Quinton said:

---

Every team in the college game has flaws. If Drew picked up another high level combo guard and added a rated big to fill that gaping hole you're talking super team level here. It's just not possible.

We literally have 5 guys that have or are going to avg 10+ a game in that scenario (Love/Nunn/Roach (last yr), VJ (easily 10 + ppg scorer) and the additional combo guard). Just not enough minutes for that. There's only ball.

---

Which is why I said I wouldn't expect that, although I don't think we've added enough to say this team is final four or bust going into the season. Roach and Oimer are coming for a natty. Maybe drew still has something crazy up his sleeve.

I don't expect that though. That's why I want someone good at being a role player we can develop because there's a bunch of holes in the skill sets of our guards and we need to make sure that's filled.

If Love gets injured or Nunn comes out with marginal development this team isn't a major tournament threat as it currently stands. That's why I do think we need another big who's really good or someone who can patch up our weakness at guard.

Even *if* Nunn doesn't develop one bit from last season, he was already a competent starting shooting guard on a #3 seed tournament team. The pessimism from you that he can't or won't develop and improve even more is wild to me.

Yes and he almost showed the month of March. Saying he was a starter on one of the noteworthy underperforming teams in the tournament isn't a badge of honor.

That garbage performance to end the regular season and in the post season isn't all on him but he was a major contributing factor.

Ivan, this weird disdain for Nunn is starting to become concerning. It seems like most of the board felt that he could have played better at points, but he acquitted himself fairly well on the offensive end, and he should be able to develop into a more consistent defender after a full off-season in the program.

I'll ask you a question: Every piece I read about Baylor this upcoming season talks about how we'll have one of the premier backcourts in the entire country, yet you keep harping on our "weakness at guard." What college backcourt would you trade for ours? Who do you think has a clearly better guard rotation?

Looking at the projected top teams, mayyyyybe KU or UNC for me? Although Elliot Cadeau and DeJuan Harris are basically the same player. Skilled facilitators who can't really score. Other than maybe those two teams, I think we're better than everyone else in the country at the guard spots. I think you're wishing for something that doesn't exist at the college level.

IvanBear said:

---

Yes and he almost showed the month of March. Saying he was a starter on one of the noteworthy underperforming teams in the tournament isn't a badge of honor.

That garbage performance to end the regular season and in the post season isn't all on him but he was a major contributing factor.

---

Based on a one game tournament sample size, or a limited 5 game sample size in March, you could send our entire team packing based off that logic. That's not how to build a roster. He is not a star player but not garbage to get rid of either.

Well considering our team's performance in March last year was exactly in line with the rest of the season….

They had the exact outcome many expected since we got a real taste of completion in December. That was one of our worst teams in quite a while last year. The difference was they were hard workers and super likable. They were not very good though.

The results don't lie we had freshman of the year and he didn't sniff an all conference selection. Our best player got injured and our point guard got 3rd team all big 12. It's amazing we were in contention for the conference as late as we were. What a testament to how down the Big 12 was last year.

IvanBear said:

---

Well considering our team's performance in March last year was exactly in line with the rest of the season….

They had the exact outcome many expected since we got a real taste of completion in December. That was one of our worst teams in quite a while last year. The difference was they were hard workers and super likable. They were not very good though.

The results don't lie we had freshman of the year and he didn't sniff an all conference selection. Our best player got injured and our point guard got 3rd team all big 12. It's amazing we were in contention for the conference as late as we were. What a testament to how down the Big 12 was last year.

---

We more than held our own starting in December when we faced real competition, finishing 3rd in conference play and earning a #3 seed. Yes we had a disappoiniting finish not making it past the first weekend, I will give you that. But overall we were far from a bad team. There were decades we could never even sniff an NIT berth much less a #3 tournament seed. If that team is considered one of our worst teams then I will certainly live with that.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

IvanBear said:

---

Well considering our team's performance in March last year was exactly in line with the rest of the season….

They had the exact outcome many expected since we got a real taste of completion in December. That was one of our worst teams in quite a while last year. The difference was they were hard workers and super likable. They were not very good though.

