(03-17-2014 12:59 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  So I have not watched Harvard enough to really make a great argument as to what the matchups will be. It's clear that's a pretty good team, but nothing really there to suggest they can beat UC if UC plays its best. I think if UC plays well they win the game...that simple.

However, while Michigan State is really good, I don't think they present a ton of matchup problems for UC. The reason is UC will have the ability to play small when it wants to. Sparty plays a lot of 4 guards (3 guards/ 1 G/F). UC has the versatility with their athletes to bother some of those guards. When Michigan State plays a couple of big guys, I like the idea of Titus on Payne. I think Titus was Born to guard that type of player. Payne could still get his own under that scenario, but I think he'd really have to work for it.

What scares me most about the matchup is that in the 4 guard sets Jackson is likely going to be spending significant time on Payne. Jackson is certainly a good enough defender for that to work, but I really fear his getting in foul trouble in that matchup. Of course, because Michigan State likes to play small, UC actually would have more flexibility in this game than a typical game where Jackson gets in foul trouble.

The other thing that scares me is that Gary Harris can get on a roll and hit difficult shots. The kind of shots where even with great defense there may be nothing else to do. Anyways, I think what makes MSU unique and tough is their quickness and versatility with the 4 guards + Payne and I think UC has a roster that actually matches up quite well with that style.

Thoughts?

UC better worry about the first game and then get concerned about whatever is next. Harvard is capable of upsetting UC. They pretty much have 6 players scoring in double figures ( 6th is at 9.3 ppg). That probably hints of very good outside shooting. We know they'll be smart and have great fundamentals. That team worries me because of our lack of consistent offense. We could Crash and Burn if we aren't ready to play some tenacious defense and score and avoid silly turnovers. In the tourney, we aren't guaranteed to play MSU if we win. There's been lots of upsets over the years. A team has to stay focused and play hard. Not overlooking someone to get ready for the next game. Go Bearcats!!!!!!

I'd like to see Big Dave get some time against Harvard. Their true big man has missed the entire season with a broken foot. 6'7" is as tall as they go now. And they are not a running team. A perfect game for a 7'1" Bearcat.

(03-17-2014 02:35 PM)indycat Wrote:  If SK is going to the free throw line a lot against Harvard, I believe UC cruises. Of course that correlates with him taking the ball hard to the rim and he should be able to do that often against Harvard compared to say UConn or Louisville.

If UC displays forty minutes of the defensive focus and energy we've seen so often this year we'll all feel pretty good by 5 P.M. Thursday and we can start worrying about MSU...or Delaware.

I hope the other teams don't start fouling JJ to take the ball out of our hands on offense. Right now, he's almost a shoo-in to miss most of them. I hope he or UC gets this figured out. He needs to bend his knees when releasing the ball. Why doesn't one of the coaches notice that and correct it?

(03-17-2014 01:13 PM)Marcus Wrote:  Harvard obviously scares me. It all comes down to which UC shows up? The one that can score or the one that cant? You just have no clue what you are going to get from these guys. They have been hideous at the foul line the last number of games. I'd love to see Justin Jackson's FT% over his last 25 attempts. It has to be below 20%. I think UC matches up decently with Michigan State as well. One thing that worries me is how the officials call the game. Will they let the game be physical or not? West Coast officials arent exactly known for letting the guys "play".

Actually, the remainder of the post pretty much backs up the notion that it is UC that scares you, not really Harvard. But, true, we need to get it going on offense.

But, I like what Mick said. We are what we are, and cannot sacrifice defense to improve offense.

(03-17-2014 05:51 PM)bearcat54 Wrote:  UC better worry about the first game and then get concerned about whatever is next. Harvard is capable of upsetting UC. They pretty much have 6 players scoring in double figures ( 6th is at 9.3 ppg). That probably hints of very good outside shooting. We know they'll be smart and have great fundamentals. That team worries me because of our lack of consistent offense. We could Crash and Burn if we aren't ready to play some tenacious defense and score and avoid silly turnovers. In the tourney, we aren't guaranteed to play MSU if we win. There's been lots of upsets over the years. A team has to stay focused and play hard. Not overlooking someone to get ready for the next game. Go Bearcats!!!!!!

Neither you or I can overlook anyone as we are not playing in the game. Absolutely if we don't play well Harvard is good enough to beat us, and anyone who wants to share thoughts on Harvard feel free as well (Some have), but I wanted to give my thoughts on how UC matches Michigan State. Players can't overlook teams, fans can certainly discuss possibilities.

CBS Evening News features Harvard as a team to be feared. CBS must have been in the seeding room with the hype already prepared!

I think we are on a mission and will bomb Harvard.

