2016-2017 Season

[UCalum08]

This is a perfect sentence imo. I shouldn't have even bothered making a prediction bc I know how fans (fans in general, not UC fans) get with the preseason expectations. Nothing has gone wrong yet, so on paper we are perfect. Take away the exact numbers of my prediction, what I'm basically saying is we'll be the same, if not a little better than the other previous 6 UC teams that have made the tournament. Could something special happen? Sure. But I have to see something different to believe it. That take was fine all offseason, but now that the schedule is out and the buzz is starting, I'm treated by some like I shouldn't even be allowed to root for the team. Relax guys! We all want the same thing. I'm just not taking the bait this year on all the buzz. I got burned pretty bad last year doing that. If people want to predict things that have only happened once in the last 10+ years, go for it. It will probably be that much sweeter if you're right. But I'm with UCalum, just letting it play out.

Well said my friend. It's exciting to have the schedule out. It's fun to know the possibility of having a great season in terms of wins and losses. IMO, we can definitely go with only 5/6 losses. To me, UC will be UC's biggest trouble.

Meaning, have we learned from last year's mistakes? Do we have the mental focus and toughness to play hard every game? We typically dont lose bc the other team is better. It's a battle within ourselves. I think we have some players (Troy and Kyle) that can help with that this year. I can't wait to watch and see.

 

[#BearcatNation]

Many, including myself, uttered the words "Final Four" last year. On paper, last year's team was much deeper, and more experienced. I obviously must have been one of the few that actually attended that pre-season scrimmage and went off the deep end over what I saw from Jenifer and Evans. I saw the promised land. So, my fall was extreme. It just seems like many forgot how we viewed last year at this same time (2 mos. before the season). You can't help but to be cautious this time around.

Absolutely. I totally agree with that. But, like I said in my prior post, we were really let down by our Jucos + Shaq. All of them are gone now. At least to an extent, that's got to be addition by subtraction. I certainly loved the depth of last year's team, but from a starting 5 + Cumberland perspective, I think I like our top 6 more this year. But last year I liked the whole team more (at least going into the season).

 

[UCBearcats]

This is a perfect sentence imo. I shouldn't have even bothered making a prediction bc I know how fans (fans in general, not UC fans) get with the preseason expectations. Nothing has gone wrong yet, so on paper we are perfect. Take away the exact numbers of my prediction, what I'm basically saying is we'll be the same, if not a little better than the other previous 6 UC teams that have made the tournament. Could something special happen? Sure. But I have to see something different to believe it. That take was fine all offseason, but now that the schedule is out and the buzz is starting, I'm treated by some like I shouldn't even be allowed to root for the team. Relax guys! We all want the same thing. I'm just not taking the bait this year on all the buzz. I got burned pretty bad last year doing that. If people want to predict things that have only happened once in the last 10+ years, go for it. It will probably be that much sweeter if you're right. But I'm with UCalum, just letting it play out.

There's a big difference between realism and pessimism. You're always realistic Jacob and I think most here appreciate it.

The optimists will tell you that we're going to be great despite the fact that we have a ton of question marks and too many unknowns in terms of depth. They'll say Washington is better than Ellis, despite the fact that they don't know jack about Washington and Ellis was a 2x all conference player. They'll talk about Cumberland despite the fact that throughout Mick's tenure he's shown that he prefers experience over youthful talent and no one really will know how talented Cumberland is until the games start.

The realists know that this team will most likely do what Mick's teams always do. They'll play tough, sometimes ugly to watch, basketball and they'll most likely scrape their way into the tourney as a near bubble team and try to make a run from there.

The pessimists (me) will tell you that they're much closer to missing the tourney than being a legit contender and that on paper anyone who is saying this team is better than last year is an idiot. I'll also point to the fact that Mick is a very average coach and anyone expecting more than an average team is kidding themselves.

More often than not the realists are the one's who are right, so you guys should listen to Jacob because come the end of the season I bet his predictions are much closer to reality than mine or yours.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

