Average or underachievers?

[markchal]

26 games into our season and with perhaps our toughest stretch ahead of us, we have a pretty good idea of where we are headed. Barring a miracle, or the team hitting a gear they haven't shown yet, we are going to be spending another selection Sunday nervously comparing our resume to other teams on the bubble. Should we get in, with no crunch time threat and no backup pg, it's hard to us imagine us going on a run. This team has no Chalmers, no Holloway.

Did this collection of talent underachieve? Or, were expectations too high and is this just an average team? It's incredibly frustrating to beat good teams at home and collapse against teams like SJU and CU. That and the 1-8 record in close games makes me think this team could've been better, but maybe my expectations were too high with this many new players.

[Xville]

I think we are who we are and that's an average team. The reason we are average is because our upper class men are nothing special. They are fine, but they aren't going to be the kind of guys who say get on my back I'm going to win us this game. And since we aren't kentucky, we can't overcome that because we don't have Mcdonald all american freshman talent. We have good young talent, much more talent than the upper class men in my opinion but it's going to take a year or two for them to be consistent threats

[bleedXblue]

Both. So tired of the uninspired play. They all looked like they were working off a hangover today. Seriously.

[DC Muskie]

I think we are who we are and that's an average team.

Yes, this. College basketball overall is very average. So we fit right in actually.

[waggy]

I just hate the dumb plays. Not staying between your man and the basket when you have him pinned. Not taking advantage on free throws. Taking bad shots. Driving the ball to nowhereland. Turnovers. They aren't the keystone cops, but they could be a lot better at the finer points of the game.

I don't want to take too much away from SJU though. They shot the ball very well. (A theme against the X defense.) Pointer had a great game.

[XfansinKy]

Considering this season is basically a wash, no reason to think the same guys with the same minutes will get it done. I may sound crazy but if Mack started JP, Tre, O'Mara and Austin and gave them majority minutes from here on out I would enjoy the rest of the season at least. What were watching the last few years is uninspired play and you can tell the players aren't even having fun. These four would at least go out and show pride. Who gives a damn who the fifth starter is. Throw in Myles, Stain, Jalen, Remy and let Dee play a little too since he is a senior. Why the hell not? Let these youngsters go out n have fun with the other guys who have proven they can't, come off as subs. Might be fun for fans because the group getting big minutes now ain't going anywhere.

[Xavier]

^ That is simply ridiculous. I think Xavier can absolutely make the tournament and you want to throw it away? I'd want Mack (or any coach) fired as soon as the season ended if he pulled a stunt like that.

To the question- I think they are average. It is very frustrating to watch- a lot of mistakes that they can control has been the difference in plenty of games (as pointed out, 1-8 in games decided by 8 points or less). My hope is the young guys (by academic class standards, IE sophomores and Freshman) go through the pain of this season and it toughens them up. How they respond in the next 2-3 years will be crucial to getting Xavier back on track, IMO.

[stophorseabuse]

They just need to stick with it. We know the talent is good, we saw the passion exists. If they stay at it it just takes one thing to click. Underachievers. Bull Shit.

[X Factor]

They just need to stick with it. We know the talent is good, we saw the passion exists. If they stay at it it just takes one thing to click. Underachievers. Bull Shit.

We're 26 games into the year. It's not going to all of a sudden click. I really hope I'm wrong, but this team is what it is. A pretty good team who can win on a lot of nights, but doesn't play good enough defense or make the clutch plays, or hit the clutch shots in close games to get the win.

[nasdadjr]

Neither this is a team of over achievers. Outside of Dee and Reynolds this team has zero athleticism. Every player on xavier looks like a kid except Jalen when compared to the players they go up against every night. It literally looks like jv against varsity every game so for this team to have 16 wins is a miracle to me.

[nasdadjr]

Oh and the uc game is an elimination game now. Win you can make tourney losing team is done

[Titanxman04]

Remy isn't athletic? Are you kidding me? Did you watch his dunk? Or his ability to get to the hoop on a fast break or force a foul?

For the record, we're still in the tournament right now. SJU is now a top 50 RPI program (they were 51 before the game). We get another shot at them. It's not a terrible loss to drop one against a top 50 RPI opponent. We were an 8 seed by projections before the game. Do you all really think ONE loss to SJU at home dropped us all those spots?

PLENTY of opportunities for this team still.

You all need to get out of this "We should be winning games like we were against the A-10" mind frame. This is the second best conference in basketball. MUCH better competition. I hate watching us lose, but it's in no way finished for us.

[Titanxman04]

Oh and the uc game is an elimination game now. Win you can make tourney losing team is done

Yeah, because losing at that games pretty much negates a win against Butler and Nova at home.

You make no sense.

[markchal]

Yeah, because losing at that games pretty much negates a win against Butler and Nova at home.

You make no sense.

Hahahahha beating Butler AND nova? You make no sense.

[danaandvictory]

For the record, we're still in the tournament right now.

Which is meaningless, as you know.

[kyxu]

Which is meaningless, as you know.

Yep. We can just as easily play ourselves out of it as we could solidify our spot.

Four conference games left against teams that we are 0-4 against so far this season, plus big rivalry game on the road. Winning a majority of these games is no longer advantageous, but a necessity.

[LadyMuskie]

Yeah, because losing at that games pretty much negates a win against Butler and Nova at home.

You make no sense.

I love your optimism, but there's no way we take down both Butler and Nova at home. We might get one scalp, but we won't get both. The way things are trending right now, we won't get either.

As a friend said yesterday, barring some sort of miraculous run through these last 5 games or a miraculous run in New York, we all better prepare ourselves to not hear Xavier called on Selection Sunday. Every year at least one team gets left out that everyone thought for sure would be in, and I'm not even sure we're that team. I'm still hoping for the best, but with each loss the light at the end of the tunnel looks more and more like a freight train.

[drudy23]

Yes, this. College basketball overall is very average. So we fit right in actually.

We are an average team and we've been an average team. We were average 6 weeks ago too when I got lambasted for calling us average.

Oh, but wait, that 5 game winning streak is coming...I swear. All the signs point to it.

Another year of disappointment...we need some type of major kickstart again for this program.

[stophorseabuse]

We're 26 games into the year. It's not going to all of a sudden click. I really hope I'm wrong, but this team is what it is. A pretty good team who can win on a lot of nights, but doesn't play good enough defense or make the clutch plays, or hit the clutch shots in close games to get the win.

I simply disagree. We are talking about a team that has been near that point all year. They have hung around the sunny side of the bubble while playing tourney level teams for a month. I don't see a team built for a deep run, but I see a team that still has time to grow. Opportunities abound. Fans can't control how they handle the next 3 weeks. i like this years team better than any team since brawl. I think there is more in the tank.

