With all the discussion about Steve Alford, I had to bring back some old postings from my archives.
Steve Alford's NCAA tournament record wasn't very good and a closer look shows almost every success was due more to lucky draws more than anything else. Prior to UCLA he made exactly one Sweet 16, way back in 1999 at SW Missouri (now Missouri St.) beating a #5 and a #4 seed. However, sometimes getting to the Sweet Sixteen takes a lot of luck and a closer examination of Alford's draw that season indicates that seems to be the case.
The team was fortunate even to make the tournament at all after an unremarkable season in which they lost 10 games and won neither the Missouri Valley Conference regular season or tournament championship. His first round game was against #5 seed Wisconsin, a team that limped into the tournament losing six of their last nine games and had more trouble scoring than (insert your own joke here), averaging barely over 50 points in their last five games. It didn't even take 50 points for SW Missouri to beat them. They scored only 43 and won by 11! The 32 points by Wisconsin were a record low for a first round game until UCLA held Mississippi Valley St to 29 in 2008. That was less than half of what SW Mo. usually gave up, so it wasn't all the result of great defense.
In the second round, they blew out Tennessee, 81-51. Now there is no way they were 30 points better than the Vols, a team that won the SEC-East, beating Kentucky, a top-10 team, twice. Tennessee just rolled over in that game. John Feinstein wrote this about the game: Tennessee (21-9) shot 29.5 percent for the game – four percentage points better than Wisconsin – and looked like a group ready to go watch spring football practice throughout most of the second half.
That might be because they were coached by one Jerry Green, who somehow got the Tennessee job after five seasons at Oregon where he won 51% of his games. Despite making the NCAA tournament in each of his four years at Tennessee, it was widely considered to be due to the players he inherited from Kevin O'Neill and he had a reputation for losing big games to teams with inferior talent. He was forced to resign just two years after this game. SW Missouri was easily dispatched by Duke in the next game.
Beleive it or not, in his next 27 years as a head college, coach Alford won exactly TWO tournament games against single digit seeds and both needed an asterisk.
Mainly based on that NCAA "success" he was hired by Iowa. In eight years there he made the tournament three times, losing in the first round twice, once to a #14 seed. He beat a #10 seed for his only tournament win there.
His 61-67 conference record at Iowa got him hired by New Mexico. Three NCAA tournaments in six seasons: Two wins over #14 and #12 seeds, two losses to #11 (by 18) and #14 seeds.
Then somehow he gets hired by UCLA, the worst choice of a coach since the other Steve. Here's where he really gets lucky. His first year, with players recruited and coached by Ben Howland, he makes the Sweet 16 by beating a #13 and a #12 seed. His only recruit was of course Bryce Alford, who missed more shots that any other player in UCLA history. The other freshman, Zach LaVine was a Howland recruit. Now compare this to the myth that Cronin made the Final Four with "Alford's players". The two best players on that team were Johnny Juzang, who transferred from Kentucky under Cronin's watch and Jaime Jaquez who had to be re-recruited after Alford was fired. The next best player was Tyger Campbell who never played a game for Alford. Cronin made the Final Four mainly due to these three players, not "Alford's". What Cronin inherited from Alford were a bunch of role players who never learned how to play defense. Had Alford coached this team, based on his long history of NCAA failures, they probably wouldn't have gotten past the Sweet 16.
Then next year, Alford again makes the Sweet 16, this time by beating a #6 seed on a controversial goaltending call and then a #14 seed. How lucky has this guy been? Then, two seasons later he takes what was probably the most talented UCLA team of this century with three future NBA 1st round and two 2nd round draft choices, he beats a #14 seed and then a #6 seed, coached by someone who is considered a lousy coach by some here and then loses by double digits in the next round. He follows that up by losing in the First Four.
But Alford wasn't done yet. Hired by Nevada, he makes two NCAA tournaments in seven seasons, losing in the First Four by 25 points and then the first round.
By contrast, Cronin's tournament record is far superior. It took several years to rebuild Cincinnati, which was a depleted program after Bob Huggins was asked to resign with no warning three months before the 2005 season, and a temporary coach was used for a season, the school did little to no recruiting for nearly a year. He made the tournament in 2011, the first of nine consecutive tournaments, winning the first round game but drawing eventual national champion UConn in the 2nd round. The next year he made the Sweet 16 by beating a #3 seed and then lost to a team which made the Final Four and lost by two points there.
The next seven seasons he lost in the first round four times, two of them close games against single digit seeds. Three times he made it to the second round, only to meet an undefeated Kentucky team, the aforementioned "best" UCLA team and a two point loss to a team that lost by one point to a Final Four team.
So maybe not a lot of tournament wins at Cincinnati, but some very respectable performances against, unlike Alford, unlucky draws.
At UCLA, of course he makes a Final Four beating a #6, a #2, and a #1 seed with players he coached, only to lose in overtime on a miracle shot in the Final Four. He followed that up with two Sweet 16's, the first losing to a Final Four team and the second on another last second shot, playing without his two best defensive players.
After a subpar season he wins first round games the next two, losing to a #2 seed in the first and then, without his leading scorer, to the eventual national runner-up. Maybe not up to the unrealistic expectations of some fans, but certainly not an embarrassment.
The bottom line: Alford lucky, Cronin not so much.