and lost in the 1st round 5 times....and never made it past a regional semifinal....sickening!
This post was edited on 3/20 9:52 AM by rockingamecock
This post was edited on 3/20 9:52 AM by rockingamecock
107 years of basketball & we've been in the big dance 8 times
- Thread starter rockingamecock
- Start date
We've won 5 NCAA tournament games, 3 of which were in consolation games. Back in the day, the tourney was smaller, so if you lost a game they'd let the losers play a meaningless consolation game. The game was meaningless because both teams were going home after it win or lose.
Thus, only 2 of our NCAA Tournament victories were in games that actually mattered.
Our only two meaningful tournament victories were: 1972 first round vs. Temple and 1973 first round vs. Texas Tech.
This post was edited on 3/20 10:05 AM by ipull4usc
pepsicock
Well-Known Member
This is some good info for those people who think we are a basketball school. Some think we have a great history because we won an ACC tournament title that one time and we had Frank McGuire. If you look it up, McGuire had about 7 or 8 good seasons here and the rest were mediocre. His first few years and his last 4 or 5 were very average. In the 40 years since McGuire's heyday, we have been relevant in college basketball for exactly 2 seasons on the national stage. Those 2 seasons we lost as a #2 seed and a #3 seed in the NCAA Tournament.
Absolutely pathetic!!!!!
I've said this before and will say again, historically we are the worst program in Division 1 history. But hey, we did win back-to-back NIT (Nobody's Interested Tournament)!
I've said this before and will say again, historically we are the worst program in Division 1 history. But hey, we did win back-to-back NIT (Nobody's Interested Tournament)!
The "negative nellie" comments are absurd
Posters have the right to be negative any time they want....especially when the subject involves USC men's basketball.
Posters have the right to be negative any time they want....especially when the subject involves USC men's basketball.
Good Lord, if you can't be negative about our basketball program, you just better not be negative about anything.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
351 Division I schools currently, and believe it or not, the tournament wasn't always 68 teams and it wasn't always available to non-conference winners. I now return you to your regularly scheduled trolling rant.
During the McGuire years USC was most certainly a basketball school. His record was not merely two good years stuck in the middle of mediocrity That's both asinine and absurd. Even after USC left the acc McGuire's teams were still beating national powers like marquette, indiana, and notre dame. Frank still managed to pull in great players in his late years too. Remember also that in those days only 16 teams in the entire country made it to the NCAA tournament. Not the watered down 64 you see now. Hell you can have a losing season and be in the tournament.
When I left my office in Charlotte today there were fans tailgating in the parking lots having a great time. . It made me sad, thinking how long it's been since I had a reason to pay attention to March Madness. I am psyched about the Ladies but I wish the men were relevant too. Maybe they will turn the corner next year.
I'm concerned that nobody cares about Gamecock basketball anymore. We have been the bottom of the barrel for so long I don't think fans will pay attention till they see a huge improvement.
It might take letting Martin have 10 years just to see what happens, it can't get any worse.
It might take letting Martin have 10 years just to see what happens, it can't get any worse.
We're not quite there yet. People in their mid-20s and early 30s are old enough to remember those teams from the late 90s, as disappointing as their tournament runs were, and once you taste success you always want more. I will say we are in danger of losing anyone much younger than me (21), who can at least remember those NIT titles. I can tell you from experience that a lot of the students (possibly a majority) are pretty indifferent to it. Overall, with a slightly sub-par team we managed to draw about 11000 to 12000 a game. I think an above average team will draw 14000-15000, and a competitive one will sell-out (or come close) every night. There is still a big demand for a strong team, but if we go too much longer without one we'll start to lose fans when they're young, and if you lose them when they're young, you'll never have them.
The problem with "looking it up" as Gamecock Tripp suggests, is that you have to go inside the numbers. I guess those "mediocre" teams were teams like the 1967 team that went 16-7 and 8-4 in the ACC. Two of those 8 wins were against Duke and North Carolina (at Duke and at North Carolina) when both teams were top 5 teams. North Carolina was in the Final Four that year. You have to know that South Carolina was 25-3 in 1970; blew out every team in the ACC on their way to an undefeated conference regular season. The Gamecocks sat at home that year and the regional was at Carolina Coliseum.As far as those consolation games being meaningless is concerned, they were contests between top 20 teams in most cases and they usually featured players that ended up in the NBA or ABA.