[stophorseabuse]

And I think these kids will leave it all for each other. I can't ask more as a fan.

[nasdadjr]

At least some people have common sense in this board. If you can watch a xavier game and tell me we are more athletic than anyone we have played outside of schools like abilene then you don't know what your looking at. I like myles Davis but he isn't as athletic as anyone he has tried to guard. Matt stain brook couldn't stay in front of me right now if jp macura can bench 135 pounds I would be amazed and Trevon blueitt looks flabby and slow as well. Just saying by the eye test we go against more athletic teams literally every night so yes I say we have over achieved. Why did we lose to st johns? They were more athletic at every single position. Bigger faster stronger matters and xavier is 0-3 in those categories almost every game

[nasdadjr]

By the way that isn't saying they won't play hard but sometimes you just physically can't beat a team. Xavier physically can't beat villanova that is a loss. We could beat butler but I'm not banking on it. Uc losing at home to Tulane makes that game a must win and if we lose that along with at Creighton at St Johns and one more home contest this team is definitely not dancing so yes the uc game is an elimination game

[nasdadjr]

Drudy23 see you can't criticize xavier on this board cause we are the best ever and if you point out the flaws you get blown up ( sarcasm). Kinda why I stopped posting as much because you can't discuss reality with these people. Criticize mack and you ain't a fan, say a player can't do something then your a hater and so on. It's not bad to understand what your team can and cannot do but some people on here don't wanna hear it

[MuskiePimp23]

Drudy23 see you can't criticize xavier on this board cause we are the best ever and if you point out the flaws you get blown up ( sarcasm). Kinda why I stopped posting as much because you can't discuss reality with these people. Criticize mack and you ain't a fan, say a player can't do something then your a hater and so on. It's not bad to understand what your team can and cannot do but some people on here don't wanna hear it

I agree with this. This board is above any criticism and Xavier will somehow "find a way" to make the dance. That to me is laughable that we are going to find something over the last 5, that we haven't found over the first 26 games.

[MuskiePimp23]

We are an average team and we've been an average team. We were average 6 weeks ago too when I got lambasted for calling us average.

Oh, but wait, that 5 game winning streak is coming...I swear. All the signs point to it.

Another year of disappointment...we need some type of major kickstart again for this program.

Completely agree with this.

[xsteve1]

I'm going to go with underachieving at this point. When the season started X was just steamrolling teams even decent teams like Murray St., Long Beach and Steve Austin. I really thought X was a top 25 level team until the UTEP and Long Beach second game. Unfortunately it seems X just hasn't gotten any better and is just terribly inconsistent.
Would love to see X finish out 4-1 but I think I have a better chance of going out with Kate Upton than that happening.

[Masterofreality]

Really funny to see posters with all red dots stroking each other on the board.

And it's not over...until it's over. My expectations remain that I have none. We could literally win every game or not win any. As such, I'll withhold judgement until later in March. It's not like we're losing to chopped liver.

[XfansinKy]

Really funny to see posters with all red dots stroking each other on the board.

That made me chuckle. Not really lol but a good solid chuckle.

[Titanxman04]

So much stroking....this needs to be NSFW

[chico]

Really funny to see posters with all red dots stroking each other on the board.

And it's not over...until it's over. My expectations remain that I have none. We could literally win every game or not win any. As such, I'll withhold judgement until later in March. It's not like we're losing to chopped liver.

Come on, MOR. Stop being such a pollyanna. I mean, that's what this board is, except for the red army, who know better than any of us about this team. That's why they only show up after losses, and only speak about how bad this team is. Everyone else her is just a bunch of pollyanna's. We can't possibly see any fault with this team. I'm sure your signature is not about Xavier's defense, but rather about people's choice of landscaping. Because only the red army are critical of this team - the rest of us never see any flaws.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I agree with this. This board is above any criticism and Xavier will somehow "find a way" to make the dance. That to me is laughable that we are going to find something over the last 5, that we haven't found over the first 26 games.

We dont need to find anything. Through 26 games pretty much every prediction site has us in the tournament. Its not like we need to go 5-0 to get in. I get we can play ourselves out but there are a lot of people on the board that erroneously dont think we are in and we are going to have to do something miraculously to play ourselves in. We need to go 3-2 to feel comfortable. Cane definitely be done.

[xubrew]

Two years ago Xavier missed the NIT.

Last year, they barely made the field.

This year, they appear to have a much better chance of making it than missing it. They're playing in the #2 rated conference where even the teams at the bottom of the league have impressive records at home.

Xavier is better this year than they were last year, and they were better last year than they were the year before that. That's improvement. Chris Mack must at least be doing a few things right. I'm not saying the team couldn't be, or even shouldn't be better, but I am saying that the plane is not crashing into the mountain. At the end of the day, it's in a better place than it's been in the last two years, and in a place that 300 other programs are not in. They're in a position (barring a collapse) to make the NCAA Tournament without winning the conference tournament.

It really is somewhat amusing to come on here and read what seems like unconditional praise after every win, and then the non stop handwringing after every loss. If Xavier were to get rid of Chris Mack, which I don't think they'll do because I do not believe them to be totally insane, they'd succeed in making another program extremely happy.

[paulxu]

Well, that's not going to make you too many friends.

[drudy23]

It's in a better place than the last two years (arguably...can't really make that claim yet this year), but is it in a better place the last 5-7 years? Something had to put us there. And it's not just "well of course we took a step back, we entered the Big East". There's an argument for that, but things haven't been up to standard well before that.

[Titanxman04]

We dont need to find anything. Through 26 games pretty much every prediction site has us in the tournament. Its not like we need to go 5-0 to get in. I get we can play ourselves out but there are a lot of people on the board that erroneously dont think we are in and we are going to have to do something miraculously to play ourselves in. We need to go 3-2 to feel comfortable. Cane definitely be done.

Absolutely. We can take either Butler or Nova (which is what I meant to say in a previous post. Never really bothered to fix it) and believe we will take Creighton on the road. Picking up one in the tournament will play it risky without another win, but I think we are capable. Given how there are a lot of teams playing this same sort of dangerous game on the bubble, leads me to believe that we have less to worry about than what most people think we do.

[Titanxman04]

Two years ago Xavier missed the NIT.

Last year, they barely made the field.

This year, they appear to have a much better chance of making it than missing it. They're playing in the #2 rated conference where even the teams at the bottom of the league have impressive records at home.

Xavier is better this year than they were last year, and they were better last year than they were the year before that. That's improvement. Chris Mack must at least be doing a few things right. I'm not saying the team couldn't be, or even shouldn't be better, but I am saying that the plane is not crashing into the mountain. At the end of the day, it's in a better place than it's been in the last two years, and in a place that 300 other programs are not in. They're in a position (barring a collapse) to make the NCAA Tournament without winning the conference tournament.

