This is why mid-majors should be barred from the tourney
- Thread starter Nick Douglas
- Start date
Funny thread.
I can not comment on Mason, because I haven't seen all of their games nor do I follow that conference, but I can speak on the mid major topic.
Bucknell would have been .500 or better in any major conference.
They were 26-4 and undefeated in conference. Beat an SEC team who went 10-6 in conference in round 1 of the tourny.
Only one home loss, and that was to Villanova. The three additional losses were @Duke, @Santa Clara and @Northern Iowa.
Draw your own conclusions, but I do think this team was very solid this season.
Basically it comes down the money, like everything else in this world, and eliminating the charm of the small schools would take the novelty away from this event. I watched the second half of yesterdays Mason vs Uconn game at a pub, and those final few minutes the place was silent in suspense. People that probably couldn't tell you where Mason is located or the basics of basketball were captivated with the overtime. That's the magic of this tournament, and if you want to take that factor away just go watch the NBA.
I can not comment on Mason, because I haven't seen all of their games nor do I follow that conference, but I can speak on the mid major topic.
Bucknell would have been .500 or better in any major conference.
They were 26-4 and undefeated in conference. Beat an SEC team who went 10-6 in conference in round 1 of the tourny.
Only one home loss, and that was to Villanova. The three additional losses were @Duke, @Santa Clara and @Northern Iowa.
Draw your own conclusions, but I do think this team was very solid this season.
Basically it comes down the money, like everything else in this world, and eliminating the charm of the small schools would take the novelty away from this event. I watched the second half of yesterdays Mason vs Uconn game at a pub, and those final few minutes the place was silent in suspense. People that probably couldn't tell you where Mason is located or the basics of basketball were captivated with the overtime. That's the magic of this tournament, and if you want to take that factor away just go watch the NBA.
I can't even imagine a more asinine take than the the one started in this thread.
The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is hands-down the best event in sports, for all of the resons the originator of this thread hates it. It is so far above all the other events, I couldn't even guess what is second, it is so distant.
The fact that any team invited can win it, legitimately, by winning 6 games, makes it unparalleled. Hating on a team that beat 4 of the last 7 champions in the same tournament and downplaying their right to be there makes any statements by Nick Douglas NULL and VOID.
Its funny, but so much is made of the power conferences and seeds and all that pre-tourney, when the reality is to be champ, you must beat whichever 6 schools you line up against, on three consecutive weekends, with one day in between games 1-2, 3-4, and 5-6. Every team has the same opportunity, and there are no fluke championships in this, the purest of all sports events.
Nick Douglas---you should be ashamed of yourself.
No Big 10 teams, no ACC teams, no Big East teams= a true indicator of how democratic and great this event is. Conference affiliation is by far the most over-rated aspect of each year's analysis, and hurrah to the 4 left standing to affirm it.
The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is hands-down the best event in sports, for all of the resons the originator of this thread hates it. It is so far above all the other events, I couldn't even guess what is second, it is so distant.
The fact that any team invited can win it, legitimately, by winning 6 games, makes it unparalleled. Hating on a team that beat 4 of the last 7 champions in the same tournament and downplaying their right to be there makes any statements by Nick Douglas NULL and VOID.
Its funny, but so much is made of the power conferences and seeds and all that pre-tourney, when the reality is to be champ, you must beat whichever 6 schools you line up against, on three consecutive weekends, with one day in between games 1-2, 3-4, and 5-6. Every team has the same opportunity, and there are no fluke championships in this, the purest of all sports events.
Nick Douglas---you should be ashamed of yourself.
No Big 10 teams, no ACC teams, no Big East teams= a true indicator of how democratic and great this event is. Conference affiliation is by far the most over-rated aspect of each year's analysis, and hurrah to the 4 left standing to affirm it.
I am in complete agreement with Nick
although this is a great sporting event, it is a HORRIBLE way to crown a NATIONAL CHAMPION
There should be a best 2 outta 3 series with at maximum 8 deserving teams to win it all
perhaps 7 -- then allow all conference champs who do not apply to the best 7 in the country -- along with a few at larges -- and play off for the 8th seed
Great 4 game winning streak for Mason -- but does a 6 game winning streak deserve a championship??
No way I say. With only 5 guys and the fickleness of the 3 point line on any given night....along with the fickleness of 3 zebras who can call anything one way or another -- and get any star in foul trouble, or dictate the way a game is played and to whom that advantage may lay -- this is NOT the way to decide a title
Give me the BCS over this crap....at least we get one of the top 3 teams winning it all without a question EVERY YEAR.
although this is a great sporting event, it is a HORRIBLE way to crown a NATIONAL CHAMPION
There should be a best 2 outta 3 series with at maximum 8 deserving teams to win it all
perhaps 7 -- then allow all conference champs who do not apply to the best 7 in the country -- along with a few at larges -- and play off for the 8th seed
Great 4 game winning streak for Mason -- but does a 6 game winning streak deserve a championship??
No way I say. With only 5 guys and the fickleness of the 3 point line on any given night....along with the fickleness of 3 zebras who can call anything one way or another -- and get any star in foul trouble, or dictate the way a game is played and to whom that advantage may lay -- this is NOT the way to decide a title
Give me the BCS over this crap....at least we get one of the top 3 teams winning it all without a question EVERY YEAR.
I do think a best of 3 series starting with the Final 4 would be awesome to follow...would extend the season and make it slightly more interesting. It would be like a pro playoff series...what a great idea. That is one of the only good ideas I have heard coming out of this thread. Other than that, its totally rediculous.
dr. freeze said:
This is one point I agree on. The three point line is too close in college, and is starting to prove to be the vehicle for some of these teams to pull off upsets. Move the line back because too many guys can make these shots.
