🏀 Has the tournament changed your mind about the state of Alabama basketball?

[alagator]

I do think this may be stretching it a bit ... almost to the category of "a moral victory" type of thought process.



Then again, the Tide is 2-1 against teams in the Final Four this season, right?

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

Exactly.

Consistency was our biggest problem. We play great for a game or 2, then Dr. Jekyll the next couple.

Every team has their off nights here or there, but our off nights were about every 2 or 3 games.

Consistency in performance will fix that.

If we can go 6-2 out of every 8 game stretch, we'll be sitting at 24-ish wins and 8-ish losses at the end of the year, for example.

We need to set smaller goals. Not trying to win the conference or make it to the dance. Just break the season down into 8 game phases, and do your best to win at least 6 of those 8. The larger goals will take care of themselves when we do that.

 

[TerryP]

We need to set smaller goals. Not trying to win the conference or make it to the dance.

I'd go with "positioning themselves to be in the right spot for the SEC tourney" and the rest falls into place. Today's game is so much about match-ups it's impossible to say what might have happened. I still believe a fourth place finish/seed in the SECT would have had this team in the tourney.

It's so weird seeing UofSC where they are, remembering Bama won twice, and then trying to rectify a first round exit from the NIT. It proves your point, SLO—consistency.

 

[UAgrad93]

Consistency!! The team was just as consistent as the weather here in BAMA.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Didn't we just lose to Richmond in the opening round of the NIT? This year's edition should have no complaint about their lot in life. We have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that we are in dire need of a few go-to players that can get theirs regardless of the opponent. It's been said many times and many ways, but it's the difference makers coming soon that will elevate us out of the cycle of mediocrity we've been in. After that all things are possible

 

[TerryP]

Didn't we just lose to Richmond in the opening round of the NIT?

Yes, they did. Does that mean a thing?

I can think of a team that won the national title, got bumped in the first round of the NIT the following season, and then was the national runner up in the following year.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Yes, they did. Does that mean a thing?

I can think of a team that won the national title, got bumped in the first round of the NIT the following season, and then was the national runner up in the following year.

So you're saying we could be SC if invited to the big dance?

 

[TerryP]

So you're saying we could be SC if invited to the big dance?

I'm saying there's sufficient reason to take results from the NIT and dismiss them. Stanford won the NIT in '15, didn't make the dance in '16. UofSC won it in '05 and '06 and we know what has happened since then—up until this year, nothing.

On the other hand, UK lost in the first round of the NIT and then turned around and made it to the natty as a runner-up the following year.

Bama was runner up in the NIT in '12, bounced from the 1st round of the NCAA's in '13.

I just don't see anything that can be drawn from the NIT in today's age. There are too many factors to be considered ... much like the hypothetical "Bama could be UofSC ..."

 

[TUSKtimes]

I'm saying there's sufficient reason to take results from the NIT and dismiss them. Stanford won the NIT in '15, didn't make the dance in '16. UofSC won it in '05 and '06 and we know what has happened since then—up until this year, nothing.

On the other hand, UK lost in the first round of the NIT and then turned around and made it to the natty as a runner-up the following year.

Bama was runner up in the NIT in '12, bounced from the 1st round of the NCAA's in '13.

I just don't see anything that can be drawn from the NIT in today's age. There are too many factors to be considered ... much like the hypothetical "Bama could be UofSC ..."

Frankly, what difference does it make where the loss occurred? It was another bad OOC loss among many this season that labeled this team nothing special in the eyes of the basketball lords.

 

[Tidestalker]

Until the home games are played in a legitimate basketball arena, I couldn't blame CAG or Avery Johnson for not "making it happen". Kind of amazing to me how well they've recruited despite playing in a gymnastics center, but not easy to break through other traditional powerhouses. The USCe thing has been fun to watch, but definitely caught lightening in a bottle.

 

[TerryP]

It was another bad OOC loss among many this season that labeled this team nothing special in the eyes of the basketball lords.

These "lords" you speak of also labeled the SEC as nothing special. To me, there's ample evidence to the contrary.

Bad OOC loss? Bad, as in because it was to Richmond? Bama was down by three with less than :30 left in the game so it can't be how the game actually went down.

Was Oregon a "bad OOC loss?" That one was tied with less than two on the clock.

These "lords" you speak of are likely paying more attention to the final score with a lot of teams. IF they see a team lose, like UK, they are likely to delve more into what actually happened.

Personally, I think this team was a lot closer to being a pretty good ball club than I did before the tourney started. If we take UofSC as one example, when they played UF the other night the Gators didn't make a three in the second half. The Gamecocks defense wasn't any better than what I saw from Bama the majority of the time this season. IF the Tide had another shot at UF can we say one way or another how that game would have ended? I don't think so.

I also believe the SEC was a lot stronger than these "lords" thought.

 

[TUSKtimes]

These "lords" you speak of also labeled the SEC as nothing special. To me, there's ample evidence to the contrary.

Bad OOC loss? Bad, as in because it was to Richmond? Bama was down by three with less than :30 left in the game so it can't be how the game actually went down.

Was Oregon a "bad OOC loss?" That one was tied with less than two on the clock.

These "lords" you speak of are likely paying more attention to the final score with a lot of teams. IF they see a team lose, like UK, they are likely to delve more into what actually happened.

Personally, I think this team was a lot closer to being a pretty good ball club than I did before the tourney started. If we take UofSC as one example, when they played UF the other night the Gators didn't make a three in the second half. The Gamecocks defense wasn't any better than what I saw from Bama the majority of the time this season. IF the Tide had another shot at UF can we say one way or another how that game would have ended? I don't think so.

I also believe the SEC was a lot stronger than these "lords" thought.

I appreciate your loyalty to the Tide, I even like it. If they were wrong about our team it would seem zipping through a good chunk of the NIT might have been the better way of sending that message. But we went out with a whimper and so did our best rebuttal for this year's program. I really think 3 SEC teams in the elite 8 will send a stronger message about our conference going into the bubble dance next year. But I doubt Bama, the barners, and Tennessee will need that much help to get in.

 

[TerryP]

If they were wrong about our team it would seem zipping through a good chunk of the NIT might have been the better way of sending that message. But we went out with a whimper and so did our best rebuttal for this year's program.

I see that side of things but again, what does the NIT tell anyone, about any team. I've cited a few examples earlier. What did those wins and losses tell.

Richmond, in my eyes, was a match-up issue. I see UofSC's success in the same light.

I really think 3 SEC teams in the elite 8 will send a stronger message about our conference going into the bubble dance next year. But I doubt Bama, the barners, and Tennessee will need that much help to get in.

If these people on the committee are paying attention, they'd have noticed the record Bama had against these teams in the Elite 8. If we make our own little RPI and include these teams in the top 10, a 2-2 record (SEC teams only,) or a 2-3 record (including the Ducks) should make them take notice. At least, I'd like to think so.

I appreciate your loyalty to the Tide, I even like it.

My intent with this thread isn't based on loyalty. It's just an idle thought this morning that made me reconsider where the team is today while looking back over this past season. Like I said, it's my impression the program is a better off than a lot are willing to recognize.