It really is somewhat amusing to come on here and read what seems like unconditional praise after every win, and then the non stop handwringing after every loss. If Xavier were to get rid of Chris Mack, which I don't think they'll do because I do not believe them to be totally insane, they'd succeed in making another program extremely happy.

This. Exactly this.

[drudy23]

we have plenty to worry about

[Titanxman04]

It's in a better place than the last two years (arguably...can't really make that claim yet this year), but is it in a better place the last 5-7 years? Something had to put us there. And it's not just "well of course we took a step back, we entered the Big East". There's an argument for that, but things haven't been up to standard well before that.

I think the Big East definitely plays a big part of it. It's hard to get up for game after game. Before the Big East, a game against a Power Conference opponent was easy to get up for. We have them every game nowadays in this conference. A season is draining. These guys should be up for it, so don't think I am making it the whole excuse, but to blame Mack, for instance, on how they don't have energy doesn't make sense to me.

If college kids look for middle-age adults for energy, theres something wrong with the kid.

We have the highest SOS ever.

We are finally recruiting at the level that suggests Big East talent. Being in this conference does that for you. This years recruiting class is the highest rated ever. And when people say, "Yeah, but _______ sucks!", I scratch my head.

Every year we get some hyped freshman coming in. We think our program is going to change like he's Derrick Rose or John Wall, and then we go nuts and say Mack cannot recruit when the kid doesn't turn out the way we hyped him up to be. The jump that Myles Davis (or BJ Raymond, Jason Love, etc...) made in a single season should be signs enough that we need to let the system work. Other programs in our conference are performing in similar manners. It's not just us.

[Titanxman04]

we have plenty to worry about

Sure we do. But folks on here are saying we need to fire the coach and makes it sound like we need a complete overhaul. It's not that bad. We're still in. We still have a great shot to get some great wins.

[CinciX12]

It really is somewhat amusing to come on here and read what seems like unconditional praise after every win, and then the non stop handwringing after every loss. If Xavier were to get rid of Chris Mack, which I don't think they'll do because I do not believe them to be totally insane, they'd succeed in making another program extremely happy.

I just don't really understand what has all of you convinced that Chris Mack is the second coming.
What school is he going to make happy? He could be a lateral hire somewhere or could go to a smaller school. That is it, IMO.

[Xavier]

I think the Big East definitely plays a big part of it. It's hard to get up for game after game. Before the Big East, a game against a Power Conference opponent was easy to get up for. We have them every game nowadays in this conference. A season is draining. These guys should be up for it, so don't think I am making it the whole excuse, but to blame Mack, for instance, on how they don't have energy doesn't make sense to me.





I am in the minority, I am sure, but I just don't think the Big East is so good that it plays a big part of it. Is it better than the A-10? Of course. I think it is filled with a bunch of average teams. Beyond Nova (and maybe Butler) I don't see a team that is great. I think Xavier is in that bunch- but I think that Xavier has a more talented roster than a lot of the other teams and should be better than 7-7 in conference and 16-10 overall. The Big East played a great RPI numbers game OOC with a few real solid wins. I hope they do that every year. But, much like last year, I see the Big East doing pretty much nothing in the tournament- I'd be shocked if most of the teams are not out of it in the first weekend again.

The only thing I will say about looking to Mack for energy is this: I think the team has played a lot better when Mack has a lot of energy on the bench. Should they play that well no matter what? Yes. If it takes Mack to be a high energy coach to get them going- I think he should recognize it and do what he needs to.

[xubrew]

I just don't really understand what has all of you convinced that Chris Mack is the second coming.
What school is he going to make happy? He could be a lateral hire somewhere or could go to a smaller school. That is it, IMO.

You take hyperbole to the extreme.

I'm not so sure what makes you think Mack couldn't get a job coaching a ten year old team in India where they're simply trying to learn the sport.

I don't think Mack is the second coming. I don't see how I've said anything that would make anyone believe that I thought he was. I do think getting rid of him would be a mistake. Programs that get rid of coaches who have been steadily improving the program and have them in position to make the NCAA Tournament don't seem to come back to being relevant any time soon. Minnesota and Wake Forest are the most recent examples of that.

[Titanxman04]

I am in the minority, I am sure, but I just don't think the Big East is so good that it plays a big part of it. Is it better than the A-10? Of course. I think it is filled with a bunch of average teams. Beyond Nova (and maybe Butler) I don't see a team that is great. I think Xavier is in that bunch- but I think that Xavier has a more talented roster than a lot of the other teams and should be better than 7-7 in conference and 16-10 overall. The Big East played a great RPI numbers game OOC with a few real solid wins. I hope they do that every year. But, much like last year, I see the Big East doing pretty much nothing in the tournament- I'd be shocked if most of the teams are not out of it in the first weekend again.

The only thing I will say about looking to Mack for energy is this: I think the team has played a lot better when Mack has a lot of energy on the bench. Should they play that well no matter what? Yes. If it takes Mack to be a high energy coach to get them going- I think he should recognize it and do what he needs to.

I coached high school lacrosse, and now high level college club lacrosse (finished 7th in the country last year, and return virtually everyone. I'm spoiled). In my 7 years coaching between middle school up to where I am now, I will tell you that using the same tricks again and again simply don't work. Some have stated that Mack needs to get T'd up to fire his guys up, for instance. And sure, when Mack gets excited the team feeds off of it.

However, it's been my experience that you cannot keep doing the same thing. Those tactics lose their effectiveness if used over and over again. Mack has his demeanor. I have said in the live chat before and I will say it now, Mack does not yell and scream and get excited often court side. In the locker room he's a different man. I can tell you from first hand accounts that that is how he coaches. It's worked for him in the past with more successful teams.

This is still a young team. SOS plays a big part in the record. Continually playing huge games against great opponents takes it's toll on any team. Having several freshmen on the roster expected to make big contributions isn't always successful.

[muethibp]

There's a great line in the West Wing series. Josh says there was a coach who felt like his player was squandering his potential and the coach asked him, "Are you ignorant or just apathetic?" To which the player responded, "I don't know and I don't care."

That reminds me of the question posed in this subject. Average or underachiever? Honestly: both. They just aren't as talented as teams of the past. And it's hard to feel like we're getting the best available play out of multiple guys.

[XU 87]

I just don't really understand what has all of you convinced that Chris Mack is the second coming.
What school is he going to make happy? He could be a lateral hire somewhere or could go to a smaller school. That is it, IMO.

No one said he is the "second coming", or even implied it. But he did get offers last year from Wake (ACC) and Cal-Berkely (Pac 12) apparently paying him more money than X pays him. Tennessee also made a run at him a few years back (and possibly last year as well). There appear to be plenty of high level programs willing to "take him off our hands." (Note sarcasm).