Curious how last season would've went had Ellis made the natural progression we all expected. I thought he'd be a force on both ends of the ball. Outside of solid man defense he was a disappointment. Shaq...I didn't expect anything more than what we always got from him. So to me Ellis was the difference from the so-so season we had and a really good year. Move forward to this year and we replace Ellis with Washington. That and we have Evans as the bona fide 3 and no Shaq to disappear 20-25 minutes a game and contribute nothing some nights. Evans might have a few bad games but I'll bet my season tickets he doesn't give us any 0 point, 0 rebound games like Shaq did, save not playing in the game obviously. As far as Washington goes...we shall see. I've never seen him play a game in a bearcat uniform in Micks system. It's easy to say he'll be better than Ellis but I thought Ellis would be better than Ellis. One thing I am confident in is this ear shouldn't be worse than last year. Even at the 2, we lose Cobb but he brought nothing to the table other than hitting threes. He wasn't good on D, he couldn't distribute the ball, he didn't really do the little things and he really didn't step up late in games. So KJ starting and giving us D and hitting the occasional 3 and the potential Cumberland will bring, I'm fine with that. I actually think from a team perspective we're better off at the 2 this year. Caupain and Clark will be solid to great any given night. So again I think this season looks better than last year based on that. My biggest concern is the loss of a guy like deberry to back up the big guys. He was real nice to have when Ellis got in foul trouble or got in his funk or whatever. Maybe Scott can give us some quality minutes or Quadri can at least not hurt us when he's in the game. I think Jenifer will be fine. Cronin will play Caupain as much as possible so anything out of Jenifer is a bonus and he never really hurt us out there. He might have taken some questionable shots, but we had plenty of bad shots taken as the shot clock expired because we couldn't run offense anyway so there's not much difference in reality. He never took a contested shot early, so I'm fine with him.

 

[L-T]

There's a big difference between realism and pessimism. You're always realistic Jacob and I think most here appreciate it.

The optimists will tell you that we're going to be great despite the fact that we have a ton of question marks and too many unknowns in terms of depth. They'll say Washington is better than Ellis, despite the fact that they don't know jack about Washington and Ellis was a 2x all conference player. They'll talk about Cumberland despite the fact that throughout Mick's tenure he's shown that he prefers experience over youthful talent and no one really will know how talented Cumberland is until the games start.

The realists know that this team will most likely do what Mick's teams always do. They'll play tough, sometimes ugly to watch, basketball and they'll most likely scrape their way into the tourney as a near bubble team and try to make a run from there.

The pessimists (me) will tell you that they're much closer to missing the tourney than being a legit contender and that on paper anyone who is saying this team is better than last year is an idiot. I'll also point to the fact that Mick is a very average coach and anyone expecting more than an average team is kidding themselves.

More often than not the realists are the one's who are right, so you guys should listen to Jacob because come the end of the season I bet his predictions are much closer to reality than mine or yours.

We're actually getting ranked in the preseason Top 25 this year. That is something different. Even the so-called experts are seeing something different in this team. I'm obviously a major pessimist when it comes to the coach. However, I'm somewhat optimistic about the players and am hoping for a change in team chemistry that triggers some additional wins this season. The realist in me says that all possibilities are in play though. I could see this team missing the tournament, and I think a deep run is possible if the cards fall just right. A lot hinges on how good Washington actually is. I think we're all assuming that he will be really good, but none of us really know for sure.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

It really doesn't matter if we are pessimistic or optimistic. The season will be here soon and we will all live and die with the results Good or bad.

 

[L-T]

The realist in me says I should be pessimistic. I'm optimistic that I can get past all of that and enjoy the season.

 

[David H]

We are so used to seeing UConn players and SMU players talked about in the AAC, this year it will be UC players. Caupain, Evans and Clark will be those guys. As bad as it was to watch those last two games, it was terrific to see the poise that Troy had and the lights out shooting that Evans did! I don't know why we only have phenom big men from time to time but I am hoping for Washington to fill that role. Many of you remember that KJ was a 3 point beast when he came to the team, he put on a lot of mass to play the defense that Cronin expects and lost some of his agility. Lets hope he worked hard in the off-season and has his form back.

I can't disagree that last season was crazy tough to watch, so many close games we lost at the very end....for me it started with Iowa State and never stopped. I can say this though, hard to watch them lose but they were always thrilling games and something exhilarating to watch!

 

[2bearcatdad]

The realist in me says I should be pessimistic. I'm optimistic that I can get past all of that and enjoy the season.

Lol!

 

[indydoug]

This is a perfect sentence imo. I shouldn't have even bothered making a prediction bc I know how fans (fans in general, not UC fans) get with the preseason expectations. Nothing has gone wrong yet, so on paper we are perfect. Take away the exact numbers of my prediction, what I'm basically saying is we'll be the same, if not a little better than the other previous 6 UC teams that have made the tournament. Could something special happen? Sure. But I have to see something different to believe it. That take was fine all offseason, but now that the schedule is out and the buzz is starting, I'm treated by some like I shouldn't even be allowed to root for the team. Relax guys! We all want the same thing. I'm just not taking the bait this year on all the buzz. I got burned pretty bad last year doing that. If people want to predict things that have only happened once in the last 10+ years, go for it. It will probably be that much sweeter if you're right. But I'm with UCalum, just letting it play out.

