http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaat...3fid%3d2329124
An interesting way to look at Coach Sampson's tourney perfromance.
http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaat...3fid%3d2329124
An interesting way to look at Coach Sampson's tourney perfromance.
"Texas might have made some concessions and they might be in the same conference as Oklahoma, but they're not in the same league."
Rece Davis College Football Final 8 OCT 2011
heh - Rick Barnes is worse. bobbie knight too.
Know thy self,
know thy enemy.
A thousand battles,
a thousand victories. - Sun Tzu (500 B.C.)
You read that backwards, BRR.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
I was fixin to say the same thing Frozen. Looks like Kelvin is in some elite company with Danny Nee and others. although Barnes is right on his heels.
funny, two of the coaches on the rise.
Quinn has no job
Davis won't have a job.
I have no argument that with the Indiana St and Manhattan losses especially that we have underachieved based on our seed under Sampson (not that I don't appreciate what lead to us having those high seeds) but the article loses me some when it lists Mike Davis and Quin Snyder as #2 and #6 on the up and comer list.
It reminds me of how MU was shooting 50% from the floor in the first 6 minutes of the game against KU. Of course it was just 1-2 and they were down 16-2 but they were shooting well.
The NCAA tourney is one of the few problems I DO have with Kelvin Sampson's coaching style.
OU is a very physical team. Big 12 refs are used to watching OU play, so lay off the whistles a little bit. Refs in the NCAA tourney aren't as likely to let things go as Big 12 refs are, so we get in to a lot of foul trouble early.
Unfortunately, a lot of years we haven't had the horses to adjust to the less physical style of play in the NCAAs, so we get bounced.
OU DID have the horses for a few years and had some really nice tourney results. The Indiana State loss shouldn't really be counted-OU's best player got a chunk bitten out of his bicept and second-best player didn't even travel to the tourney after getting kicked off the team. The next two years were a Final Four and an Elite Eight-what's whack about that analysis, though, is that losing as a #1 seed in the Elite Eight to a #2 or 3 (can't remember what 'Cuse was) playing in their backyard that went on to win a national championship is somehow considered underachieving. Going to the Final Four the year before as a #2 seed is only considered slightly overacheiving and receives the same weight as a #9 seed beating a #8 to get to the round of 32.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
I pretty much agree with all of that, especially how we have had fouls plague us in some tourney games.Originally Posted by Frozen Sooner
The thing is Sampson's record was flat out terrible in tourney play starting out and has gotten much better though I would argue that the 95-96 teams and 96-97 teams overachieved some just to make the NCAA tourney. As I see it anyway:
94-95 First rd loss to Manhattan, no way to sugar coat that, it was a huge first round choke.
95-96 We started off the season 1-3, I thought we did well just to make the tourney, the fact that Temple beat us so handily 61-43 was bad but again I think we did well just getting to the tourney that year
96-97 Loss to Stanford Basic 50/50 game We were probably 2 and done that year anyway but I certainly would have rather won
97-98 Indiana That was a great game, disappointing but no shame in that loss
98-99 Sweet 16 run and gave Michigan St all they wanted,
99-00 62-66 Rd 2 loss to Purdue, not to bitch too much but I remember being really steamed by the officiating in the game, no call in particular sticks with me so that could be some crimson colored glasse. Again a 50/50 game
00-01 Indiana St loss, even with Price being hurt I think we should have won that game, BUT Price was lost for the year even if we had won and we probably weren't going to go any further
01-02 Final Four Great tourney run, had we hit a couple shots we would have been in title game
02-03 Elite 8 vs Syracuse. Congrats on your 24-6 regular season and Big 12 Championship your reward is to play Syracuse in their backyard
04-05 Utah loss was frustrating, I think we could have played better but I also think Utah played over their heads and hit a couple outside shots that made Neals banked 3-point shot against Colo look like it was by design
Anyway if there is a trend in all this I think it is that we are avergaing 3 1/3 games in our last 3 NCAA tourney appearances after averging 1.4 games per tourney in our previous 7. Also I think our overall talent level in the last 5-6 seasons is much better than in the previous ones.
My .02 anyway
Last edited by Rock Hard Corn Frog; 2/20/2006 at 05:45 PM.
talent is better, would be great if we could keep a couple of them transfers here. darn kids
If you simply look at the gap between expected wins and actual wins, Rick Barnes is worse. In fact, he'd be the second worst on that list.
I think that is what BRR was looking at.
No particular call? What about the late phantom foul on the 3?
Totally agree.
This part, not so much.OU DID have the horses for a few years and had some really nice tourney results. The Indiana State loss shouldn't really be counted-OU's best player got a chunk bitten out of his bicept and second-best player didn't even travel to the tourney after getting kicked off the team. The next two years were a Final Four and an Elite Eight-what's whack about that analysis, though, is that losing as a #1 seed in the Elite Eight to a #2 or 3 (can't remember what 'Cuse was) playing in their backyard that went on to win a national championship is somehow considered underachieving. Going to the Final Four the year before as a #2 seed is only considered slightly overacheiving and receives the same weight as a #9 seed beating a #8 to get to the round of 32.
Each team has to play the cards they're delt. Doesn't really matter if it's injuries or playing in a lower seeds back yard. It is what it is and pretty much every school can complain but the NCAA's going to do what it wants on that front.
I kind of look at the NCAA tournament like I do the bowls in football. It's where you show what you're made of since it's somebody else picking the match-up and location. The teams you're going to play have either won their conference or were damn near the top. You better bring your 'A' game every night cause most of the time your 'B' game just ain't gonna cut it.
I'm not saying it's unfair that we lost to Indiana State-just that it's unfair to say OU underacheived in that game. I also say that it's unfair to say that OU underachieved against Syracuse by "only" getting to the Elite Eight. Cripes, they went on to win the national title.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
Now, the losses I did have a problem with were the ones where the team that beat us lost in the next round.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
But didn't we? Top to bottom, we should be better than Indiana State.
Can't disagree with that. Elite Eight is quite an achievement.I also say that it's unfair to say that OU underachieved against Syracuse by "only" getting to the Elite Eight. Cripes, they went on to win the national title.
Well, I can remember a guy who played at Indiana State who's better than anyone we've ever had at OU.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
That was over 25 years ago. I'm not sure I can name a single player or year that Indiana State was even remotely close to being as good as they were then.
I must have had a few's that night and suppressed that memory. All I remember was being ****ed.
What aggravates me most about the Indiana State game is that Hollis didn't get chomped until AFTER we'd blown a 16-point lead with ten minutes left in the game.
He should've never been hurt. He should've been on the bench celebrating an easy first-round win.
if Jason Yannish makes that wide open layup, we go all the way baby!
Posting Permissions