Mack is probably not the second coming of Wooden or Coach K, but there are multiple high level programs out there that would like to have him as their coach. And that you should tell you and the rest of us something.

[LA Muskie]

I think the Big East has contributed to the number of losses. But I don't think it has contributed to our tournament prospects. As I said in another thread, if anything I think our strength of schedule -- and the credibility of the conference in general -- has given us a much greater margin for error. The problem being that our team hasn't been as strong the last few years, so we've used up most (if not all) of that margin. Hopefully that doesn't happen again this year.

[LA Muskie]

No one said he is the "second coming", or even implied it. But he did get offers last year from Wake (ACC) and Cal-Berkely (Pac 12) apparently paying him more money than X pays him. Tennessee also made a run at him a few years back (and possibly last year as well). There appear to be plenty of high level programs willing to "take him off our hands." (Note sarcasm).

Mack is probably not the second coming of Wooden or Coach K, but there are multiple high level programs out there that would like to have him as their coach. And that you should tell you and the rest of us something.
I'm no Chris Mack basher. Let's make that clear upfront. I don't want him leaving. I don't think he's a star, but I think he's an above-average coach, a solid recruiter, and for the most part a very good face of the university. But mostly I don't want the upheaval of a coaching change, even if I'm not as worried as others about our ability to replace him.

I also agree that he has been in demand in the past. And that, if we were to let him go (or if he were to leave of his own volition) after this season, he would land on his feet and make someone else very happy.

I agree with all of that so far.

What I'm not entirely sure about is whether that means much more than that. Chris would be a "safe" pick. He has head coaching experience. At Xavier. Now in the Big East. With plenty of tournament experience. Including a Sweet 16 birth.

Many AD's are risk averse. They'd rather take the known quantity. Which is why so many washed-up coaches get second, third and fourth chances.

So yes, I think he would get another job. Likely at a Big 5 school. Possibly with even more basketball success. But I'm not sure that makes him any more the coach we think we have. It may just mean that the AD is as scared about the "unknown" as many on this board are.

[XU 87]

I'm no Chris Mack basher. Let's make that clear upfront. I don't want him leaving. I don't think he's a star, but I think he's an above-average coach, a solid recruiter, and for the most part a very good face of the university. But mostly I don't want the upheaval of a coaching change, even if I'm not as worried as others about our ability to replace him.

I also agree that he has been in demand in the past. And that, if we were to let him go (or if he were to leave of his own volition) after this season, he would land on his feet and make someone else very happy.

I agree with all of that so far.

What I'm not entirely sure about is whether that means much more than that. Chris would be a "safe" pick. He has head coaching experience. At Xavier. Now in the Big East. With plenty of tournament experience. Including a Sweet 16 birth.

Many AD's are risk averse. They'd rather take the known quantity. Which is why so many washed-up coaches get second, third and fourth chances.

So yes, I think he would get another job. Likely at a Big 5 school. Possibly with even more basketball success. But I'm not sure that makes him any more the coach we think we have. It may just mean that the AD is as scared about the "unknown" as many on this board are.

I think that's a fair assessment.

[xubrew]

I think the Big East has contributed to the number of losses. But I don't think it has contributed to our tournament prospects. As I said in another thread, if anything I think our strength of schedule -- and the credibility of the conference in general -- has given us a much greater margin for error. The problem being that our team hasn't been as strong the last few years, so we've used up most (if not all) of that margin. Hopefully that doesn't happen again this year.

It's crazy to think about, but we lost by Auburn, Long Beach and UTEP by a combined total of eight points (I think). If we win just one of those, we're in much better shape. If we win two of those, we're not even having this conversation. If you were to run the numbers with two more wins away from home, everything on Xavier's profile would look so much better. With those wins, it's easy to say that we've struggled away from home in league play, but it's very tough to win on the road in this league. Now, I get the feeling they're going to say "Well, they lost to sub NIT teams away from home out of conference. Winning one or two of those would have made a world of difference. The margin for error you speak of would have been a lot higher. But, we didn't win. They all count and you can't just pick and choose.

[Masterofreality]

It's crazy to think about, but we lost by Auburn, Long Beach and UTEP by a combined total of eight points (I think). If we win just one of those, we're in much better shape. If we win two of those, we're not even having this conversation. If you were to run the numbers with two more wins away from home, everything on Xavier's profile would look so much better.

Right. And no way we should have lost all 3. No more than 1 of those. (UTEP was charmed that night).

[BandAid]

Disclaimer: I haven't bothered to read the entire thread.

My opinion is our upperclassmen are limited in different ways (Dee isn't big, Stain isn't quick, Farr is Farr).

Our best candidates to take over a game and will the team to victory are underclassmen. And underclassmen are notoriously inconsistent and a step or two behind on team defense.

Therefore, as a team, we have been inconsistent and spotty defensively.

In hindsight, I can't really say the season's results to date are surprising. Yes, an individual game here or there is surprising, by as a whole, not really.

[chico]

I'm no Chris Mack basher. Let's make that clear upfront. I don't want him leaving. I don't think he's a star, but I think he's an above-average coach, a solid recruiter, and for the most part a very good face of the university. But mostly I don't want the upheaval of a coaching change, even if I'm not as worried as others about our ability to replace him.

I also agree that he has been in demand in the past. And that, if we were to let him go (or if he were to leave of his own volition) after this season, he would land on his feet and make someone else very happy.

I agree with all of that so far.

What I'm not entirely sure about is whether that means much more than that. Chris would be a "safe" pick. He has head coaching experience. At Xavier. Now in the Big East. With plenty of tournament experience. Including a Sweet 16 birth.

Many AD's are risk averse. They'd rather take the known quantity. Which is why so many washed-up coaches get second, third and fourth chances.

So yes, I think he would get another job. Likely at a Big 5 school. Possibly with even more basketball success. But I'm not sure that makes him any more the coach we think we have. It may just mean that the AD is as scared about the "unknown" as many on this board are.

He was the "safe" pick when Bobinski hired him. I have no inside knowledge into the decision making process when Mack was hired, but I have to believe that after losing Matta and Miller the way we did, Bobonski was looking for a little more stability with the next hire. Because of that, Mack had the upper hand. Now I'm not saying that he shouldn't have gotten the job. But I do think that Bobinski traded a little bit of the "upside" Miller and Mack had for the stability of Mack. Of course, Mack could leave after this season and completely blow my theory to bits.

[LadyMuskie]

He was the "safe" pick when Bobinski hired him. I have no inside knowledge into the decision making process when Mack was hired, but I have to believe that after losing Matta and Miller the way we did, Bobonski was looking for a little more stability with the next hire. Because of that, Mack had the upper hand. Now I'm not saying that he shouldn't have gotten the job. But I do think that Bobinski traded a little bit of the "upside" Miller and Mack had for the stability of Mack. Of course, Mack could leave after this season and completely blow my theory to bits.

