The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(01-29-2023 01:39 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 07:32 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  We got our requisite 1 good half per game. Beats the alternative.

While it's good that the team stayed in it until the end, it'll do no good until the team gets out of "two steps forward, one step back" mode. These 20 or so offensive rebounds for Temple and wide open Memphis cutters under the hoop type games better be done.

Too many 4th and 5th year guys on this team to be so uneven. Based on the level of play yesterday, I'd better see no more than two losses the rest of the regular season. In the back of my mind, I'm really sensing the strong possibility of being disappointed. But hope springs eternal, nonetheless.

As one of the "resident optimists" on the board [no one tops Bearcatmark] I don't think that is going to happen based on what I've seen with my own eyes this season. To lose at Houston was expected but they put up a helluva fight to boot. That said, we're 5-4 in the conference standings [good for sole position of 5th place] and we still haven't beaten anyone of note outside of Tulane at home. I was hopeful earlier in the year for an NIT bid but that is looking dimmer by the week.

(01-29-2023 02:10 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 01:39 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 07:32 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  We got our requisite 1 good half per game. Beats the alternative.

While it's good that the team stayed in it until the end, it'll do no good until the team gets out of "two steps forward, one step back" mode. These 20 or so offensive rebounds for Temple and wide open Memphis cutters under the hoop type games better be done.

Too many 4th and 5th year guys on this team to be so uneven. Based on the level of play yesterday, I'd better see no more than two losses the rest of the regular season. In the back of my mind, I'm really sensing the strong possibility of being disappointed. But hope springs eternal, nonetheless.

As one of the "resident optimists" on the board [no one tops Bearcatmark] I don't think that is going to happen based on what I've seen with my own eyes this season. To lose at Houston was expected but they put up a helluva fight to boot. That said, we're 5-4 in the conference standings [good for sole position of 5th place] and we still haven't beaten anyone of note outside of Tulane at home. I was hopeful earlier in the year for an NIT bid but that is looking dimmer by the week.

We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

(01-29-2023 12:05 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 10:16 AM)bearcat_df Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 09:53 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  It's not nearly enough time. Things are improving, however today probably sealed the deal that Nolley won't be back. Next year is a rebuild again without he and DDJ and whomever else we lose to graduation or transfer. We are likely going to get clobbered next year in the B12 in another transition season. We will need 2-3 more years to know what we have with this staff.

I looked at this yesterday. A lot a players are listed as seniors, 5th, year, grad.
DDJ & Newman- Grad; Phinisee & Ezikpe - 5th;
MAW, JDIII, & Ogaume - Sr; Nolley - RS-SR

Could be anywhere between 2 - 6 scholarships to fill!??
Can MAW, JDIII & Ogauma get a 5th year? If so, there would be a pretty good talent core, with some veteran leadership

MAW, Skilings, James, Reed
Davenport, Griffith, Hensley
Lahkin, Oguama, Tolentino
Nolley??

Starting 5 - MAW, Skillings, Nolley, Oguama, Lahkin
Hopefully we see development from Reed & Tolentino
And James and Griffith come in and are able to contribute quickly

Imagine if the line up is James, Skilling, Nolley, Lahkin, and Tolentino going into conference play. As always - 1 & 5 are the hardest positions to fill. Be great to get a veteran PG and a couple of wide bodies

I’d be pretty shocked if they brought all three of MAW, Davenport, and Oguama. Love the effort from those guys but UC needs a talent upgrade if they don’t want to finish near the bottom of the Big 12.

Transfer portal is huge for this staff this off-season.

We need several alpha dogs.

If MAW and Davenport are the go to guys on the perimeter next year we are easily going to lose 15+ games. Heading into year 5 if we can't finally recruit over those two, wash, rinse, repeat...

(01-29-2023 02:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 02:10 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 01:39 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 07:32 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  We got our requisite 1 good half per game. Beats the alternative.

While it's good that the team stayed in it until the end, it'll do no good until the team gets out of "two steps forward, one step back" mode. These 20 or so offensive rebounds for Temple and wide open Memphis cutters under the hoop type games better be done.

Too many 4th and 5th year guys on this team to be so uneven. Based on the level of play yesterday, I'd better see no more than two losses the rest of the regular season. In the back of my mind, I'm really sensing the strong possibility of being disappointed. But hope springs eternal, nonetheless.

As one of the "resident optimists" on the board [no one tops Bearcatmark] I don't think that is going to happen based on what I've seen with my own eyes this season. To lose at Houston was expected but they put up a helluva fight to boot. That said, we're 5-4 in the conference standings [good for sole position of 5th place] and we still haven't beaten anyone of note outside of Tulane at home. I was hopeful earlier in the year for an NIT bid but that is looking dimmer by the week.

We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

5-0 vs teams 4 though 11. 0-4 vs the teams in the top 3. UC is better a beating the bad teams but still isn’t good enough to win the ones vs the top of the league. I want to see 7-2 or better the rest of the way. 6-3 or worse would be very meh unless they then make a run in conference tournament. Basically would like to see about 8 more wins this year including a few vs some good teams.

(01-29-2023 02:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

Exactly. Despite the team's faults, I see some room for a run. But, that does involve a lack of regression.

(01-29-2023 02:35 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If MAW and Davenport are the go to guys on the perimeter next year we are easily going to lose 15+ games. Heading into year 5 if we can't finally recruit over those two, wash, rinse, repeat...

Spot on. I love them both as supporting cast guys, but as you say, neither is an alpha dog.

(01-29-2023 03:22 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 02:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

Exactly. Despite the team's faults, I see some room for a run. But, that does involve a lack of regression.

We win 4 of the next 6 by just rolling out of bed. Bottom half of the AAC is so awful.

(01-29-2023 03:21 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  5-0 vs teams 4 though 11. 0-4 vs the teams in the top 3. UC is better a beating the bad teams but still isn’t good enough to win the ones vs the top of the league. I want to see 7-2 or better the rest of the way. 6-3 or worse would be very meh unless they then make a run in conference tournament. Basically would like to see about 8 more wins this year including a few vs some good teams.

Barrtorvik has uc as a top 30 team since December 1st. Don't get hung up on 3 close losses to tournament teams. This team has improved a ton.

If they play like they've been playing, they will break through against better teams. A couple little things go different & they could have won 3 of the 4. Missed too many open looks against Memphis, walker went supernova yesterday, tough foul on vik against x. There's randomness to close results people underrate.

It's why in the tournament I love to go against teams that made their season winning close games. Probably not as good as their record. The inverse is usually true as well.

(01-29-2023 04:19 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 03:21 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  5-0 vs teams 4 though 11. 0-4 vs the teams in the top 3. UC is better a beating the bad teams but still isn’t good enough to win the ones vs the top of the league. I want to see 7-2 or better the rest of the way. 6-3 or worse would be very meh unless they then make a run in conference tournament. Basically would like to see about 8 more wins this year including a few vs some good teams.

Barrtorvik has uc as a top 30 team since December 1st. Don't get hung up on 3 close losses to tournament teams. This team has improved a ton.

If they play like they've been playing, they will break through against better teams. A couple little things go different & they could have won 3 of the 4. Missed too many open looks against Memphis, walker went supernova yesterday, tough foul on vik against x. There's randomness to close results people underrate.

It's why in the tournament I love to go against teams that made their season winning close games. Probably not as good as their record. The inverse is usually true as well.

Pretty much where I am too on this season. And barring a total collapse, the Bearcats won't remain in 5th place. UC has already had three games with Houston/Memphis and some of the dregs are headed to 5th/3rd in the coming weeks. Those teams will face losses too when they get their turns with the conference leaders.

We were spoiled to tough, winning basketball for many years. Most here felt the first two years for Wes would be challenging. As Igor said in Young Frankenstein, "It could be worse, it could be raining (or... we could be Louisville with two wins)."

(01-29-2023 03:59 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 03:22 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 02:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

Exactly. Despite the team's faults, I see some room for a run. But, that does involve a lack of regression.

We win 4 of the next 6 by just rolling out of bed. Bottom half of the AAC is so awful.

Exactly. Four out of the next six, and I'm actually a bit disappointed.

