ADVERTISEMENT

First ever Sweet 16 is not exactly true.

uscbeckham

Well-Known Member
Staff
Oct 22, 2001
60,764
116,420
113
39
Chapin, SC
While it was not called "Sweet 16" at the time, USC made the round of 16 in 1971, 1972 and 1973. Back then, you simply had to win your first game to advance to the Regional Semifinal, which is the Sweet 16.
 
  • Like
Reactions: myrtlecock
As per the usual, the overwhelming majority of the media is too lazy to figure this out.

I mean, the NCAA tournament was completely different and way less interesting / relevant than it is now.

As far as I'm concerned, this is the first of many sweet 16 trips for the Frank Martin-era Gamecocks!
 
As per the usual, the overwhelming majority of the media is too lazy to figure this out.
Well, yeah but not really, or sorta kinda...

By that I mean that back then the playoffs didn't initiate with 68 teams did it?? I thought it was just 32. Could be wrong. Somebody explain...
 
As per the usual, the overwhelming majority of the media is too lazy to figure this out.

Rod,I pulled some strings and brought our objection to the media and they have responded to us

I do question the sincerity though seems like a standard catch all.

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
While it was not called "Sweet 16" at the time, USC made the round of 16 in 1971, 1972 and 1973. Back then, you simply had to win your first game to advance to the Regional Semifinal, which is the Sweet 16.

That's not entirely true either. The 71 team had a bye into the round of 16, didn't even have to win a game to be there.

I am perfectly fine with the media saying this is our first Sweet 16, as most understand it to mean the modern era of the tourney.
 
That's not entirely true either. The 71 team had a bye into the round of 16, didn't even have to win a game to be there.

I am perfectly fine with the media saying this is our first Sweet 16, as most understand it to mean the modern era of the tourney.
So, most schools out there claim all of those as Sweet 16's, but USC is not allowed to?
 
That's not entirely true either. The 71 team had a bye into the round of 16, didn't even have to win a game to be there.

I am perfectly fine with the media saying this is our first Sweet 16, as most understand it to mean the modern era of the tourney.


When teams count how many Sweet 16s they have gone to, they count these old tournaments. I think we should too.
 
Maybe it's just me, but I don't mind the press taking that angle if it brings more publicity.
 
So, most schools out there claim all of those as Sweet 16's, but USC is not allowed to?
Do we have banners for those previous "sweet 16s" in our arena? Honestly, I can't recall what all banners are in there at the moment.

Asking because if we aren't claiming them ourselves, can we really get mad at the media for not doing so?
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscbeckham
Do we have banners for those previous "sweet 16s" in our arena? Honestly, I can't recall what all banners are in there at the moment.

Asking because if we aren't claiming them ourselves, can we really get mad at the media for not doing so?

It's coinage -- not a title, like winning a regional would be. I think they have a banner for each year in the tourney, which is about all it amounted to for us.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT