Re: NCAA Tournament Failures?

[Adam Osterholt]

Tom,

I fully understand the point that you are trying to make with these
statistics.  UC has a tremendous record with getting into the NCAA
tournament and rarely getting bounced in the first round.  I think the
frustration for UC fans comes with rarely making a run deep into a
tournament.  Even the years when they went deep into the tournament they did
not beat a single team which was seeded lower than them. I also understand
that they were setup for this record by being seeded in the top four in
their bracket a number of times, but this does tend to lead one to the
conclusion that UC teams generally under-achieved in the tourney.  My belief
is that every once in a while a team should over-achieve and exceed
expectations.  This is something the UC never did.......

I was not a Huggins hater, but I have to be honest and say that it felt like
he had reached a plateau and was not going to be able to take UC to the next
level.  Would the Big East have changed that?  Maybe, but we will never
know.  I have moved on and am rooting for UC and Mick to reclaim the
programs national stature.

Adam


On 10/29/06, address@hidden <address@hidden> wrote:
> My point is very simple. UC has one of the 10 best NCAA tournament records
> of those 14 years (1992 through 2005).
>
> The last time UC had one of the Top 10 NCAA tournament records was 30
> years earlier (1958 through 1963) when UC had the #1 record. UC only had 4
> NCAA appearances in those intervening 30 years.
>
> The Top 5 teams - Duke, UNC, Kentucky, UConn, Arizona or Kansas - are
> better than UC in that period. But only a handful of others.
>
> Do the research. It's not easy to get to the Sweet 16. It's even harder to
> get to the Elite 8. Please, do the research. I gave you the link. I've done
> it before. Not my turn this time. Teams with 5 or more Sweet 16 (and 4 or
> more Elite 8) appearances are fewer than 10 schools.
>
> Tom Gray, UC fan since 1958