAA games than they have (so far) over that span. We have precisely one fewer NCAA win than Pitt, W.Va., Louisville (although they could have more this year), and Nova -- those are the other schools with the same NCAA appearances as we have. We have been in one more tournament than Cuse and won one more game (so far). UConn (at 13-4 over that time span) is the only school with demonstrably more success...but they qualified one fewer year than we have. So, our success in reaching and winning games in the NCAA tournament really only objectively fails relative to UConn among our BE peers. You previously wrote about "underperformance based on seed" but in a previous post I showed that our performance and the typical performance of a 2-4 seed have been fairly similar. In short, the better your seed, the more likely you are to underperform! We can't be punished for having had good regular seasons; that doesn't make sense. Hoyaspirit, I have no problem with someone with a different opionion; Enj is entitled to his (I don't ridicule him for it, but rather try to provide facts that show, in my opinion, that he's objectively wrong). As for your points, I respectfully disagree also. Like Enj, you're focusing on 08-12 and excluding 06 and 07. It's fair to say we've underperformed in the NCAA tournament in the years you choose compared to our seed, but in the two previous years, the team overperformed. Second, you indicate you'll be ratcheting down your interest in viewing because of what you perceive to be the team's underperformance. Obviously that's your right and privilege. But if you're going to watch fewer games for that reason, I would suggest you analyze whether this team (or that of the past few years) really underperformed during the season. Certainly this team overperformed all expectations, except perhaps in the NCAA tournament (when it fell one game short of its seed by three points). To cut back on watching the team for underperforming ignores what I believe is the reality that the team overperformed for most of the games that one could watch. We'll have to agree to disagree on what you perceive to be the fundamental flaws with the program. I appreciate you discussing it in a normal manner. The BE as a whole has underperformed in the same time span. Short of UCon's run the BE has taken the gears for their lack of success in March. So while you say we have been better than almost everyone else, the fact remains most of the BE schools have been just as poor or worse. To me it comes down to coaching. Are we getting the most out of our staff? He did have his run in 2007, but he didn't bring those players in. He has had 5 years since, recruited some high level kids ( and reached on a few ) and still, with his system and players, we can't win in the 2nd round. Either you win or you don't.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,767
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Mar 20, 2012 9:15:48 GMT -5
The elder John Thompson's first five NCAA appearances:
1975: 0-1 1976: 0-1 1979: 0-1 1980: 2-1 1981: 0-1
Somehow, things worked out.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Mar 20, 2012 9:16:19 GMT -5
Accept who we are. An underachieving program that bombs out in the 1st or 2nd round. Just stop all this talk about next year. It happens every spring, and most here aren't realizing next spring never comes. I disagree that a team that was a complete afterthought in the preseason and ended up ranked in the top 15 for the entire meaningful portion of the season is "underachieving." Do you have friends who are non Hoya fans? Do they look at the Hoyas and say well they gave it the ol' college try. Better luck nexxt time old boy. Or are they saying thanks, Hoyas f'd up my bracket again? Why do they always lose early? My point is outside of the circle you know what around here, most people see the Hoyas for what they are. A perennial NCAA under achiever. And tourney success goes a long way towards defining a program. I want better.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Mar 20, 2012 9:17:32 GMT -5
The elder John Thompson's first five NCAA appearances: 1975: 0-1 1976: 0-1 1979: 0-1 1980: 2-1 1981: 0-1 Somehow, things worked out. I certainly hope so. But did he have the higher end talent this coaching staff have had?
