NCAA Tourney Talk

[montster]

Too close for my 'Cats. Phew.

 

I have an ulcer after that Texas/Arizona game. Amazing.

[Fatman]

Go Wisco! And it would've been a great weekend had Mich upset Duke...

[darin3]

I have an ulcer after that Texas/Arizona game. Amazing.

[Chief Dick]

Rick Barnes gets less out of more talent than anyone in America.

[billay]

The much maligned ACC is 7-1 in tourney play. The Big East is 9-9, and only 2 of their 11 teams remaining.

 

I'm happy to see FSU get the win over Notre Dame. FSU is a strong defensive ball club that got no respect all year long. The ACC has 3 teams in the sweet 16, by my count, more than any other conference.

[bushwacked]

I have an ulcer after that Texas/Arizona game. Amazing.

 

Looking forward to the Sportscenter highlights on this one. Wish the Pac 10 had 2 teams left.

Edited March 21, 2011 by bushwacked

[electricrelish]

The much maligned ACC is 7-1 in tourney play. The Big East is 9-9, and only 2 of their 11 teams remaining.

 

I'm happy to see FSU get the win over Notre Dame. FSU is a strong defensive ball club that got no respect all year long. The ACC has 3 teams in the sweet 16, by my count, more than any other conference.

 

+1 ACC deserves more respect. Big East was overrated.

Edited March 21, 2011 by electricrelish

[Chargerz]

This has been a pretty good tournament so far... lots of exciting finishes!

That's for sure! The San Diego State double overtime win over Temple almost gave me a heart attack!!

[Gopher]

What's sort of funny about the Big East having only two teams left is that they had two second round games where Big East teams faced each other (those were the only two where Big East teams advanced). So, going into Saturday, they were guaranteed at least two Sweet 16 teams, and that's all they got. I'm not so sure the conference was really that overrated, though... I just think they had a bunch of very good teams, but no real great teams. Considering that they had the most teams ever (from one conference), it's pretty remarkable that none of the eleven were truly considered a threat to win the title (not even #1 seed Pitt). Sure, I think most people thought they might get another team or two into the Sweet 16, but it's not like the results so far have been shocking. I thought Butler had a very good shot of beating Pitt, when the brackets came out, and same with FSU against Notre Dame. Didn't think they would blow them out like they did, but anybody who watched the Irish's pathetic second half against Louisville, in the Big East tournament, could see that they were somewhat of a farce as a 2-seed, and are really a pretty vulnerable team when Hansbrough has an off-shooting night (or when the opposing team simply pressures him a bunch).

 

By the way, I still consider the Sat/Sun games the second round, not the Thurs/Fri games. The play-in games, in my opinion, are NOT the first round of the tournament, but rather the games to get INTO the tournament. Not a big deal... I just find it annoying when they refer to today's games as the 3rd round.

 

All in all, the past two weeks have been about as good as I've seen, in terms of tournament hoops. Tons of exciting finishes, and some crazy finishes as well. Seems like nearly every game this weekend had some sort of drama, controversy, last-second finish, etc. The funny thing about basketball officiating is that it's a thankless job, 95% of the time. When the refs are doing their job well, nobody talks about them (which is almost always the case). When they're off, though, it's the topic of discussion everywhere you look. I did think both fouls in the Butler-Pitt game had more to do with bonehead decisions by the players, though, than questionable calls by the refs. Normally, you swallow the whistle in both of those scenarios, but those fouls were pretty obvious, and had to be called.

 

The clock situation in the UNC-Washington game, on the other hand, I thought was handled pretty poorly. Probably wouldn't have made much difference (if the Huskies had closer to a full second, instead of 0.4), but you never know. I just thought the officiating director's explanation (about having to account for a time lapse, etc.) was pretty weak... I've seen dozens of situations where that did NOT happen, this year. In other words, situations where refs went to the monitor to determine how much time was left, and used the exact time that the clock should have stopped (based on the ball or a player going out of bounds), not when the whistle blew. That's the only part I have an issue with... inconsistency makes people look stupid.

 

Another call that I thought was questionable, at best, was the five-second call against Texas. The Texas player was calling timeout as the ref signaled his 4th second count (with his arm). Pretty weak, no matter how Barkley and those other schmucks try to spin it. Charles may be fine doing the NBA stuff on TNT, but he adds absolutely nothing to the college hoops talk.