(01-29-2023 03:21 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  5-0 vs teams 4 though 11. 0-4 vs the teams in the top 3. UC is better a beating the bad teams but still isn’t good enough to win the ones vs the top of the league. I want to see 7-2 or better the rest of the way. 6-3 or worse would be very meh unless they then make a run in conference tournament. Basically would like to see about 8 more wins this year including a few vs some good teams.

7-2? Yeesh. So let's look closer at who we've beaten and who we still have to play.

Completed Home Games [NET]
W Tulane [99]
L Houston [1]
W ECU [221]
L Memphis [41]

Completed Road Games
L @Temple [114]
W @WSU [138]
W @SMU [215]
W @USF [156]
L @Houston [1]

Remaining Home Games
Tulsa [287]
UCF [65]
USF [156]
Temple [114]
SMU [215]

Remaining Road Games
@Tulane [99]
@ECU [221]
@UCF [65]
@Memphis [41]

Holding onto the trend that we won't beat anyone below a 100 NET, the remaining conference schedule shows 5-4. The Temple home game and the Tulane road game could go either way so call it a wash. I think 6-3 is the best we do but if Nolley is less than 100% then 5-4 is very likely IMO.

(01-29-2023 05:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Holding onto the trend that we won't beat anyone below a 100 NET, the remaining conference schedule shows 5-4. The Temple home game and the Tulane road game could go either way so call it a wash. I think 6-3 is the best we do but if Nolley is less than 100% then 5-4 is very likely IMO.

This is a really negative way to frame this. The truth is, we haven't really had games against teams that are good but not tournament teams. Uc is 1-0 against teams between 37 and 106 kenpom (having beaten Tulane 87 kenpom).

They haven't broken through against the three ncaa tournament caliber teams they've played in the last 2 months (including a final 4 contender they played twice), but they've been right there.

Of course...5-4 is a reasonable guess. Kenpom thinks 6-3 which i think is probably the most likely result but I think better is more likely than worse.

They go 7-2 the rest of the way and end up in 3rd place. Trending in the right direction - opposite of last year

1 Houston
2 Memphis
3 UC

(01-29-2023 06:21 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 05:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Holding onto the trend that we won't beat anyone below a 100 NET, the remaining conference schedule shows 5-4. The Temple home game and the Tulane road game could go either way so call it a wash. I think 6-3 is the best we do but if Nolley is less than 100% then 5-4 is very likely IMO.

This is a really negative way to frame this. The truth is, we haven't really had games against teams that are good but not tournament teams. Uc is 1-0 against teams between 37 and 106 kenpom (having beaten Tulane 87 kenpom).

They haven't broken through against the three ncaa tournament caliber teams they've played in the last 2 months (including a final 4 contender they played twice), but they've been right there.

Of course...5-4 is a reasonable guess. Kenpom thinks 6-3 which i think is probably the most likely result but I think better is more likely than worse.

Not sure why what I posted is a "really negative way to frame this?" We ended up with essentially the same conclusion...

(01-29-2023 07:54 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  [
Not sure why what I posted is a "really negative way to frame this?" We ended up with essentially the same conclusion...

Because it isn't really a trend of not beating top 100 teams. Generously the trend is coming up a bit short against top 40 teams. I don't see a reason to apply that trend to 41 through 100.

(01-29-2023 08:25 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 07:54 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  [
Not sure why what I posted is a "really negative way to frame this?" We ended up with essentially the same conclusion...

Because it isn't really a trend of not beating top 100 teams. Generously the trend is coming up a bit short against top 40 teams. I don't see a reason to apply that trend to 41 through 100.

What other trend is there? You can't have a trend against teams not on your schedule. If a team with a 70 NET isn't on your schedule then how does that even factor in? I'm talking conference games only at this point but Tulane is our best NET win on the season. We've lost to any team with a NET better [or lower] than that. Look at the remaining games with NET that I listed and it would sure seem to hold true based on our current results. Again, we both arrived at 5-4 to 6-3 to end the season...

(01-29-2023 05:26 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 03:59 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 03:22 PM)Ring of Black Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 02:26 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  We're 5-4 but we're 5-2 in games against teams not ranked in the top 3 in the country. We do avoid those the rest of the way

Exactly. Despite the team's faults, I see some room for a run. But, that does involve a lack of regression.

We win 4 of the next 6 by just rolling out of bed. Bottom half of the AAC is so awful.

Exactly. Four out of the next six, and I'm actually a bit disappointed.

We'll find a way to lose at least one of those "roll out of bed games." Mark my words.

Whether it's "we just weren't prepared" or a "trap game" mentality, we're good for at least one more "WTF" this season.

(01-28-2023 09:24 PM)natibeast2.0 Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 08:32 PM)chatcat Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:59 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:36 PM)chatcat Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:29 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  Wes isn't the guy.

Who would you suggest is?

Isn't that the ADs job?

Two years to clean up the mess left by John Brannen isn't enough.

He only had 5-6 months to recruit Skillings and Reed. Both look to be solid but neither were highly rated.

I expect Jizzle and Rayvon level recruits to be common place especially having the Big 12 label starting soon also aiding us in transfer portal.

Wes gets out coached regularly, and will be even more exposed in the Big12.

Look at how far this board has fallen. We used to have 20+ pages for nationally televised game. Now, lucky to break 10.

(01-30-2023 12:04 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 09:24 PM)natibeast2.0 Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 08:32 PM)chatcat Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:59 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:36 PM)chatcat Wrote:  Who would you suggest is?

Isn't that the ADs job?

Two years to clean up the mess left by John Brannen isn't enough.

He only had 5-6 months to recruit Skillings and Reed. Both look to be solid but neither were highly rated.

I expect Jizzle and Rayvon level recruits to be common place especially having the Big 12 label starting soon also aiding us in transfer portal.

Wes gets out coached regularly, and will be even more exposed in the Big12.

Look at how far this board has fallen. We used to have 20+ pages for nationally televised game. Now, lucky to break 10.

I think most of this board migrated over to BCJ. Bearcattalk is pretty dead too. I wish this board more active because Bearcat Banter always was the place for honest UC discussion. While other forums were sunshine and rainbows or everything stinks this place always had loyal long time fans there were not afraid to be critical or complimentary of UC but also smart enough to know when things were too good to be true and called out BS.

(01-30-2023 12:24 PM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(01-30-2023 12:04 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 09:24 PM)natibeast2.0 Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 08:32 PM)chatcat Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 04:59 PM)aCincinnatiFan Wrote:  Isn't that the ADs job?

Two years to clean up the mess left by John Brannen isn't enough.

He only had 5-6 months to recruit Skillings and Reed. Both look to be solid but neither were highly rated.

I expect Jizzle and Rayvon level recruits to be common place especially having the Big 12 label starting soon also aiding us in transfer portal.

Wes gets out coached regularly, and will be even more exposed in the Big12.

Look at how far this board has fallen. We used to have 20+ pages for nationally televised game. Now, lucky to break 10.

I think most of this board migrated over to BCJ. Bearcattalk is pretty dead too. I wish this board more active because Bearcat Banter always was the place for honest UC discussion. While other forums were sunshine and rainbows or everything stinks this place always had loyal long time fans there were not afraid to be critical or complimentary of UC but also smart enough to know when things were too good to be true and called out BS.

Bolded, I agree. We have some excellent, knowledgeable posters here and mostly respectful exchanges of ideas and opinions.

Regarding board traffic on game threads, I think it's more about the energy and interest generated by winning big. Fourteen months ago, football game threads were beehives of activity progressing through an undefeated season toward a CFP bid. Winning cures all ills in both major sports.

Few believed last October this was an NCAA Tourney team and that's the bar many have set for basketball. So yesterday's game was expected to be a loss by most everyone's measures. As someone else suggested, a win would have been great but a subsequent loss to Tulsa would have negated it. UC is in a rebuild and has to measure success differently right now. I won't judge Wes until the conference season plays out; I won't condemn his coaching until he's had a chance to get enough high major talent on the roster to compete with the best. Yesterday was competitive, but there still isn't sufficient depth and talent to upend the Cougars in Houston.