At first I was not thrilled with the draw however I actually like all the so called experts picking Harvard. Harvard is a very good team but they have not played a team like UC since December. I saw them play in person at the Pit against Vanderbilt in the NCAA Tournament 2 years ago and I watched them upset New Mexico last year. I also like that everyone is picking Michigan State to win the Championship after having one good week. My neighbors are MSU grads and they told me that they would much rather play Harvard than us. My neighbor said that he would rather play the other 5 seeds because they are not as physical and tough as UC. Harvard and Michigan State are receiving all the attention and I like that the Bearcats are the underdogs.

(03-17-2014 06:19 PM)jcm16 Wrote:  CBS Evening News features Harvard as a team to be feared. CBS must have been in the seeding room with the hype already prepared!

Brian Phillips ‏@runofplay Mar 16
Weird how all these highly paid men in suits are picking Harvard over Cincinnati.

(03-17-2014 05:52 PM)Ragpicker Wrote:  I'd like to see Big Dave get some time against Harvard. Their true big man has missed the entire season with a broken foot. 6'7" is as tall as they go now. And they are not a running team. A perfect game for a 7'1" Bearcat.

I don't think the NCAA tournament is the time to start experimenting. We need to stay with what's worked all year. Our lineup is twice as athletic as theirs. The game won't be won with new tactics- we need to exploit our strengths and execute.

(03-17-2014 06:19 PM)jcm16 Wrote:  CBS Evening News features Harvard as a team to be feared. CBS must have been in the seeding room with the hype already prepared!

Love it, keep it up. reminds of of Mizzou and FSU.

(03-17-2014 09:47 PM)InspectorHound Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 05:52 PM)Ragpicker Wrote:  I'd like to see Big Dave get some time against Harvard. Their true big man has missed the entire season with a broken foot. 6'7" is as tall as they go now. And they are not a running team. A perfect game for a 7'1" Bearcat.

I don't think the NCAA tournament is the time to start experimenting. We need to stay with what's worked all year. Our lineup is twice as athletic as theirs. The game won't be won with new tactics- we need to exploit our strengths and execute.

Besides, although Harvard does not run, they are supposedly an efficient 3-point shooting team. A team where everyone can shoot is a lot to ask for Dave to guard someone, probably smaller and quicker. But, maybe there will be scenarios where Mick goes to zone, and does put him in. Dave has definitely been productive when we've done that.

On ESPN this morning they had HArvard as the likeliest upset of the 2nd round games 36.2%.

(03-18-2014 07:06 AM)bctn8n Wrote:  On ESPN this morning they had HArvard as the likeliest upset of the 2nd round games 36.2%.

Its interesting to hear all the talking heads praise and praise and praise Harvard, call the upset and put all these numbers on it to support their cause. However, there are only one or two who actually look at Cincy in a way other than "They struggle to score". People seem to be ignoring the fact that we just dont allow teams to score on us or shoot well. We are a terrible matchup for a team like Harvard. Weve shown many times this year that we can hold an offensivly efficient team in check and to 20+ pts lower than their average. WE have trouble with teams that can really defend and lets be honest we know that this isnt the Crimson.

Just funny to me how they all focus on one facet of our team and not look at the whole which is a team that hasnt lost to a team like Harvard all season.

(03-18-2014 07:06 AM)bctn8n Wrote:  On ESPN this morning they had HArvard as the likeliest upset of the 2nd round games 36.2%.

So even after all the pro-Harvard hype, 63.8% are still picking the Bearcats.

With the way everyone is touting Harvard, if I were in Vegas I would lay down a nice chunk of change on the Bearcats. I would imagine we are favored by a lot fewer points than the Vegas oddsmakers think we should be.

Same goes for the Michigan State game on Saturday.

UC will win. The 12 seed that wins is never the one everyone thinks it will be.

Last I saw the Vegas odds makers had the Bearcats as a 3.5 point favorite.

Since it opened money has gone on Harvard and the line is down to cincy -2.5. Im gonna ride this out and see if it doesnt get closer to a pick em on game day and drop a good chunk on cincy.

I think part of the reason Harvard is a trendy upset pick is because their scoring defense is ranked 13th, and the Bearcats seem to struggle offensively.

Teams the 'Cats have lost to over the past month(ish) and their scoring defense rank (in other words, points allowed per game):
15. Louisville
20. SMU
32. UConn

FWIW - the 'Cats have beaten all of those teams, too, as well as NCCU (7) & Pitt (22). And don't forget part of Harvard's ranking is somewhat dependent on their SOS (212).

When it comes to defensive FG%, though, Harvard falls all the way to #47. A comparison of defensive FG%
5. SMU
10. UConn
17. Louisville

Finally, Harvard ranks 191 in defensive rebounding (which is better than the 'Cats current ranking, actually), but UC is 26th in offensive rebounding.

If the Bearcats don't turn the ball over, they should win this game. But it's March; crazier things have happened...

The reason Harvard's defensive stats are (relatively) good is because they've played half of their games against the TERRIBLE Ivy League. That's why Tommy Amaker can recruit a couple good players and rack up tourney appearances. This ain't 1940- people at Penn, Brown, Dartmouth, etc. don't give a **** about basketball.