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 20, 2012 9:21:22 GMT -5
I disagree that a team that was a complete afterthought in the preseason and ended up ranked in the top 15 for the entire meaningful portion of the season is "underachieving." Do you have friends who are non Hoya fans? Do they look at the Hoyas and say well they gave it the ol' college try. Better luck nexxt time old boy. Or are they saying thanks, Hoyas f'd up my bracket again? Why do they always lose early? My point is outside of the circle you know what around here, most people see the Hoyas for what they are. A perennial NCAA under achiever. And tourney success goes a long way towards defining a program. I want better. I don't really care what my friends think of the Hoyas.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 20, 2012 9:21:42 GMT -5
The program, the coach and the players are not perfect. We all know that. There are posters at both ends of the spectrum, doom-and-gloomers to sunshine-and-lollipops - we know that. Hoya Spirit has some valid points. But the vast majority of posters on this board are reasonable, intelligent, respectful fans. We celebrate the wins and see them as signs of greatness; we ache over the losses and see them as signs of disaster looming. We sometimes react emotionally and irrationally to posts that disagree with our view of the Hoya world. But to condmen an entire population of fans because a few criticize your viewpoint is unfair and shortsighted.
JTIII is a very good coach, who is still learning his craft. It took Boeheim 11 years to reach a final four and 28 to win a title (and have you noticed how many horrible 3's they have taken this year, and how poor they are at boxing out?). How long did it take Coach K to start winning and get to his final fours? I'll take our program, particularly with its integrity, its class, and the type of young men it turns out, every single day. Would I like more success? Of course. Am I disappointed by losses, especially the last loss of every season? Sure. That's part of being a fan. And throw in some liberal use of the "Ignore" feature. That will make your Hoya fandom even more satisfying.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 20, 2012 9:38:18 GMT -5
Yes, NCAA success or lack thereof has a way of defining a program, and memories are awfully short. You're absolutely right that the national media and general fans focus on that -- and tend to focus on the short term. A wider lens view of GU in the JTIII era should show that in the NCAAs the team has performed similarly to the typical team with its seeding on average, and a still wider lens would show that the team has performed admirably throughout the year. But I admit that many don't use that wider (in my view, more appropriate) lens.
Let me come back to the present: this year, under any scenario, was clearly an improvement, even under your metrics. Many average fans and most of the national media (based on that short term lens) believed we would lose to a very good mid-major team in the first round. The kind of team we've lost to in the past five years. We didn't. Not even close. That's an improvement over the last few years, isn't it? When the media talks about this year's "shocking" upsets, they aren't mentioning the Hoyas. In our second round game, we played against and lost to a major conference opponent -- this time by three points in a game we had two chances to tie at the end and in which one of our key players had minutes curbed. I'm not making an excuse for WHY we lost; I'm just pointing out that this wasn't a blow-out to mid-major VCU or low-major Ohio. This was a disappointing tightly contested loss to a well-respected (if lower seeded) team. No shame in that. I understand that a loss is a loss, and it was to a double-digit seed. But I do think it's short-sighted to not look just a bit deeper at the context here.
Finally, fair enough on the Big East. I agree the perception is that the league has underperformed (although I think the only year it objectively did was two years ago). But I guess I would want to know which power conference teams (even outside the BE) we've performed worse than in terms of number of appearances and wins. Sure, UNC, Duke, Kansas, Michigan State, and Kentucky. Fair enough, but that's hardly a damning comparison. We may aspire to be in that class year in and year out, but I don't think it's demeaning to say we're not there now. Who else? No one in the Pac-12, right? (Maybe UCLA over the whole seven year period, but we certainly don't want to be where they are now.) Anyone else in the Big-12? Anyone in the SEC? ACC? I don't know the answers, but I suspect not many (maybe I'd be surprised). My point is that success or failure, while felt in our own vacuum, can't properly be judged in that same vacuum. And can't even really be judged by potential recruits in that same vacuum.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 20, 2012 11:01:32 GMT -5
Why can't people offer basketball related criticisms without being told they are stupid? I don't think Enj/Spirit are completely correct but Spirit made some very good points that relate to the basketball program in terms of weakness and needs to see improvement.
For the poster who posted:
Michigan State has made the tourney every year since 1998, from 2001 to 2007 they were bounced in the first or second round 4/6 times.
Duke lost in the first or second round back to back years in '06, '07.
UNC lost in the first or second round 4 straight years from '01-'04.
Here's a difference in using that to even bring up in this thread/discussion:
Every player who has stayed 4 years in Tom Izzo's program has played in a Final Four.
