The Good News: The days worry about whether USC's SOS would be good enough to get into the tournament are over.
The Bad News: The SOS will be so substantially good that only a really, really good team could go .500 or better in the SEC this year.
USC Current Ranking: 111 (The bubble is so far away that it looks like a dot)
Quality Wins: None (#43 UAB closest to Quad 1)
Quality Loses: Two (at #64 Clemson, v. #6 Auburn)
Bad Loses: Two (v. #105 Princeton, at #137 Coastal Carolina). None are Quad 4 and both are very close to Quad 2, which would remove the Bad Loss tag (Princeton needs top 100 and they've been in and out of the top 100, Coastal needs to crack the top 135). For the first time that I can remember, USC could end up with zero bad losses but still not be able to get in.
Remaining:
Quad 1 (9): at #73 Vanderbilt, at #9 Tennessee, at #73 Texas A&M, at #37 Mississippi State, v. #9 Tennessee, v. #16 Kentucky, v. #5 LSU, at #21 Alabama, at #6 Auburn
Quad 2 (5): v. #42 Florida, at #94 Arkansas, v. #73 Vanderbilt, at #126 Mississippi, v. #37 Mississippi State
Quad 3 (1): at #238 Georgia
Quad 4 (2): v. #238 Georgia, v. #237 Missouri
As you can see, the schedule is brutal. South Carolina will have to win six of the fourteen Quad 1 or Quad 2 games (and win the 3 other games) to even sniff the NCAA Tournament.
Prognosis: (Bias plays in). It's not going to happen. I believe this is not an overreaction to the Auburn loss.
1. First, the future schedule is too talented to let Carolina get away with playing defense the way they do. Sadly, Frank's Tombstone will read "Overhelp Defense" as time and time again the other team's guards run into the lane and away from the basket with no intention to shoot in order to pass it to big guy or 3-point shooter left alone by the overhelping defense.
2. Second, he blames #1 on the guards and then begins his revenge substitution pattern, which results in a merry-go-round of guys getting beat, overhelp, score, substitution that never allows the team to get into any offensive rhythm. #2 if basically how #1 kills both our offense and defense. Frank had done a pretty good job of limiting these substitutions during the non-conference schedule and actually not overhelping as much -- to include some really good stretches of zone defense. All of that was thrown out during the Auburn game and leads me to believe (ala Muschamp) Frank will always just be Frank.
In all, I hope I'm wrong and I'll continue to hope for a turnaround. I'd also love to hear someone tell me I am way off.
The Bad News: The SOS will be so substantially good that only a really, really good team could go .500 or better in the SEC this year.
USC Current Ranking: 111 (The bubble is so far away that it looks like a dot)
Quality Wins: None (#43 UAB closest to Quad 1)
Quality Loses: Two (at #64 Clemson, v. #6 Auburn)
Bad Loses: Two (v. #105 Princeton, at #137 Coastal Carolina). None are Quad 4 and both are very close to Quad 2, which would remove the Bad Loss tag (Princeton needs top 100 and they've been in and out of the top 100, Coastal needs to crack the top 135). For the first time that I can remember, USC could end up with zero bad losses but still not be able to get in.
Remaining:
Quad 1 (9): at #73 Vanderbilt, at #9 Tennessee, at #73 Texas A&M, at #37 Mississippi State, v. #9 Tennessee, v. #16 Kentucky, v. #5 LSU, at #21 Alabama, at #6 Auburn
Quad 2 (5): v. #42 Florida, at #94 Arkansas, v. #73 Vanderbilt, at #126 Mississippi, v. #37 Mississippi State
Quad 3 (1): at #238 Georgia
Quad 4 (2): v. #238 Georgia, v. #237 Missouri
As you can see, the schedule is brutal. South Carolina will have to win six of the fourteen Quad 1 or Quad 2 games (and win the 3 other games) to even sniff the NCAA Tournament.
Prognosis: (Bias plays in). It's not going to happen. I believe this is not an overreaction to the Auburn loss.
1. First, the future schedule is too talented to let Carolina get away with playing defense the way they do. Sadly, Frank's Tombstone will read "Overhelp Defense" as time and time again the other team's guards run into the lane and away from the basket with no intention to shoot in order to pass it to big guy or 3-point shooter left alone by the overhelping defense.
2. Second, he blames #1 on the guards and then begins his revenge substitution pattern, which results in a merry-go-round of guys getting beat, overhelp, score, substitution that never allows the team to get into any offensive rhythm. #2 if basically how #1 kills both our offense and defense. Frank had done a pretty good job of limiting these substitutions during the non-conference schedule and actually not overhelping as much -- to include some really good stretches of zone defense. All of that was thrown out during the Auburn game and leads me to believe (ala Muschamp) Frank will always just be Frank.
In all, I hope I'm wrong and I'll continue to hope for a turnaround. I'd also love to hear someone tell me I am way off.
