Search results

Where are you coming up with "2011 or 2013"? The same data holds true for the entire decade. None of them beat a #1 seed, none of them beat a team on the road, every single one was eliminated once they were challenged.

The 2015-16 teams also didn't beat the good teams once they faced them. You keep forgetting that important point.

You forgot that the "best Miami teams of the decade" went 1-4 once they got out of the 3/4-seed portion of the tournament.

We don't beat good teams in the postseason, that's why we rarely advance. "WE BEAT 16 TOP 25 RPI TEAMS IN 2016!!!! Thanks, DannyBoyCane.

If it was so dumb you would be able to tell us why it's so dumb. Jim Morris has ADVANCED just three times in the last ten years. Why? Because in two of those years he played only 3 and 4 seeds. The data backs me up.

You can't advance by beating top 25 RPI teams in the regular season. Stay focused. We're talking about what it takes to ADVANCE.

Except that we don't beat who's in front of us if they are any good. We've had ten years worth of that.

That's the point flying past you. If we win ONE game against a #1 seed, then you are one win closer to advancing. If you go ten years without beating one, then you probably didn't advance very often. Sorry, Jim, but you can't rely on VCU and BC showing up in the other dugout every night in...

Show me the path to a title during Jim Morris' tenure when we would not have had to face a single #1 or #2 seed. Quit being disingenuous. His teams have sucked when they were challenged.

If you make it to a Super Regional, there's a good chance that you are going up against a #1 seed. But "who cares" if we even win one of those games?

If you're in a road regional, beating the number one seed puts you in a better position to win the tournament. But "who cares", right?

You know what matters? Advancing. We've made the postseason eight of the last ten years, and we were eliminated by a 1 or 2 seed in 7 of those years. Somehow we even managed to get eliminated without even playing a 1 or 2 seed. Advancing matters, and you don't advance very far if you can't beat...

Teams with wins against #1 seeds in the past two weeks: FAU, Army, Auburn (2), Duke (3), South Carolina (2), UNC Wilmington, Tennessee Tech (3), Samford, Oregon State (2), North Carolina (2), Mississippi State, Vanderbilt (2), Cal State Fullerton (2), Washington, Connecticut. It has only...

Ten years worth of results: Record vs #1 seeds: 0-9 Record vs #2 seeds: 4-5 Record vs #3 seeds: 11-4 Record vs #4 seeds: 7-1 So, yes, I'm assuming that we finally reached Omaha because we faced easy opponents. To get to Omaha in 2015-16, we played 100% of our games against 3/4 seeds and went...

The ACC is seeded into Omaha because of a laughably bad rating system. And we still can't get it right.

Except that it's a fact.

Of course it is. "We had the #8 RPI. We shouldn't have been paired with Florida" What about when Florida had the #5 RPI and they were sent to us? "Uh, look at their conference record" Why do you think we were good in 2015 and 2016? "Look at our RPI" So the 2017 team was better than the 2018...

Yes, because I can look at a ten year sample size and see what happens when he plays #1 and #2 seeds. ****, look what happened IN THOSE YEARS when he finally had to play #1 and #2 seeds. 1-4. He couldn't even have a clean slate against the 3 and 4 seeds in those postseasons.

Once again, four ACC hosts, three of whom don't make it out of the first weekend. BUT LOOK AT OUR WINS AGAINST CLEMSON AND LOUISVILLE!!!!

In other words, we were regular season beasts against the ACC. Sorry, but that doesn't get you anywhere in the postseason, as the ACC shows year after year.