UCLA did not belong (Doug Gottlieb)

[SoonerTraveler]

UCLA did not belong

60 .. (11) UCLA
59 .. (6) SMU


Lots of buzzer-beaters today.

 

[kingssc]

Just because they won doesn't mean they deserved to be in. That's a classic case of playing the results.

 

[SoonerTraveler]

Just because they won doesn't mean they deserved to be in. That's a classic case of playing the results.

I agree with that logic. Also, to be fair, just because a higher seed team (e.g., SMU) loses, that does not mean that team was seeded too high. A single-elimination tournament is a bit of a crap shoot.

 

[coolm]

I agree with that logic. Also, to be fair, just because a higher seed team (e.g., SMU) loses, that does not mean that team was seeded too high. A single-elimination tournament is a bit of a crap shoot.

yep.

 

[chuckb]

I agree with that logic. Also, to be fair, just because a higher seed team (e.g., SMU) loses, that does not mean that team was seeded too high. A single-elimination tournament is a bit of a crap shoot.

This. Every low seed has some chance to beat the high seed and sometimes that 20% comes through.

There are some here who think that if a team wins, they're automatically better than the team they beat. Thus, Georgia state is better than Baylor and UAB Is better than Iowa St.

 

[sdcloud9]

There are at least 15 teams that did not make the tournament that could have beaten SMU today.

The point is that UCLA didn't belong...and still doesn't.

 

[bda2000]

Was that really goal tending?

 

[1390]

This. Every low seed has some chance to beat the high seed and sometimes that 20% comes through.

There are some here who think that if a team wins, they're automatically better than the team they beat. Thus, Georgia state is better than Baylor and UAB Is better than Iowa St.

Yup..fact is you only have to be better then your opponent when you're facing them..

 

[Boomtown]

Everyone thought Colorado State belonged and then they go out and get blown out at home by South Dakota St. in the NIT

 

[BlackwellSooner]

Was that really goal tending?

Yes, it was. The clip that I saw showed that the ball would almost certainly have hit the rim (AND it was interfered with on its downward arc).

https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/04DC7F07F61190452890503356416_315998c307c.1.5.3766763960256137070.mp4?versionId=VjUXq6ywPCAnX6ZYRRmcoCn4n5KRUb2L

That combination spells goaltending to me.

Had the ball hit the rim, it was pretty unlikely to have resulted in a made basket, but the interference doomed the Bruins. No tears lost, as far as I am concerned.

 

[kingssc]

Yes, it was. The clip that I saw showed that the ball would almost certainly have hit the rim (AND it was interfered with on its downward arc).
That combination spells goaltending to me.

Not according to the rulebook. Ball has to have the possibility of going in, and there's no way that ball was going in.

 

[BlackwellSooner]

Not according to the rulebook. Ball has to have the possibility of going in, and there's no way that ball was going in.

How do we know that the ball wasn't going in? It could have taken a bounce, gone straight up, dropped through. Or some other combination of bounces. I agree, it was unlikely, but POSSIBLE.

But because of the interference it had no chance.

Definitely goaltending.

 

[kingssc]

How do we know that the ball wasn't going in? It could have taken a bounce, gone straight up, dropped through. Or some other combination of bounces.

But because of the interference it had no chance.

Definitely goaltending.

My understanding of the world would be completely different if that ball had found a way to bounce in.

 

[jerry]

Always glad to see Larry Brown lose. State of Texas went 0-4 today I think!!

 

[euphguy]

I agree with that logic. Also, to be fair, just because a higher seed team (e.g., SMU) loses, that does not mean that team was seeded too high. A single-elimination tournament is a bit of a crap shoot.

+1.

 

[euphguy]

Just because they won doesn't mean they deserved to be in. That's a classic case of playing the results.

+1.

 

[jackson_supersooner]

The craziest part is UCLA will be in the sweet 16 thanks to ISU croaking! How wild is that? A team that didn't deserve being in the tourney will be playing in one of the last 8 games of the season.

 

[sdcloud9]

The craziest part is UCLA will be in the sweet 16 thanks to ISU croaking! How wild is that? A team that didn't deserve being in the tourney will be playing in one of the last 8 games of the season.

It is amazing. That's the beauty (or curse) of the NCAA Tournament.

 

[POBR25]

This. Every low seed has some chance to beat the high seed and sometimes that 20% comes through.

There are some here who think that if a team wins, they're automatically better than the team they beat. Thus, Georgia state is better than Baylor and UAB Is better than Iowa St.

Which of course is absolutely ridiculous. Both of those games were absolute flukes. Baylor had a 99.9% chance to win with 2 min left and lost...that's a fluke. ISU shot 20% from 3 and Niang played the worst game of his career and they lost by 1...that's a fluke. If Northeastern got a shot off and beat ND, that would've been a fluke too. Same with Harvard over UNC. A one game shot is a crap shoot. March is weird.

 

[WTSooner]

The real question is, why was boca pimping SMU so hard? I watched them some this year b/c of Tulsa, and while they are a good/solid team, they had some holes. Only one good scoring guard, and he is little. Bigs that have dominated against smaller teams all year. I just didn't see the talent there to be talked about like they had.