This is why mid-majors should be barred from the tourney

[ageecee]

Just my opinion but ive said all year this was a down year for college basketball. Lots of parity this year and some teams being over-rated and over ranked.

 

[freelancc]

:wall:

 

[chop33]

you are showing your age with comments like this chumpo.you obviously don't now jack about hoops.keep your piss poor comments to yourself glass boy!

 

[Goose]

With all due respect, I don't think it's possible for me to disagree more. How in the world can you leave out half of the NCAA basketball planet just because they are mid-majors...and not from the power conerences that Billy Packer loves so much?? Just because they are from the Colonial...or the MVC...or the MAC for that matter, the tournament is won on the floor. There's no hiding here. Regardless to what Mason did in the regular season, there's no reason to 'penalize' themn for taking care of their business on the floor. Now----if it was the old days of college football, and championships weren't determined on the playing field (by writers and polls), then yeah, you may have an arguement. See BYU. That is the beauty of this tournament-----everyone starts the thing with a clean slate. Survive and advance. Lose and go home. I'm not a Mason fan (nor do I play one on TV), but you have to respect the he!l out of what they are doing.

If we apply this 'only the best get in' theory to other major sporting events and tournaments.......forget about USA Hockey in 1980, forget about the Jets in SB III, forget about the Utah Utes in the Fiesta Bowl a couple years back.....cripe, forget about Rocky Balboa while we're at it.... :shrug:

 

[UT-Longhorn]

crack kills.

 

[jr11]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and here is mine.

To answer your question, GM certainly could be at least .500 in any of those conferences. They just beat MSU, NC, and UCONN...all top or near the top of their respective conferences Come on.....

Here's one thought for you all, if GM played in a power conference they would also get some bigger/better recruits too.

This exemplifies what is means to be a team, and a true underdog role which almost everyone if life can relate too in some fashion. Common goal, hardwork, determination and passion can go a long way.

I know, you would rather see a lackluster team like UCONN in the tournament where these kids appear to not care at all. There is a place for the UCONN members, it is called the NBA....they will fit in perfectly.

One way to determine if this is a failure having a mid-major in the final four or game....TV ratings. We will see if this relished from even non-basketball lovers.

The bottom line is if you feel this way then don't watch it.

jr11

 

[Sleasy77]

This type of comment can be related to the media coverage of Tiger Woods. I mean seriously if Tiger sarted to fall off the map and miss cuts would golf ratings go up? would it be good for the game? HELL NO. I think George Mason's run in the tourney is great for the game.(also great for the media) and even better for the school itself. If your to busy putting them down by sayying that they shouldnt even be there is rediculous. I always thought the beauty of it all is that.... OF COURSE... anybody can win. Thats not exciting? Its the same exact reason that TEXAS HOLD EM is getting the publicity on ESPN. In 2003 when a no namer accountant won the bracelet it made people think. Well hell I can do that.

So Nick.. Let me guess. your bracket consist of all the number 1 seeds in the final four with Duke and Uconn in the finals. Then we all really dont care who you picked in that one.

My final words are that you should follow the NIT more than the actuall tourney. Seems you fit a person like yourself. Remember NIT stand for: not invited tournament. and guess what bud. If NIT stands for that then I consider madjacks a tournament

 

[kneifl]

Possibly the most assanine diatribe I have ever read on this board.

kneifl

 

[Nosigar]

WWW.ONEPEAT.COM

 

[nchiappetta]

The comment about it being complete luck is TOTALLY rediculous. You don't get 'lucky' playing ONE game for 40 minutes and coming out on top, let alone 4 against top quality teams/programs as MSU, UNC, and UConn...and yes Wichita State is good as well. You don't just get lucky playing a back and forth game where each team has their opportunities to capitalize, make shots, make steals, make free throws, and eventually come out with more points than the opponent...LUCKY???

I agree that THIS is, along with most of the other things mentioned above, some of the most assanine things I have read on this board. There is NO way that this tournament would have the attention and publicity it does if it weren't for all the conferences having at least one representative that is supposedly the best of its league compete and have a chance to win. Yes, some of the buzzer shots have been lucky here and there, but its the totality of the game that is NOT lucky.