The results don't lie we had freshman of the year and he didn't sniff an all conference selection. Our best player got injured and our point guard got 3rd team all big 12. It's amazing we were in contention for the conference as late as we were. What a testament to how down the Big 12 was last year.

---

We more than held our own starting in December when we faced real competition, finishing 3rd in conference play and earning a #3 seed. Yes we had a disappoiniting finish not making it past the first weekend, I will give you that. But overall we were far from a bad team. There were decades we could never even sniff an NIT berth much less a #3 tournament seed. If that team is considered one of our worst teams then I will certainly live with that.

---

I think the truth is between your two views. Ivan's is too gloomy, as is often the case, and yours is too sunny.

We had a good team last year, but it was miles from greatness. And the writing was on the wall pretty early that we were headed toward another early tournament exit.

For the second year in a row, we couldn't defend at all, and as a result, we finished right around .500 in QUAD 1 games for the second straight year.

We were a good, solid team capable of beating other good teams. But we weren't anything special. Every game against other good teams was a 50-50 bet.

Unfortunately, we haven't been special since the first half of the 2022 season -- basically since EJ went down and our defense took a massive step backwards.

Did I say we were a great team? We were clearly not a great team but with a different draw we could have ended up in the sweet 16 or even elite 8. Due to variance and overall parity in the college game anything can happen in the tourney and we got super unlucky drawing Clemson. That result doesn't mean we go and get rid of Nunn and other productive players. Even with our disappointing early exit, finishing 3rd in arguably the best conference and earning a #3 seed was nothing to be ashamed of. That is not a sunny perspective, that is a realistic perspective.

The excuse every year seems to be we got a super unlucky draw. That excuse is horse ***** We were gifted a FANTASTIC draw this year. We still **** the bed. You could argue last years draw sucked but that side of the bracket broke perfectly for us and we failed to capitalize.

IowaBear said:

---

The excuse every year seems to be we got a super unlucky draw. That excuse is horse ***** We were gifted a FANTASTIC draw this year. We still **** the bed. You could argue last years draw sucked but that side of the bracket broke perfectly for us and we failed to capitalize.

---

You are way off. Clemson was nails and came a hair away form a Final 4 berth. Extremely tough opponent. Again, not an excuse we simply lost to a better opponent.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

Did I say we were a great team? We were clearly not a great team but with a different draw we could have ended up in the sweet 16 or even elite 8. Due to variance and overall parity in the college game anything can happen in the tourney and we got super unlucky drawing Clemson. That result doesn't mean we go and get rid of Nunn and other productive players. Even with our disappointing early exit, finishing 3rd in arguably the best conference and earning a #3 seed was nothing to be ashamed of. That is not a sunny perspective, that is a realistic perspective.

---

For the second straight year, we were overseeded due to an inflated view of the Big 12. Our last two teams were five or six seeds masquerading as three seeds. Our resumes were better than our teams actually were.

It's funny, for all the talk in the other thread about our ceiling, we've actually been more of a high-floor program than a high-ceiling program since the title run. We almost never lose to teams we can overwhelm athletically, but we go .500 against the good teams on our schedule, leaving us susceptible to any draw because you only play good teams after the first round.

They were 11-9 in a weak ACC. Handle "nails" They got hot at the right time. Quit exaggerating your takes to fit your agenda. They were slightly above average team who got warm down the stretch. We had a great down and crapped the bed. Nothing more.

IowaBear said:

---

They were 11-9 in a weak ACC. Handle "nails" They got hot at the right time. Quit exaggerating your takes to fit your agenda. They were slightly above average team who got warm down the stretch. We had a great down and crapped the bed. Nothing more.

---

I don't have an agenda. Did you even watch them after they beat us? Clemson was playing well enough to make the final and they almost did. Yes, tournament success is all about getting hot at the right time, which they did. Our season was not a failure due to losing to Clemson.

