UC vs. Tournament bound teams

[binturong07]

I think one of the biggest measures of progress of this team is their record vs. NCAA bound team. Below is a list from the past 10 years of our record vs. tournament teams (not counting the tournament games)

'99-'00 - 10-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'00-'01 - 2-3 (1-1 CUSA)
'01-'02 - 8-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'02-'03 - 3-6 (1-4 CUSA)
'03-'04 - 8-6 (6-4 CUSA)
'04-'05 - 3-5 (2-3 CUSA)
'05-'06 - 5-10 (3-8 BE)
'06-'07 - 2-8 (0-6 BE)
'07-'08 - 4-10 (4-7 BE)
'08-'09 - 2-9 (1-6 BE)
'09-'10 - 5-11 (2-9 BE)

I think this highlights what we already know...this is the best team since 05-06, and the Big East is a lot harder than CUSA. This year, nearly half our games were against NCAA teams. I think this just helps quantify the struggles to rebuild the program in the face of this competition.

oh, another obvious conclusion, the '99-'00 team was really really good.

[Who Dey Time]

I think one of the biggest measures of progress of this team is their record vs. NCAA bound team. Below is a list from the past 10 years of our record vs. tournament teams (not counting the tournament games)

'99-'00 - 10-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'00-'01 - 2-3 (1-1 CUSA)
'01-'02 - 8-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'02-'03 - 3-6 (1-4 CUSA)
'03-'04 - 8-6 (6-4 CUSA)
'04-'05 - 3-5 (2-3 CUSA)
'05-'06 - 5-10 (3-8 BE)
'06-'07 - 2-8 (0-6 BE)
'07-'08 - 4-10 (4-7 BE)
'08-'09 - 2-9 (1-6 BE)
'09-'10 - 5-11 (2-9 BE)

I think this highlights what we already know...this is the best team since 05-06, and the Big East is a lot harder than CUSA. This year, nearly half our games were against NCAA teams. I think this just helps quantify the struggles to rebuild the program in the face of this competition.

oh, another obvious conclusion, the '99-'00 team was really really good.

Also keep in mind that 13 of 16 Big East teams are in the NCAA or NIT. That just elaborates on how difficult this league is night in and night out.

[Scheids21]

Also keep in mind that 13 of 16 Big East teams are in the NCAA or NIT. That just elaborates on how difficult this league is night in and night out.

Wow didnt realize it was 13...thats crazy

[loshow22]

I think one of the biggest measures of progress of this team is their record vs. NCAA bound team. Below is a list from the past 10 years of our record vs. tournament teams (not counting the tournament games)

'99-'00 - 10-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'00-'01 - 2-3 (1-1 CUSA)
'01-'02 - 8-2 (5-1 CUSA)
'02-'03 - 3-6 (1-4 CUSA)
'03-'04 - 8-6 (6-4 CUSA)
'04-'05 - 3-5 (2-3 CUSA)
'05-'06 - 5-10 (3-8 BE)
'06-'07 - 2-8 (0-6 BE)
'07-'08 - 4-10 (4-7 BE)
'08-'09 - 2-9 (1-6 BE)
'09-'10 - 5-11 (2-9 BE)

I think this highlights what we already know...this is the best team since 05-06, and the Big East is a lot harder than CUSA. This year, nearly half our games were against NCAA teams. I think this just helps quantify the struggles to rebuild the program in the face of this competition.

oh, another obvious conclusion, the '99-'00 team was really really good.

Who was our loss to in '99-'00 in conference? We ran the table and if we aren't counting tournament games then losing to St. Louis is void.

[binturong07]

Who was our loss to in '99-'00 in conference? We ran the table and if we aren't counting tournament games then losing to St. Louis is void.

didnt count ncaa tournament...counted conference tournament.

[Best Body]

I think this highlights what we already know...this is the best team since 05-06, and the Big East is a lot harder than CUSA.

the Big East is alot harder than CUSA, yes. Though, all UC needed to do was finish in the top half of the league, and they'd be in the dance. The same old justifications get really tired. To play along though, I'd argue that going 4-7 (07-08) in your league against NCAA teams is a better year than 2-9, and they lost less games against tourney teams overall. The Big East tourney win against Louisville was exciting to have happen, but take that away, and there is no doubt to me that 07-08 was actually more productive. Either way, it's not like there's been a ton of progress. Even if this is UC's best team since 05-06, well how does the saying go about being the tallest midget go?

[UcatsRick]

the Big East is alot harder than CUSA, yes. Though, all UC needed to do was finish in the top half of the league, and they'd be in the dance. The same old justifications get really tired. To play along though, I'd argue that going 4-7 (07-08) in your league against NCAA teams is a better year than 2-9, and they lost less games against tourney teams overall. The Big East tourney win against Louisville was exciting to have happen, but take that away, and there is no doubt to me that 07-08 was actually more productive. Either way, it's not like there's been a ton of progress. Even if this is UC's best team since 05-06, well how does the saying go about being the tallest midget go?

Overall though, 4/14 = .285 and 5/16 = .312.

[Best Body]

Overall though, 4/14 = .285 and 5/16 = .312.

I understand, but also 4/11 vs. 2/11 in league, which typically carries more weight. And 285 vs. 312 is pretty much equivalent, and not a clear improvement.

[bearcatbret]

Do those records count wins against the same opponent during the season. We played those teams twice so does that count as two wins in those CUSA years? That kind of devalues those numbers.

[Former Lurker]

Interesting post, and a valid measure of quality. The improvement was real from Year 1 MC to Year 2 MC, and grudging from Year 2 MC to present.

It would be good to look to this record all the way back to the beginning of the 64/65 team field...was that around '85?