Duke--Coach K's record speaks for itself in March.
UNC-the numbers you provided are why coaches were sent out the door--to make room for Roy Williams--who was only part of '04 season and won a National Title in '05.
I wouldn't hold Georgetown to the standard of Duke/UNC because they have so many built in advantages--with one of them being the fact they often get to play in their homestate (I'd think Hoyas chances of NCAA success in opening rounds go up if they were playing in College Park, Landover, Baltimore, etc...) and for big schools--the toughest weekend to deal with is opening weekend--after that--it's all basketball and III's proven he performs very well in Sweet 16--just tough getting there. Michigan State is a program that I do think you can model your program after-because they often get similar recruits in terms of "status" as Georgetown. They aren't always elite--get some, but they get guys who buy into their program. That's the model for Georgetown to follow and think should be similar.
Now will that happen? Hard to do because Tom Izzo is a great coach. I don't believe III is a great coach--=think he's a very good coach who CAN be great--but has to still prove that. Think this past year was a sign he is on his way--he changed look of roster/had an extremely young team and that nobody had any expectations for and by end of year-they are a 3 seed and some are lamenting the "upset" to NC State. This was a flawed team offensively--nobody was a go to scorer who could be counted on consistently to score, the guard play was marginal at PG spot--where a guy who was a SF/SG in HS had to move to point and did a great job --especially when he's an average ball handler. That is toughness. That is progress. Losing is never bad--not showing up is. If Hoyas lose in NCAA's like they did on Sunday I can live with that every year. They were prepared, competed hard, and kept fighting when things looked tough. Coaching didn't lose that game--opposing players making plays did, and some of the players Hoyas needed to produce had off games---they didn't stink--they just didn't get shots to fall or were in foul trouble. That happens. It's a huge improvement from '09-11 teams.
So put me in category of liking where things are heading at Georgetown but agreeing that improvement is still needed to get over hump. Will it? Hope so--but for that to happen some of the areas that were brought up by HoyaSpirit have to be addressed and improved.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Mar 20, 2012 11:18:10 GMT -5
Very reasonable post RDF.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,456
|
Post by TC on Mar 20, 2012 11:30:55 GMT -5
I wouldn't hold Georgetown to the standard of Duke/UNC because they have so many built in advantages--with one of them being the fact they often get to play in their homestate (I'd think Hoyas chances of NCAA success in opening rounds go up if they were playing in College Park, Landover, Baltimore, etc...) and for big schools--the toughest weekend to deal with is opening weekend--after that--it's all basketball and III's proven he performs very well in Sweet 16--just tough getting there. Michigan State is a program that I do think you can model your program after-because they often get similar recruits in terms of "status" as Georgetown. Sure, let's just compare JT3 to the most successful tournament coach in college basketball at the #12 most profitable school. That's not cherry picking or anything. Georgetown, Michigan State, same difference.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 20, 2012 11:42:34 GMT -5
JTIII would be the first person to tell you that he needs to improve as a coach, that the team and the program can and need to do better. Being disappointed that we did not get to the Sweet Sixteen is a reasonable reaction. Believing that this season was a complete failure because of that is not. And reasoned dsicussions of the program's deficiencies will usually be credited and will result(for the most part) in reasonable responses and discussions. Blanket opinions and criticisms that are propounded as unassailable facts will not.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,456
|
Post by TC on Mar 20, 2012 11:50:24 GMT -5
JTIII would be the first person to tell you that he needs to improve as a coach, that the team and the program can and need to do better. Why would he say that other than humility? I don't believe that. This year was an unqualified success. This team lost a close game to NC State - and that is the ONLY reason that HoyaSpirit posted what he did. I don't understand how that says anything about the program, the system, or the direction the program is going in.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 20, 2012 12:06:31 GMT -5
program still has a ways to go to reach the level that it can and should be at. We addressed a lot with the freshman class and really can't afford any misses with recruiting which i fear we may be doing with our next class. Need to continue to improve the athleticsm overall but especially in the backcourt. It would be nice if we had a 1 or a 2 who could actually defend and provide a consistent scoring threat.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,765
