I have hope this team is tourney bound. It’s the most excited I’ve felt since 2011. With that said, we all want a lengthy tourney run. But keep in mind the common fallacy of equating a higher seed this year to more success. For example, even if we get a 5 seed, we would statistically be expected to make the round of 32. It would certainly be a much more favorable matchup to advance, but we would really need a 4 seed or better to “expect” them to make the sweet 16. 9 out of the top 25 teams will not make the sweet 16. We fail to realize this and sort of took it for granted in years Pitt faltered. There is a chance this team can be better than last year and with 3 point shooting they certainly could make a run, but equaling a round of 32 should not be a failure if they don’t have a 4 seed or higher.
Tempering tourney run expectations: The reality fallacy
- Thread starter Pitt2006
- Start date
Everything imo starts with team defense followed by team rebounding. If this team as a collective group does those 2 things every game, we could become quite dangerous quickly.
The effort by Ish last game on defense was something we used to see in the 2002-2004 teams. That effort needs to be there every game and he has to be the guy to set the tone for our team defense. As a quibble I would have liked to see us attack the passing lanes more to create more turnovers, but we moved our feet really well as a team on defense, the help defense was good, and we contained penetration. And all this good stuff on defense came from effort. Elite level effort without slacking off except toward the end of the game. That effort needs to continue.
Took what for granted? Before last year, this program never met expectations according to seed line this century. Well, we did advance in an 8/9 game once.
I loved the first game of the season but to start talking about sweet sixteen is ridiculous.
Yep. But with success expectations rise quickly.
We took for granted that we would be in the tourney every year and make runs. It’s why Dixon got canned and then people were like the grass is greener and instead of what should have been a tourney appearance with stallings first year turned into 0-19 the next.
Wanny and Jamie were beloved by a majority of Pitt people. But it doesn’t mean that moving on from them was the wrong decision. It just showed that getting things right and making the right decision in the hiring process is often difficult. By the end with Jamie, it didn’t feel like making runs was ever possible again.
The NCAAT produces random results. I just want to enjoy a great regular season, get a good seed and take our chances.
They were both the wrong decision.
The football program had won 27 games in 3 years. They were BE Co-champs in 2010. Realistically, where the hell did they think the program was going to go?
With Jamie, the program had slid from its heights, but had still went to the tourney 3 out of his last 5 years. It seemed a bit rudderless, especially with the change of conference etc. but I thought he should have the opportunity to get the mojo back. I'm of the personal opinion that the roster talent was depleting, and 2017-18 was going to be somewhat of a train wreck regardless, but I thought Jamie deserved the opportunity to continue and possibly stave that off.
And as I always say, you dont make a move unless you know you can do better. They didnt fire Dixon but allowing him to leave without enforcing the buyout equates to a firing since Barnes wanted him gone. You dont let those guys go to hire Haywood and Stallings.
