(03-17-2017 08:18 AM)Banter Wrote: The fact of the matter is that Xavier continues to win games it should, while we exit the tournament in the first or second round every year.
Win in March and our perception will change. Xavier wins when it matters.
I agree. Reality is, we've made it past the opening weekend twice in the last 20 years (15 tourney appearances). Xavier has made it 6 times in 16 attempts during the same time frame. You've got to have a good amount of luck to advance in March and we've gotten the short end of the stick - whether it be Kenyon breaking his leg, half court shots, drunks going in .01 seconds late, etc. Oh well. Sports, f'in a.
(This post was last modified: 03-17-2017 08:39 AM by wanes.)
(03-17-2017 08:18 AM)Banter Wrote: The fact of the matter is that Xavier continues to win games it should, while we exit the tournament in the first or second round every year.
Win in March and our perception will change. Xavier wins when it matters.
I agree. Reality is, we've made it past the opening weekend twice in the last 20 years (15 tourney appearances). Xavier has made it 6 times in 16 attempts during the same time frame. You've got to have a good amount of luck to advance in March and we've gotten the short end of the stick - whether it be Kenyon breaking his leg, half court shots, drunks going in .01 seconds late, etc. Oh well. Sports, f'in a.
The only reason people continue to focus on this kind of thing is the fact we can't advance. If we made the sweet 16 2 or 3 times in the past 10 years then this would be just a fun little joke. Right now it just looks like jealousy.
(03-16-2017 10:42 PM)Recluse1 Wrote: Do we really need a separate thread for this? Kind of a lame topic in and of itself.
Did we really need your lame post. I never understood the people who cry about a thread not be interesting to them. How hard is it to simply not click it. You knew it was going to be about Xavier by looking at the title.
Don't be so presumptuous. My issue with it is it could have easily stayed in the Tournament thread it started in. It's hardly worthy of it's own thread, as evidenced by the fact that you and I have already taken it off-topic, with this back and forth right here.
On the first page of bearcat banter there are threads that haven't been posted to in a week. This thread isnt exactly crowding out a bunch of other hot topics. And it's ironic that you were the one who took the thread off topic to begin with then used that to validate your opinion that this wasn't worthy of a separate thread.
No, what's ironic, is you're saying this while taking the thread further into weeds; as I never once accused it of crowding other threads out of anything.
So you're just objecting to the fact that this thread fits neatly into the other tournament thread and having it broken out separately offends your sensibilities? Odd objection
(03-17-2017 07:58 AM)Eastside_J Wrote: You are right - its not luck at all. They have been given A LOT of sweetheart seedings in the tournament and faced a lot of lousy absurdly overseeded opponnents - this year is a perfect example.
Xavier an 11 seed goes to Orlando (where to my knowledge they have been placed more than anyone else.) They play Maryland a 6 seed.
Xavier is 31st in the Sagarin ratings, Xavier is 35th in Kenpom - Maryland is 44th. in the Kenpom they are 48th. By subjective measure, forget being a 6 seed, they probably shouldn't have made the tournament.
Think about it - Xavier an 11 seed got a chance to play a team that every objective measurement tool said they should beat and arguably should not have made the tournament.
That is not luck - that is being dealt from the bottom of the deck.
I do believe Xavier has had more than their fair share of good draws but some years they just have been really good too.
I think people in Cincinnati thinks that the NCAA tournament is all about getting lucky and playing lower seeded teams. This probably comes from UC's 1992 Final Four run where the bracket fell apart and the fact Huggins never beat a higher seeded team at UC. Couple that with the times Xavier and UC have played double digit seeds to advance to Sweet 16 and start to believe that advancing in the tournament is all about playing easy games.
X is just a piece of evidence that goes to my WAG that there are certain programs that for whatever reason have relationships or reputations within the committee room that affords them a more comfortable landing each year. The inverse for other teams is also true.
When X gets a lower seed, its almost as if the committee is sloberingly apologetic about it and gives them a vastly overseeded opponent. Its like there is a narrative there looking to be filled.
UC got shafted for no good reason. X got a sweetheart pod, also for no good reason.
(This post was last modified: 03-17-2017 09:40 AM by rath v2.0.)
How hard is this to figure out? If you are a good team/program, you beat who is on the court in front of you and you move on. In the past 10 years, XU has done that more than UC. The rest is just excuses and hyperbole.
(03-17-2017 04:28 AM)jarr Wrote: Did we really need your lame post. I never understood the people who cry about a thread not be interesting to them. How hard is it to simply not click it. You knew it was going to be about Xavier by looking at the title.
Don't be so presumptuous. My issue with it is it could have easily stayed in the Tournament thread it started in. It's hardly worthy of it's own thread, as evidenced by the fact that you and I have already taken it off-topic, with this back and forth right here.
On the first page of bearcat banter there are threads that haven't been posted to in a week. This thread isnt exactly crowding out a bunch of other hot topics. And it's ironic that you were the one who took the thread off topic to begin with then used that to validate your opinion that this wasn't worthy of a separate thread.
No, what's ironic, is you're saying this while taking the thread further into weeds; as I never once accused it of crowding other threads out of anything.
So you're just objecting to the fact that this thread fits neatly into the other tournament thread and having it broken out separately offends your sensibilities? Odd objection
It's not a spatial thing, so much as a "Why is this even a thing" ...thing. To summarize;
(This post was last modified: 03-17-2017 10:39 AM by Recluse1.)
