(03-24-2017 09:34 AM)bearcatmill Wrote:  I have been on hiatus due to work and family. However, I felt the need to offer some perspective to Lance "the sacred cow of sports talk" comments.

Lance, as well as other members of the local media, bring up this topic whenever Norwood U has some success beyond UC. The questions and comments are not new. My personal opinion is Lance's "sources" are either himself, Norwood U staff members, other Cincy media types or a combination of the aforementioned.

Stability: One could argue UC is more stable program. Since the 1940's only one coach has left UC for supposed greener pastures - Gale Catlett. (He left due to a rift between him and President Winkler. Also, the job at his alma mater opened up.) Norwood U has been consistently a revolving door. One should give them credit for not whiffing on hires though. Mick's success, while not at an elite level, has been consistent as well. My issue with this part of the conversation is UC Fball was getting killed by the local media as being unstable and losing coaches, even though we were hiring the right candidate, until Tubbs. How can one give a pass to Norwood U, while lambasting UC in the same scenario?

Facilities: Shoemaker was for years the better facility. I do agree the accelerated arms race in college athletics made the facility obsolete. Still the facility is not a "high school gym" as Lance characterized the facility in another related post. Lance discounts Shoemaker today, which is fine. However, he gives cursory treatment to the renovation. After the renovation Shoemaker will once again be the crown jewel for basketball in the Cincinnati area.

Conference: Everyone know the AAC is not strong, top to bottom in basketball. Realignment was a cruel situation for UC. My issue is the tone of this topic. When Norwood U was in the MCC, A10, and now a watered down BE, the media never ripped their conferences. At least not to the extent they go out of their way to disparage UC's situation. I remember the local media building up Richmond and now DePaul as great opponents for Norwood U.

Scheduling: "Which school was more prepared for the tournament, as a result?" This is a matter of perspective.
When UC was in the Old BE, the narrative was UC is in too tough of a conference. They are too beat up for March. I do believe UC is trying for better matchups. Issue is you cannot force a team to play you, ie Michigan.

Recruiting: Shoe on the other foot. UC was killed locally for players Norwood U has on their roster now. Maybe it's their ability, as a private institution, to cover up most transgressions. Their institution is more relaxed as far as player standards go. How about the booster with the car dealership in Indiana? An adjunct faculty member, whose contract was not renewed, when they would not play ball?

Football: The local media constantly claims football is an anchor on the institution. The only place in the country where you hear these comments. Football drive the bus at all major Universities. You have the opportunity to make more money for the entire athletic department through football. Very few Universities, with both sports, have basketball out earning football. Lance, UC did not put "all their eggs in one basket" regarding football. UC is renovating both Nippert and Shoemaker. I guess, since Nippert came first, this must mean something? I know for a fact Norwood U has recently underfunded its other sports and put all their eggs in one basket with basketball. So far, this seems to have worked out for them. You can have high level winning football and basketball.

Some circles in Cincinnati favor Norwood U. This is especially apparent in the media. When you consistently hear praise and positive pub for one institution over another, you take notice. Football is not a drain on UC. The negative comments lead me to believe football has recently been at a higher level than basketball so this is a problem. UC Football is a competitor to the Bungles, so this is a problem. When Norwood U was praised for their lesser situation over the years and now UC is being beaten over the head, one wonders. I have a feeling Lance and PDoc are friends with Mick, support Norwood U or a combination of both.

Thoughtful and insightful, thanks. Bolded, I have heard this as well. And that perhaps it extends beyond athletics. They're not really a "prestige private" institution but their price point on tuition is way up there. To attract undergraduates they are likely subsidizing with a lot of scholarship dollars in an effort to maintain enrollment. I believe their endowment may be the smallest of all the new Big East schools. Look no further than St. Joseph's University of Indiana to see the potential consequences when small, private universities are stretched financially.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local...story.html

I'm not conflating football with basketball. But Coach Fickell's "can do" attitude, energy and passion have provided a breath of fresh air in UC Athletics. Ultimately, he'll be judged on results as all coaches are. But I've never heard him suggest he won't at least go after the best of the best. And most would agree, UC football is a tougher sell in recruiting against the P5 than basketball should be.

XU underfunding other sports? That would fool me. They recently won the BE in baseball (making the Regionals), their swimming team has won the BE the past three years and their women's basketball has been very good for a long time.

(03-24-2017 10:10 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  XU underfunding other sports? That would fool me. They recently won the BE in baseball (making the Regionals), their swimming team has won the BE the past three years and their women's basketball has been very good for a long time.

Yea. X's athletic department is very impressive. They do a great job over there.

UC basketball is doing a very good job and had an amazing season. Our problem is that Xavier, Kentucky, Louisville, and Ohio State occupy the same neighborhood and most likely someone from that is going to have more wins than UC, a better tournament run, or something else that makes us feel jealous. It hard being a fan in a city where your best is almost never good enough. Don't even get me started on football where UC is seemingly compared to Ohio State.

For the most part UC's players have stayed out of trouble and have won at a lot of games in basketball and football over the last decade. As long as they continue to win, play in the post season, and be positive representatives of my alma mater I will be proud to wear the Red & Black every day.

(03-24-2017 09:03 AM)jarr Wrote:  Mick needs to get away from the underdog mentality. We need to go back to having swagger, and wanting to stomp teams in our way.

Agreed, 1000%. When a coach whines about not being able to get top talent and that everyone is out to get him, why would a top player want to play for him? I would feel insulted if someone recruited me while telling the world that he doesn't waste time with the best players, just the ones he thinks he has a chance with.

What would you expect if a high school kid loudly proclaimed he doesn't waste his time with the prettiest girls, just the ones he thinks he can score with, and then asked some girl to prom? He would get denied, possibly slapped, and laughed at by the whole school. You can't take someone seriously who is that short-sighted and unwilling to play the game.

