(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
Hey, I'd take it over Mick's 6-10 and 1S16, 0 FF, 0 E8 lol.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
I'd take under-performance with those results if we were getting top 4 protected seeds every other year.
Well, I'm not sure. I guess 2 sweet sixteens in 20 years isn't very good when you make tourney all the time. Of coarse, we have won a lot of conf. champs. and tourney champs. but we don't play in the ACC, Big XII, Big 10 or SEC so you can take that with a grain of salt. Winning all those conf. thingy dingies hasn't helped much in preparing for NCAA tourney ( see last year as an example ), but rooting for UC is better than being the one of 10,000 X fans in this city. So, as long as MC is coach, it is what it has been for 13 years and I will have to live with it. Apathy has now set in, don't get to high or low during games, I now just watch or socialize at the Shoe, always wishing for better but never seems to happen. By the way, seems to be a few better BB players on football team than what sit on his bench.
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2019 09:23 AM by CincyBro.)
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
This. He's had some disappointments for sure, but he's also made some legit runs deep into the tournament and has had consistent success as well. I'm still not sure I've seen more fluke losses in the tournament than he's had. Losing Kenyon how and when he did, definite fluke. And the bank shot loss to WVU, only because Patterson got a finger on the ball, definite fluke. The UCLA and Iowa State 2nd round losses weren't quite as flukeish but they were brutal the way they ended as well.
Call me crazy, but I think Mick has shown he can build the foundation of an Elite Eight or a Final Four team. I still think the breakthrough is coming for him.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
This. He's had some disappointments for sure, but he's also made some legit runs deep into the tournament and has had consistent success as well. I'm still not sure I've seen more fluke losses in the tournament than he's had. Losing Kenyon how and when he did, definite fluke. And the bank shot loss to WVU, only because Patterson got a finger on the ball, definite fluke. The UCLA and Iowa State 2nd round losses weren't quite as flukeish but they were brutal the way they ended as well.
Losing starting guard Allen Jackson before Great Eight game with North Carolina might have cost us a second Final Four.
You don't double and triple count the Final Fours as Elite 8s and Sweet 16s. Huggs has had 2 FFs, 2 E8s, 5 S16s.
LOL, yeah, who's ever heard of fluke losses in the NCAA tournament!? Huggs also beat a dominant UK team that went like 4 for 35 from three. And the '92 team, of course, faced a 13, a 5, a 9, and a 6 seed to make the to the Final 4. He's not been entirely snakebit. But, given how you view Cronin's teams, it's hilarious that you see the Iowa St. and UCLA games as somehow flukes.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
This. He's had some disappointments for sure, but he's also made some legit runs deep into the tournament and has had consistent success as well. I'm still not sure I've seen more fluke losses in the tournament than he's had. Losing Kenyon how and when he did, definite fluke. And the bank shot loss to WVU, only because Patterson got a finger on the ball, definite fluke. The UCLA and Iowa State 2nd round losses weren't quite as flukeish but they were brutal the way they ended as well.
We got hosed in the ISU game...Burton had the rebound and was knocked over and called for travelling, which gave ISU the ball back and they scored which gave them the 1pt lead. We should have had the ball and a 1pt lead with what, under 30 seconds left and Burton going to the line for 2.
I think the regular season is the main key to success. Make the NCAA tournament and make it as a high seed, do so and eventually the NCAA tournament run will come.
Tournament runs require too much luck for them to be the defining factor in success. It's like a poker hand, you can do everything right and still lose when the wrong card comes up on the river. Look at Houston last year. Michigan needed a miracle shot at the end of the game to beat them and then went on to a final four. With 10 seconds left Houston had an 88.5% chance of winning (according to ESPN's live odds), they did everything right and ended up with a loss. That doesn't mean their whole season was a failure.
For Cincinnati, I define success as making the NCAA tournament and being in the top 25 at the end of the regular season (top 25 polls go crazy after the NCAA tournament, see Layola-Chicago last year) and being a protected seed in the NCAA tournament and ending the regular season in the top 15 every 2-3 years. Sending guys to the NBA every few years helps too. As long as we continue to do that, the NCAA tournament run will come.
I give Cronin a pass for a number of years because he has had to rebuild the entire program. I see a program that continues improving. Mick is getting recruits who fit his system better and doing well developing them. He may not be getting higher star players, but he is getting the guys he wants - athletes who he can develop into basketball players - and developing those players very well. Before 2016 Mick's highest win total was 27 wins. We have a good chance of tying/beating that total for the 3rd straight year and are likely to do so again next year.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
This. He's had some disappointments for sure, but he's also made some legit runs deep into the tournament and has had consistent success as well. I'm still not sure I've seen more fluke losses in the tournament than he's had. Losing Kenyon how and when he did, definite fluke. And the bank shot loss to WVU, only because Patterson got a finger on the ball, definite fluke. The UCLA and Iowa State 2nd round losses weren't quite as flukeish but they were brutal the way they ended as well.
We got hosed in the ISU game...Burton had the rebound and was knocked over and called for travelling, which gave ISU the ball back and they scored which gave them the 1pt lead. We should have had the ball and a 1pt lead with what, under 30 seconds left and Burton going to the line for 2.