You should make that twice in the last 20 years if you want to be more accurate

 

[jacobkdoyle]

You should make that twice in the last 20 years if you want to be more accurate

You always do this Doug. I know you hate Huggins, but he accomplished a lot despite the troubles in the NCAA tournament. The regular season matters. I even added the + just for you, but still not good enough.

 

[indydoug]

Rhode Island is a win but 4 of the 7 are definitely loses, duke ,iowa state, xavier and one of uconn's I guarantee it. 24-7 is still a good recorded regular season...

I'm not a UC downer like some on here, but Rhode Island will be a VERY difficult game for UC. They return 4 double-digit scorers and might even be a slight favorite in that game.

 

[2bearcatdad]

When we fall short year after year in big games you can start to predict the future....

Agreed. We should stay on the bus. Things can never change.

Thanks for your insight and analysis.

 

[indydoug]

You always do this Doug. I know you hate Huggins, but he accomplished a lot despite the troubles in the NCAA tournament. The regular season matters. I even added the + just for you, but still not good enough.

You couldn't be more wrong. I was a huge fan of Huggs when he was here. He brought the program back from the post-Catlett bad years. The problem is most people only remember the very good. His last 9-10 years were very much like the last 6 (not to say that wasn't good--it was and is. But his last 10 yrs. are more indicative of what this program is, whether you want to accept that or not.) I just try to add some perspective to all the unrealistic expectations on here about the program's place among the elite hoops programs. It is a top 30 or so program, which is about where it's likely to stay, the periodic ascensions and falls notwithstanding. Did UC have a great 8-10 year run in Hugg's beginning? Absolutely, but the 2nd half was just like the last 6, in terms of NCAA success and what UC can expect going forward regardless of coach, facilities or conference, IMO. So carry on with your normal posts but I will periodically point out the actual facts to you. Regular season is not what programs are recognized for.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Potential L's

OOC
Rhode Island or Duke
@Iowa State
@Butler
Xavier

AAC
Temple x2 (I put x2 bc it'll be hard to win both vs these teams)
SMU x2
UConn x2
Houston x2
Tulsa x2
Then we have to be careful vs Memphis, @ ECU, @Tulane, @USF, and @UCF.

I could see better than 22-9 overall. But we can't afford to drop any of the gimmie games, and we can't get swept by anyone.

 

[UCBearcats]

You couldn't be more wrong. I was a huge fan of Huggs when he was here. He brought the program back from the post-Catlett bad years. The problem is most people only remember the very good. His last 9-10 years were very much like the last 6 (not to say that wasn't good--it was and is. But his last 10 yrs. are more indicative of what this program is, whether you want to accept that or not.) I just try to add some perspective to all the unrealistic expectations on here about the program's place among the elite hoops programs. It is a top 30 or so program, which is about where it's likely to stay, the periodic ascensions and falls notwithstanding. Did UC have a great 8-10 year run in Hugg's beginning? Absolutely, but the 2nd half was just like the last 6, in terms of NCAA success and what UC can expect going forward regardless of coach, facilities or conference, IMO. So carry on with your normal posts but I will periodically point out the actual facts to you. Regular season is not what programs are recognized for.

Huggs was only here for 16 seasons and had a career .759 winning percentage as our coach. Say what you want about how his teams performed in the NCAA's, everyone knows they often let us down in March.

Please don't pretend like his entire body of work or what he did in the last half of his career here was anything close to what Mick is doing. Bob's teams were consistently ranked in the Top 10 and consistently got top 5 seeds in the tourney. Bob's last season was 04-05 and many would argue that despite their letdowns in the NCAA's his early 2000's teams were his best at UC. Why do people feel like they have to put down our past to justify our present?

 

[L-T]

You couldn't be more wrong. I was a huge fan of Huggs when he was here. He brought the program back from the post-Catlett bad years. The problem is most people only remember the very good. His last 9-10 years were very much like the last 6 (not to say that wasn't good--it was and is. But his last 10 yrs. are more indicative of what this program is, whether you want to accept that or not.) I just try to add some perspective to all the unrealistic expectations on here about the program's place among the elite hoops programs. It is a top 30 or so program, which is about where it's likely to stay, the periodic ascensions and falls notwithstanding. Did UC have a great 8-10 year run in Hugg's beginning? Absolutely, but the 2nd half was just like the last 6, in terms of NCAA success and what UC can expect going forward regardless of coach, facilities or conference, IMO. So carry on with your normal posts but I will periodically point out the actual facts to you. Regular season is not what programs are recognized for.