Once again, can't believe you even said they were lucky to get here...obviously at least 2 peeps thought this would be the outcome as can be seen from the leaders of the ESPN Tournament Challenge. I guess make that 2 + all the players, coaches and fans of George Mason.

My guess is that you lost a lot on Uconn's ML??? :shrug:

 

[scott4]

you need to go back to the coffee shop and debate some sh it you know about. here is an idea why dont these power teams pull their heads out of their as ses and destroy these so called lucky teams. you equated this to deal or no deal picking someone out of the crowd that did nothing to earn it these kids took care of business all year hardly cant say they were picked out of the crowd.

 

[gjn23]

By the way, nobody answered the legitimate question I posed in the article: Does anyone think that George Mason (with their only two major conference regular season games being losses to Miss. St. and Wake) could have even hit .500 in a major conference this year?

since you say you pay no attention to college basketball during the regular season my question to you is....how the hell would you know and why would you care?

to answer your question, yes i think they could go 500 in certain power conf like the big 12, pac-10, acc, big-10....all of whom had a bunch of teams at or near 500.....why couldnt george mason???

as far as your analysis on the tourney being a sham......instead of railing on george mason, you should be railing on the 16-15-14- seeds who are terrible but get an automatic bid......but......that doesnt serve your idiotic point so nevermind.

back to the crack pipe.....please provide us with more intellegent insights in another 6 months, maybe after you and nolan dolla get together over a double double with cheese at in-n-out burger on tropicana blvd.

:sadwave:

 

[Sun Tzu]

This whole thread is ridiculous.

That said, I dont think there is a sport where the regular season means less. Not sure they can do anything about it. Maybe have double elimination makes more sense.

But to me if it is going to be this way they should let everyone in the tournament. If Mason could do this, it is just as possible Missouri State or whomever else could too, so why not give them all a shot.

 

[nchiappetta]

That said, I dont think there is a sport where the regular season means less. Not sure they can do anything about it. Maybe have double elimination makes more sense.

I don't know of another sport where the regular season is more meaningless, but the regular season does have more meaning than some give credit for. The regular season record positions teams to get certain seedings, which in theory, the lower you get the easier road you have to the championship. Now, I don't know of other sports league's regular seasons that are equivalent or less, but everyone seems to bitch about college football's joke of playoff bowl season and the lack of objectivity that can be applied in certain situations (ie: 3 undefeated teams at end of regular season). I think what CBB has here is great and to say the regular season has little meaning, well, I am not so sure. If teams don't play tough out of conference schedules and/or lose a terrible game and have it on their resumes, then they know the consequences.

 

[DAwGD]

I haven't posted here in awhile and can't even find my old login but I must say this is one of the best final fours ever. My team isn't even in it and I still love it!
:clap:


I see no reason why mid majors should be eliminated. If anything, they should turn this into a two loss tournament (like the World Baseball Classic, i think it was that way), expand it to even more teams (say 128), and make it run for 6 weeks.

:shrug:

 

[gjn23]

This whole thread is ridiculous.

That said, I dont think there is a sport where the regular season means less. Not sure they can do anything about it. Maybe have double elimination makes more sense.

But to me if it is going to be this way they should let everyone in the tournament. If Mason could do this, it is just as possible Missouri State or whomever else could too, so why not give them all a shot.

apparently you've never heard of the nhl or the nba

as for letting everyone in......everone is already in, it's called their conference tournament....win it and you move on to the final field of 64.

personally i have no interest in watching 317 teams invited to a tournament....if you think the ncaa reg season is meaningless now, what would happen in your scenario??? might as well just play a few months of exhibition games.

 

[Sun Tzu]

Not true. Ivy doesnt have a tournament. Some conferences dont let every team play in their tournaments. Conference tourneys arent at "neutral sites", and they are eating each other instead of chances at the big boys.

NHL and NBA at least have some limits to where the regular season means something.

Of course I dont want everyone in - I am just showing how absurd it is. Letting in 8 teamas from a conference, teams with losing conference records, etc is just crazy. yet for football everyone was up in arms when Nebraska played for the national title when it didnt win its conference.

It would be less fun, but to me they should just let in all the conference champs, maybe a handful of wild cards and go from there. The wild cards should be the play-in games.

