For the record, I don’t think we’re a national title contender this season. I do think we’re a good team that can win on any given night and we’re a shoo in for the tourney and have the potential to go as high as Elite 8.
7 Likes
I know this is just a matter of definitions, not actual disagreement, but to me if you have Elite 8 potential then you’re a national title contender. Maybe not a “top” contender, but you’re in the mix.
7 Likes
I’m confused by this. What teams do you consider national title contenders?
Yeah, it’s all just how broadly you define it. On a certain broad meaning, everyone except Louisville and those teams new to D-1 are national title contenders. They could win their conference tourney and go on an epic run and win it all. On more narrow meaning, we all have those 5-7 or so teams that we think have the best shot and therefore probably get you to 90%+ on a probability scale. I tend to refer to the latter group as national title contenders, not the former, and not the various gradations in between.
I agree with @Galileo24 that I don’t think we are in that latter group. It’s possible we are, and I’ve seen flashes to make me think we are (Reece operating like first half of Michigan being a big one), but in general I don’t think we are. But one thing I’m good at is being wrong.
6 Likes
I think we’re headed for another *magical season!
6 Likes
I equate this to the fluency argument… all my German friends who can speak English that I think are fluent say they are not… and their reasoning is that they all know several other Germans that can speak better English than them.
I will be the first to tell you I am not fluent in German… I can speak German… but there are definitely those who are more fluent than me… so I can’t be fluent… unless I am…
Tale as old as time. Hahaha!
4 Likes
Agreed, this type of thinking is common but misguided. We are capable of making the elite eight, but not capable of winning that next game to get to final Four? We aren’t sure by any means that that matchup would be against a 1 seed and often isn’t. What kind of sense does that make?
Not that this team is completely incapable of beating a 1 seed.
Truth is: if you are both:
- capable of beating the best teams in college basketball on your best night; and
- consistent enough for there to be at least an outside chance of you winning six games in a row against good teams in march/April……
Then you are by definition a natty contender. There are at least 20-25 teams each year who make the tourney who at least have an outside chance of that. It is pretty clear to me we check both of the those boxes this year in spades. The only question is whether we are in The top five team group or somewhere after that.
There is a lot of randomness to college bball. Nobody can consistently accurately predict what is going to happen. Yet many look into history and pretend that it was always going to go that way because they were just “better.” All the lower seeds who won were “underranked”.
That is not how life or sports work. And it is the basest of MMQBing. People who do this likely have a demonstrably lower IQ on average than people who don’t. .
2 Likes
Danka shane (or schoein?)
2 Likes
Seems like it’s trending that we land at #2 based on what the big J pundits and analysts are sharing about their rankings.
2 Likes
You’re assuming I’ve made a greater analysis than I have. My sense of things is that our ceiling is probably just barely top 10 which would put our ceiling at the Elite 8. I haven’t analyzed the competition. I’m just comparing this team to our past teams. In February I may feel differently. I would need to see a couple aspects improve such as more consistency from the arc, development from Dunn and IMac. better defensive rebounding.
I don’t think we would beat Houston 5 times if we played them 10 times for example. We might beat them at the JPJ on a good night.
Don’t read too much into it.
4 Likes
Poll inertia theory always applies, except when it relates to us being ranked #1. Then it comes down to resumes and advanced analytics
3 Likes
I don’t mean to start an argument over definitions. It’s just semantics.
To me, we currently “feel like” a Top 15 team that happens to have a Top 5 record. But I also think once we get Dunn and McKneeley settled in, we’ll actually be a Top 5 team.
8 Likes
lol when was the last time a top 5 team was poll jumped for not having good enough wins
I do not see how “I do not believe this team is a national title contender” and “they have the potential to go as far as the elite eight” as semantics or ambiguous at all.
It is completely 100% laughably incorrect, but people say 100% incorrect stuff all the time.
I wonder what his predictions would’ve sounded like for our baseball team when they won the college World Series. Probably would’ve said they shouldn’t have even entered the acc tournament.
Just keep knocking. Last years team didn’t knock. This years team will and will be loud about it.
This is fair. I don’t know if we are in the top 5 or 15 or top 25 in terms of chances to win it all.
But I have no idea how you could be a fan of this program and completely write their chances of winning the ultimate prize off in December when they are 8-0 and already beaten four solid teams and say they don’t not have a realistic shot at winning it all (I can’t find any other interpretation of “contender” that doesn’t fall along those lines).
1 Like
It’s just what we each mean by “contender.” Haney made the case: You could use the word to mean “literally every team that isn’t mathematically eliminated yet” or you could mean “My Personal Top 4.” So I take your point, and Galileo’s as well. We can certainly win it all this year. My guess is the folks on this board wouldn’t even be very far apart if we each had to put odds on it. (Except perhaps for WFS_HOO who will put the odds at zero.)
1 Like
Well selected bet offers often get loudmouths who are wrong to back off. No way anybody can pick 6 ncaa teams prior to the tourney and get to a 90% confidence of the winner being among them as Haney said.
Again, just mmqbing and arrogance to think it is that predictable.
Yes indeed, I would take the entire ncaa field to win the tourney except for the too six teams at +1000 (bet $10 to win $100). The actual odds would be no better than -100 and probably worse.
Congrats Haney, you are wrong by at least an entire magnitude.
Yeah, it’s me. Mr arrogant
Being obnoxious when right does not make someone arrogant.
It is people who are wrong and still crow about it and use their resumes and other things to boost their position that are the arrogant ones.
It does not happen very often …