|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Aug 11, 2016 8:33:46 GMT -5
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Aug 11, 2016 8:37:57 GMT -5
Unfortunately, though, it's true.
Use it for motivation!
123 Fireballs!
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,259
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 11, 2016 8:58:01 GMT -5
Is there a "Comments" section for hs2003 to point out March record vs. regular season record vs. $3M p/y?  |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 11, 2016 9:27:01 GMT -5
Is there a "Comments" section for hs2003 to point out March record vs. regular season record vs. $3M p/y? I know you're joking (at least in part!), but I actually agree that we have been a big March underachiever. That's clearly true and not really debatable. Where I differ from some of you all is what to do about it. |
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Aug 11, 2016 9:33:18 GMT -5
This begs the question, is it a good thing to be the worst of the good teams or would you rather be Depaul (or Esh era Hoyas) and just be downright miserable and hopeless. I notice that Duke & Kansas are numbers two & three on this list but that is due to underachieving their seeds which tend to be really high. We have failed in a similar manner although our seeding hasn't been as historically high from year to year.
|
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Aug 11, 2016 9:48:52 GMT -5
For those who don't want to waste their time with 11 different pages for a 1 page article...
1. Georgetown
2. Duke
3. Kansas
4. Notre Dame
4. Wisconsin Badgers
6. Vanderbilt
6. New Mexico
8. UVA
9. OSU
10. Baylor
I understand how they decided on "Biggest NCAA Tournament Underachievers of the Past Decade" but really? Duke is 22-8 w/ 2 National Championships , Kansas is 17-9 w/ 1 National Championship and 1 appearence, Wisconsin is 20-10 w/ 2 FFs, UVA is 7-5 w/ 4 of those losses to fellow HM teams, OSU is 17-8 w/ 2 FFs, Notre Dame (and us) are at .500 winning %. If those mean under achieving in the NCAA T, I think you have 340+ teams lining up to under achieve.
Arguably, take Duke, Kansas, and Wisc out and maybe the article makes sense.
It is Bleacher Report though, I probably shouldn't have put in the effort for this.
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Aug 11, 2016 12:00:35 GMT -5
I have no problem agreeing with the list nor our position on the list. Where I think maybe the list can be adjusted a little is that given the amount of talent over that time span versus the opposition to that talent is Duke should be tied with us at the #1.
|
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Aug 11, 2016 18:46:46 GMT -5
Nothing we can do but win and change the narrative.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,855
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 11, 2016 19:05:07 GMT -5
Nothing we can do but win big and change the narrative. Fixed it for you.. |
|