(03-17-2017 08:18 AM)Banter Wrote: The fact of the matter is that Xavier continues to win games it should, while we exit the tournament in the first or second round every year.
Win in March and our perception will change. Xavier wins when it matters.
Perception shouldn't matter an iota. Each roll of the dice is independent of the last.
Based on resume, XU should have been sent to Siberia to play SMU, not a big 10 t am that was overseesed several spots...and they should not get the benefit of a cream puff 3 seed versus one that can legitimately challenge for the final 4.
We're talking about X and UC's first round opponent, Maryland and K-State played to a one point game earlier in the year. Big Ten sucks, that is the only advantage X has over us in this draw. If we had not laid an egg on Sunday then maybe we would be in Tulsa playing USC.
I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
Blueitt has been a monster every time I watch Xavier. 29 points against tonight. Mack getting the most out of a defensively limited team...just gimmicking the hell out FSU. A well coach, skilled offense will expose them, but they got a great draw for avoiding their biggest liability. Considering they played like dog crap for a month this has been really impressive from them.
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
How is Fla. St. a very weak 3 seed, they are higher in rpi and kenpom than UCLA. List of tourney teams Fla.St. has beaten include but not limited too---Iona, Minn., Fla., W.F., Va., Va. Tech, Duke, N.D., UL, Miami. UCLA has five wins against tourney teams, total. For what its worth, UC only has four.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2017 07:28 PM by CincyBro.)
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
How is Fla. St. a very weak 3 seed. they are higher in rpi and kenpom than UCLA. List of tourney teams Fla.St. has beaten include but not limited too---Iona, Minn., Fla., W.F., Va., Va. Tech, Duke, N.D., UL, Miami. UCLA has five wins against tourney teams.
I agree with this... thought I will say I think FSU was a very desirable 3 seed to draw. Mack coached circles around Hamilton. They don't run good offense and pretty much try to out talent you. They are very inconsistent as a result. X took care of business against a good team. Credit to them.
I think a team that runs good offense with skilled offensive players will expose X on defense. X is pretty bad on that end and they Mack has resorted to some gimmick zones (none of which are particularly good zones). FSU was a team it could work on. I think St Marys for example would expose them on that end. That said Blueitt can keep X in games. He has been special.
Whether or not FSU was a weak 3 is irrelevant. A weak 3 is still a quality team that X just blew out in their home state. As much as it hurts nothing but props for X tonight.
As far as being gimmicky and a well coached team exposing that I kind of agree but I think Sean Miller is a talent accumulator more than a great coach. If St Mary's wins X would have a talent advantage and wouldn't have to play gimmicky
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
How is Fla. St. a weak 3 seed. they are higher in rpi and kenpom than UCLA. List of tourney teams Fla.st. has beaten include but not limited too---Iona, Minn., Fla., W.F., Va., Va. Tech, Duke, N.D., UL, Miami. UCLA has five wins against tourney teams.
Most of FSU's ACC wins were at home. They didn't do as well on the road.
Watching FSU play I can't figure out they beat any of the top ACC teams. They are totally undisciplined on D and their offense is dunks or FTs.
They looked bad but won against FL Gulf Coast and sucked versus XU.
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
How is Fla. St. a very weak 3 seed. they are higher in rpi and kenpom than UCLA. List of tourney teams Fla.St. has beaten include but not limited too---Iona, Minn., Fla., W.F., Va., Va. Tech, Duke, N.D., UL, Miami. UCLA has five wins against tourney teams.
I agree with this... thought I will say I think FSU was a very desirable 3 seed to draw. Mack coached circles around Hamilton. They don't run good offense and pretty much try to out talent you. They are very inconsistent as a result. X took care of business against a good team. Credit to them. Gimmick zone, sounds familiar.
I think a team that runs good offense with skilled offensive players will expose X on defense. X is pretty bad on that end and they Mack has resorted to some gimmick zones (none of which are particularly good zones). FSU was a team it could work on. I think St Marys for example would expose them on that end. That said Blueitt can keep X in games. He has been special.
You make shots and it really makes other aspects of the game easier. If UC is going to win tomorrow night it will look exactly like this game. Bluett is playing like a 1st round pick ( probably won't be ) but you need that to advance. Gimmick zone, sounds familiar.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2017 07:37 PM by CincyBro.)
(03-18-2017 06:55 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: I hate XU but hats off to them....I had them losing in the first round and here they are smacking down the 3 seed. Nothing cheap about that, FSU is a good team.
There are plenty of folks who said before the tournament that FSU was a very weak 3 seed. No one's saying that about UCLA. We got a tough draw and X got a great draw (again). Maybe its just luck or maybe Rath is right or maybe the universe is conspiring against us.
How is Fla. St. a very weak 3 seed, they are higher in rpi and kenpom than UCLA. List of tourney teams Fla.St. has beaten include but not limited too---Iona, Minn., Fla., W.F., Va., Va. Tech, Duke, N.D., UL, Miami. UCLA has five wins against tourney teams, total. For what its worth, UC only has four.
Florida State is 25 on kenpom (I know, I'm drinking). UCLA 18, UC 19. In fact Florida State is only 4 spots higher than Kansas State.
/
Lucky X. Really?