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

They were 11-9 in a weak ACC. Handle "nails" They got hot at the right time. Quit exaggerating your takes to fit your agenda. They were slightly above average team who got warm down the stretch. We had a great down and crapped the bed. Nothing more.

---

I don't have an agenda. Did you even watch them after they beat us? Clemson was playing well enough to make the final and they almost did. Yes, tournament success is all about getting hot at the right time, which they did. Our season was not a failure due to losing to Clemson.

---

We're Baylor, we're a national championship winning program with a national championship winning coach. We had two guys on the team with enough talent to be first round NBA draft picks. We had a sought after veteran point guard, a veteran forward whos likely going to have at least a cup of coffee in the league, and so many on this board love to point out how many guys we had average double figures last year. So losing to a mediocre team that got kinda hot is fine?

Clemson didn't get that hot they still let us come all the way back and if Walter was any kind of clutch we probably would have won that game. They also weren't playing well enough to make a final four because they lost to an Alabama team who had underachieved all year as well. Alabama took a lead with like 2:30 left in the first half and never surrendered it. The game was close in points, but Alabama didn't surrender a lead for over 22 minutes of game time that's not exactly clemson putting on some kind of masterclass.

So all that to say, I'm confused were we a massive underachiever all season and we met expectations by losing in the second round, or were we a better team than Clemson and got embarrassed by a team who was our lesser all year and really didn't go on to do anything noteworthy (no one outside of the specific school remembers elite 8s)?

You're a flag in the wind on this argument.

Clemson was a tough matchup and they beat us. Losing to them didn't make our entire season garbage. We were a #3 seed which was a solid, but not great, season for us. We didn't massively underachieve last year. Hoping for a better result next year. I trust CSD knows how to build a program and how to build a roster.

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

This. I would call our 2023-24 season a moderate success, but a lot of Baylor fans talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want to crow about our program like it's a new blood elite, but they refuse to hold it to that performance standard and make excuses when we don't meet it.

It wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't spend so much time running down programs that are often outperforming us on the court.

I'm proud of Scott Drew and the program he's built. We've been a picture of consistency the last 15 years and are as strong a bet as anyone in the country to put a good product on the court on a year-to-year basis. But the heights we reached from 2020-22 are looking more like a peak than a plateau. And if we really want to talk and act like an elite program, we need to get back to winning like one.

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

Yet you cite Clemson's regular season record while ignoring their elite 8 (and near final 4) run in March. You can't hold Baylor to one set of standards while holding other teams to a different set of standards.

bear2be2 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

This. I would call our 2023-24 season a moderate success, but a lot of Baylor fans talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want to crow about our program like it's a new blood elite, but they refuse to hold it to that performance standard and make excuses when we don't meet it.

It wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't spend so much time running down programs that are often outperforming us on the court.

I'm proud of Scott Drew and the program he's built. We've been a picture of consistency the last 15 years and are as strong a bet as anyone in the country to put a good product on the court on a year-to-year basis. But the heights we reached from 2020-22 are looking more like a peak than a plateau. And if we really want to talk and act like an elite program, we need to get back to winning like one.

---

So get back to a winning like an elite program by getting rid of productive starters like Jayden Nunn? That's how this argument started when Ivan said we had a garbage finish to the season, in large part because Nunn started for us. Elsewhere Ivan says we have weak backcourt going into next season and need to upgrade from Nunn and Love. You don't achieve program continuity by recruiting over or getting rid of productive players like Jayden Nunn or Langston Love. You let them develop and flourish over a 2 or 3 year period. Jayden Nunn and Langston Love are the exact type of players we need to build around if you are looking for roster continuity from one season to the next.