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 20, 2012 12:29:27 GMT -5
Why can't people offer basketball related criticisms without being told they are stupid? This is pretty ironic coming from you. I mean, really? I appreciate your postings, but you aren't really known for your polite, civil style, ya know? ;D They are reactionary posts to a loss and I think everyone who reacted as if they are is right. Spirit's post is littered with references to problems that didn't exist this season -- rebounding is a PERFECT example. We rebounded poorly against NC State, and it cost us the game. But our rebounding was good all season. If a team rebounds well all season and then has one bad game against an extremely athletic team with good size, does anyone really think the coach not teaching rebounding properly was the problem? Where's the logic there? Furthermore, where confronted with logical rebuttals, his answer seemed to be "my dad agrees with me" and not any kind of response. As for enj's arguments, they start in a place where no one else is and he never responds to rebuttal, so what's the point? I disagree with you plenty, and MCI, and richfame and a whole slew of others but all of us respond to good arguments or at least address the points. I just don't see that here -- and I like hoyaspirit's posts and don't think he's a troll. I just think his post was a reaction to the NC State game and not this five year though he claims it is. On other schools...Izzo is a better coach than III, and I have no problem saying that. I also have no problem saying that we've had disappointing performances in the NCAA tourney. That's a fact. Where I have an issue is the cause of that. And this is where other coach's failures are important. The NCAA tourney is a single elimination matchup of very good teams, and so has a ton of natural variability. Duke losing to Lehigh doesn't mean that K needs to change or he'll suffer the same fate next year. Bill Self's first and second round exits (Elite Eight, First Round, First Round, Elite Eight, National Champs, Sweet Sixteen, Second Round, Elite Eight) didn't preclude a national title, and he's at Kansas! I'm not saying III doesn't have flaws or wouldn't benefit from improving. I'm just saying that people way overstate his control over tourney performance. The reality is you need a fairly elite team to be upset-free in the tourney. When looking for areas of improvement, especially for next year, we need to find a real scorer -- our offense was always tenuous this year as it relied on a good but not elite scoring guard in Jason, an erratic play-making center in Henry and a shooter in Hollis and not much else. Frankly, compared to the personnel, I'm shocked our offense was as good this year as it was. We win this game a lot of ways, but regardless of why he was off the court, we win this game if Henry plays 30 minutes. If people want to post ways to improve the team based on the whole season or a whole set of games, I'm all ears. But based on five tourney games, all with different personnel, over five years, where we lost for different reasons? Eh, what's the point? Are you really going to find a real common thread there? If you do -- and it's legit, not like many of the criticisms levied here -- people will listen. If there's evidence against them, expect to be rebutted. People should stop acting persecuted if people disagree.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,765
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 20, 2012 12:43:24 GMT -5
Does Coach K's record speak for itself in March?
He always has very good talent, can we agree? Can we also agree that his overall results -- consistently strong records, rankings and sheer number of national titles, etc., make him one of the best coaches in the game?
Here's K's performance in the tourney:
He's been there 28 times in his history.
He's overperformed his seed (including all his Finals and Championship appearances) 11 times. He's performed to seed only twice. He's underperormed his seed 15 times, including seven of the last eight years.
I do this not to say III is as good a Coach as K. Just to point out that Tourney performance is a terrible evaluator of a coach.
K was on a 5 year run of under-performance and hadn't over-performed in nine years when Brian Zoubek had a great half year and they won the 2010 National Title. It's not a complete crapshoot, but there's some skill and some luck.
You wouldn't evaluate K on just his tourney record over the last ten years, would you?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 20, 2012 12:56:24 GMT -5
I evaluate Coach K based on his resemblance to a foul-mouthed weasel and/or ferret.
The man is outstanding!!! There is none better!!
(In a non-Boz-like note, IMO Tom Izzo is the best college basketball coach on the planet over the last decade to 15 years. And I'm not even sure there is a close second.)
