04-02-2015, 09:04 PM
It was a very exciting game.
One of the problems with giant tournaments like the NCAAs is that every team but 1 goes home a loser in their last game. It never seems a fitting end to a successful season--and all the teams that make the tournament had successful seasons of one sort or another. At least we get to send the seniors off with a win in their final game.
And we are #34 according to Sagarin before winning tonight. We are probably better than most of the teams that lost in the first round.
Don't get me wrong--I would prefer a coaching change too, although Dawkins is probably better than Dick DiBiaso, Howie Dallmar, and Tom Davis--in other words, better than the coaching we had for the entire modern era leading in to Monty. Dawkins seems inferior because we we had a 2.5 : 1 winning margin under Monty and Trent, and Dawkins is pedestrian in comparison. But the whole time I was a student we never had a winning season, and most years we lost twice as many games as we won. At that time I would have gladly taken Dawkins' results.
Today, however, it find it hard to recapture that enthusiasm I had under Monty. I remember watching when we won the NIT in 1991 and being excited by it. So I think that is the proof that I have just become jaded by our later success.
One of the problems with giant tournaments like the NCAAs is that every team but 1 goes home a loser in their last game. It never seems a fitting end to a successful season--and all the teams that make the tournament had successful seasons of one sort or another. At least we get to send the seniors off with a win in their final game.
And we are #34 according to Sagarin before winning tonight. We are probably better than most of the teams that lost in the first round.
Don't get me wrong--I would prefer a coaching change too, although Dawkins is probably better than Dick DiBiaso, Howie Dallmar, and Tom Davis--in other words, better than the coaching we had for the entire modern era leading in to Monty. Dawkins seems inferior because we we had a 2.5 : 1 winning margin under Monty and Trent, and Dawkins is pedestrian in comparison. But the whole time I was a student we never had a winning season, and most years we lost twice as many games as we won. At that time I would have gladly taken Dawkins' results.
Today, however, it find it hard to recapture that enthusiasm I had under Monty. I remember watching when we won the NIT in 1991 and being excited by it. So I think that is the proof that I have just become jaded by our later success.