(03-24-2017 10:39 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:03 AM)jarr Wrote:  Mick needs to get away from the underdog mentality. We need to go back to having swagger, and wanting to stomp teams in our way.

Agreed, 1000%. When a coach whines about not being able to get top talent and that everyone is out to get him, why would a top player want to play for him? I would feel insulted if someone recruited me while telling the world that he doesn't waste time with the best players, just the ones he thinks he has a chance with.

What would you expect if a high school kid loudly proclaimed he doesn't waste his time with the prettiest girls, just the ones he thinks he can score with, and then asked some girl to prom? He would get denied, possibly slapped, and laughed at by the whole school. You can't take someone seriously who is that short-sighted and unwilling to play the game.

agree...this aint the Big East

No reason we cant be the Alpha Dog and have swagger in this mid major conf

(03-24-2017 09:11 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:  Its best not to feed the stupidity.

X was a bubble team until the very end of the season that had an impressive win last night against the first really good team they played in the tournament. The previous two were lousy and mediocre.

They have still yet to make a single final four in the history of the program, let alone a NC game or NC. At some point, maybe they will. Maybe even this year.

But if the tournament is as people like Lance and X most fans would say "is all that matters". OK, fine than X is just one of the raft of teams that has never in the history of the program, gotten good enough to accomplish a final four or NC season.

If quality of season doesn't matter and making it to the last weekend of the tournament is everything, than I am pretty sure "close doesn't count".

"Final five" - Whoop de effing do.

Yes, let's not feed the stupidity. I at least love how creative you're having to become to define success on such narrow and subjective terms.

Let's see if I have this straight. NCAA Tourney wins don't matter ... unless they're against teams we deem good, regardless of the Committee or other ranking systems ... even if those wins in the two rounds were by an average of 18 points.

Final Fours are the only thing that matter ... even though ours was 25 years ago, and then when my grandparents were barely alive.

Elite Eights? They matter zero. In fact, no wins prior to the Final Four should get any credit whatsoever--which is a great criterion because our last Elite Eight was over 20 years ago (vs. 3) and we've had one Sweet Sixteen (vs. 7) in the past 15 years.

Hell, if you're not going to make a Final Four, why even bother going, or winning at all?

Oh, and if you make a Final Four, that's the one time it's okay to beat mediocre teams--let's say a 13-seed, a 5-seed, a 9-seed, and a 6-seed. But I'm sure those teams were all worthy of 1- or 2-seeds, whereas X's NCAA 6-seed, 3-seed and 2-seed opponents were all grossly overseeded.

Oh, and don't forget that UCLA should have been seeded much, much higher than 3-seed FSU despite the Committee, the best ranking systems and their resume suggesting otherwise.

I'm sure I've forgotten some of the other criteria required to narrow the definition of "success." And I'm sure there's more narrowing to come, if necessary.

Look, is it fair to say X barely made the Tourney this season? Yep. It's been a rough season with Myles' suspension, our most talented player out for the back half of the season--who was already playing with one shoulder before that injury (which you guys saw in person), and our next best player hurt and/or hobbled for much of the back third of the season. X could've mailed it in and said the adversity was too great and we're not good enough to beat good teams.

I can say this. I'm glad they didn't. And while I loved last season, where X truly played on an elite level--spending much of the season in the Top 10 and breaking the Top 5--until the last 6 minutes in the 2nd round of the NCAA Tourney. I like this season even more--especially given what they where faced with.

There are a ton of smart people on this board. One of your fans here (BearcatHawkeye) is my favorite poster on any board. There are many other balanced opinions as well. Other are, let's just say, amusing/entertaining.

(03-24-2017 10:48 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 10:39 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:03 AM)jarr Wrote:  Mick needs to get away from the underdog mentality. We need to go back to having swagger, and wanting to stomp teams in our way.

Agreed, 1000%. When a coach whines about not being able to get top talent and that everyone is out to get him, why would a top player want to play for him? I would feel insulted if someone recruited me while telling the world that he doesn't waste time with the best players, just the ones he thinks he has a chance with.

What would you expect if a high school kid loudly proclaimed he doesn't waste his time with the prettiest girls, just the ones he thinks he can score with, and then asked some girl to prom? He would get denied, possibly slapped, and laughed at by the whole school. You can't take someone seriously who is that short-sighted and unwilling to play the game.

agree...this aint the Big East

No reason we cant be the Alpha Dog and have swagger in this mid major conf

These are examples of smart takes. Even if you take X out of the equation during the A-10 days, look at Butler and the Zags.

Even if UC doesn't get out of the AAC any time soon, they have the facilities, draw and coaching/recruiting to kill it.

(03-24-2017 11:10 AM)Xpectations Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:11 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:  Its best not to feed the stupidity.

X was a bubble team until the very end of the season that had an impressive win last night against the first really good team they played in the tournament. The previous two were lousy and mediocre.

They have still yet to make a single final four in the history of the program, let alone a NC game or NC. At some point, maybe they will. Maybe even this year.

But if the tournament is as people like Lance and X most fans would say "is all that matters". OK, fine than X is just one of the raft of teams that has never in the history of the program, gotten good enough to accomplish a final four or NC season.

If quality of season doesn't matter and making it to the last weekend of the tournament is everything, than I am pretty sure "close doesn't count".

"Final five" - Whoop de effing do.

Yes, let's not feed the stupidity. I at least love how creative you're having to become to define success on such narrow and subjective terms.

Let's see if I have this straight. NCAA Tourney wins don't matter ... unless they're against teams we deem good, regardless of the Committee or other ranking systems ... even if those wins in the two rounds were by an average of 18 points.

Final Fours are the only thing that matter ... even though ours was 25 years ago, and then when my grandparents were barely alive.