I agree. I think the fan base really wanted someone who would stay for awhile as well, and that could have influenced Bobinski. Let's be honest, we still want the success and longevity of Mark Few and Gonzaga.

Someone mentioned awhile back in another thread that if Bobinski doesn't come calling for Mack it says something. I don't think that's necessarily wrong either. I'm not sure that it says that Mack isn't a good coach or a good enough coach, but it may say more about why Mack was hired here in the first place more than anything.

[XU 87]

Unlike Miller, and even Matta to some extent, Bobinski interviewed multiple candidates for the HC job when he hired Mack. While he may have been the safer pick, he still had to win the job over a number of other candidates.

[LadyMuskie]

Unlike Miller, and even Matta to some extent, Bobinski interviewed multiple candidates for the HC job when he hired Mack. While he may have been the safer pick, he still had to win the job over a number of other candidates.

They did interview others, but I don't know anyone who was surprised when they named Mack the head coach. Even on this board most people were hoping it would be Mack to keep some continuity and retain some recruits.

[Xavier]

We're the other candidates public knowledge? Just can't remember who was interviewed if it was.

[CinciX12]

Second coming is hyperbole. And XUBrew, you are just who I happened to quote, I wasn't trying to throw you under the bus.

I don't remember anyone else we interviewed? Someone refresh my memory.

[LadyMuskie]

I don't remember who else was named, but I remember the word was that coaches were being interviewed.

[GoMuskies]

Darrin Horn interviewed for the job. He would have been a truly atrocious choice. Surely Fran McCaffery was interviewed as well. He would have been a fine choice.

[Masterofreality]

I don't remember who else was named, but I remember the word was that coaches were being interviewed.

One for sure was Darrin Horne who went to South Carolina and was fired after his 4th year.
I also believe that Mark Fox was interviewed as well. He's still at Georgia, and has been since 2009.

[Masterofreality]

Darrin Horn interviewed for the job. He would have been a truly atrocious choice. Surely Fran McCaffery was interviewed as well. He would have been a fine choice.

I'm not sure we interviewed Fran the last time. I know we did after Beaknose snuck off by dark of night.

[mohr5150]

I happened to watch the X/WVa 2008 tourney game the other day. The talent on that roster was sick. Burrell, CJ, Duncan, Drew, Brown, with BJ off the bench. Comparing that team with this one, there really is no comparison. A big difference for me is the amount of experience we had on the court. The only freshman who played was Dante. Freshmen are inconsistent, plain and simple, and defense is not their forte. But having them play so much this year will pay off big time down the road. Think about Justin D and Justin C. playing as freshmen and what they turned into. This team is mostly inconsistent, but their is a talent gap at one or two positions.

[Masterofreality]

Want to know somebody who underachieved? Beaknose in 2003.

He had Anthony Myles, Lionel Chalmers, Romain Sato, Dedrick Finn...oh, and some random guy by the name of West plus a pretty decent bench including Keith Jackson. Lost in the first NCAA weekend.

[LadyMuskie]

I happened to watch the X/WVa 2008 tourney game the other day. The talent on that roster was sick. Burrell, CJ, Duncan, Drew, Brown, with BJ off the bench. Comparing that team with this one, there really is no comparison. A big difference for me is the amount of experience we had on the court. The only freshman who played was Dante. Freshmen are inconsistent, plain and simple, and defense is not their forte. But having them play so much this year will pay off big time down the road. Think about Justin D and Justin C. playing as freshmen and what they turned into. This team is mostly inconsistent, but their is a talent gap at one or two positions.

But Burrell, CJ, Duncan, Drew and Brown were recruited to play in the League That Shall Not Be Named. So, obviously, this current team's freshmen would crush them because our freshmen now were recruited to play in the Big East.

[GoMuskies]

I'm not sure we interviewed Fran the last time.

I'd be surprised if we didn't. Fran was pretty hot at the time. Siena had just won a first round Tournament game and scared the life out of overall #1 seed Louisville in the second round.

[chico]

Unlike Miller, and even Matta to some extent, Bobinski interviewed multiple candidates for the HC job when he hired Mack. While he may have been the safer pick, he still had to win the job over a number of other candidates.

Matta was Bobinski's choice from the get-go. Miller was not Bobinski's hire. I don't know how many candidates were interviewed, I just remember things being very close to the vest. MOR named the ones I remember, and Go is likely on to something with McCaffery - I think Siena had just beaten Ohio State in Dayton that year so Bobinski probably had him on the radar.

[nasdadjr]

So master of reality your basis for whether someone makes a good point or not is a system where unless you provide comments others agree with you will get a bad score? I could make a great post you don't agree with its contents and score or bad so I get this bad posting score just because I don't agree with you. Sounds about right for someone as limited as yourself.

On another note this member of the red army said Xavier had over achieved which from my understanding of English is a compliment not a criticism. I think we can all agree that this xavier team is athletically deficient so to be about .500 in the second rated conference is actually decent given our limited talent

[X-band '01]

One for sure was Darrin Horne who went to South Carolina and was fired after his 4th year.
I also believe that Mark Fox was interviewed as well. He's still at Georgia, and has been since 2009.

I didn't know Fox was a candidate for Xavier; I think he was just coming in from Nevada when he was on the market back in 2009.

I still chuckle when I think back to the love affair that posters had for Johnny Dawkins at the time. He's been able to get to one Sweet 16 at Stanford, but that's about it. The Cardinal looked like an NCAA team in January but have gone into freefall for the past few weeks.

[Titanxman04]

I happened to watch the X/WVa 2008 tourney game the other day. The talent on that roster was sick. Burrell, CJ, Duncan, Drew, Brown, with BJ off the bench. Comparing that team with this one, there really is no comparison. A big difference for me is the amount of experience we had on the court. The only freshman who played was Dante. Freshmen are inconsistent, plain and simple, and defense is not their forte. But having them play so much this year will pay off big time down the road. Think about Justin D and Justin C. playing as freshmen and what they turned into. This team is mostly inconsistent, but their is a talent gap at one or two positions.

I would agree with this completely.

Comparing those two teams just isn't right. It's not like we had five freshmen on the team that year. Seniors and juniors, all of them.

The past success of Xavier was that we were LOADED with upperclassmen those years. The past few years, I would argue, haven't been that way. Our leaders are younger guys. Our top players were freshmen and sophomores and the players that we were hoping would be seniors and juniors have left early or transferred. We could have counted a lot on players like Lyons, Dez, and Semaj on the past couple of years, and our success would have shown it.

