How BYU's tourney success stacks up in the Dave Rose era

Just updated a spreadsheet I compiled last season when I was curious to see how our tourney success compared to other traditional powers (past and present) during the Dave Rose era.



Here's a link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsoXzrkkdQYudEVzZTFsOVl4VjMxWXdybklNV1JySnc#gid=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Top 5 interesting facts (to me at least)...



1. Only 9 teams have made the tournament for the past 6 years straight: Kansas, Michigan State, Duke, Xavier, Texas, Gonzaga, Marquette, Wisconsin, and BYU. The other 8 on that list are going on at least 7 strong (some of them much longer, like Kansas).



2. Only 20 teams total have 6 bids (12 with six bids, 8 with seven).



3. Notable teams with fewer bids than BYU: UConn, Florida, UCLA, Louisville, Butler, Syracuse, Arizona, and all other Pac 12 and ACC schools not named UNC or Duke. Shows just how hard it is to make it year after year, when programs like these with significant tourney success in this decade (titles, Final 4's, etc.) have down years.



4. However if you count this year's win (and I do), there are 35 teams with more NCAA wins than BYU. If you're in the camp where play-in doesn't count and you only give us 3 wins, then we're tied with an additional 11 teams. So either way, we're in the top 50.



5. Of the teams with 6+ bids, we have the fewest wins to show for it (not a real surprise if you look at the other 19 teams...mostly powerhouses).



A few other observations...



*Our history really pales in comparison to so many teams, including many that have been down recently (like Oklahoma, Georgia Tech, Indiana, Illinois, Arkansas).



*The competitive set in college basketball is so much larger than football. There's still a clear balance of power (Duke, Kansas, UNC, Kentucky, etc.) at the top, but there are so many more teams that will have successful years or a successful run that football doesn't deal with.

---Examples include: Villanova, Georgetown, Marquette, Butler, George Mason, VCU, Missouri Valley Conference (Northern Iowa, Creighton, Wichita), WCC (Zags, St. Mary's), Atlantic 10 (Xavier, Dayton, Richmond, Temple), and then your occassional upstarts from the other 200+ schools not in D-1 football (Murray State, Davidson, Kent State, etc.).



Personally, I think it's remarkable to see where we've come in 6 years considering the quantity of schools out there we're competing with that have stronger history, better facilities, stronger recruiting bases, stronger conferences, and our 15 year tourney win drought before Rose took over.



Coach Rose has placed us right in the thick of college basketball, with 6 years in a row in the tourney and single digit seeds in 5 of those years. We're in the top 20 for bids and top 35 for wins, and we've cracked the top 25 in either 4 or 5 of those years.



Are we elite? Certainly not, but I don't think that should be the goal. I feel we've landed the players we should, maximized their talents (see Fredette, Jimmer and Hartsock, Noah as examples), played together as a team, and made ourselves relevant nationally.



And what's even better is that the pipeline looks to be well stocked and we should be positioned to be fighting for another bid this year and for many to come.

It's meh, but we are getting much better talent, we should go 1 or 2 deep consistently from here on out. We were a healthy stephen rogers from winning 2 in the tourney this year.

So, basically BYU has no trouble getting to the tournament, but has trouble winning tournament games.



It's an impressive run on our end and I hope we continue it; but, I would trade missing a year every now and then for making it to the Sweet 16 or Elite 8 every few years.



Fine, UConn hasn't been to the tournament as often as we have in the last 6 years. However, UConn still is considered a much better basketball program. Not sure we would have have beaten UConn last year...

1. Only 9 teams have made the tournament for the past 6 years straight: Kansas, Michigan State, Duke, Xavier, Texas, Gonzaga, Marquette, Wisconsin, and BYU. The other 8 on that list are going on at least 7 strong (some of them much longer, like Kansas).

If you look at that list, you see some of the best coaches in hoops. In my opinion, Izzo and Self are neck and neck as the best coach in america; I'll take Self but man do I have respect for Izzo. Gonzaga, Marquette, Wisconsin, BYU, and Xavier have had top ten coaching the last decade (which leaves 3 programs in my top ten of coaches... I'll have to go back and find out who else makes the cut..). The only two schools on that list that I really don't have respect for their coaches are Duke and Texas... both of which I believe have incredibly overrated coaching... however you might ask others and they'll list them both in the top 5, so maybe I'm just a hater, dunno.



Prior to seeing the list above, I have always though that Calhoun, Calipari, Coach K, Roy Williams, Pitino, and Boeheim were incredibly overrated as coaches but ordinarily good (if not great) recruiters. Not seeing their schools on that list only convinces me more and more that they are. (I realize Coach K is on the list... but to me he's one of the more overrated coaches in history)

I think there is something to be learned from the list above, that talent and recruiting alone don't create consistent dance cards.(though obviously they can be enough for championships)..coaching and the ability to manage your roster and talent over the long haul does.

Now, those coaches have something that we don't (which would be final fours and national championships) but Dave Rose can only work with what he has.



I'm a little fearful that run could end this year, unless Carlino improves, Haws and Delgado are in top condition, ready to score and play D early AND Austin and Davies drastically improve. (It wouldn't hurt if Collinsworth and Rogers were healthy, but honestly, would anyone be willing to bet they will be?)





NOW HERE'S THE CAVEAT WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED



Over the last 30 years, no one (and I mean no one) has been screwed more than BYU when it comes to seeding, bracket draws, and location



I used to think that was just my opinion, but it's happened so much that it has become fact to me...( wherever that part in my brain that contains "facts" now contains this information... it was permanently moved from the "opinion" part) :roll:



In a hypothetical world where Dave Rose doesn't get screwed every year in seeding and bracketing, Dave Rose has half a dozen more NCAA wins (an average of one more per year is not beyond reason). Again, this once began as opinion in my head, has now fully taken up space in the "fact section"

This "fact" cannot be ignored when comparing Dave Rose and BYUs record in the NCAA tournament.





**I got an A in neurophysiology and B in neuroanatomy in medical school and at no point in time was there a section about facts and opinions being separately stored. I intend to donate my brain to science just to prove my theory** :skeptic: