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

I know most of us are angry and upset about the ending to the game yesterday but I am hoping that we can have a common sense thread regarding this season and the program.

The good: This was the first UC team that looked like the Bearcats of the late 1990's. UC has slowly become the dominate program in the American going 32-4 over the last two seasons, winning one conference championship and one conference tournament championship.

The bad: Just like 1997,1998, 1999, 2000, and 2002 the season ended in the round of 32. UC continues to struggle to beat Xavier and too much greater extent the super mid-major type team. Mick Cronin is 5-0 in the NCAA tournament against middle tier power five teams and 0-4 against the super-mid major. I have seen enough evidence to know that teams with elite offenses like Xavier, Wichita State, Nevada, and Rhode Island over the last few years have exposed UC defense.

The tournament: I put more stock in the regular season than I do the NCAA tournament which is one of the worst ways to crown a true champion but one of greatest sporting events in the nation. The one loss and out nature of the tournament and overall randomness of the bracket makes the post-season the least important metric in terms of examining where the program sits. I badly wanted a deep run this year and every year but I am not going to let that cloud my judgement of what was great year.

Going forward: The program is in need of more talent. The team wasn't deep no matter what the coaching staff says. UC had four really good to great players and another three that filled roles that I would consider average. To really win big and have at true title contender that number needs to increase to five very good to great players and at least two above average to good players off the bench. If Evans returns UC will have two very good to great players but will need to find or develop at least two more to stand a chance of winning the league again and earning a high seed.

+1

(03-19-2018 07:10 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I know most of us are angry and upset about the ending to the game yesterday but I am hoping that we can have a common sense thread regarding this season and the program.

The good: This was the first UC team that looked like the Bearcats of the late 1990's. UC has slowly become the dominate program in the American going 32-4 over the last two seasons, winning one conference championship and one conference tournament championship.

The bad: Just like 1997,1998, 1999, 2000, and 2002 the season ended in the round of 32. UC continues to struggle to beat Xavier and too much greater extent the super mid-major type team. Mick Cronin is 5-0 in the NCAA tournament against middle tier power five teams and 0-4 against the super-mid major. I have seen enough evidence to know that teams with elite offenses like Xavier, Wichita State, Nevada, and Rhode Island over the last few years have exposed UC defense.

The tournament: I put more stock in the regular season than I do the NCAA tournament which is one of the worst ways to crown a true champion but one of greatest sporting events in the nation. The one loss and out nature of the tournament and overall randomness of the bracket makes the post-season the least important metric in terms of examining where the program sits. I badly wanted a deep run this year and every year but I am not going to let that cloud my judgement of what was great year.

Going forward: The program is in need of more talent. The team wasn't deep no matter what the coaching staff says. UC had four really good to great players and another three that filled roles that I would consider average. To really win big and have at true title contender that number needs to increase to five very good to great players and at least two above average to good players off the bench. If Evans returns UC will have two very good to great players but will need to find or develop at least two more to stand a chance of winning the league again and earning a high seed.

If Cronin had eight McDonalds All-Americans at his disposal Sunday his coaching would have overcome that and the outcome would have been the same.

Agree with everything the OP said. Sunday sucked, but I'm moving through the stages of grief in order to move on.

The high of winning the Wichita State game to end the regular season plus pulling out the Houston game in the conf championship was awesome. Made Sunday's loss hurt that much worse.

(03-19-2018 07:10 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I know most of us are angry and upset about the ending to the game yesterday but I am hoping that we can have a common sense thread regarding this season and the program.

The good: This was the first UC team that looked like the Bearcats of the late 1990's. UC has slowly become the dominate program in the American going 32-4 over the last two seasons, winning one conference championship and one conference tournament championship.

The tournament: I put more stock in the regular season than I do the NCAA tournament which is one of the worst ways to crown a true champion but one of greatest sporting events in the nation. The one loss and out nature of the tournament and overall randomness of the bracket makes the post-season the least important metric in terms of examining where the program sits. I badly wanted a deep run this year and every year but I am not going to let that cloud my judgement of what was great year.

Going forward: The program is in need of more talent. The team wasn't deep no matter what the coaching staff says. UC had four really good to great players and another three that filled roles that I would consider average. To really win big and have at true title contender that number needs to increase to five very good to great players and at least two above average to good players off the bench. If Evans returns UC will have two very good to great players but will need to find or develop at least two more to stand a chance of winning the league again and earning a high seed.

I agree on the tournament, it is one of the worst ways to determine a champion. But one-and-done games also seem to appeal much more to the public then long series. March Madness, the super-bowl and NCAA footballs bowl games seem to draw more popularity then the best of 5 or best of 7 series in the NBA and MLB - the randomness where any team can we is more exciting then longer series where the best team has a higher chance of winning. The best way to determine a champion is probably the full round-robin regular season of European Soccer, but that is impossible for many sports.

I disagree on the players. I think we had three very good to great players (Clark, Evans, Cumberland), one good (Washington) and two above average (Broome, Scott) as well as a few average (Moore, Jenifer and Brooks - who were above average on D but below average on O). We were considered a true title contender this year, not the top contender but many measures had us in the top 5 most likely too win.

Going forward we should continue to improve. Cronin has built a program that has been better each year then it was the prior year. Next year, will probably be the exception (if Evans goes pro), but we should still make the NCAA tournament. Being a two seed, having a player go pro early and get drafted in the first round (as well as another player in Cumberland who will probably do the same next year) and the newly renovated stadium will all improve Cronin's recruiting clout. We probably won't get any one-and-dones, but we will get more players who are athletic enough and willing to play Cronin's D, but who also have a more developed offensive game (Evans, Cumberland, Hardnett, Diarra, Williams and Moore are all of that type).

This season would be easier to take if this wasn't the first real contending UC team since 2002. It's so hard when you miss your real opportunity and it's compounded by UC utterly dominating Nevada for 28 minutes then letting Nevada turn it into a pick up game and you somehow blow a 22 point lead in just over 11 minutes...it's compounded even more by how open the bracket was. With 12 minutes left in the game I truly believed UC had as good a chance to win the title as anybody. Duke and Villanova looked like the two best teams left, but both were on the same side of the bracket (and one with many more tough games). UC was ready to head to the sweet 16 where they'd play an 11 seed that they would have outmatched (Loyola is good but they didn't create the matchup problems of a team like Nevada). To have it fall apart so quickly is devastating. It makes everyone start thinking of the prior tournament early losses.

This was the first Cronin tournament loss that really stuck with me. The other losses to me weren't really tournament failures, but failure to have a team that was truly a contender. They could have stolen a couple more games but they weren't winning anything. This year and this year's team was different. They had the players, they had the seed, they had the breaks in the bracket. If they had a team that played at this level more often maybe it would be easier to swallow. We need to see UC have protected seed type teams more often... Blowing this one hurts.

You can analyse this game from now until next October but I'm blaming the loss on Cronin ... poor coaching. With nine minutes left and Nevada within twelve points I'm yelling at the TV: SLOW IT DOWN! SLOW THE GAME DOWN. I'm not a coach, but even I realized what would happen. Did Mick listen to me? No-o-o-o-o-o-o-o......