Official Running NCAA/March Madness thread

It occurs to me that all of the Coach K hagiography has somehow caused Duke's history of underacheivement in the NCAA tournament to be overlooked. Since his hiatus for health reasons in 1995, the following years are ones in which Duke did not live up to their NCAA seed (i.e., if you're seeded 1 you should make the Final Four, if you're seeded 2 you should make the Elite Eight, etc.):
2019
2017
2014
2012
2011
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2002
2000
1997
1996

Now, I understand that there are going to be upsets and that it's not easy to win NCAA tournament games, especially after the first round, so you certainly wouldn't expect them to have a perfect record on this . . . but that's an awful lot of coming up short, which I don't seem to recall getting much attention.

 

Not judging by all the what-are-we-gonna-do-without-Duke coverage on the WWL

 

So who's the new Tony Bennett "Why hasn't he gotten there?" coach? It has to be somebody with a realistic shot in their current situation (which keeps Mick Cronin and especially Jamie Dixon off the list). I'd say:

- Sean Miller (given the talent that's come through that program, it's him unless he gets canned)
- Matt Painter
- Mike Brey
- Chris Mack
- Leonard Hamilton
- Fran McCaffery

 

I get the "root for them to lose because I hate them" argument. But how many college basketball programs does the average fan truly "hate"? I guess mine would be Kentucky and Duke.

 

Nobody was better at an early round butt pucker than a Jaime Dixon coached Pitt team.

 

Maybe now they’ll raise the salary cap on D1 basketball.

 

I don't know about Hamilton and McCaffery. Those programs will never be the elite in their respective conferences. You could argue Florida State should be able to be at the same level as Duke and UNC. I don't think you can argue that Iowa should be at the Michigan State/Michigan level.

 

Couldn't you have said that about UVA? I guess Bennett changed the culture and broke through in an amount of time that was quick enough that it seemed like real, sustainable change, but took long enough to get to the Final Four (and used a controversial enough style) that it allowed for the questions to start. And I guess McCaffery and (especially) Hamilton might be in the "they are what they are" stage of their careers, if that makes sense. Still, I think Hamilton, at least, is worth questioning, particularly in light of the Xavier game a couple of years ago.

It's also likely true that none of the guys on that list except maybe Miller are feeling the weight that Bennett was.

 

I guess I'd feel differently about Hamilton if he had gotten Florida State to 1-seed status a couple of times and lost. Sure, that Xavier loss was bad, but that was one of the few times FSU was actually a seed favorite and lost. (2012 when they were a three and lost to #6 Cincy being the other.)

 

I'm super late to the party about Texas Tech but they were super impressive this weekend.

 

Jesus, I hate all this talk about disappointing and should have made a Final Four by now. Purdue had a great season. Anyone who starts putting pressure on them for not making Final Fours should go root for a team that does not make Final Fours or enough Elite Eights needs to fuck off. Sorry Circus, but UVA should pray with Tony every night and thank God they have him.

Now, are certain coaches overachieving and are they underachieving? That got me thinking.

According to this (How do seeds perform in the Final Four? | NCAA.com), a #1 seed makes the Final Four 56% of the time. So if Duke has 16 #1s under K (I have no idea what the number is) he should have made eight Final Fours. Anything after making the Final Four is gravy. I'm not tackling that.

Two seeds make the final four 28% of the time, so if your school has had four two seeds, it should have broken through at least once to the Final Four to be average.

Three seeds are a 1/6 chance and the mean regresses from there.

So, how often does a #2 seed make the Elite Eight? I found this, but I'm not retyping. - https://www.betfirm.com/seeds-national-championship-odds/
It's 45.8% of the time.

A #4 seed makes the Sweet 16 47% of the time.

With this info, I'll break down K.

K has 35 appearances - I might be off one, this is bitch to tally and keep straight.

In 18 trips, he met or exceeded his ranking. He did not 17 times. In the last decade, he's 5 up and 5 down.

He has five titles in 12 Final Fours. That's really good.

Now for Izzo...

Izzo has 23 appearances. He has overachieved 14 times and underachieved nine times.

He has nine Final Fours. Three times as a one seed. Three times as a two seed. Twice as a five seed (4.4 % chance of doing it once... 1/625 of taking a five seed twice) and a seven seed (1/50 chance). That's 1/31,250 chance of a coach taking a five seed twice and seven seed dancing. That might be skewed, but it puts into perspective.

The best tournament coach of the last 40 years might be Izzo. It might not even be close.