somebody tell me again why it has that the national champion just has to be Illinois or North Carolina? One of them may well win it, and they are good teams. But man are they beatable. Clemson isnt even a bubble type team.
Based on the last week....
- Thread starter Sun Tzu
- Start date
ACC is tough all around...you always have to showup unlike illinois where u can sleepwalk through northwestern
well east coasters say they are the best so it MUST be true.....
i guarantee that Ill doesn't win it all, they are very beatable, was hoping uconn saw them in the sweet 16 ,but uconn is on fire that they will likely get a 2-3 seed....unc has the best talent but not sure about their mental makeup (simialr to uconn last year, but uconn had the mental makeup).
i guarantee that Ill doesn't win it all, they are very beatable, was hoping uconn saw them in the sweet 16 ,but uconn is on fire that they will likely get a 2-3 seed....unc has the best talent but not sure about their mental makeup (simialr to uconn last year, but uconn had the mental makeup).
Its all about probabilities and Illinois and/or UNC have very high probabilities of winning it all compared to other teams in the country. I think you can make strong argument supporting that and that is why they both are the odds on favorite to win it all. Both are under 4-1 to win it all and the next fav. is 8-1. Big gap.
ADot said:
Thats what people "wrongly" said about USC in college football the past 3 seasons. Yet USC blew out their BCS opponent 3 straight years. Illinois is a great team and the Big 10 is not as down as you think. Now ACC is better than the Big 10 but don't knock down Illinois because they play in the Big 10. Bogus argument.
In March madness, guard play is crucial and Illinois has 3 superstar guards.
Last edited:
gjn23
Uconn won't be as good as you think. They are inexperienced on the outside and guard play is crucial in March Madness. Uconn will get upset.
Uconn won't be as good as you think. They are inexperienced on the outside and guard play is crucial in March Madness. Uconn will get upset.
Scott the Big 11 is down. There cant be any real dispute about that. The issue isnt that "they beat nobody." It is they havent been tested week in and week out. The one game that came to nut-crunch time they blew it against a very average team.
Last I checked Illinois had those guards last year - how did that work out?
Last I checked Illinois had those guards last year - how did that work out?
Sun Tzu said:
You have to give credit to a team who has been down at half in their last four and won each of them...without arguably their best player. McCants has not played, not even practice full speed in over 3 weeks. Do you know how hard it is in basketball to do that and come back w/ 13 pts and two huge momentum 3 pointers. The fact that he's back and this team has not folded when it does in the past is telling.
By the way I'm not sure if anyone on here has said Carolina or Illinois will definitely win it. This is college basketball, any team can have a huge day and upset a big team. You have been harping on this one topic too long, I think you need a new topic to whine about for a little while.
I think this will be the most wide open tournament in years. . . no team is safe or guaranteed a trip into the Sweet 16. . . not even the #1 seeds.
saint said:
carolina has truly overcome all odds and obstacles when everybody wrote them off. nobody gave the heels much of a chance vs. florida state in chapel hill w/o mccants and nobody thought the heels could handle clemson on a neutral court, but thank god for mccants 13 points, otherwise carolina would have been overmatched by the powerful tigers. credit goes to unc.
Sun Tzu said:
Illinois has won 8 games against top 30 ranked teams. Next highest in the country is 6 (Duke, WF, and OU)
Illinois has only beaten 1 top 10 ranked opponent vs Duke beating 3 and bunch others having won 2 games against top 10 comp. Illinois only faced 1 top 10 opponent while others have faced 3-5.
Maybe that is where Illinois has not been tested. Against "elite' competition. That could be a concern but Illinois would only face these top 10 "elite" teams in the final four.
Like i mentioned before. MANY people said the exact same things about USC in collge football for 3 straight years. Exact same quotes thats why I love this argument. Yet USC has dominated their last 3 BCS opponents. So that is why these arguments touting how great ACC and how bad Big 10 is doesn't mean much to me.
Would UNC, WF, Duke have only 1 loss of they played Illinois schedule? Maybe, but I doubt any of the above would be undefeated.
As for the only loss of Illinois, they shot HORRIBLY. As a team they shot bad and yet they still only lost by 2pts on the road. Says a lot to me. What are the chances of all 3 superstars for Illinois having piss poor shooting nights again? Even if it does happen, they have proven they can hang with a team even on the road. Illinois plays both sides of the court.
UNC, WF, Duke etc. may be more tested (and I think they have been) but I don't think that is a great argument to put down Illinois. If Illinois played in ACC, they prob. have 3-4 losses. But it just matters winning in March. I like the fact that Illinois blew out WF. Doesn't say a lot but says something. I think it would say a lot more if WF beat Illinois. But they didn't and they didn't even compete.