The refs had just fouled out Kelvin Cato on a bad call right before. And while the traveling call was wack, Huggs just stood there frozen, and they gave up a damn layup on the ensuing out of bounds play. And then he had Flint take the last shot! It was a debacle that didn't have much to do with bad luck.
I would view this season as a success given what they lost and who came back this season however like it or not the spot light shines brightest on what happens in March and UC has not performed very well in March in a long time. Hopefully that changes but I think last season was our best chance at a long run.
(03-14-2019 02:26 PM)levydl Wrote: You don't double and triple count the Final Fours as Elite 8s and Sweet 16s. Huggs has had 2 FFs, 2 E8s, 5 S16s.
LOL, yeah, who's ever heard of fluke losses in the NCAA tournament!? Huggs also beat a dominant UK team that went like 4 for 35 from three. And the '92 team, of course, faced a 13, a 5, a 9, and a 6 seed to make the to the Final 4. He's not been entirely snakebit. But, given how you view Cronin's teams, it's hilarious that you see the Iowa St. and UCLA games as somehow flukes.
You can dissect things many ways to fit your agenda. One fact is the Memphis team we beat four times was very good and unrated because of our dominance over them. Heck they beat a top ten team Arkansas twice that season. No matter what the 1991 -92 and 1999 -00 are the greatest Bearcat teams of the modern era. That would be quite a game.
(This post was last modified: 03-14-2019 04:08 PM by cincybb51.)
(03-14-2019 02:26 PM)levydl Wrote: You don't double and triple count the Final Fours as Elite 8s and Sweet 16s. Huggs has had 2 FFs, 2 E8s, 5 S16s.
LOL, yeah, who's ever heard of fluke losses in the NCAA tournament!? Huggs also beat a dominant UK team that went like 4 for 35 from three. And the '92 team, of course, faced a 13, a 5, a 9, and a 6 seed to make the to the Final 4. He's not been entirely snakebit. But, given how you view Cronin's teams, it's hilarious that you see the Iowa St. and UCLA games as somehow flukes.
You can dissect things many ways to fit your agenda. One fact is the Memphis team we beat four times was very good and unrated because of our dominance over them. Heck they beat a top ten team Arkansas twice that season.
Memphis was definitely good. They were also a 6 seed in the Elite 8. It happens, and Huggs and the boys took advantage and ran them out of the gym. I'm not knocking them for it, I'm just saying that it wasn't all bad luck for Bob in the tournament.
(03-12-2019 08:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: Huggins 19-15, for the level of talent he has had is not really great. It's not garbage, but his should be SO much more. He has pee'd away a lot of good seedings, just being honest.
No doubt Bob has probably underperformed in the tournament, but still (2 final fours, 4 elite 8s, 9 sweet 16s) is not terrible.
This. He's had some disappointments for sure, but he's also made some legit runs deep into the tournament and has had consistent success as well. I'm still not sure I've seen more fluke losses in the tournament than he's had. Losing Kenyon how and when he did, definite fluke. And the bank shot loss to WVU, only because Patterson got a finger on the ball, definite fluke. The UCLA and Iowa State 2nd round losses weren't quite as flukeish but they were brutal the way they ended as well.
We got hosed in the ISU game...Burton had the rebound and was knocked over and called for travelling, which gave ISU the ball back and they scored which gave them the 1pt lead. We should have had the ball and a 1pt lead with what, under 30 seconds left and Burton going to the line for 2.
The refs had just fouled out Kelvin Cato on a bad call right before. And while the traveling call was wack, Huggs just stood there frozen, and they gave up a damn layup on the ensuing out of bounds play. And then he had Flint take the last shot! It was a debacle that didn't have much to do with bad luck.
yeah...Flint should NEVER have been the one with the last shot. You either give it to Burton from long range or hey, we are down 1, how about go to Danny in the paint?!?!?!?!?!? It was a really bad way to end.
(03-14-2019 02:09 PM)Bruce Monnin Wrote: Call me crazy, but I think Mick has shown he can build the foundation of an Elite Eight or a Final Four team. I still think the breakthrough is coming for him.
I agree. He has started to do a bit more on the offense and recruiting more offensive guys and I think the new arena will help, plus sending guys to the NBA will help. My gut says in the next 3 years we make a nice run.
(03-14-2019 02:09 PM)Bruce Monnin Wrote: Call me crazy, but I think Mick has shown he can build the foundation of an Elite Eight or a Final Four team. I still think the breakthrough is coming for him.
(03-14-2019 02:09 PM)Bruce Monnin Wrote: Call me crazy, but I think Mick has shown he can build the foundation of an Elite Eight or a Final Four team. I still think the breakthrough is coming for him.
Even if I agreed with your premise, the problem is that he can "build the foundation" all he wants, but "foundations" are wasted if you never get past the second story...
The most damning thing you can say about a coach or a program is that they had "potential." Potential means that you left something unused on the shelf.
If Mick is "building foundations" for "Elite Eight or Final Four" teams but we aren't getting out of the first or second rounds, then that's pure potential.
/
How do you define success?