Elite Eights? They matter zero. In fact, no wins prior to the Final Four should get any credit whatsoever--which is a great criterion because our last Elite Eight was over 20 years ago (vs. 3) and we've had one Sweet Sixteen (vs. 7) in the past 15 years.

Hell, if you're not going to make a Final Four, why even bother going, or winning at all?

Oh, and if you make a Final Four, that's the one time it's okay to beat mediocre teams--let's say a 13-seed, a 5-seed, a 9-seed, and a 6-seed. But I'm sure those teams were all worthy of 1- or 2-seeds, whereas X's NCAA 6-seed, 3-seed and 2-seed opponents were all grossly overseeded.

Oh, and don't forget that UCLA should have been seeded much, much higher than 3-seed FSU despite the Committee, the best ranking systems and their resume suggesting otherwise.

I'm sure I've forgotten some of the other criteria required to narrow the definition of "success." And I'm sure there's more narrowing to come, if necessary.

Look, is it fair to say X barely made the Tourney this season? Yep. It's been a rough season with Myles' suspension, our most talented player out for the back half of the season--who was already playing with one shoulder before that injury (which you guys saw in person), and our next best player hurt and/or hobbled for much of the back third of the season. X could've mailed it in and said the adversity was too great and we're not good enough to beat good teams.

I can say this. I'm glad they didn't. And while I loved last season, where X truly played on an elite level--spending much of the season in the Top 10 and breaking the Top 5--until the last 6 minutes in the 2nd round of the NCAA Tourney. I like this season even more--especially given what they where faced with.

There are a ton of smart people on this board. One of your fans here (BearcatHawkeye) is my favorite poster on any board. There are many other balanced opinions as well. Other are, let's just say, amusing/entertaining.

Unfortunately the X fan is making the most sense to me in this thread.

Thanks for posting the entire article so I didn't have to click on it. You would have thought UC pulled and IU or OSU and missed the tourney.

BTW X has had lots and lots of talent, NBA talent more than UC, when they were in that rinky dink conference and then the A10 later on. I remember that Sweet 16 team they had in 1990 that beat a loaded Georgetown team, GTown had Alonzo Mourning and Mutumbo.
X was loaded that year, Tyrone Hill, Derek Strong, Davenport, Aaron Williams, Jamie Gladden, Jamal Walker.

(03-24-2017 11:14 AM)Xpectations Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 10:48 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 10:39 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:03 AM)jarr Wrote:  Mick needs to get away from the underdog mentality. We need to go back to having swagger, and wanting to stomp teams in our way.

Agreed, 1000%. When a coach whines about not being able to get top talent and that everyone is out to get him, why would a top player want to play for him? I would feel insulted if someone recruited me while telling the world that he doesn't waste time with the best players, just the ones he thinks he has a chance with.

What would you expect if a high school kid loudly proclaimed he doesn't waste his time with the prettiest girls, just the ones he thinks he can score with, and then asked some girl to prom? He would get denied, possibly slapped, and laughed at by the whole school. You can't take someone seriously who is that short-sighted and unwilling to play the game.

agree...this aint the Big East

No reason we cant be the Alpha Dog and have swagger in this mid major conf

These are examples of smart takes. Even if you take X out of the equation during the A-10 days, look at Butler and the Zags.

Even if UC doesn't get out of the AAC any time soon, they have the facilities, draw and coaching/recruiting to kill it.

Which is why I was happy with the 30 wins this season. To me this was the first season in a style of play change that will pay off down the road.

Exactly, Cronin needs to stop crying in the media and perpetuating the underdog mentality. You heard guys like Gary Clark and Troy Caupain talking about how UC embraces the role of the underdog whenever they play a team of similar or better talent. Maybe if Cronin would instead talk up the talent then you would see Gary Clark dominate on a consistent basis. It's almost the same bull**** as downplaying the shootout every year and then this year saying March performance doesn't define success. Those things matter greatly to fans, so maybe stop being a sound bite and coach up your players. I mean we got to March and Scott, Brooks, Moore, etc. were completely worthless, yet Mack is getting quality minutes out of Sean O'Mara...

Honestly, if next year's squad (which is loaded) doesn't make a run then I don't even know what to say.... Get it done, Mick.

The thing that annoys me about Lance (and Doc recently) is their need to dismiss the accomplishments of the Huggins era to defend Mick Cronin. I wrote a very long winded response to this BS.

My Response to Local Media Anti-Huggs Crusade
(AKA Why You Can Support Mick AND Appreciate the Huggs Years)

The UC fans have moved on but the local media hasn’t. Every year at some time or another it seems the local media needs to explain why Huggins didn’t actually have great years (as if we all weren’t around) and why that means the Bearcat fans should support Mick. To most fans, this is not an either or scenario. The smart fans get that program is in a different situation and are evaluating Mick’s performance mostly independent of what was achieved under Huggins. We want Mick to get the program to that level again and even beyond, but we are not grading Mick against Huggins. My support of Mick Cronin and his Bearcat program is not dependent on tearing down the accomplishments of the Huggins era. I know many Bearcat fans that feel this way.

The media using Huggs’ tournament losses to justify why UC should stick with Mick Cronin is idiotic because it misses what makes Mick the right guy for Cincinnati. He’s not right because he can lose in the second round too…he’s right because of the stability he brought the program and the direction he is moving the program. To be perfectly frank to date Mick hasn’t accomplished anything near what Huggins accomplished at UC, but that doesn’t mean he won’t or cannot. The comparison with what Huggins accomplished to what Mick has so far is idiotic because Huggs is so far ahead by those measures, but those measures fail to appreciate the situations and context.

