This was another (very) disappointing loss, and emotions are raw in the moment, both for the players and the fans. But I don't why everything has to be black and white - about the season, about Self, and about our tournament performance.
By all measures except one - a big one admittedly - this was a very successful season - 30+ wins, 13th consecutive conference crown - NPOY - Self showing more adaptability with his players than ever before, with entertaining results - a team with more grit and determination perhaps than many other recent Jayhawk teams - beat UK and Duke - epic comeback against WVU. Frank will go down as one of the all time greats at KU. JJ was the best OAD we've had - at least in terms of his play at KU. A lot to be grateful for and appreciative of with this team.
But that shouldn't preclude a thoughtful discussion of the whys and wherefores of falling short again with regard to the goal each and every year at KU (yes we are blessed and cursed by high expectations) - a national championship or at least a Final Four appearance.
The numbers are what they are. Self's 2-7 record in E8 games is what most folks are pointing the finger at. The one that really gets me is that we've had 8 #1 seeds during the Self era and have reached the FF only once during that time ('08). I haven't gone back and checked this, but I think we have only beaten a higher seed team once during the Self era?
The bottom line is that we've consistently fallen short of playing to our expected seed over a long period of time during the tournament. That is a fact. The question is why? Luck? That may have something to do with, but again, it's not a one, two or three time thing. Have we (and by extension the B12) been seeded higher than we should have? Probably yes to a degree, but that should actually make EASIER to advance further. And, advanced metrics have largely supported KUs seed most years - at least within a seed line.
Is something else going on? Is coaching an aspect - in terms of preparation, in-game adjustments, and the dreaded "tightness" factor? Perhaps it is inherently unknowable - certainly isn't provable. By I'm one that has always had the feeling that Self does tighten up during the tournament and it is something could well be felt by and impact the players. It is most manifested in his substitution patters (or lack thereof) during the tournament. That our guys played not to lose, rather than playing to win.
I thought this year was different - that this team had a different character and swagger. But, after yesterday's game, I don't know what to think. Oregon struggled to put away URI and Michigan - could easily have lost either game. Didn't really dominate Iona in the first round. Yet all 3 of those teams scored more points against Oregon than we did. We had our worst shooting %s and lowest point total of the year (eerily reminiscent of last year and other E8 results).
It took us forever to figure out their match-up on zone and adapt. We kept taking shots from the perimeter - some way too quickly - and didn't drive the ball nearly enough (Frank did for a awhile, with good results). Perhaps we were cowed by Bell? Clearly having JJ on the bench hurt and while we were only down 1 when he came back in, he probably was playing less aggressively than he otherwise would have (and did in the second half).
How much of the game yesterday was on Self and how much of the KU performance in the tournament over the past decade and a half is on Self? I think some of it has to be - he is the one constant. Having said that, he is without question one of the small handful of best college coaches, a Hall of Famer, and I would still rather have Self than any other coach in the game - yes. But that doesn't mean he is or should be immune from a critical assessment of why we continue to fall short of ours and his expectations.....