I'm not ignoring anything. They weren't nails as you so weirdly put it. And their season as a whole proved that. You'll do anything to avoid stating the obvious… which is that we crapped the bed in March again.
But by all means… go ahead and keep trying to convince people Clemson was some juggernaut. I'm sure you'll get a few clueless fans to buy into your views on them

You yourself said on multiple occasions you wouldn't be surprised if Nunn and BU mutually parted ways…. Yet now you're this huge Jayden Nunn fan. And you trash LL whenever you get a chance to throw in a dig at his game. Not sure why your now this big cheerleader of both

IowaBear said:

---

You yourself said on multiple occasions you wouldn't be surprised if Nunn and BU mutually parted ways…. Yet now you're this huge Jayden Nunn fan. And you trash LL whenever you get a chance to throw in a dig at his game. Not sure why your now this big cheerleader of both

---

Back in early January before Nunn broke out, I did say I wouldn't be surprised if they mutually parted ways. At that point of the season Nunn was very bad and looked more like Dale Bonner than the productive player he later developed into as conference play wore on. He and Bridges carried us from the time Langston went down.

I have never trashed Love but I am realistic about his limitations. He is always injured, is a scoring-only guard with no play-making skills, and a very bad defender. That said he is an elite 6th man and always has a place in our rotation as long as he can stay healthy.

You continually predict Love will get passed on the depth chart. You did it last year saying Little would eventually surprise him and you'll inevitably make that silly claim regarding Wright passing him.
It's just incredibly hypocritical of you to dog on Ivan ( I don't agree with him ) when you yourself were wanting Nunn gone until he started playing to your standards.
But will agree to disagree on all this. Have a good Thursday evening

IowaBear said:

---

You continually predict Love will get passed on the depth chart. You did it last year saying Little would eventually surprise him and you'll inevitably make that silly claim regarding Wright passing him.
It's just incredibly hypocritical of you to dog on Ivan ( I don't agree with him ) when you yourself were wanting Nunn gone until he started playing to your standards.

---

I never said Love would get passed on a depth chart. Before last season I predicted he would be our 6th man and I was correct. Being a 6th man for us is not a stigma or a slander on Love. His game is ideally suited for the 6th man role and he thrived in that role. For next year I never said Wright would pass him. They play different positions and roles. Wright will mainly play PG when Roach is out of the game, and some minutes with Roach. Remember we play 3 guards at a time at all times and we will have a 5 guard rotation.

Nunn was objectively very bad last year in November/December and in today's transfer portal he probably would have left had he not turned things around. The same way Grimes and Little left to find playing time elsewhere. My feelings have nothing to do with it.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

You continually predict Love will get passed on the depth chart. You did it last year saying Little would eventually surprise him and you'll inevitably make that silly claim regarding Wright passing him.
It's just incredibly hypocritical of you to dog on Ivan ( I don't agree with him ) when you yourself were wanting Nunn gone until he started playing to your standards.

---

I never said Love would get passed on a depth chart. Before last season I predicted he would be our 6th man and I was correct. Being a 6th man for us is not a stigma or a slander on Love. His game is ideally suited for the 6th man role and he thrived in that role. For next year I never said Wright would pass him. They play different positions and roles. Wright will mainly play PG when Roach is out of the game, and some minutes with Roach. Remember we play 3 guards at a time at all times and we will have a 5 guard rotation.

Nunn was objectively very bad last year in November/December and in today's transfer portal he probably would have left had he not turned things around. The same way Grimes and Little left to find playing time elsewhere. My feelings have nothing to do with it.

---

Nunn had a bad November December AND March. His January wasn't great either. He had a good February which just happened to be the softest part of our conference schedule.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

This. I would call our 2023-24 season a moderate success, but a lot of Baylor fans talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want to crow about our program like it's a new blood elite, but they refuse to hold it to that performance standard and make excuses when we don't meet it.

It wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't spend so much time running down programs that are often outperforming us on the court.

I'm proud of Scott Drew and the program he's built. We've been a picture of consistency the last 15 years and are as strong a bet as anyone in the country to put a good product on the court on a year-to-year basis. But the heights we reached from 2020-22 are looking more like a peak than a plateau. And if we really want to talk and act like an elite program, we need to get back to winning like one.