When you recruit players years in advance, it is with the understanding that you'll have certain players still on the roster. Losing the key players we did leaves a void that, frankly, we're still trying to recover from. This freshmen class playing so much will cause headaches, as we have all experienced so far. But I look at how this program has developed committed players, and there's a history of success there. I cannot wait to see what Sumner, Bluiett, Macura, London and O'Mara look like in three to four years. This team, assuming all stay, will be absolutely nasty. The recruiting level is up there now. We just need time for these young men to learn it all.

For those who say that Mack and Co. fail to develop players, just look at how Myles Davis has improved in one off-season here. For the most part, Dee Davis has been playing more of a pass-first type of game, which is leading to his success. Jalen Reynolds is developing every day it seems (though a tough game this past Saturday may be the counter-argument for that, but I'd say it's the exception to the rule).

I think this team is underachieving. I don't think we can honestly say that a team that relies on sophomores, freshmen, and a transfer for their scoring is overachieving. There is a lot of scoring option on the floor, but mid-season slumps and struggles will come and go. It's the nature of the game with the exception of the elite few, and even they have their off-nights. Sometimes it takes time to find who has the "hot hand" in a game. Last year we knew Semaj was going to bring it most nights and had that go-to player. This year, it could be a number of guys who could have that great night.

That balance in scoring will come. The 06/07 and 07/08 teams were deep, talented, and experienced. I think one of those years we had six players averaging double figures. Thats incredible. I have faith that we will have that in a year or so again. This is just the year where they are all coming into their own. Sometimes it takes guys longer than others.

[Titanxman04]

So master of reality your basis for whether someone makes a good point or not is a system where unless you provide comments others agree with you will get a bad score? I could make a great post you don't agree with its contents and score or bad so I get this bad posting score just because I don't agree with you. Sounds about right for someone as limited as yourself.

On another note this member of the red army said Xavier had over achieved which from my understanding of English is a compliment not a criticism. I think we can all agree that this xavier team is athletically deficient so to be about .500 in the second rated conference is actually decent given our limited talent


Two points to make about this.

1. MOR is a class act. Should you ever have the privilege to meet the man, his generosity, charity, and friendly demeanor will strike you as exemplary. Calling him "limited" shows that you're only seeing what you want to see. I hope you have the opportunity to have a beer with the man, as most of you should at some point or another. He is passionate about Xavier as a university, as much as he is about the program, and is a standard barer for the qualities that our beloved university tries to instill on all of it's students. It's his example (along with the likes of Kahn's and others) that I try to mold myself after in person. While things may get heated on the board, should I run into you at Dana's, I'd still offer to buy you a beer and have polite discourse on why we disagree on certain items. Hell, I'd even buy MuskiePimp a beer, though it'd be domestic. I only buy good craft beer for people that don't call me a douche.

2. I have no clue how you can call this team "athletically deficient". You've mentioned that Jalen is your exception to that, and I would call anyone who would argue that Jalen is not athletic, as being incompetent to the highest degree. However, please explain to me this:

How is Remy not athletic? He is one of the fastest guys on the court, and on the break he can get to the rim at will, or get fouled trying. When he's locked in, he's the best defender we have.

What about Dee Davis? Our second-best defender is typically only hampered by his lack of height. He is not going to stop guys like Harrison of St. John's, who has several inches on him and is just as athletic. Dunn of Providence fits a similar mold, and I would argue is more talented. Both are incredible players, let alone guard, who would start on most teams in the NCAA, including the top tier ones. Davis is an excellent defender, and while some of his decisions with the ball leaves usbanging out head against the wall, calling him "athletically deficient" boggles my mind. His agility is top tier.

JP Macura isn't athletic? Have you seen that guy jump? Almost every game he comes in from the perimeter on a shot and jumps over defenders to win rebounds (or at least tips them away from opponents). His defense needs work due to his footwork and not really having to fight to play defense too much in high school (a similar argument I'd make for Bluiett). JP is going to be a freak. He can shoot, drive, and jump. He may be raw around the edges, but can't say he isn't athletic.

Point is, I guess I'd like to know what your definition for athletic is. Does it mean they have to have a 40 inch vertical like Brown, McClean, and Jalen? If thats the case, then a lot of talented X teams aren't athletic.

[xsteve1]

I'd be surprised if we didn't. Fran was pretty hot at the time. Siena had just won a first round Tournament game and scared the life out of overall #1 seed Louisville in the second round.

Bobo interviewed Fran McCaffrey after Prosser left. I believe Rogers hired Miller without really doing any search.
I believe Bobo may have interviewed Fran after Miller but really had not heard his name at that time. Horn and maybe Brownell were the names floated around before going with Mack.

[XU 87]

Second coming is hyperbole. And XUBrew, you are just who I happened to quote, I wasn't trying to throw you under the bus.

I don't remember anyone else we interviewed? Someone refresh my memory.

Besides Mack, they interviewed the old coach from South Carolina and I think the coach who is now at Clemson and was at Wright State. I also think the coach at Cleveland State, who was also at Rutgers and Kent State got interviewed. Those are the ones I heard of. I think I heard Iowa's coach, while at Siena, inquired about the job, but I'm not sure if he got interviewed.

(I see Xsteve answered this question 45 minutes ago).

[XU 87]

Matta was Bobinski's choice from the get-go. Miller was not Bobinski's hire. I don't know how many candidates were interviewed, I just remember things being very close to the vest. MOR named the ones I remember, and Go is likely on to something with McCaffery - I think Siena had just beaten Ohio State in Dayton that year so Bobinski probably had him on the radar.

Miller was not technically Bobinski's hire, but I think was done with Bobinski's blessing. Wasn't Miller hired the same day that Matta left? Or was it the next day? But X did not interview anyone else before the Miller hire.

[XU 87]

Want to know somebody who underachieved? Beaknose in 2003.

He had Anthony Myles, Lionel Chalmers, Romain Sato, Dedrick Finn...oh, and some random guy by the name of West plus a pretty decent bench including Keith Jackson. Lost in the first NCAA weekend.

I wouldn't go that far. That team was top 15 and had a 3 seed. Just because we lost to Maryland in the second round means there was underachievement. (I did have a very empty feeling at halftime when we were down by about 16 points . If only Maryland hadn't made that last second shot against UNC- Wilmington.)

[danaandvictory]

Besides Mack, they interviewed the old coach from South Carolina and I think the coach who is now at Clemson and was at Wright State. I also think the coach at Cleveland State, who was also at Rutgers and Kent State got interviewed. Those are the ones I heard of. I think I heard Iowa's coach, while at Siena, inquired about the job, but I'm not sure if he got interviewed.

(I see Xsteve answered this question 45 minutes ago).