Here’s how I would rank every Bearcat season by accomplishments of the team since Huggins came to UC:

The Great Seasons:
1992- Final Four, Regular Season Champion, Conference Tournament Champion, Four Seed in the Tournament.
2000- Ranked Number 1 most the season, Undefeated Regular Season Conference Champions, 1st in the RPI, 10-2 against the RPI top 50, 19-3 against the RPI top 100… just a dominating season. 2 seed in the tournament
1993- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed in the tournament
1996- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Seasons Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed,
2002- Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 1 seed, RPI #3, 8-2 v. RPI top 50, 17-3 v. RPI top 100. #2 kenpom adjusted efficiency (first year he kept that stat)

The Very Good Seasons:
1999- Only 6 losses, Regular season champions, 3 seed in the tournament, won great Alaskan Shootout over Historically great Duke team. Made round of 32. 8-3 vs. RPI top 50, 12-4 over top 100.
2012- Clearly Mick’s best overall season despite a disappointing start. 4th in a loaded Big East, Conference tournament finals, sweet 16. 8-6 v. RPI top 50, 11-8 vs. top 100. Only 31 kenpom but they were a different team once they went small.
1998- Regular Season and Tournament Conference Champions, 2 seed in tournament. 9th in Final AP Poll.
1997- Preseason number 1, Regular Season Conference Champions, 3 seed in tournament. Final AP Rank of 10. Disappointing overall season, but still a really good season.
2014- Tied for regular season conference title with defending champs ahead of eventual champs, 5 seed in tournament, 6-6 v. RPI top 50, 10-7 v. RPI top 100, tourney results disappointing, but that team ahead a really good year. Only 27 in kenpom, but top 10 in adjusted defense.
2017- 16-2 conference record, 6 seed, 3-4 RPI top 50, 6-5 v. top 100, no bad losses, conference tournament finals, 2nd round NCAA tournament. 22 kenpom. Top 15 in Polls on multiple occasions.
2004- Regular Season and Tournament Champions, 4 seed in tournament, 7-6 v. RPI top 50, 12-6 v. top 100, no bad losses. 17 in kenpom. Maybe should be higher but hard to get 2nd round dismantling by Illinois out of head.

The Good Seasons:
2001- Regular Season Conference Champion, Sweet 16, 5 seed in tournament, 2-4 Vs. RPI top 50, 9-5 vs. RPI top 100. 4 losses outside RPI top 100. Nice break in tournament, but not a great overall season.
2011- 6th in loaded Big East, 2nd round of NCAA tournament, team that put UC back in the NCAAs, 21st in kenpom. 7-9 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. RPI top 100, no bad losses.
2005- 2nd round NCAA tournament, 4-5 vs. RPI top 50, 9-6 v. top 100. 7 seed in NCAA tournament. 19 kenpom.
2015- Round of 32, 6-4 v. RPI top 50, 9-8 v. top 100. Only 43 kenpom. 8 seed.
2016- First round exit, 5-5 v. top 50, only 7-10. 32 kenpom. 9 seed. Team seemed close, but as we know lost a ton of close games.
2013- First Round Exit, 5-10 vs. top 50, 9-12 v. top 100. 40 kenpom, 10 seed.
1995- Conference Tournament Champion, 7 seed, 2nd round exit.
1994- Conference tournament champions, First round exit, 8 seed. 25 in final AP poll.
2006 (AK’s year)- NIT quarterfinals (lost when players suspended), 4-8 vs. RPI top 50, 11-11 v. top 100, 44 kenpom.
2003- First Round Exit, only 17 wins (against 12 losses), 3-6 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. top 100, 36 kenpom

OK Seasons:
2010- NIT second round, 3-11 RPI top 50, 8-16 RPI top 100, kenpom 68, great start, team not quite ready.
1991- NIT, 18 wins, 10.62 Strength of Record According to Sports Reference
1990- Huggs first year, NIT, 20 wins, 7.19 SOR According to Sports Reference.
2009- 1-9 v. RPI top 50, 7-12 v. RPI top 100. 86 kenpom

The Rebuild-
2008
2007

Of note I would rank 5 Huggs seasons as great. Mick has yet to break through but I am optimistic he does next season. All of Mick’s seasons since he got back to the tournament have been good and very good. Like Huggins he’s consistently kept UC in position to make the tournament and has avoided real down years. Unlike Huggins he has yet to break through for those next level quite season. My hope is that is coming and ultimately would love to see him achieve even beyond where Huggins had the program.

Mick Cronin and Bob Huggins inherited two different programs in two different situations in two different times with many different sets of obstacles. The decimation of the program that took place before Mick arrived has been well documented and I do not know a single Bearcat fan that doesn’t appreciate the job Mick did resurrecting the program from the ashes, back to the NIT in year 4 and the NCAA in year 5…where UC has been each of the last 7 years. He brought stability to the program, made it nationally relevant again and brought the kind of sustained, consistent success few other programs have. I believe UC is one of 8 programs to make the NCAA tournament the last 7 seasons. That means something.

Most of those who criticize Mick do so because they believe this program needs to get to the next level. I tend to agree with those people that this cannot be it. While UC has been consistently good to very good under Mick, he has not had that breakthrough great season. I think it is coming next year for many reasons and believe he will start delivering those type of seasons on a semi-regular basis, but that isn’t an unfair or unreasonable expectation.

Why hasn’t that season come yet? Well at least in the first few years Cronin was severely handicapped by the programs decimation. However, we are long past that now. Mick just completed year 11 on the Bearcat bench. That’s a long time. That is no longer an acceptable excuse for why we cannot break through. However, I would argue there are reasons to this point Mick has not quite made the jump from strong, consistent program, to one capable of being a contender from time to time. Whether it was facility issues, conference instability or a couple missed recruiting classes after SKs class, UC just hasn’t quite gotten over the hump we all want to seem them get to.