Still like the system as is, and starting to think the tide is changing, these mid majors with a team of 5 seniors seem to be on par with a team of all very talented underclassmen from the major conferences. This years UNC team is loaded with young talent, but there is something to be said for having a squad that has played together for over 100 games.
Heh, I see a couple of more anti-me types have popped in with more lies. Disregarded as always.
The one post I feel compelled to respond to is potty-mouth Zubbers (or whatever TF his handle is). Saying that any kind of point is "proven" by a handful of wins in college basketball games is retarded. Everyone here knows that inferior teams beat superior teams in all sports all the time. The better way to separate the wheat is in conference play. That way everyone is forced to play the same (or at least a similar) schedule and it is done over a larger cross section of games so that a lucky streak of a few games won't get you crowned champion.
As for teams that were more deserving of an NCAA tournament bid than George Mason, I'd say every team that had a winning percentage better than .000 against major conference opponents in the regular season this year.
I also love the naivete of the people acting like these poor mid-majors are stuck in crap conferences because of some kind of unseen political machinery. Tell that to the Virginia Tech football team. You may want to deny it, but it's true: If your school is willing to spend the money on their athletic programs, a major conference will take them in.
The one post I feel compelled to respond to is potty-mouth Zubbers (or whatever TF his handle is). Saying that any kind of point is "proven" by a handful of wins in college basketball games is retarded. Everyone here knows that inferior teams beat superior teams in all sports all the time. The better way to separate the wheat is in conference play. That way everyone is forced to play the same (or at least a similar) schedule and it is done over a larger cross section of games so that a lucky streak of a few games won't get you crowned champion.
As for teams that were more deserving of an NCAA tournament bid than George Mason, I'd say every team that had a winning percentage better than .000 against major conference opponents in the regular season this year.
I also love the naivete of the people acting like these poor mid-majors are stuck in crap conferences because of some kind of unseen political machinery. Tell that to the Virginia Tech football team. You may want to deny it, but it's true: If your school is willing to spend the money on their athletic programs, a major conference will take them in.
I appreciate your praise of my precious Hokies, BUT I still think your full of crap on this particular subject.
Have you considered how different NCAA hoops is from NCAA football? A huge factor in the parity of hoops is that the best of the best players either go straight to the NBA or only spend 1-2 years in college. The elite teams really are not so elite as a result. It's very watered down, and if you get a pretty good Geroge Mason team with several players into their 3rd and 4th year on the team - then they are arguably as good as most "elite" teams.
You don't get that in football. All the time together in the world won't lift most of the midmajors to the competetive level of the gridiron elites. But hoops - you get a good coach, experienced team - a sprinkle of talent - and they can play with anyone these days. Just look at how low the spreads have gotten in those early round games. #1 Memphis was only favored by 11 against their 16 opponent. It's not the same game at all as 10+ years ago.
Have you considered how different NCAA hoops is from NCAA football? A huge factor in the parity of hoops is that the best of the best players either go straight to the NBA or only spend 1-2 years in college. The elite teams really are not so elite as a result. It's very watered down, and if you get a pretty good Geroge Mason team with several players into their 3rd and 4th year on the team - then they are arguably as good as most "elite" teams.
You don't get that in football. All the time together in the world won't lift most of the midmajors to the competetive level of the gridiron elites. But hoops - you get a good coach, experienced team - a sprinkle of talent - and they can play with anyone these days. Just look at how low the spreads have gotten in those early round games. #1 Memphis was only favored by 11 against their 16 opponent. It's not the same game at all as 10+ years ago.
Last edited:
Mid major teams that do well in the tournament are fundamentally sound. They have good chemistry due to the fact that most of the players stay for 3-4 years. Good senior leadership, good coaching, playing HARD and having nothing to lose = Success!!
lmao- when I saw the thread title and the author I knew this was going to be an entertaining thread and it didn't disappoint. Good ol' Nick.
I did see your reference to the 2002 NC and I suggest you click on the link that nosigar helpfully provided.
I did see your reference to the 2002 NC and I suggest you click on the link that nosigar helpfully provided.
WOW how did i miss this post during the final four!!!!!!
I would definitely rate this #1 as dumbest things posted in any thread.
But what made this thread so enjoyable to me was
1. Another USC brat that hasnt been spotted but a couple times since SC lost in NC. I thought scott4sc was a one of a kind @sshole. Looks like his daddy who has been paying his gambling debts had twins!
2. The fact that this guy tries to back up this idiotic rant multiple times throughout the thread, and with long exasperated(sp?) posts, very similar to scotts style as well. HMMMM I think Jack should check IPs.
3 I had no idea you were a Hokie fan too smurphy, after alot of your pics in the actress contest and your request for others, I find we have alot more in common than I originally thought. I have only met 1 other Hokie fan on this board and his name IS hokie fan lol.
onepeat onepeat onepeat onepeat onepeat lol
I would definitely rate this #1 as dumbest things posted in any thread.
But what made this thread so enjoyable to me was
1. Another USC brat that hasnt been spotted but a couple times since SC lost in NC. I thought scott4sc was a one of a kind @sshole. Looks like his daddy who has been paying his gambling debts had twins!
2. The fact that this guy tries to back up this idiotic rant multiple times throughout the thread, and with long exasperated(sp?) posts, very similar to scotts style as well. HMMMM I think Jack should check IPs.
3 I had no idea you were a Hokie fan too smurphy, after alot of your pics in the actress contest and your request for others, I find we have alot more in common than I originally thought. I have only met 1 other Hokie fan on this board and his name IS hokie fan lol.
onepeat onepeat onepeat onepeat onepeat lol
