• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BUZZ THE FUDGE IN!!!!

5 wins, I think. 4 is about what I'd expect, and anything above that is a positive step toward next year.

Will it get people involved in the program, attending games again? I have no idea. Many people seemed to make up their mind about the state of the program upon the announcement of [Redacted]'s hire, and horrendous losses along the way have reinforced the belief that we aren't even competitive. We are competitive, though, and I think those horrendous losses are outliers rather than the norm.
 
TexasDeac10 said:
5 wins, I think. 4 is about what I'd expect, and anything above that is a positive step toward next year.

Will it get people involved in the program, attending games again? I have no idea. Many people seemed to make up their mind about the state of the program upon the announcement of [Redacted]'s hire, and horrendous losses along the way have reinforced the belief that we aren't even competitive. We are competitive, though, and I think those horrendous losses are outliers rather than the norm.
Click to expand...

It's pretty tough to argue that we were competitive last year. This year it could be argued, though it could also be argued that we wouldn't be competitive in a stronger conference with a stronger OOC schedule. That's nothing more then a hypothetical though and in reality we are competitive. Not good, but competitive.

You are absolutely right that the buzzout sentiment began the moment he was hired, and the results have only reinforced it.
 
TexasDeac10 said:
We are competitive, though, and I think those horrendous losses are outliers rather than the norm.
Click to expand...

The definition of competitive has been seriously altered in a post-Bzz world.

How many outliers does one get before it becomes a trend?
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
Do you think we played poorly in the other 4 ACC games?
Click to expand...

For what we're capable of? I don't know, because the constant stumbles last season and this indicate to me that our coach doesn't really get everything out of our team.

Do you honestly look at a team with home losses to Wofford and Richmond, and absolute embarrassments to AZ State (neutral) and State (home) and think we're competitive this year? If anything, the outliers of the last two seasons are the ACC wins and not the horrible loses.
 
I absolutely think we are competitive, at least by my own subjective standards of that term. Actually our true road performances this year have been pretty darn solid for Bz's history. The Nebraska win was a very quality road win. We played pretty well on the road at a tourney team in Seton Hall. The 2nd half of Maryland was maybe the best offensive half we've had all year. And everyone guaranteed we'd lose at High Point but we nonchalantly poo poo that slim margin win now. And we handled BC pretty easily and wire-to-wire despite the fact they had already won against 2 other ACC teams at home.

We lost to Wofford without our best player. Not acceptable but when you are an undermanned team and low on talent and lose your best player, that's not the first game I go to as representative of our team. I don't see how anyone honestly could say we have had more stinkers than decent performances.
 
Last edited:
Fuck Your Couch said:
I don't see how anyone honestly could say we have had more stinkers than decent performances.
Click to expand...

I would hope we have more decent performances than stinkers...but that can be true without us being competitive.
 
RacerDeac said:
I would hope we have more decent performances than stinkers...but that can be true without us being competitive.
Click to expand...

Please define your use of competitive. Did we not compete hard in most games? Looks like in 17 of our 19 games we were competitive to me by the definition of the word.
 
I define competitive in historical terms (with more weight to recent history). We're not even close to being competitive in the ACC (win as many as we lose), much less with regards to our recent history.

Competitive is somewhere I'm content with the team being on an average season. There's no way this season even comes close to fitting that bill.

Are you content with being "competitive" as you seem to define it?
 
I don't see how last year's team (or the one before, or the one before...) is relevant to whether this team is competitive. The definition I'm using comes from Webster's. I have no idea where "being content with the team on an average season" came from. To me competitive is not some relative term from team to team.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
I don't see how last year's team (or the one before, or the one before...) is relevant to whether this team is competitive. The definition I'm using comes from Webster's. I have no idea where "being content with the team on an average season" came from. To me competitive is not some relative term from team to team.
Click to expand...

It's relative to the competition but not to the team itself. IE: a competitive high major team is better than a competitive mid major team, but a competitive high major team is not necessarily better than a competitive high major team regardless of how well said teams did the previous year.
 
RacerDeac said:
I define competitive in historical terms (with more weight to recent history). We're not even close to being competitive in the ACC (win as many as we lose), much less with regards to our recent history.

Competitive is somewhere I'm content with the team being on an average season. There's no way this season even comes close to fitting that bill.

Are you content with being "competitive" as you seem to define it?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear...in your opinion, being "competitive" means going 8-8 (or better) in conference play?

If that's your interpretation of competitive, that's fine. By that definition, we almost certainly aren't going to be competitive this year. But you should recognize that most people don't define competitive in that way.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Buzz can't win on the road.
Click to expand...

I see this non-sense over and over again here. Is his coaching or game plan somehow different on the road?

Colorado doesn't win many games on the road in hoops in the Big 12 and, since we only won 1 ACC game last year, I am guessing we didn't win many on the road.

This is an absurd criticism.
 
We are actually tied for 2nd most road wins this year among ACC teams.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
We are actually tied for 2nd most road wins this year among ACC teams.
Click to expand...

Where is SmallSampleSizeDeac?


I'm happy we won on the road; thrilled in fact. I was terrified that we could possibly lose to even that shitty ass BC team.

That said, I was still not overly impressed by a win at a pathetic team. They just aren't good right now. 'dems da facts.


I will be impressed if we get a road win at one of: Clemson, NC State, Virginia, Miami, and 1/2 impressed if we win at Georgia Tech (they suck balls too, but not as much balls as BC.)
 
Turns out we are top ten in one category per Kenpom: luck.

Stat nerds, what does that actually mean?
 
It is the difference between our record and kenpom's projected record up to that point. Teams with very low overall rankings but with decent records are going to have high "luck" factors. It isn't really a measure of luck.
 
TBR said:
Turns out we are top ten in one category per Kenpom: luck.

Stat nerds, what does that actually mean?
Click to expand...

Our actual win-loss record is better than our expected win-loss record, given our point differential.

It reflects the fact that we've been blown out twice without blowing anyone out ourselves, and that we're 4-2 in close games.

In short: we're worse than our record would indicate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top