Iowa State @ 
Utah Am I wrong for my BBall expectations be for them to make the tourney annually?
Welcome Cyclones Fans! › Forums › Utah Utes Sports › Basketball (Men) › Am I wrong for my BBall expectations be for them to make the tourney annually?
- This topic has 17 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 8 months ago by
noneyadb.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
AlohaUteParticipantThere has been a lot of debate in the past few weeks about the state of the Basketball team. I’ve decided that my expectations is that the program should make the Tourney every year. I can live with the occasional miss, but considering about 50% of the Pac-12 schools make the tourney every year, there is no reason Utah shouldn’t be one of them. We have a more storied BBall program than we do Football program and I expect the school to continue to excel in Basketball and Football. Are my expectations irrational?
-
bopahullParticipantYes
-
TrailgoatParticipantYes. NIT is now Utah BBs gold standard.
-
-
PlainsUteParticipant50%? True of Big-12 and Big-Ten, maybe, not Pac-12 recently.
2017: 4, 2018:3, 2019:3 so more like 25%-
Tony (admin)KeymasterCoach K is 22%
-
AlohaUteParticipant
There is zero excuse for Utah not to make the tourney 50% of the time. We are in a power conference, a historically BBall school, and in a conference with fairly mediocre basketball in which there are only two traditional powers in UCLA and Arizona.
-
-
StoneParticipantI don’t know what is reasonable, but I would be somewhat content if they were in the tourney at least 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time would be divided like this: 40% NIT and 10% CBI or no appearances.
March madness is so much more fun when my team is playing.
-
EagleMountainUteParticipantAdjust your expectations to be lower than that and you will be satisfied. The P12 is not as good as other Western conferences. Probably the lowest in Basketball. The ones at the top also cheat and still are not very good.
-
utetastic
ParticipantWe made the tournament 2 times in the 40s (44 and 45)
3 times in the 50’s (55,56, and 59)
3 times in the 70’s (77,78, and 79)
3 times in the 80’s (81,83, and 86)
7 times in the 90’s (missed 90,92, and 94)
6 times in the 2000’s (missed 01, 06,07, and 08)
2 times in the 2010’s (15 and 16)
The disclaimer to these numbers are that the tournament used to be smaller. It reached 64 in 1985.
All of the 90’s were under Majeras and it could be argued that all the 2000 appearances could be linked to Majeras but 2009. Rupp finished the 2004 season with Majeras coached players and even most of the players on 2005 where his players. The Majeras years were a pretty big anomoly.
-
NavyUteParticipantSeems we are digressing. Yay!
-
astUTEModeratorAnother factor missing here, is the NIT, which was bigger than the NCAA the father back you go. As late as the Late 70’s, playing in the NIT was NOT a second class seasonal result.
Your list should probably included these NITs to be complete:
3 times in the 40s (44, 47 (Champions), 49)
2 times in the 50s (57, 58)
2 times in the 70s (70, 74)
By the late 80s when Archibald teams were in the NIT a couple of years, it really had become a second class tournament.
The Majerus years were the best streak in school history, but looking at all the numbers, the time since Majerus, has been the worst. Only two real results in that time, Giacoletti’s, with Majeres’ team, and 2015. Even the 80s, which were considered the previous progam low spot, were arguably as good as the period since Majerus.
When Coach K improved every year up to the sweet 16 year, 2015 (I’ll include the 2016 as a good year) I thought we had a coach who was producing a reasoanble program considering our history.
In the 4 years since, I have not.
-
astUTEModerator
clarification – the 80s years under Archbald – were considered the low point…
-
-
-
CharlieParticipant50% is high. Maybe 1 or 2 Pac teams have done that over the last 10. 30% or 40% is doable and is my expectation. 50% or better would be a delite, multiple years in a row would be also.
-
EutawStreet
ParticipantIt’s all about NET rankings and scheduling tougher games. The PAC12 has done much better at that this season. 5 teams in the top 50. Keep it up and the Pac12 could get 5 or 6 teams in each year. Compare the NET ranking and the Conf standings:
Net Ranking (Pac12 Finish)
Oregon 12 (1)
Arizona 14 (5)
Colo 23 (6)
Stanford 30 (7)
USC 45 (4)
Ariz St 52 (3)
Wash 55 (12)
Ore St 71 (8)
Ucla 76 (2)
UTAH 85 (9)
Wash St 119 (11)
Cal 148 (10)
-
-
noneyadbParticipantDo you believe Utah to be a one and done destination, or a school where majority of student athletes stay 3+ years?
One and done = tourney run 3 out of 4yrs
3+ = tourney run 1 in 4yrs.
Fans should consider time for rebuild, transfers, suspensions, early departures, etc. especially with basketball where one player can drastically alter a program.
-
Sanders
ParticipantI don’t mind the NIT rebuilding seasons, but no NIT invite means they’re terrible and many high schools teams could hang with them. Other than Mommy and Daddy, nobody is paying let alone cares to watch a sub 100 ranked team in the country.
-
UtahParticipantWe have top 10 coach salary.
We have top 25 facilities.
We have top 30 history (was top 25 before Larry).
We are in a power conference.
Yeah, we should be in the tournament 4 out of 5 years.
No other team with these resources would still have Larry as their HC.
-
noneyadbParticipant
Dr Hill spent the cash on bball because of history and attempting to return Utah to the glory days.
Utah doesn’t have the recruiting pool to compete for a tourney run 4 out of 5 yrs, and UA is the wrong apparel deal.
-
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