According to Gman2
, he said Illinois wouldn't win it all if they went undefeated but loved their chances if they lost prior to entering the big NCAA Tourney. If you put a lot of credit in Gman2's opinion, then Illinois probability of winning it all just went up! If Illinois had it so much easier playing in the Big 10 vs teams from ACC on an everyday basis, then maybe we should give Illinois some type of advantage for being more rested team.
and saint - please relax because i am just fu.cking with you. have a sense youre ready to open fire.
saint said:
Thanks for being an ass yet again. You once said you would stay out of my threads. ANytime now will be fine. I commented because Scott and others last week posted how they were all betting somne prop of UNC/ILL v The Field. But why let facts get in the way of your vendettas.
And hats off to the Heels. Let me ask - did McCants play v Santa Clara, or is he only needed to beat the bottom half of the acc?
Scott4USC said:According to Gman2
my opinion placed side-by-side with a pile of dog shit looks to the naked eye to be similar to two piles of crap.
but, yes, i think illinois stands a better chance right now to win it after getting that first loss.
you must give credit to any team that is loaded with about 6 or 7 nba players that only shoots 47 free throws versus a 5-11 clemson team .
Scott4USC said:Illinois has won 8 games against top 30 ranked teams. Next highest in the country is 6 (Duke, WF, and OU)
Illinois has only beaten 1 top 10 ranked opponent vs Duke beating 3 and bunch others having won 2 games against top 10 comp. Illinois only faced 1 top 10 opponent while others have faced 3-5.
Maybe that is where Illinois has not been tested. Against "elite' competition. That could be a concern but Illinois would only face these top 10 "elite" teams in the final four.
Like i mentioned before. MANY people said the exact same things about USC in collge football for 3 straight years. Exact same quotes thats why I love this argument. Yet USC has dominated their last 3 BCS opponents. So that is why these arguments touting how great ACC and how bad Big 10 is doesn't mean much to me.
Would UNC, WF, Duke have only 1 loss of they played Illinois schedule? Maybe, but I doubt any of the above would be undefeated.
As for the only loss of Illinois, they shot HORRIBLY. As a team they shot bad and yet they still only lost by 2pts on the road. Says a lot to me. What are the chances of all 3 superstars for Illinois having piss poor shooting nights again? Even if it does happen, they have proven they can hang with a team even on the road. Illinois plays both sides of the court.
UNC, WF, Duke etc. may be more tested (and I think they have been) but I don't think that is a great argument to put down Illinois. If Illinois played in ACC, they prob. have 3-4 losses. But it just matters winning in March. I like the fact that Illinois blew out WF. Doesn't say a lot but says something. I think it would say a lot more if WF beat Illinois. But they didn't and they didn't even compete.
According to Gman2
If Illinois had it so much easier playing in the Big 10 vs teams from ACC on an everyday basis, then maybe we should give Illinois some type of advantage for being more rested team.
Well we both know nthat "top 30" is computer generated crap alhtough I know you love it. Those are the same things that have had So Illinois and Vermont in the Top 20 all year. No doubt Illinois played some tough non-conference games and won them - 3 months ago.
I will simply note you chose to ignoe how far those guards took Illinois last year. On paper I would say Illinois is the best team and SHOULD win. Hostory shows that more often than not the team that should win doesnt. Last 3 years the champs werent even 1 seeds.
The argument is UNC and Illinois are and deserve to be 2 of the top 3 favorites to win it all. Doesn't mean they will, but they are 2 of the top 3 favorites to win it all. Probability wise. Nobody said either "will" win it all. Nobody said it was a lock for UNC of Ill. to win it all.
Put it this way. If a sportsbook gave me 3 free $1000 bets on 3 teams of my choice to win it all and all teams are 1-1 odds. Illinois and UNC would be 2 of my 3 selections. Sun Tzu wouldn't have UNC or Illinois in his top 3 but would have Washington, Oklahoma St., and WF. 3 solid choices, but I think he is crazy not to inlcude EITHER UNC or Illinois in his top 3.
Put it this way. If a sportsbook gave me 3 free $1000 bets on 3 teams of my choice to win it all and all teams are 1-1 odds. Illinois and UNC would be 2 of my 3 selections. Sun Tzu wouldn't have UNC or Illinois in his top 3 but would have Washington, Oklahoma St., and WF. 3 solid choices, but I think he is crazy not to inlcude EITHER UNC or Illinois in his top 3.
gman2 said:
In terms of statistics, check when the last time a one loss team won it all. I venture you werent born yet.
