Miami's History in the Big Dance

Gables Canes

Freshman
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Messages
5,075
There's been a lot of chatter on here recently about how Miami has struggled in the Big Dance. Not counting the appearance in 1960, below are all of our appearances since the re-birth of the program in 1985:

Miami's tourney history:
1998: 11 seed - lost to 6 seed; chalk performance
1999: 2 seed - beat 15 seed and lost to 10 seed; huge underperformance
2000: 6 seed - beat 11 seed, beat 3 seed, lost to 7 seed; pulled off one upset (over performance)
2002: 5 seed - lost to 12 seed; huge underperformance (Thanks, Fat Perry!)
2008: 7 seed - beat 10 seed, lost to 2 seed; chalk performance
2013: 2 seed - beat 15 seed, beat 7 seed, lost to 3 seed; slight underperformance
2016: 3 seed - beat 14 seed, beat 11 seed, lost to 2 seed; chalk performance
2017: 8 seed - lost to 9 seed; underperformance
2018: 6 seed - lost to 11 seed; underperformance

So in the 9 appearances not counting 1960:
1 overperformance
3 "chalk" neutral performances
5 underperformances
So in 9 tourney appearances in 18 total games, we've pulled off ONE upset over a higher seed and that was nearly a full TWO DECADES AGO. An overall 8-10 record despite being a top 8 seed in all but one appearance. Bottom line - our March performances have left a ****load to be desired. Yesterday's disappointment was nothing new.
 
Advertisement
99 and 02 were the only real bad underperformances. Other than that, we've done ok in the NCAAT. Not terrible.
 
I wonder what this looks like for the bluebloods. The only difference, they have 30+ tournaments, so a lot of deep runs.
 
How is an 8 seed losing top a 9 "underperformance"? Not only is that a toss up, 9 seeds are actually 22-18 vs 8 seeds over the past 10 years.

And if you really want underperformance, go pull up Mich St, Virginia, or UCLA post-1980 then get back to me.

Overperforming your seed, as a major conference school, is a statistical rarity
 
Advertisement
I saw in another thread that there was some bantering back and forth how we will never be a UNC, Duke, or Kentucky.

Think about it...that's three teams out of 350ish. I guess you could put Michigan St, UCLA (maybe not anymore), Gonzaga, Louisville, etc. on that list. I just don't get how 'some' can be disappointed with this program because they don't compare with those three teams...and UM has compared very favorable to that last group as of late. But there is no reason that this program could not be one of those other consistent performers that make the Tournament 8 out of 10 years or so...obviously the current run is 4 out 6 and really should be 5 appearances (2015). How about teams like Syracuse, Purdue, or Wisconsin?...solid every year and consistent Tournament teams that have the ability to go on deep runs. Is the UM program that far off from Syracuse? This program is well on its way to being in that upper echelon of college basketball.
 
I still feel that Miami could have won it all in 2013. That team had a bunch of seniority, depth and physicality. That team not getting past the Sweet 16 was the most disappointed I've ever been with Canes basketball, because I felt that team had a legitimate shot.
 
I still feel that Miami could have won it all in 2013. That team had a bunch of seniority, depth and physicality. That team not getting past the Sweet 16 was the most disappointed I've ever been with Canes basketball, because I felt that team had a legitimate shot.
I agree 100%. I was so disappointed with that sweet 16 loss. But apparently Larkin was really sick throughout the game and he was our best player so as he goes.. The team goes. I didn't know that at the time or even for a while after the game. But it was still disappointing to not go further that season.
 
I still feel that Miami could have won it all in 2013. That team had a bunch of seniority, depth and physicality. That team not getting past the Sweet 16 was the most disappointed I've ever been with Canes basketball, because I felt that team had a legitimate shot.

No guard depth did that team in.
 
Advertisement
You could tell during the selection show, the team wanted nothing to do with the tournament this year.
 
No guard depth did that team in.

Larkin having the flu and Reggie having surgery and missing the sweet 16 (and more games, if we would have advanced) did us in as we had enough talent to overcome lack of depth. But, if Bishop Daniels doesn't flake out, we might have had enough depth to get by Marquette with a sick Larkin, though I doubt it. If Larkin and Reggie were healthy, we're in the Final Four.
 
Larkin having the flu and Reggie having surgery and missing the sweet 16 (and more games, if we would have advanced) did us in as we had enough talent to overcome lack of depth. But, if Bishop Daniels doesn't flake out, we might have had enough depth to get by Marquette with a sick Larkin, though I doubt it. If Larkin and Reggie were healthy, we're in the Final Four.

Miami had more than enough guard depth. Not only did Miami have guys like Scott and TMJ, they also had young guys like Rion Brown. The problem was that Larkin's illness made the ACC Player of the Year a shell of his usual self. He was the straw that stirred the drink, and even if Bishop was around, he wasn't going to be nearly good enough to do the things Shane could do. Miami with a healthy Shane would have been a Final Four team, and maybe a National Champion. That's how dominant he was, and that's how good the team was when he was playing at a high level.
 
Advertisement
Miami had more than enough guard depth. Not only did Miami have guys like Scott and TMJ, they also had young guys like Rion Brown. The problem was that Larkin's illness made the ACC Player of the Year a shell of his usual self. He was the straw that stirred the drink, and even if Bishop was around, he wasn't going to be nearly good enough to do the things Shane could do. Miami with a healthy Shane would have been a Final Four team, and maybe a National Champion. That's how dominant he was, and that's how good the team was when he was playing at a high level.

We had 2 guards, Larkin and Scott. I wouldn't call that "more than enough guard depth."
 
Miami had more than enough guard depth. Not only did Miami have guys like Scott and TMJ, they also had young guys like Rion Brown. The problem was that Larkin's illness made the ACC Player of the Year a shell of his usual self. He was the straw that stirred the drink, and even if Bishop was around, he wasn't going to be nearly good enough to do the things Shane could do. Miami with a healthy Shane would have been a Final Four team, and maybe a National Champion. That's how dominant he was, and that's how good the team was when he was playing at a high level.

That's what I said
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top