However, this has been slowly changing. The 2015-2016 showed promise despite losing a ton of heartbreakers. The underclassman were clearly players. The team continued with UC’s trademark defense but began to show much improved offense. That trend continued this season as UC hung around as a borderline top 20 type team by most metrics all season. They were better in conference, had better out of conference wins, a better offense, a similar defense and advanced further in the tournament. They finished 22 in kenpom efficiency and earned the 22nd spot on the committee’s bracket. They were good, but not good enough to avoid a tough second round matchup and went home.

That 22 was 10 spots higher than the prior season and similar improvement next season would finally make UC a legit final four contender and likely earn them a top 4 protected seed. That would be a big step for the program and one I am confident Mick Cronin will make. The hardest thing for fans to appreciate is consistent success at the same level. Fans always want more.

Mick’s achievement of sustained success is probably undervalued by many, but it ultimately cannot be the peak for UC basketball and I have plenty of confidence based on recent history that it will not be. I firmly believe Mick Cronin is the right guy to lead this Bearcat program forward and believe next year’s team will be well positioned for a tournament run. In a one game and out tournament things can happen, the key is putting together great teams that are real contenders… eventually you will break through. Next year could very like be that first great Mick team and I am happy the administration has had the confidence to stick with him as we move towards making that break through and the clear appreciation for what he has already done.


http://bearcatmark.blogspot.com/2017/03/...huggs.html

(03-24-2017 11:30 AM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 11:10 AM)Xpectations Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:11 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:  Its best not to feed the stupidity.

X was a bubble team until the very end of the season that had an impressive win last night against the first really good team they played in the tournament. The previous two were lousy and mediocre.

They have still yet to make a single final four in the history of the program, let alone a NC game or NC. At some point, maybe they will. Maybe even this year.

But if the tournament is as people like Lance and X most fans would say "is all that matters". OK, fine than X is just one of the raft of teams that has never in the history of the program, gotten good enough to accomplish a final four or NC season.

If quality of season doesn't matter and making it to the last weekend of the tournament is everything, than I am pretty sure "close doesn't count".

"Final five" - Whoop de effing do.

Yes, let's not feed the stupidity. I at least love how creative you're having to become to define success on such narrow and subjective terms.

Let's see if I have this straight. NCAA Tourney wins don't matter ... unless they're against teams we deem good, regardless of the Committee or other ranking systems ... even if those wins in the two rounds were by an average of 18 points.

Final Fours are the only thing that matter ... even though ours was 25 years ago, and then when my grandparents were barely alive.

Elite Eights? They matter zero. In fact, no wins prior to the Final Four should get any credit whatsoever--which is a great criterion because our last Elite Eight was over 20 years ago (vs. 3) and we've had one Sweet Sixteen (vs. 7) in the past 15 years.

Hell, if you're not going to make a Final Four, why even bother going, or winning at all?

Oh, and if you make a Final Four, that's the one time it's okay to beat mediocre teams--let's say a 13-seed, a 5-seed, a 9-seed, and a 6-seed. But I'm sure those teams were all worthy of 1- or 2-seeds, whereas X's NCAA 6-seed, 3-seed and 2-seed opponents were all grossly overseeded.

Oh, and don't forget that UCLA should have been seeded much, much higher than 3-seed FSU despite the Committee, the best ranking systems and their resume suggesting otherwise.

I'm sure I've forgotten some of the other criteria required to narrow the definition of "success." And I'm sure there's more narrowing to come, if necessary.

Look, is it fair to say X barely made the Tourney this season? Yep. It's been a rough season with Myles' suspension, our most talented player out for the back half of the season--who was already playing with one shoulder before that injury (which you guys saw in person), and our next best player hurt and/or hobbled for much of the back third of the season. X could've mailed it in and said the adversity was too great and we're not good enough to beat good teams.

I can say this. I'm glad they didn't. And while I loved last season, where X truly played on an elite level--spending much of the season in the Top 10 and breaking the Top 5--until the last 6 minutes in the 2nd round of the NCAA Tourney. I like this season even more--especially given what they where faced with.

There are a ton of smart people on this board. One of your fans here (BearcatHawkeye) is my favorite poster on any board. There are many other balanced opinions as well. Other are, let's just say, amusing/entertaining.

Unfortunately the X fan is making the most sense to me in this thread.

Good Lord yes. It continues to amaze me.

(03-24-2017 12:41 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The thing that annoys me about Lance (and Doc recently) is their need to dismiss the accomplishments of the Huggins era to defend Mick Cronin. I wrote a very long winded response to this BS.

My Response to Local Media Anti-Huggs Crusade
(AKA Why You Can Support Mick AND Appreciate the Huggs Years)

The UC fans have moved on but the local media hasn’t. Every year at some time or another it seems the local media needs to explain why Huggins didn’t actually have great years (as if we all weren’t around) and why that means the Bearcat fans should support Mick. To most fans, this is not an either or scenario. The smart fans get that program is in a different situation and are evaluating Mick’s performance mostly independent of what was achieved under Huggins. We want Mick to get the program to that level again and even beyond, but we are not grading Mick against Huggins. My support of Mick Cronin and his Bearcat program is not dependent on tearing down the accomplishments of the Huggins era. I know many Bearcat fans that feel this way.

The media using Huggs’ tournament losses to justify why UC should stick with Mick Cronin is idiotic because it misses what makes Mick the right guy for Cincinnati. He’s not right because he can lose in the second round too…he’s right because of the stability he brought the program and the direction he is moving the program. To be perfectly frank to date Mick hasn’t accomplished anything near what Huggins accomplished at UC, but that doesn’t mean he won’t or cannot. The comparison with what Huggins accomplished to what Mick has so far is idiotic because Huggs is so far ahead by those measures, but those measures fail to appreciate the situations and context.