[TimC]

Richmond, Virginia...best hoops town outside of Chapel Hill, NC.

 

I can't believe both teams have made it this far. This place will go insane* if they play each other for a chance to go to the Final Four.

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Insane in a crappy sports town like Richmond means someone will honk their horn twice.

[wiegie]

What's sort of funny about the Big East having only two teams left is that they had two second round games where Big East teams faced each other (those were the only two where Big East teams advanced). So, going into Saturday, they were guaranteed at least two Sweet 16 teams, and that's all they got. I'm not so sure the conference was really that overrated, though... I just think they had a bunch of very good teams, but no real great teams. Considering that they had the most teams ever (from one conference), it's pretty remarkable that none of the eleven were truly considered a threat to win the title (not even #1 seed Pitt). Sure, I think most people thought they might get another team or two into the Sweet 16, but it's not like the results so far have been shocking.

The committee seeded them as though they should have 5 teams in the sweet-16. The big east was/is overrated.

 

By the way, I still consider the Sat/Sun games the second round, not the Thurs/Fri games. The play-in games, in my opinion, are NOT the first round of the tournament, but rather the games to get INTO the tournament. Not a big deal... I just find it annoying when they refer to today's games as the 3rd round.

agreed--I will call the Sat/Sun games the third round as soon as the NCAA announces that 60 teams got byes in the first round

[Gopher]

The committee seeded them as though they should have 5 teams in the sweet-16. The big east was/is overrated.

 

 

agreed--I will call the Sat/Sun games the third round as soon as the NCAA announces that 60 teams got byes in the first round

I see what you're saying (and going strictly by the numbers/seeds, you are indeed correct), but once the initial Thursday/Friday games are complete, you can pretty much throw all seeds out the window. At that point (down to 32 teams), I don't think you could have found too many knowledgeable fans who would have believed that the Big East would have five teams advance to the next round (3rd or 4th, depending on how you look at it)... It's just not likely to happen, with the way some of these other teams are playing (VCU, Butler, Richmond, Florida State, etc.).

 

I guess when I hear people say that they're overrated, I interpret that to imply that they got more invitations than they deserved. Maybe that interpretation is off-based, but there's no way any of the 11 teams didn't deserve to be there. Based on what they did, during the entire season, they were all seeded where they should have been (or at least very close). You can make an argument that Villanova should have been an 11 or even a 12, and I think you could make the argument that Marquette could/should have been an 8/9, rather than an 11... But, anybody who watches these teams play would be short-sighted to say that any of them were not in the top 68 (or, technically, the top 37 teams, not including conference winners), from November to early March.

 

I've seen literally hundreds of brackets filled out, by everyone from the "experts" to casual fans, and I can probably count the number of brackets where a Big East team is penciled in as the winner on one hand. That might be a slight exagguration, but it's not much more than that. From what I've seen, it's probably 45% OSU, 35% Kansas, 15% Duke, and the remaining 5% made up of a bunch of various teams, Big East included (but no one team dominating that 5%). As tough as they are/were, top to bottom, as a conference (and they were... they proved it all year, in their non-conference games), they simply did not have a dominant team that anybody considered a serious threat to win the championship.

 

The two teams seeded at the top were Pitt and Notre Dame... Pitt hasn't made a run in the NCAA's in something like a decade (despite being seeded high regularly), Notre Dame hasn't been seeded as an elite team in almost 30 years, etc. I've seen more brackets with Syracuse, and UConn (3-seeds) in the Final Four, than Pitt or Notre Dame. That is another indicator that the conference may have been very strong as a whole, but definitely doesn't have a strong contender or two at the top of the conference. On any given week, it seems, there could be 2-3 teams that are playing better than anyone else in the conference... and those 2-3 teams could be completely different than the 2-3 best teams from the week before. You don't really see that in any of the other "power" conferences, which is part of the reason the Big East gets so much love.

 

Don't get me wrong... I'm not a Big East fan or apologist. I mean, really, when we think back to when they added Louisville, Marquette, etc., what are we talking about? It would be the equivalent of the ACC adding four more teams, and having those teams just happen to be Temple, Xavier, Richmond, and Dayton. Of course, it would make them into a super-power conference... You're adding the best teams from a conference that might not be a power conference, but it's pretty damn close. The Big East just hasn't had a great showing in this tournament. I just think the number of invites they received is more than justified, and their accomplishments over the years proves that they're not overrated at all (one bad showing in two rounds of a tournament doesn't make anyone overrated).

 

Edit: Sorry... my posts get sort of long-winded, sometimes. I can probably summarize best by just saying this. People tend to throw around the word "overrated" far too quickly, when watching college basketball in March. Going strictly by the seeds, sure... The Big East failed to meet expectations. In my opinion, that doesn't make them overrated. It's just a bad year for them, in terms of NCAA results. Actually, it's just a bad four days... Who knows, we could end up seeing UConn or Marquette in the Final Four. I'd be surprised, but not any more surprised than I would be to see several of the other remaining teams get that far. In other words, outside of OSU, Kansas, and Duke, I think pretty much everyone else remaining would be SOMEWHAT of a surprise to make it to the final weekend.

 

Another example... I spent the weekend in Minnesota, watching basketball (mainly at sports bars). I heard some people (obviously not unbiased fans, in my opinion) murmuring about the Big 10 being "underrated" because they went 5-2 in the first round. I had to laugh because, if anything, the Big 10 was overrated as well... They just happened to play well on Thursday/Friday, but 3 of the 5 teams who won got bounced back into reality on the weekend (two of them quite significantly). Another example of how people overreact to a snapshot of basketball, when the overall season (and in some cases, fair or unfair, past seasons) paints a much more accurate picture of a conference's strength.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Gopher

[Chief Dick]

The line between an "elite" team and a good team is pretty blurry right now.

 

Just based on the eye test, VCU looks like the best team in the tournament.

[detlef]

Certainly agree with Gopher on the bit about the Big East getting as many invites as they deserved. Needless to say, they've crapped the bed. But the irony is that the only teams that were even bubble teams were Nova and Marquette, and Marquette is still in it.. Had any of the rest not made it, it would have been considered a way bigger slight than Va Tech, CU, or Bama. Way bigger. Hell, and it's not like Nova got dummied or anything, they were a 9 seed that lost a close game to an 8 seed. You would think that's how that game is supposed to go.

 

As an ACC fan, I'm happy to see my conference represent, but in fairness, we've crapped the bed as a whole in plenty of years. That Duke and UNC have won the last two hides the fact that the conference has been a major let-down most years of late.

 

I also agree that they were thick in the middle but lacked an elite team. It's been well documented, but the Big East really lacks elite talent. The one team that really looks strong enough to make a deep run is the one team with a guy who can take over a game, and that's UConn. That's no coincidence. Team-work may get you a good record, but it almost always takes one guy having a magical March to take a team deep. Look at who is left, they pretty much all have that guy (or a couple of those guys). There's exactly one factor that will dictate whether my team, UNC goes deep, and that's whether or not Barnes continues to be money. He's had one so-so game in the last month, and that was in the ACC final where they got run out of the gym by Duke. But he's our ticket, end of story. And he's going to be playing on the next level either next year or the year after that.

Edited March 21, 2011 by detlef

[Gopher]

The line between an "elite" team and a good team is pretty blurry right now.

 

Just based on the eye test, VCU looks like the best team in the tournament.

A couple of thoughts on the VCU-Purdue game. First, the color commentator was absolutely correct in that Purdue was hurting themselves by pressing... They simply are not quick enough to press most teams, much less a VCU team that is far more athletic (as a group) than they were. They would have been much better defending from the 3-point line and in, rather than pressing, possession after possession, only to give up basket after basket, by fast-break lay-ins and/or uncontested three's (uncontested as a result of being out of alignment on defense, due to the failed press attempts). Didn't take a genius to figure that out, yet Matt Painter insisted on pressing, even early in the 2nd half (when there theoretically was still plenty of time to erase a 15-18 point lead).

 

Secondly, a big reason they weren't quick enough to press was that they were missing the guy who is arguably their best defender. Kelsey Barlow's numbers are nothing special (around 20 MPG, 4 PPG, and a couple of boards per game), but he's the glue that held them together (defensively) early in the year. It's no wonder that they struggled after his suspension, and without him, they were possibly the weakest 3-seed in the field.