---

So get back to a winning like an elite program by getting rid of productive starters like Jayden Nunn? That's how this argument started when Ivan said we had a garbage finish to the season, in large part because Nunn started for us. Elsewhere Ivan says we have weak backcourt going into next season and need to upgrade from Nunn and Love. You don't achieve program continuity by recruiting over or getting rid of productive players like Jayden Nunn or Langston Love. You let them develop and flourish over a 2 or 3 year period. Jayden Nunn and Langston Love are the exact type of players we need to build around if you are looking for roster continuity from one season to the next.

---

Ivan's take on Nunn -- and our guard guard corps, in general -- is way off IMO. I've said as much many times.

And this post seems odd being directed as me because I've been beating the drum for more roster continuity, not less.

bear2be2 said:

---

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

This. I would call our 2023-24 season a moderate success, but a lot of Baylor fans talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want to crow about our program like it's a new blood elite, but they refuse to hold it to that performance standard and make excuses when we don't meet it.

It wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't spend so much time running down programs that are often outperforming us on the court.

I'm proud of Scott Drew and the program he's built. We've been a picture of consistency the last 15 years and are as strong a bet as anyone in the country to put a good product on the court on a year-to-year basis. But the heights we reached from 2020-22 are looking more like a peak than a plateau. And if we really want to talk and act like an elite program, we need to get back to winning like one.

---

So get back to a winning like an elite program by getting rid of productive starters like Jayden Nunn? That's how this argument started when Ivan said we had a garbage finish to the season, in large part because Nunn started for us. Elsewhere Ivan says we have weak backcourt going into next season and need to upgrade from Nunn and Love. You don't achieve program continuity by recruiting over or getting rid of productive players like Jayden Nunn or Langston Love. You let them develop and flourish over a 2 or 3 year period. Jayden Nunn and Langston Love are the exact type of players we need to build around if you are looking for roster continuity from one season to the next.

---

Ivan's take on Nunn -- and our guard guard corps, in general -- is way off IMO. I've said as much many times.

And this post seems odd being directed as me because I've been beating the drum for more roster continuity, not less.

---

We fully agree on the need for roster consistency.

To be clear my reservations of our guard core next year are about 50% need for consistency, 30% we're going to rely on 2 freshmen, and 10% concern for Nunn's skill and Drew usage of him and 10% concern for Love's health.

I'm way more worried we've got a core that hasn't played together that's going to demand a lot of ball handling and production out of the freshmen. That's always a dicey proposition.

My constant frustration with Nunn is I don't get how he fits in this team. He's not great at defense, he's not good at ball handling, and he's only a streaky scorer. Even if he starts, he should be 5th in minutes out of our guard core. We're all in on Wright being competent enough to come in off the bench and relieve Roach, and last year Love was getting more minutes than Nunn when healthy. I don't get what Nunn brings to the table over either of those guys unless like Miro Little, Wright won't be as ready to play at the next level as people make him out to be (I hope this is not the case). If Wright isn't ready for 15-20 minutes of play time this is running back essentially the same guard group as last year with a more talented guy in the point even though he's a combo not a PG.

Our guard core last year was not very impressive and I'm worried we haven't done enough to upgrade it. They constantly underperformed in meaningful games and meaningful moments. Only 2 games last year can I think of them winning us the game against a top flight opponent and that was Auburn and the miracle recovery against the refs with Iowa state. The rest of the time they'd put out a valiant effort but be unable to finish the job (Houston, Ku in Lawrence, Duke, etc).

We've for sure upgraded over Dennis with Roach, hopefully Love stays healthy and gives us an upgrade over Nunn, and hopefully Edgecombe is better than Walter. Hopefully Wright is ready to be a sixth man of the year nominee. But that's a lot of hopefully and not a lot of proven commodities in our guard core.

I still think the roster is shaping up a lot better than last year, Omier I think really changes a lot of the dynamics of the team, but the Guard core is only a marginal upgrade and only makes us more like our 2022-2023 guard core not 2021-2022 or the completely unfair standard of 2019-2021.

I'm fairly negative on Nunn but I'm positive on this team right now, I like us 3rd or 4th in conference and anything below elite 8 would be a massive disappointment with the current roster. I think the roster will get better and I would hopefully we'll add more talent that makes our talent so great we just have to ignore the consistency issue when comparing us to Houston and Iowa State.

IvanBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Your season is defined by what you do in March. Fair or foul. I don't necessarily call it a failure. But we underachieved relative to our seeding.. again

---

This. I would call our 2023-24 season a moderate success, but a lot of Baylor fans talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want to crow about our program like it's a new blood elite, but they refuse to hold it to that performance standard and make excuses when we don't meet it.

It wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't spend so much time running down programs that are often outperforming us on the court.

I'm proud of Scott Drew and the program he's built. We've been a picture of consistency the last 15 years and are as strong a bet as anyone in the country to put a good product on the court on a year-to-year basis. But the heights we reached from 2020-22 are looking more like a peak than a plateau. And if we really want to talk and act like an elite program, we need to get back to winning like one.

---

So get back to a winning like an elite program by getting rid of productive starters like Jayden Nunn? That's how this argument started when Ivan said we had a garbage finish to the season, in large part because Nunn started for us. Elsewhere Ivan says we have weak backcourt going into next season and need to upgrade from Nunn and Love. You don't achieve program continuity by recruiting over or getting rid of productive players like Jayden Nunn or Langston Love. You let them develop and flourish over a 2 or 3 year period. Jayden Nunn and Langston Love are the exact type of players we need to build around if you are looking for roster continuity from one season to the next.

---

Ivan's take on Nunn -- and our guard guard corps, in general -- is way off IMO. I've said as much many times.

And this post seems odd being directed as me because I've been beating the drum for more roster continuity, not less.

---

hopefully Love stays healthy and gives us an upgrade over Nunn,

---

Love will not give us an upgrade over Nunn. It is not an either/or. Just like last season they will both continue getting minutes in the 25-28 minute range because our coaching staff doesn't share your opinion of Nunn.

Because Ivan said we had a garbage season and in large part blamed Nunn. You and Iowa piggybacked off of his post to complain about our season and our performance in March . Your MO is always to seccond-guess Drew and complain about his roster construction and recruiting strategy. You guys can't have it both ways...complaining about roster turnover and continuity while at the same time wanting to push productive starters off our roster.

YOUR the one who wanted to push a productive starter off the roster… your words not mine. Not 1 time did I ever say I think Nunn and BU will parts ways. You made those predictions not me.
I also never said last season was a failure. I said your defined by what you do in March and that's absolutely correct. And we've **** the bed in March lately… another correct statement.

Nunn was objectively very bad last year in November/December and in today's transfer portal he probably would have left had he not turned things around.

Thankfully he did turn things around and become a building block for our program. He wasn't soley to blame for our loss to Clemson in the round of 32.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

Because Ivan said we had a garbage season and in large part blamed Nunn. You and Iowa piggybacked off of his post to complain about our season and our performance in March . Your MO is always to seccond-guess Drew and complain about his roster construction and recruiting strategy. You guys can't have it both ways...complaining about roster turnover and continuity while at the same time wanting to push productive starters off our roster.

---

I've never advocated for pushing productive starters off our roster. Literally ever.

What I'd ultimately like to see is us stop relying so heavily on players who will never be back for a second year -- whether it's one-and-done freshmen and one-year transfers.

Why you continue to direct this at me is baffling, to be honest.

Not my plan to promote a perpetual self-promoter, but Calipari makes an interesting argument for reducing the roster size of top-level programs. With the high turnover rate with the portal, he considers going with 8-9 scholarship players. The argument, "Why develop a player at the end of your bench who is going to leave anyway?" Is this a valid argument or is he just blowing smoke at a couple of players holding them up for more NIL money?



https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/40115234/amid-portal-era-calipari-hints-limiting-arkansas-roster-8-9-guys

IowaBear said:

---

They were 11-9 in a weak ACC. Handle "nails" They got hot at the right time. Quit exaggerating your takes to fit your agenda. They were slightly above average team who got warm down the stretch. We had a great down and crapped the bed. Nothing more.

---

The "weak ACC" really showed out during the tournament.