Pitt beat both of the teams in the ACC tourney championship game
- Thread starter California Panther
- Start date
It means this Pitt team, when it plays up to its potential, is a very good.. tournament level... team.
It means that next year, if they can be more consistent. .. which often happens as players mature... they can have a very good year.
Consistency in sports is important!
When you win the games that you should win the upsets of " better" teams really count.
We won some big games but in the end they didn't help much due to the unexpected losses.
Next year we probably have a more established line-up, less trial and error which should help!
Even the PENS struggled with this issue when they had a lot of guys in and out this year.
You can beat the best but you have to beat the rest!
Go Pitt!
This post was edited on 3/14 9:24 AM by goat123
When you win the games that you should win the upsets of " better" teams really count.
We won some big games but in the end they didn't help much due to the unexpected losses.
Next year we probably have a more established line-up, less trial and error which should help!
Even the PENS struggled with this issue when they had a lot of guys in and out this year.
You can beat the best but you have to beat the rest!
Go Pitt!
This post was edited on 3/14 9:24 AM by goat123
Reply
You make an indirect good point...which is that Roy and the Tarheels grossly underachieved this season. Interesting that they seem to be waking up in the ACC Tournament and in time for the Dance. There is an awful lot of talent on that ball club. Will be interesting to watch the game tonight [I expect they will beat ND]...and how they play in the Dance. Hail to Pitt!
You make an indirect good point...which is that Roy and the Tarheels grossly underachieved this season. Interesting that they seem to be waking up in the ACC Tournament and in time for the Dance. There is an awful lot of talent on that ball club. Will be interesting to watch the game tonight [I expect they will beat ND]...and how they play in the Dance. Hail to Pitt!
What it means is our guys shot lights out for two games! You could say that we massively overachieved those two games. I don't think there is any other explanation. With our guard play being what it was in the final 4 game stretch it is almost unfathomable that we were able to win those two games even though they were at home.
I think Jamie and how he tightens up when the games mean the most may have had something to do with the four game collapse. I think that his "tightness" shows a lack of confidence in the team and what it can do. I believe that the players can feel it as well, and it manifests itself in poor play and total lack of confidence, because their coach does not believe in them.
We won those two games on the back of great offensive performances. We sure did not win them with our defense. While I will admit that our defense sucked all season, I don't believe it was any better or worse in those last 4 games. We lost those last four games because our offense went stagnant and no one had the leadership and talent to step up and take over. Most notably, I thought Jamel was far more passive offensively than he had been during that stretch where we played very well.
Somewhere along the line we lost our confidence, and I think our coach and his nail biting intensity and tight sphincter, had something to do with it!
I think Jamie and how he tightens up when the games mean the most may have had something to do with the four game collapse. I think that his "tightness" shows a lack of confidence in the team and what it can do. I believe that the players can feel it as well, and it manifests itself in poor play and total lack of confidence, because their coach does not believe in them.
We won those two games on the back of great offensive performances. We sure did not win them with our defense. While I will admit that our defense sucked all season, I don't believe it was any better or worse in those last 4 games. We lost those last four games because our offense went stagnant and no one had the leadership and talent to step up and take over. Most notably, I thought Jamel was far more passive offensively than he had been during that stretch where we played very well.
Somewhere along the line we lost our confidence, and I think our coach and his nail biting intensity and tight sphincter, had something to do with it!
This. Anybody who played sports as a youth understands how teams take on the attitude, confidence, bravado.. whatever you want to call it... of their coach. I played on teams where the roster was nearly identical from one year to the next, but one coach was able to bring out the "winner" in us and get us to step up our games, and the other.. not so much. Was UConn the best team in the country a few years ago? Absolutely not. Yes, they had an outstanding player, but also a haughty winner of a New Englander for a head coach. It matters!
Not counting the CBI (as I'm sure none of us do), Jamie's only post-season tournament championship came in 2008 as moderate underdogs in the Big East. Only one of his runs to the Big East finals was as high seed. His tourney performance under heavy expectations, with the cross hairs on his back, has been abysmal. Look it up.
Uh, he's reached the tournament finals 4 times. More than anyone else in that timeframe. How abysmal.
You do realizing that making it that far in a 16 team league is a difficult task. Of course, we're also going to hold it against him for being successful in the regular season.