Here’s how I would rank every Bearcat season by accomplishments of the team since Huggins came to UC:

The Great Seasons:
1992- Final Four, Regular Season Champion, Conference Tournament Champion, Four Seed in the Tournament.
2000- Ranked Number 1 most the season, Undefeated Regular Season Conference Champions, 1st in the RPI, 10-2 against the RPI top 50, 19-3 against the RPI top 100… just a dominating season. 2 seed in the tournament
1993- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed in the tournament
1996- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Seasons Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed,
2002- Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 1 seed, RPI #3, 8-2 v. RPI top 50, 17-3 v. RPI top 100. #2 kenpom adjusted efficiency (first year he kept that stat)

The Very Good Seasons:
1999- Only 6 losses, Regular season champions, 3 seed in the tournament, won great Alaskan Shootout over Historically great Duke team. Made round of 32. 8-3 vs. RPI top 50, 12-4 over top 100.
2012- Clearly Mick’s best overall season despite a disappointing start. 4th in a loaded Big East, Conference tournament finals, sweet 16. 8-6 v. RPI top 50, 11-8 vs. top 100. Only 31 kenpom but they were a different team once they went small.
1998- Regular Season and Tournament Conference Champions, 2 seed in tournament. 9th in Final AP Poll.
1997- Preseason number 1, Regular Season Conference Champions, 3 seed in tournament. Final AP Rank of 10. Disappointing overall season, but still a really good season.
2014- Tied for regular season conference title with defending champs ahead of eventual champs, 5 seed in tournament, 6-6 v. RPI top 50, 10-7 v. RPI top 100, tourney results disappointing, but that team ahead a really good year. Only 27 in kenpom, but top 10 in adjusted defense.
2017- 16-2 conference record, 6 seed, 3-4 RPI top 50, 6-5 v. top 100, no bad losses, conference tournament finals, 2nd round NCAA tournament. 22 kenpom. Top 15 in Polls on multiple occasions.
2004- Regular Season and Tournament Champions, 4 seed in tournament, 7-6 v. RPI top 50, 12-6 v. top 100, no bad losses. 17 in kenpom. Maybe should be higher but hard to get 2nd round dismantling by Illinois out of head.

The Good Seasons:
2001- Regular Season Conference Champion, Sweet 16, 5 seed in tournament, 2-4 Vs. RPI top 50, 9-5 vs. RPI top 100. 4 losses outside RPI top 100. Nice break in tournament, but not a great overall season.
2011- 6th in loaded Big East, 2nd round of NCAA tournament, team that put UC back in the NCAAs, 21st in kenpom. 7-9 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. RPI top 100, no bad losses.
2005- 2nd round NCAA tournament, 4-5 vs. RPI top 50, 9-6 v. top 100. 7 seed in NCAA tournament. 19 kenpom.
2015- Round of 32, 6-4 v. RPI top 50, 9-8 v. top 100. Only 43 kenpom. 8 seed.
2016- First round exit, 5-5 v. top 50, only 7-10. 32 kenpom. 9 seed. Team seemed close, but as we know lost a ton of close games.
2013- First Round Exit, 5-10 vs. top 50, 9-12 v. top 100. 40 kenpom, 10 seed.
1995- Conference Tournament Champion, 7 seed, 2nd round exit.
1994- Conference tournament champions, First round exit, 8 seed. 25 in final AP poll.
2006 (AK’s year)- NIT quarterfinals (lost when players suspended), 4-8 vs. RPI top 50, 11-11 v. top 100, 44 kenpom.
2003- First Round Exit, only 17 wins (against 12 losses), 3-6 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. top 100, 36 kenpom

OK Seasons:
2010- NIT second round, 3-11 RPI top 50, 8-16 RPI top 100, kenpom 68, great start, team not quite ready.
1991- NIT, 18 wins, 10.62 Strength of Record According to Sports Reference
1990- Huggs first year, NIT, 20 wins, 7.19 SOR According to Sports Reference.
2009- 1-9 v. RPI top 50, 7-12 v. RPI top 100. 86 kenpom

The Rebuild-
2008
2007

Of note I would rank 5 Huggs seasons as great. Mick has yet to break through but I am optimistic he does next season. All of Mick’s seasons since he got back to the tournament have been good and very good. Like Huggins he’s consistently kept UC in position to make the tournament and has avoided real down years. Unlike Huggins he has yet to break through for those next level quite season. My hope is that is coming and ultimately would love to see him achieve even beyond where Huggins had the program.

Mick Cronin and Bob Huggins inherited two different programs in two different situations in two different times with many different sets of obstacles. The decimation of the program that took place before Mick arrived has been well documented and I do not know a single Bearcat fan that doesn’t appreciate the job Mick did resurrecting the program from the ashes, back to the NIT in year 4 and the NCAA in year 5…where UC has been each of the last 7 years. He brought stability to the program, made it nationally relevant again and brought the kind of sustained, consistent success few other programs have. I believe UC is one of 8 programs to make the NCAA tournament the last 7 seasons. That means something.

Most of those who criticize Mick do so because they believe this program needs to get to the next level. I tend to agree with those people that this cannot be it. While UC has been consistently good to very good under Mick, he has not had that breakthrough great season. I think it is coming next year for many reasons and believe he will start delivering those type of seasons on a semi-regular basis, but that isn’t an unfair or unreasonable expectation.

Why hasn’t that season come yet? Well at least in the first few years Cronin was severely handicapped by the programs decimation. However, we are long past that now. Mick just completed year 11 on the Bearcat bench. That’s a long time. That is no longer an acceptable excuse for why we cannot break through. However, I would argue there are reasons to this point Mick has not quite made the jump from strong, consistent program, to one capable of being a contender from time to time. Whether it was facility issues, conference instability or a couple missed recruiting classes after SKs class, UC just hasn’t quite gotten over the hump we all want to seem them get to.