Horn, Brownell, and Gary Waters were all candidates.

McCaffery almost got the job in 2001 and I think he pissed Bobinski off at the time, so I'm not sure whether he was interviewed or not despite being an obvious candidate.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I wouldn't go that far. That team was top 15 and had a 3 seed. Just because we lost to Maryland in the second round means there was underachievement. (I did have a very empty feeling at halftime when we were down by about 16 points . If only Maryland hadn't made that last second shot against UNC- Wilmington.)

Stupid Steve Blake.

[XU 87]

Stupid Steve Blake.

I think it was Drew Nichols, although Blake was on that team. Blake hit back to back threes against X late in the second half to pull Maryland away after X made a great comeback.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I think it was Drew Nichols, although Blake was on that team. Blake hit back to back threes against X late in the second half to pull Maryland away after X made a great comeback.

Yes you are correct. I just make up my own memories pretty often apparently.

[Masterofreality]

I wouldn't go that far. That team was top 15 and had a 3 seed. Just because we lost to Maryland in the second round means there was underachievement. (I did have a very empty feeling at halftime when we were down by about 16 points . If only Maryland hadn't made that last second shot against UNC- Wilmington.)

Well, people who keep saying that by losing in the First Round last year it was a disaster, seem to forget what the "Gods of Coaching" have done. Just reminding that one game doesn't brand a program.

[chico]

Miller was not technically Bobinski's hire, but I think was done with Bobinski's blessing. Wasn't Miller hired the same day that Matta left? Or was it the next day? But X did not interview anyone else before the Miller hire.

Should have put "wink, wink" after the Miller hire, because I'm sure you're right about Bobinski having input. Can't remember if Miller was hired the next day but it was very soon after Matta left.

[XU 87]

Well, people who keep saying that by losing in the First Round last year it was a disaster, seem to forget what the "Gods of Coaching" have done. Just reminding that one game doesn't brand a program.

My personal belief is that a good run in the NCAA tourney can make up for a disappointing regular season (see 2011- 12 season), but an early round loss doesn't turn a really good season into a bad season (2002-03 and 2010-2011 seasons).

[LadyMuskie]

Well, people who keep saying that by losing in the First Round last year it was a disaster, seem to forget what the "Gods of Coaching" have done. Just reminding that one game doesn't brand a program.

I don't think losing in the play in round made the season a disaster, but the game itself was an abomination I hope Xavier never, ever repeats.

[Masterofreality]

I don't think losing in the play in round made the season a disaster, but the game itself was an abomination I hope Xavier never, ever repeats.

And on that we have common ground. FO' SHO'!

[Xavier]

My personal belief is that a good run in the NCAA tourney can make up for a disappointing regular season (see 2011- 12 season), but an early round loss doesn't turn a really good season into a bad season (2002-03 and 2010-2011 seasons).

Completely agree. Unless Xavier wins the Big East regular season or tournament. Beyond that, its all about tournament play.

[Cheesehead]

gotta get in to make a run and I guess I will believe it when I see Xavier's name called on Selection Sunday

[nasdadjr]

Titan muskie my definition of athletic is the combination of size speed and strength. I mentioned in my post before that Dee has zero size which is why his defense is so suspect. Guys just shoot over him. Dee is very quick and great passer but his lack of size is why he struggles defensively. Myles Davis has no speed and little strength which is why it's hard for him to defend. Stain has no speed or quickness as a matter of opinion he looks like he wears cement shoes. Blueitt looks flabby and slow and jp macura has zero strength. Now yes a lot of these guys are young and I know in the off season this will change as they get older but for this season right now it is why this team is so challenged defensively. It's hard to defend if you can't stay in front, push people off the block, and when you do make a play to stay in front you gotta put a hand in someone's face.

As far as Remy Abell is concerned I'll give him to you he has the size strength and speed to defend well for his position but having only one guy like him (2 if Reynolds is on the floor) just isn't enough. What I'm getting at is we have good projects on this team and I'm not against that in any way cause I like having 4 year guys instead of one and dones but that is why the last few recruiting classes have been so frustrating cause those project players have left and we are stuck with the development players getting time and struggling now. It will pay off big down the road but is why I say we have over achieved to this point

[Xavier]

While I think athleticism is somewhat important (the team needs some of it to be successful) it is really an overrated thing. I take a good basketball player over an athletic guy. For example, since we do play UC next, all they do is recruit athleticism. Thus, they can be good defensively and can jump but just flat out are not good basketball players. That stuff only takes them so far (I.E. only scoring 49 on home court against Tulsa?).

[sUCk]

Long time since I have posted. Frankly I avoid reading chat rooms during the season because so many on these boards have the same emotional feelings, whether after a victory or defeat, as I do. Xavier basketball has frustrated me for the last 3 seasons. Ever since the event at the last crosstown shootout, the emotions/anxieties felt from the post game news conference, to the suspensions, to the NCAA tournament round of 16, to the tumultuous offseason that saw both Lyons and Wells essentially kicked out of school and couple that season with the next couple seasons of Xavier basketball, we have all gone through a very mind numbing experience. Frankly last year I thought the team overachieved early during the season and gave all fans a false sense of hope going to February/March. This year, the team has not found any form of consistency. We lack a finisher/closer in the last 4 minutes. We cannot get a big defensive stop when we need to. I don't know if these players trust one another, whether or not it is coaching, or maybe a little bit of both. This team can look terrific and terrible in the same game. That to me spells average...HOWEVER, this team has a plethora of talent. They are big, can shoot and can push tempo. The fact that this does not happen every night and that the effort appears inconsistent at best spells underachievers. I have not ever been a fan of the current coaches philosophy and continue to be frustrated by our lack of in game movement/strategy shifts/player strategy...to me this means we have an average commander in chief. If you were to take these three variables of talent, coaching and in-game execution/philosophy, we are an average ball club with above average talent (albeit young talent). If this program continues to be average next year, it is time for the administration to look at the consistent variable in our formula at the end of next season and make a change at that time. Until that time, my alcohol consumption during X games will continue to increase and my frustration will follow suit.

[xubrew]

I've changed my mind!!! I want mack fired!!!

[D-West & PO-Z]

He has made some great coaching moves today!

[markchal]

Every time they make you think they turned the corner...they keep coming back to the middle. Playing on fumes in our third game in five days, we put up a good fight but we just are what we are. Some good young talent, pretty average upperclassmen (outside of Dee's crosstown game, he's been pretty forgettable lately, and don't even get me started on Stainbrook).

Unless we pull off a miracle on Saturday, we're going to be facing a Creighton team with nothing to lose on senior night to make it into the tournament and then we'll need to beat either GT or Providence in the BE tourney to avoid the play-in game.

I tricked myself into thinking we were putting it all together, but we just are what we are.