There's no comparison in Huggs last 10 and Mick's last 6 in so many different ways. That statement is just laughable.

Nearly every publication who has ever ranked college basketball programs has us anywhere from about #9 to about #19 all-time, so I'm sad that your own personal ranking has us over 30. Your bar is pretty low. We already have our place in the top 20 established. Our coach is paid a Top 20 salary. Our facilities are top 20...so your so-called actual facts are flawed....but please continue to drop in and post anyway.

 

[L-T]

You couldn't be more wrong. I was a huge fan of Huggs when he was here. He brought the program back from the post-Catlett bad years. The problem is most people only remember the very good. His last 9-10 years were very much like the last 6 (not to say that wasn't good--it was and is. But his last 10 yrs. are more indicative of what this program is, whether you want to accept that or not.) I just try to add some perspective to all the unrealistic expectations on here about the program's place among the elite hoops programs. It is a top 30 or so program, which is about where it's likely to stay, the periodic ascensions and falls notwithstanding. Did UC have a great 8-10 year run in Hugg's beginning? Absolutely, but the 2nd half was just like the last 6, in terms of NCAA success and what UC can expect going forward regardless of coach, facilities or conference, IMO. So carry on with your normal posts but I will periodically point out the actual facts to you. Regular season is not what programs are recognized for.

So, when Jordan selected us to wear his uniforms, when national TV started creating made-for-tv games including us and televising many of our games on a weekly basis, when ESPN sent Dick Vitale out to televise our Midnight Madness across the nation, when we ascended to number 1 in the polls and became a fixture in the Top 10 annually, and McDonalds All-Americans and Juco players of the years were flocking here, what were they all recognizing us for? Those NCAA busts didn't seem to matter much did they? Seems to me like the regular seasons might have had an impact after all.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

You couldn't be more wrong. I was a huge fan of Huggs when he was here. He brought the program back from the post-Catlett bad years. The problem is most people only remember the very good. His last 9-10 years were very much like the last 6 (not to say that wasn't good--it was and is. But his last 10 yrs. are more indicative of what this program is, whether you want to accept that or not.) I just try to add some perspective to all the unrealistic expectations on here about the program's place among the elite hoops programs. It is a top 30 or so program, which is about where it's likely to stay, the periodic ascensions and falls notwithstanding. Did UC have a great 8-10 year run in Hugg's beginning? Absolutely, but the 2nd half was just like the last 6, in terms of NCAA success and what UC can expect going forward regardless of coach, facilities or conference, IMO. So carry on with your normal posts but I will periodically point out the actual facts to you. Regular season is not what programs are recognized for.

Doug, I believe we won either the conference regular season or conference tournament title in every season of those years. You don't think we got national recognition for that? Those kind of accomplishments help give you the benefit of the doubt and make you a fixture in the Top 25 polls. Always having a number by your name also helps visibility for recruits. To pretend we didn't have those things going for us then much more so than now is re-writing history.

If we are ranked from season start to season end this year, no matter what happens in the NCAA Tournament, I guarantee we get more national recognition than what we got last year when we weren't receiving votes most of the year. String together a few seasons like that, and it'll make a world of difference.

 

[indydoug]

Huggs was only here for 16 seasons and had a career .759 winning percentage as our coach. Say what you want about how his teams performed in the NCAA's, everyone knows they often let us down in March.

Please don't pretend like his entire body of work or what he did in the last half of his career here was anything close to what Mick is doing. Bob's teams were consistently ranked in the Top 10 and consistently got top 5 seeds in the tourney. Bob's last season was 04-05 and many would argue that despite their letdowns in the NCAA's his early 2000's teams were his best at UC. Why do people feel like they have to put down our past to justify our present?

First of all, I wasn't putting down our past. Re-read my post. As to consistent top 5 seeds, what did those do for UC the last 9-10 years? Ever heard of Uconn? They've won a couple of NCAA titles in the last decade where they were not conference champs and actually finished as the #9 seed in the Big East Conference Tourney one year. You think anyone cares about their regular season? Top 10 in-season rankings are fine but are really meaningless if you never beat a team with a better seed in the tournament. Huggs had a very good run here but only made in out of the first weekend once in his last 9-10 years. That's a fact; doesn't mean he wasn't a successful coach here during those years.