However, this has been slowly changing. The 2015-2016 showed promise despite losing a ton of heartbreakers. The underclassman were clearly players. The team continued with UC’s trademark defense but began to show much improved offense. That trend continued this season as UC hung around as a borderline top 20 type team by most metrics all season. They were better in conference, had better out of conference wins, a better offense, a similar defense and advanced further in the tournament. They finished 22 in kenpom efficiency and earned the 22nd spot on the committee’s bracket. They were good, but not good enough to avoid a tough second round matchup and went home.

That 22 was 10 spots higher than the prior season and similar improvement next season would finally make UC a legit final four contender and likely earn them a top 4 protected seed. That would be a big step for the program and one I am confident Mick Cronin will make. The hardest thing for fans to appreciate is consistent success at the same level. Fans always want more.

Mick’s achievement of sustained success is probably undervalued by many, but it ultimately cannot be the peak for UC basketball and I have plenty of confidence based on recent history that it will not be. I firmly believe Mick Cronin is the right guy to lead this Bearcat program forward and believe next year’s team will be well positioned for a tournament run. In a one game and out tournament things can happen, the key is putting together great teams that are real contenders… eventually you will break through. Next year could very like be that first great Mick team and I am happy the administration has had the confidence to stick with him as we move towards making that break through and the clear appreciation for what he has already done.


http://bearcatmark.blogspot.com/2017/03/...huggs.html

Excellent post Mark, it is pretty much spot on with how I feel about the entire situation.

Maybe we need to take a page of the Boston Red Sox handbook and burn NZ in effigy?

(03-24-2017 01:00 PM)Not Duane Wrote:  Maybe we need to take a page of the Boston Red Sox handbook and burn NZ in effigy?

Here is a reason why. Shipped out west UC was put in the same region with UCLA and Kentucky.
While X got to play a weak FSU (note only one ACC team left out of 8) then a west coast version of Duke.

Quote:Whine whine, b!tch b!tch!

Maybe this is Lance trying to create subjects to talk about. XU got hot at the right time. That happens to many teams. The UK team a few years back came into the touney as an 8 seed and made the finals. Some might say the two Butler teams that made the finals overachieves. The two UCONN titles in the last ten years. None of those teams were the best teams in thee country. They got hot in March and rode the wave in the tourney. X is ddoing that now. Is X better than Arizona in a 7 game series? probably not, but they were last night.

Lance is always creating topics like this to try and keep his show relevent. He was doing the same thing earlier in the week trying to stir emotions with Mixon and the Bengals. Why give him the time of day? He's a hack. His show on WLW is about as relevent as PDoc's a few years back.

(03-24-2017 12:45 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 12:41 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The thing that annoys me about Lance (and Doc recently) is their need to dismiss the accomplishments of the Huggins era to defend Mick Cronin. I wrote a very long winded response to this BS.

My Response to Local Media Anti-Huggs Crusade
(AKA Why You Can Support Mick AND Appreciate the Huggs Years)

The UC fans have moved on but the local media hasn’t. Every year at some time or another it seems the local media needs to explain why Huggins didn’t actually have great years (as if we all weren’t around) and why that means the Bearcat fans should support Mick. To most fans, this is not an either or scenario. The smart fans get that program is in a different situation and are evaluating Mick’s performance mostly independent of what was achieved under Huggins. We want Mick to get the program to that level again and even beyond, but we are not grading Mick against Huggins. My support of Mick Cronin and his Bearcat program is not dependent on tearing down the accomplishments of the Huggins era. I know many Bearcat fans that feel this way.

The media using Huggs’ tournament losses to justify why UC should stick with Mick Cronin is idiotic because it misses what makes Mick the right guy for Cincinnati. He’s not right because he can lose in the second round too…he’s right because of the stability he brought the program and the direction he is moving the program. To be perfectly frank to date Mick hasn’t accomplished anything near what Huggins accomplished at UC, but that doesn’t mean he won’t or cannot. The comparison with what Huggins accomplished to what Mick has so far is idiotic because Huggs is so far ahead by those measures, but those measures fail to appreciate the situations and context.

Here’s how I would rank every Bearcat season by accomplishments of the team since Huggins came to UC:

The Great Seasons:
1992- Final Four, Regular Season Champion, Conference Tournament Champion, Four Seed in the Tournament.
2000- Ranked Number 1 most the season, Undefeated Regular Season Conference Champions, 1st in the RPI, 10-2 against the RPI top 50, 19-3 against the RPI top 100… just a dominating season. 2 seed in the tournament
1993- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed in the tournament
1996- Elite Eight, Conference Regular Seasons Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 2 seed,
2002- Conference Regular Season Champions, Conference Tournament Champions, 1 seed, RPI #3, 8-2 v. RPI top 50, 17-3 v. RPI top 100. #2 kenpom adjusted efficiency (first year he kept that stat)

The Very Good Seasons:
1999- Only 6 losses, Regular season champions, 3 seed in the tournament, won great Alaskan Shootout over Historically great Duke team. Made round of 32. 8-3 vs. RPI top 50, 12-4 over top 100.
2012- Clearly Mick’s best overall season despite a disappointing start. 4th in a loaded Big East, Conference tournament finals, sweet 16. 8-6 v. RPI top 50, 11-8 vs. top 100. Only 31 kenpom but they were a different team once they went small.
1998- Regular Season and Tournament Conference Champions, 2 seed in tournament. 9th in Final AP Poll.
1997- Preseason number 1, Regular Season Conference Champions, 3 seed in tournament. Final AP Rank of 10. Disappointing overall season, but still a really good season.
2014- Tied for regular season conference title with defending champs ahead of eventual champs, 5 seed in tournament, 6-6 v. RPI top 50, 10-7 v. RPI top 100, tourney results disappointing, but that team ahead a really good year. Only 27 in kenpom, but top 10 in adjusted defense.
2017- 16-2 conference record, 6 seed, 3-4 RPI top 50, 6-5 v. top 100, no bad losses, conference tournament finals, 2nd round NCAA tournament. 22 kenpom. Top 15 in Polls on multiple occasions.
2004- Regular Season and Tournament Champions, 4 seed in tournament, 7-6 v. RPI top 50, 12-6 v. top 100, no bad losses. 17 in kenpom. Maybe should be higher but hard to get 2nd round dismantling by Illinois out of head.