As for the OP's point and the ever comical Jamie tightened up that worked it's way into here, I take up it to Pitt being a mediocre team this year that rose up - at home - and sprung a few upsets. Which most teams are able to do.
You do realizing that making it that far in a 16 team league is a difficult task. Of course, we're also going to hold it against him for being successful in the regular season.
As for the OP's point and the ever comical Jamie tightened up that worked it's way into here, I take up it to Pitt being a mediocre team this year that rose up - at home - and sprung a few upsets. Which most teams are able to do.
Reply
Worthy historical points. But seems to me we need to start reciting ACC tournament accomplishments and NCAA accomplishments since changing leagues. Unfortunately, the Big East and the legacy and accomplishments that happened then have long been in the history books. Dixon is 19-17 in ACC regular season play [very mediocre]...which is not horrible, but hardly what is expected by the school or fans. And Pitt has not come close to getting to the ACC Tournament finals. Hail to Pitt!
Worthy historical points. But seems to me we need to start reciting ACC tournament accomplishments and NCAA accomplishments since changing leagues. Unfortunately, the Big East and the legacy and accomplishments that happened then have long been in the history books. Dixon is 19-17 in ACC regular season play [very mediocre]...which is not horrible, but hardly what is expected by the school or fans. And Pitt has not come close to getting to the ACC Tournament finals. Hail to Pitt!
You missed my point entirely. Again, when he reached the finals, what had been the expectations? How did he perform as the top seed? Are you sure "abysmal" isn't an appropriate adjective in those instances?
No argument from me that making the finals 4 times is a nice accomplishment. It certainly is.
It's a flawed question because only one season - the CBI year - could you say that Pitt had no expectations.
With as deep as the conference was, even being a 6 or 7 seed - or apparently one year, a 9 seed - meant you had a chance to win that tourney. Losing to those teams is hardly abysmal.
2004: Pitt (1) - lost in finals to UConn (2)
2005: Pitt (5) - lost in quarterfinals to Vilanova (4)
2006: Pitt (6) - lost in Finals to Syracuse (9)
2007: Pitt (3) - lost in Finals to Georgetown (1)
2008: Pitt (7) won
2009: Pitt (2) lost in quarterfinals to WVU (7)
2010: Pitt (2) lost in quarterfinals to Notre Dame (7)
2011: Pitt (1) lost in quarterfinals to UConn (9)
2012: Pitt (13) lost in second round to Georgetown (5)
2013: Pitt (4) lost in quarterfinals to Syracuse (5)
With as deep as the conference was, even being a 6 or 7 seed - or apparently one year, a 9 seed - meant you had a chance to win that tourney. Losing to those teams is hardly abysmal.
2004: Pitt (1) - lost in finals to UConn (2)
2005: Pitt (5) - lost in quarterfinals to Vilanova (4)
2006: Pitt (6) - lost in Finals to Syracuse (9)
2007: Pitt (3) - lost in Finals to Georgetown (1)
2008: Pitt (7) won
2009: Pitt (2) lost in quarterfinals to WVU (7)
2010: Pitt (2) lost in quarterfinals to Notre Dame (7)
2011: Pitt (1) lost in quarterfinals to UConn (9)
2012: Pitt (13) lost in second round to Georgetown (5)
2013: Pitt (4) lost in quarterfinals to Syracuse (5)
So, what you've shown us is...
...seeded 4th or better, Pitt lost to a lower seed on 5 out of 6 occasions.
...seeded 2nd or better, Pitt lost to an opponent who was, on average, 6 seeds worse than Pitt.
...the second lowest seed Pitt ever received was the year Pitt won it all.
Just for fun, why don't you give us the NCAA tourney performance over that same period. Care to guess whether it would be better or worse than Big East results?
I maintain my case and reiterate what Plan B said above. Under the weight of expectations, Jamie's tight-sphincter syndrome acts up and negatively affects his teams' performance.
Some coaches are built for the post-season. Some aren't. What kind of coach does Pitt have? I guess (even more) time will tell.
...seeded 4th or better, Pitt lost to a lower seed on 5 out of 6 occasions.
...seeded 2nd or better, Pitt lost to an opponent who was, on average, 6 seeds worse than Pitt.
...the second lowest seed Pitt ever received was the year Pitt won it all.
Just for fun, why don't you give us the NCAA tourney performance over that same period. Care to guess whether it would be better or worse than Big East results?