 

So, as much as VCU has looked pretty good, so far (especially against Purdue), I think Purdue did themselves a huge disservice by attacking them in a completely ineffective way, given the personnel that Purdue was able to put on the court. Purdue's strength has always been tough half-court defense... thinking they could get away with pressing, without their best perimeter defender, was a pipe dream. And, as impressive as VCU has been, Purdue made them look even better than they are, by pressing for most of the second half. Imagine Kevin Love trying to guard Lebron James, in a full-court one-on-one game... Would he be better off trying to guard him the entire 80+ feet of the court, or picking him up at half-court (or inside of that, even)? Like I said, doesn't take a genius to figure that one out, and I have no idea what Painter was thinking. Seems like he went into panic mode, way too early in that game.

[Gopher]

I'm not saying Purdue would have won, had they taken on a different strategy. But, I do think they eliminated any chance of winning, by pressing like they did.

[TimC]

Purdue sucks.

 

There...I summarized it for you.

[Gopher]

There...I summarized it for you.

Thanks. Like I said, my posts can sometimes be a bit wordy.

[Chargerz]

Of all the teams I saw play, Ohio State looked the best. This week I hope it's San Diego State.

[Boilerduff]

Purdue doesn't suck. If anything they played to a higher level than they should have with all the injuries they had.

 

Being the only team to Beat OSU certainly should earn them some respect. VCU played well, and Purdue didn't.

I think Gopher hit the nail on the head though. Not sure what the hell Painter was thinking. Barlow was a real loss.

 

Going to miss JuJuan and Etwan, just saying thier names was fun.

 

Hopefully, We'll have enough next year to be a force in the Big Ten again. Not holding my breath though... Boiler UP!

[bpwallace49]

Purdue doesn't suck. If anything they played to a higher level than they should have with all the injuries they had.

 

Being the only team to Beat OSU certainly should earn them some respect. VCU played well, and Purdue didn't.

I think Gopher hit the nail on the head though. Not sure what the hell Painter was thinking. Barlow was a real loss.

 

Going to miss JuJuan and Etwan, just saying thier names was fun.

 

Hopefully, We'll have enough next year to be a force in the Big Ten again. Not holding my breath though... Boiler UP!

 

false . .

 

The Wisconsin Badgers beat OSU, and they are still in the tourney . . . .

[Kid Cid]

Of all the teams I saw play, Ohio State looked the best. This week I hope it's San Diego State.

After watching SDSU's first two games, I gotta say, I'm not wowed. Their final numbers say differently, but they look like a hot mess on the court which is exactly why they win so much I guess. A fast paced, scattershot game, drawing teams out of their comfort zone into their little version of hell. In a word, their halfcourt game looked...raw. Still, I don't think that they can get past UCONN simply because of the Kemba factor. The guy is playing on an entirely different level than anyone including that machine from BYU. UCONN's freshmen (and let's face it, after playing 18 games in the Big East plus taking on all comers in Storrs and on the road, they are no longer freshmen) are finally able to take up some of the slack when Kemba gets double and triple teamed. Right now, the only thing he isn't doing is posting up the other team's center in the paint, and I'm sure he's working on a way to do just that.

 

Bottom line is that I think SDSU has had an amazing season but I also think it ends Thursday.

[electricrelish]

+1 ACC deserves more respect. Big East was overrated.

 

The ACC hasn't gotten much respect this year. The conference just had two teams win back to back NCAA championships. Guess that doesn't count for much.

Edited March 22, 2011 by electricrelish

[tazinib1]

Of all the teams I saw play, Ohio State looked the best. This week I hope it's San Diego State.

 

Nobody is giving the Aztecs any chance to beat UCONN. That and the lack of coverage on ESPN is really starting to piss me off. Aztecs could bust alot of brackets and the blowhard experts at ESPN with a win.

[Chargerz]

Bottom line is that I think SDSU has had an amazing season but I also think it ends Thursday.

I think that's what alot of people are thinking. If I know Fisher he'll use that to motivate his team. Also, the game's in Anaheim. If the student body travels the short distance to the game and turns it into a home game atmosphere, SDSU has a chance.