The Good Seasons:
2001- Regular Season Conference Champion, Sweet 16, 5 seed in tournament, 2-4 Vs. RPI top 50, 9-5 vs. RPI top 100. 4 losses outside RPI top 100. Nice break in tournament, but not a great overall season.
2011- 6th in loaded Big East, 2nd round of NCAA tournament, team that put UC back in the NCAAs, 21st in kenpom. 7-9 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. RPI top 100, no bad losses.
2005- 2nd round NCAA tournament, 4-5 vs. RPI top 50, 9-6 v. top 100. 7 seed in NCAA tournament. 19 kenpom.
2015- Round of 32, 6-4 v. RPI top 50, 9-8 v. top 100. Only 43 kenpom. 8 seed.
2016- First round exit, 5-5 v. top 50, only 7-10. 32 kenpom. 9 seed. Team seemed close, but as we know lost a ton of close games.
2013- First Round Exit, 5-10 vs. top 50, 9-12 v. top 100. 40 kenpom, 10 seed.
1995- Conference Tournament Champion, 7 seed, 2nd round exit.
1994- Conference tournament champions, First round exit, 8 seed. 25 in final AP poll.
2006 (AK’s year)- NIT quarterfinals (lost when players suspended), 4-8 vs. RPI top 50, 11-11 v. top 100, 44 kenpom.
2003- First Round Exit, only 17 wins (against 12 losses), 3-6 v. RPI top 50, 8-9 v. top 100, 36 kenpom

OK Seasons:
2010- NIT second round, 3-11 RPI top 50, 8-16 RPI top 100, kenpom 68, great start, team not quite ready.
1991- NIT, 18 wins, 10.62 Strength of Record According to Sports Reference
1990- Huggs first year, NIT, 20 wins, 7.19 SOR According to Sports Reference.
2009- 1-9 v. RPI top 50, 7-12 v. RPI top 100. 86 kenpom

The Rebuild-
2008
2007

Of note I would rank 5 Huggs seasons as great. Mick has yet to break through but I am optimistic he does next season. All of Mick’s seasons since he got back to the tournament have been good and very good. Like Huggins he’s consistently kept UC in position to make the tournament and has avoided real down years. Unlike Huggins he has yet to break through for those next level quite season. My hope is that is coming and ultimately would love to see him achieve even beyond where Huggins had the program.

Mick Cronin and Bob Huggins inherited two different programs in two different situations in two different times with many different sets of obstacles. The decimation of the program that took place before Mick arrived has been well documented and I do not know a single Bearcat fan that doesn’t appreciate the job Mick did resurrecting the program from the ashes, back to the NIT in year 4 and the NCAA in year 5…where UC has been each of the last 7 years. He brought stability to the program, made it nationally relevant again and brought the kind of sustained, consistent success few other programs have. I believe UC is one of 8 programs to make the NCAA tournament the last 7 seasons. That means something.

Most of those who criticize Mick do so because they believe this program needs to get to the next level. I tend to agree with those people that this cannot be it. While UC has been consistently good to very good under Mick, he has not had that breakthrough great season. I think it is coming next year for many reasons and believe he will start delivering those type of seasons on a semi-regular basis, but that isn’t an unfair or unreasonable expectation.

Why hasn’t that season come yet? Well at least in the first few years Cronin was severely handicapped by the programs decimation. However, we are long past that now. Mick just completed year 11 on the Bearcat bench. That’s a long time. That is no longer an acceptable excuse for why we cannot break through. However, I would argue there are reasons to this point Mick has not quite made the jump from strong, consistent program, to one capable of being a contender from time to time. Whether it was facility issues, conference instability or a couple missed recruiting classes after SKs class, UC just hasn’t quite gotten over the hump we all want to seem them get to.

However, this has been slowly changing. The 2015-2016 showed promise despite losing a ton of heartbreakers. The underclassman were clearly players. The team continued with UC’s trademark defense but began to show much improved offense. That trend continued this season as UC hung around as a borderline top 20 type team by most metrics all season. They were better in conference, had better out of conference wins, a better offense, a similar defense and advanced further in the tournament. They finished 22 in kenpom efficiency and earned the 22nd spot on the committee’s bracket. They were good, but not good enough to avoid a tough second round matchup and went home.

That 22 was 10 spots higher than the prior season and similar improvement next season would finally make UC a legit final four contender and likely earn them a top 4 protected seed. That would be a big step for the program and one I am confident Mick Cronin will make. The hardest thing for fans to appreciate is consistent success at the same level. Fans always want more.

Mick’s achievement of sustained success is probably undervalued by many, but it ultimately cannot be the peak for UC basketball and I have plenty of confidence based on recent history that it will not be. I firmly believe Mick Cronin is the right guy to lead this Bearcat program forward and believe next year’s team will be well positioned for a tournament run. In a one game and out tournament things can happen, the key is putting together great teams that are real contenders… eventually you will break through. Next year could very like be that first great Mick team and I am happy the administration has had the confidence to stick with him as we move towards making that break through and the clear appreciation for what he has already done.


http://bearcatmark.blogspot.com/2017/03/...huggs.html

Excellent post Mark, it is pretty much spot on with how I feel about the entire situation.

A fair and balanced write up.