[Cheesehead]

Just a very very frustrating team. I could see the team miss the tourney and I could see this team make the sweet 16

[D-West & PO-Z]

If we beat Creighton I think we are solidly in and wont have to play first four even with no wins in the BE tourney. The other bubble teams are soooo mediocre. Problem is if we do lose to Creighton it will be very damaging and could keep us out if we lose to nova and lose first BE tourney game. The difference is seeding with a win at Creighton vs a loss will be huge.

[LadyMuskie]

Just a very very frustrating team. I could see the team miss the tourney and I could see this team make the sweet 16

Agree. There must be at least a half dozen versions of this team and it's anyone's guess which version we'll get on any given night. Schizophrenics have fewer personalities. the team as a whole is inconsistent. The players and coaching staff individually are inconsistent. It's a clusterf&*k that sometimes gives us amazing basketball to watch.

[xubrew]

Winning would have helped a lot. Losing didn't really hurt a lot.

The Johnnies have four home losses, and three were to teams that are going to be considered for #1 seeds. The other was to Butler.

Winning would have made our profile look a lot better than it did yesterday, but I don't think losing that game really makes us look any worse.

[sgarcia]

Winning would have helped a lot. Losing didn't really hurt a lot.

The Johnnies have four home losses, and three were to teams that are going to be considered for #1 seeds. The other was to Butler.

Winning would have made our profile look a lot better than it did yesterday, but I don't think losing that game really makes us look any worse.

Losing does hurt. That would've locked up a bid. We can't rely on our RPI, SOS and any other metric when we keep losing games. It comes down to W's and L's. I can't imagine the selection committee is going to be that impressed with a 19-13 team if we finish like I think we will. For how good Mack is at out of bounds plays we sure are terrible at end of game situations. That goes for the players and coaches. Looks like Trevon was all by himself again just like the Auburn game with no one bothering to pass him the ball.

[Xer4ever]

By (returning) player: Matt- best passing center ever at X? Big East projected 1st team set expectations too high-- Meets my expectations
Jalen- developing into consistent beast I thought he could be. Still needs more maturity- Meets
James- Best rebounder on team but lost shooting touch from close and long range- Below expectations
Myles- great all around improvement- Exceeds
Dee- Great A/TO and heart of a lion. But poor decision making and shooting percent are disappointment- Below
Coach- Definately see growth. Great coaches transition from a player to a mentor. I hope Coach Mack gets there. Meets Expectations
As for the sum of the parts, they have exceeded my expectations, given the amount of minutes being played by 1st and 2nd yr players, and the absence of a proven leader. Yes they are expectantly inconsistent. But no way did I expect this team to be one of the top 10% of all Div 1 schools this year. Let's all hold on and try to appreciate what our young team is trying to accomplish.

[Muskie]

I'm not here to make excuses. But we looked exhausted down the stretch. Schedule caught up with us. Also I'd love to know statistically what our fg% is from inside 3 ft. We've missed more bunnies and lay ups than I can ever remember. Now are misses last night were coming off the front of the shot (rim). That tells me the boys were tired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LadyMuskie]

I'm not here to make excuses. But we looked exhausted down the stretch. Schedule caught up with us. Also I'd love to know statistically what our fg% is from inside 3 ft. We've missed more bunnies and lay ups than I can ever remember. Now are misses last night were coming off the front of the shot (rim). That tells me the boys were tired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe they are tired, but if they want to win the Big East tourney or move beyond the first weekend of NCAA play, they better learn to play hard no matter what. All of these basketball teams have been playing ball since November. They're all a little tired, a little beat up, and so on. We're coming up to the part of the season where you either play through the fatigue and man up, or you go home and your season is over. There will be plenty of time to sleep in April and May. It sucks having to play Saturday and then Monday, but in 3 weeks, won't the goal be to play Thursday then Saturday or Friday then Sunday? I know there's no travel there, but it's not like flying from Cincinnati to New York via charter is the same as taking a wagon train to Utah. They're not exactly schlepping it.

I'm not surprised they didn't win last night, but if they couldn't play well because they were so damned tired, then we should all expect very early flame outs in the Big East tourney and NCAA tourney. You've got to want it, and if you can't play past tired at this level, then you must not want it all that much.

[NY44]

Average...for now.

I was talking about this with some buddies at the game yesterday. I vividly remember feeling very differently about Mack's earlier teams, basically all of the teams Tu Holloway was on. Those were underachievers. I knew that if those teams made it to the tournament, they could make some noise and turn some heads. It felt like we had some talent that would step up in the spotlight, but had been underachieving in less critical games. Last and this year, we've been on the bubble, but it doesn't stress me out as much as it has in the past, because I don't think these have been a Sweet 16 teams. We don't have those guys that can just take a game over, like JCraw, Tu and Semaj did. I think we're more balanced then we have been in the past (which is great), but in close games we're missing that extra lift from a star player.

I'm hopeful that we can adopt a more balanced attack in the coming years, or that Bluiett will get the tenacity of our studs before him. I'd take either.

[X-band '01]

Maybe they are tired, but if they want to win the Big East tourney or move beyond the first weekend of NCAA play, they better learn to play hard no matter what. All of these basketball teams have been playing ball since November. They're all a little tired, a little beat up, and so on. We're coming up to the part of the season where you either play through the fatigue and man up, or you go home and your season is over. There will be plenty of time to sleep in April and May. It sucks having to play Saturday and then Monday, but in 3 weeks, won't the goal be to play Thursday then Saturday or Friday then Sunday? I know there's no travel there, but it's not like flying from Cincinnati to New York via charter is the same as taking a wagon train to Utah. They're not exactly schlepping it.

I'm not surprised they didn't win last night, but if they couldn't play well because they were so damned tired, then we should all expect very early flame outs in the Big East tourney and NCAA tourney. You've got to want it, and if you can't play past tired at this level, then you must not want it all that much.

But at least they're done with this stretch. Now they get some rest going into the Villanova game on Saturday and they'll have a week off going into the roadie at Creighton. Every Big East team of note has had to do at least 1 48-hour turnaround; it's not like when Xavier had to do it an inordinate number of times in the A-10 to suit the TV suits.

[LadyMuskie]

But at least they're done with this stretch. Now they get some rest going into the Villanova game on Saturday and they'll have a week off going into the roadie at Creighton. Every Big East team of note has had to do at least 1 48-hour turnaround; it's not like when Xavier had to do it an inordinate number of times in the A-10 to suit the TV suits.

So, if we lose to Villanova and/or Creighton, will it be because we're too rested and hence rusty?

[X-band '01]

It will also be because of our fair President and a brawl from 3 seasons ago.

Add any excuse to the fire as well.

[Lamont Sanford]

I blame George H. W. Bush.