I maintain my case and reiterate what Plan B said above. Under the weight of expectations, Jamie's tight-sphincter syndrome acts up and negatively affects his teams' performance.
Some coaches are built for the post-season. Some aren't. What kind of coach does Pitt have? I guess (even more) time will tell.
Again, your point is flawed. You're acting like a Big East 7th seed was a mediocre squad with no expectations.
If Pitt was losing to squads like Providence or Rutgers in the 1st round, then maybe you'd have a point. But since they weren't....
The talk of the NCAA tourney has been beaten to death here. I don't remotely think it's because of Jamie being "overtight".
I think - moreso recently - it's been case of:
1. Pitt hasn't been as good. (Was Dixon "too tight" last year, or was it a case of Florida being a whole lot better)
2. Pitt's had some bad luck in their draws (Butler sure as hell wasn't a team a 1 seed is supposed to face in Round 2. Wichita State also to a lesser extent)
3. Perimeter defense philosophy. Taking a chance that a player won't go bonkers works fine in the regular season where you can stand to lose a game if he go off. It's a lot more dangerous in a one and done tourney.
If Pitt was losing to squads like Providence or Rutgers in the 1st round, then maybe you'd have a point. But since they weren't....
The talk of the NCAA tourney has been beaten to death here. I don't remotely think it's because of Jamie being "overtight".
I think - moreso recently - it's been case of:
1. Pitt hasn't been as good. (Was Dixon "too tight" last year, or was it a case of Florida being a whole lot better)
2. Pitt's had some bad luck in their draws (Butler sure as hell wasn't a team a 1 seed is supposed to face in Round 2. Wichita State also to a lesser extent)
3. Perimeter defense philosophy. Taking a chance that a player won't go bonkers works fine in the regular season where you can stand to lose a game if he go off. It's a lot more dangerous in a one and done tourney.
Look, we all know the team was short on talent this year. However, the team played quite well for a stretch after some early losses.
When there were absolutely no expectations on the team, after some of those losses, most on here were already posting for next year and whining about our recruiting and all that goes with losing. But with no expectations, the team began to respond because they had nothing to lose and they went out and played well.
As we all know, when most knew or suspected that pitt had to win their last 4 regular season games, they squeaked out a home win against Boston College and then melted under the weight of expectations in the last 3 games.
I guess it is fair to blame the players. They are the ones who play after all. It couldn't have anything to do with Jamie and his preparation and tightness that those players pick up on, could it?
I love how you come to defend Jamie as if he has no flaws. He is a good coach and can turn it around. But he is not God! The team has looked awful those last four games after playing some pretty good basketball, at least on the offensive end. I believe expectations overwhelmed them, and our coach is not to be absolved of at least some of the blame!
I hope that with better talent and higher expectations at some point in the future that I don't have to bring something like this up again. But, like it or not, our past history suggests this could be a problem. Until we perform well in some big games in March I think that this tightness issue with Jamie cannot be put to sleep! Maybe it is all on the players and them not having that championship pedigree like Duke and Kentucky's players. If that is the case, and it may be, well, not to beat a dead horse, WE MUST RECRUIT BETTER STARTING NOW!
When there were absolutely no expectations on the team, after some of those losses, most on here were already posting for next year and whining about our recruiting and all that goes with losing. But with no expectations, the team began to respond because they had nothing to lose and they went out and played well.
As we all know, when most knew or suspected that pitt had to win their last 4 regular season games, they squeaked out a home win against Boston College and then melted under the weight of expectations in the last 3 games.
I guess it is fair to blame the players. They are the ones who play after all. It couldn't have anything to do with Jamie and his preparation and tightness that those players pick up on, could it?
I love how you come to defend Jamie as if he has no flaws. He is a good coach and can turn it around. But he is not God! The team has looked awful those last four games after playing some pretty good basketball, at least on the offensive end. I believe expectations overwhelmed them, and our coach is not to be absolved of at least some of the blame!
I hope that with better talent and higher expectations at some point in the future that I don't have to bring something like this up again. But, like it or not, our past history suggests this could be a problem. Until we perform well in some big games in March I think that this tightness issue with Jamie cannot be put to sleep! Maybe it is all on the players and them not having that championship pedigree like Duke and Kentucky's players. If that is the case, and it may be, well, not to beat a dead horse, WE MUST RECRUIT BETTER STARTING NOW!