The question becomes do we want a true champion or just the team that played well for 3 weeks or had a nice draw or got to play close to homw (Cuse/Michigan State).

 

[gjn23]

personally i think the tourney is fine the way it is but some modifications should be made....i think the whole pod system has become a joke and too many teams are getting home court breaks or teams seeds are being adjusted to fit sending them to a location.

as far as the nba/nhl....the nhl is the worst regular season....16 teams get in the playoffs and battle for 82 games for home ice? who cares, in hockey it's irrelevant. Give me an 7-8 seed with a hot goalie over a 1 seed with home ice any day......as for the nba, the regular season is extremely irrelevant and he playoffs are virtually the same with a 7 game format

 

[volfan]

This is why college hoops is the best, sorry you lost a wager or 12 but I LOVE THIS CHIT!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DIRTY Diapers]

We are now exactly two games from utter embarassment. The realistic possiblity exists that George f'n Mason will be crowned the 2005-2006 NCAA Men's Basketball Champion.

This should be seen as a wake-up call to eliminate mid-major conferences from the NCAA tournament. I don't know exactly where the line would be drawn on conference admission to The Dance. People who know a heck of a lot about college hoops would be able to make that decision better than I would. What I do know, however, is that if George Mason wins the whole enchilada it will be a dark day for college basketball.

It's been obvious for some time that the NCAA tournament is about money rather than legitimate athletic competition, so we should have seen this coming. When you design something as a legitimate athletic competition, you require entrants to pass a certain criteria before they are allowed entry to the elite level. When you design something for money, you turn it into a game of chance where any meathead can win $1,000,000 by shouting, "No Deal!" to Howie Mandel.

The "Deal or No Deal" analogy is actually quite relevant here. I, along with millions of others, love that show because it has absolutely no barrier for entry. You don't have to answer a question correctly or show off some archaic academic knowledge. You simply get picked from the crowd and you're in the money.

The NCAA tournament is in a similar state. You can play a schedule where your only two games against power conferences are decisive losses to non-tournament teams and you're in the money.

People are giving credit to George Mason for beating the alleged powerhouses of college basketball. Maybe they deserve it. I don't know. I don't know because I know how meaningless the college basketball regular season is so I barely follow it. So my greatest exposure to George Mason has been watching them beat teams that looked hopelessly mediocre not only in the games they lost in the NCAAs, but also in other NCAA tournament wins.

It is true that judging teams based on a game or two is unfair, but that's the whole point, isn't it? This middling basketball program from Fairfax could be crowned our National Champion by having a lucky six game run. They didn't have to prove their worth against elite competition all year. They were simply able to beat up on the dredges of Division I college hoops and get awarded a place in the money by the NCAA tournament selection committee.

Does anyone on the selection committee (or any other college basketball fan, for that matter) think that George Mason could have even posted a .500 conference record in the Big East? Or the Pac-10? Or the Big 10 Or even the lowly Big 12? Of course not. Had George Mason been forced to play the kind of schedule that teams like USC, Cincinnatti and Florida State played, they would have been an afterthought. Another big conference stepping stone for elite teams like Boston College, Washington and Pittsburgh.

But no, that's not how it goes in college basketball. In college basketball, everyone gets a shot at the million dollar case. Everyone, no matter how average they prove themselves to be during the regular season, is give a shot at the championship if March is the month of their lives.

As often happens, I probably look like the crumudgeon on all of this. Or the elitist, or snob or whatever word shortsighted people want to use to describe it. Everyone in the mainstream media seems to love the George Mason. It's historic (even though nobody will care 100 years from now) and they've shocked the world (even though 99.5% of the population neither knows nor cares). It's a watershed event that proves the unpredictability (and therefore, greatness?) of March Madness.

Bah, humbug, I say. Give me the best athletes and the best coaches who play the best other teams all year. Give me the teams who prove their worth by navigating three grueling months of high profile games and hostile arenas.

Even better, give me a sport like baseball, where only the best play for the championship and teams prove they belong by conquering great teams all season long.

GEORGE MASON +610 (Pinnacle) for the NCAA Championship 100/610

DUMBEST THING EVER SAID ON THE BOARD... CONGRATS.