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 20, 2012 13:16:17 GMT -5
JTIII would be the first person to tell you that he needs to improve as a coach, that the team and the program can and need to do better. Why would he say that other than humility? I don't believe that. This year was an unqualified success. This team lost a close game to NC State - and that is the ONLY reason that HoyaSpirit posted what he did. I don't understand how that says anything about the program, the system, or the direction the program is going in. Because he knows that there is much more to do to get to the level he and the program want to reach. I am not suggesting that he is not satisfied with this season, or that all of us should not see the season as a success, but he also knows that it could have been even better. Every coach thinks that way. Boeheim, Coach K, Bill Self, Tom Izzo - they all repeatedly talk about the need for their teams AND themselves to continue to work hard and to get better.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Mar 20, 2012 13:54:06 GMT -5
I evaluate Coach K based on his resemblance to a foul-mouthed weasel and/or ferret. The man is outstanding!!! There is none better!! (In a non-Boz-like note, IMO Tom Izzo is the best college basketball coach on the planet over the last decade to 15 years. And I'm not even sure there is a close second.) Agree 150%.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Mar 20, 2012 15:55:51 GMT -5
Why can't people offer basketball related criticisms without being told they are stupid? This is pretty ironic coming from you. I mean, really? I appreciate your postings, but you aren't really known for your polite, civil style, ya know? ;D They are reactionary posts to a loss and I think everyone who reacted as if they are is right. Spirit's post is littered with references to problems that didn't exist this season -- rebounding is a PERFECT example. We rebounded poorly against NC State, and it cost us the game. But our rebounding was good all season. If a team rebounds well all season and then has one bad game against an extremely athletic team with good size, does anyone really think the coach not teaching rebounding properly was the problem? Where's the logic there? Furthermore, where confronted with logical rebuttals, his answer seemed to be "my dad agrees with me" and not any kind of response. As for enj's arguments, they start in a place where no one else is and he never responds to rebuttal, so what's the point? I disagree with you plenty, and MCI, and richfame and a whole slew of others but all of us respond to good arguments or at least address the points. I just don't see that here -- and I like hoyaspirit's posts and don't think he's a troll. I just think his post was a reaction to the NC State game and not this five year though he claims it is. On other schools...Izzo is a better coach than III, and I have no problem saying that. I also have no problem saying that we've had disappointing performances in the NCAA tourney. That's a fact. Where I have an issue is the cause of that. And this is where other coach's failures are important. The NCAA tourney is a single elimination matchup of very good teams, and so has a ton of natural variability. Duke losing to Lehigh doesn't mean that K needs to change or he'll suffer the same fate next year. Bill Self's first and second round exits (Elite Eight, First Round, First Round, Elite Eight, National Champs, Sweet Sixteen, Second Round, Elite Eight) didn't preclude a national title, and he's at Kansas! I'm not saying III doesn't have flaws or wouldn't benefit from improving. I'm just saying that people way overstate his control over tourney performance. The reality is you need a fairly elite team to be upset-free in the tourney. When looking for areas of improvement, especially for next year, we need to find a real scorer -- our offense was always tenuous this year as it relied on a good but not elite scoring guard in Jason, an erratic play-making center in Henry and a shooter in Hollis and not much else. Frankly, compared to the personnel, I'm shocked our offense was as good this year as it was. We win this game a lot of ways, but regardless of why he was off the court, we win this game if Henry plays 30 minutes. If people want to post ways to improve the team based on the whole season or a whole set of games, I'm all ears. But based on five tourney games, all with different personnel, over five years, where we lost for different reasons? Eh, what's the point? Are you really going to find a real common thread there? If you do -- and it's legit, not like many of the criticisms levied here -- people will listen. If there's evidence against them, expect to be rebutted. People should stop acting persecuted if people disagree. It's too bad you won't see my response, as you have me on ignore. Rather unfortunate. I like your posts; all you have to do is skip ahead to the final sentence or two to get the gist of it. Rebut me all you want. The perception of this program is one of bowing out early, one of underachieving. 2-5 in the last five years in the NCAA's. That is the reality. And I don't feel persecuted. Sorry...
|
|