Unc shoots 64% from 3 and looses

[bgrch1350]

Syracuse was one of the best teams for two weekends. For the previous four months, they were not. Two good weekends don't mean they were one of the best four teams overall. Not by a mile.

When did Syracuse win it? And Syracuse had a lot of talent on their team.

You're not going to get the 4 best teams in the final 4. Obviously having Nova and KU in the same region eliminates one of them.

The tournament isn't designed to get the 4 best teams into the final 4. Its designed to crown the best team. In the end, Nova played KU and UNC and they beat both of them.

 

[skyvue]

In the end, Nova played KU and UNC and they beat both of them.

And OU, you left out OU. On an OU site.

 

[scrybe]

And OU, you left out OU. On an OU site.

If that doesn't tell you something…

 

[bgrch1350]

And OU, you left out OU. On an OU site.

Yes and Miami and Iowa.

 

[bgrch1350]

If that doesn't tell you something…

Maybe I wasn't trying to throw in the team that lost to them by the biggest margin than any other team they faced just the 2 teams that they barely beat.

 

[WaymanFan]

It crowns the best team. The best team wins 6 games in a row. If you can do that then you are the best.

Its the best sporting event b/c it doesn't matter who the AP voters vote for as the top 2 or who BCS votes for or ESPN and so on...68 teams get a shot to see who the best is and its proven on the hardwood.

This makes a lot of sense...then you went and screwed it up by mentioning NC and KU while conveniently omitting our Sooners. Oh well.

 

[skyvue]

Maybe I wasn't trying to throw in the team that lost to them by the biggest margin than any other team they faced just the 2 teams that they barely beat.

Maybe.

Of course that same team beat Nova by 23 (and it wasn't that close) earlier in the season, but with your preference for focusing on the final three weeks of the season (y'know, when "the truth" is revealed) over the four months of play that lead up to them, perhaps it's not surprising.

And then there's the fact that it was OU.

The nation's coaches seem to have moved past that Final Four defeat with no particular problem, given they voted OU #4 in their final poll, but you know best, I'm sure.

 

[skyvue]

It crowns the best team. The best team wins 6 games in a row. If you can do that then you are the best.

OU won 12 games in a row, four of those against tourney teams. Does that make us national champs too?

The tourney crowns the hottest team over its final three weeks; that's it. Often that team is genuinely one of the country's best teams -- that applies to Villanova this year -- and sometimes it's even the best team in the country, but there are seasons when it isn't. Just as conference tourney titles don't always go to the conference's best team (ask Villanova if Seton Hall was the Big East's best team this year).

Or ask yourself if KU was the best team in the country in 1988, and see if you get an honest answer.

 

[bgrch1350]

Maybe.

Of course that same team beat Nova by 23 (and it wasn't that close) earlier in the season, but with your preference for focusing on the final three weeks of the season (y'know, when "the truth" is revealed) over the four months of play that lead up to them, perhaps it's not surprising.

And then there's the fact that it was OU.

The nation's coaches seem to have moved past that Final Four defeat with no particular problem, given they voted OU #4 in their final poll, but you know best, I'm sure.

So mentioning they beat 2 1 seeds(the top 2 overall teams going into the tournament) and not bringing up OU means you should be able to use that against me. You guys crack me up.

 

[bgrch1350]

OU won 12 games in a row, four of those against tourney teams. Does that make us national champs too?

The tourney crowns the hottest team over its final three weeks; that's it. Often that team is genuinely one of the country's best teams -- that applies to Villanova this year -- and sometimes it's even the best team in the country, but there are seasons when it isn't. Just as conference tourney titles don't always go to the conference's best team (ask Villanova if Seton Hall was the Big East's best team this year).

Or ask yourself if KU was the best team in the country in 1988, and see if you get an honest answer.

No. We didn't win tournament so we are not champs. We weren't big 12 champs either.

If OU can't win 6 games in a row...and Kansas could...that makes Kansas the best team.

 

[bgrch1350]

OU won 12 games in a row, four of those against tourney teams. Does that make us national champs too?

The tourney crowns the hottest team over its final three weeks; that's it. Often that team is genuinely one of the country's best teams -- that applies to Villanova this year -- and sometimes it's even the best team in the country, but there are seasons when it isn't. Just as conference tourney titles don't always go to the conference's best team (ask Villanova if Seton Hall was the Big East's best team this year).

Or ask yourself if KU was the best team in the country in 1988, and see if you get an honest answer.

Just like Golden State. They can break the record but if they don't win the playoffs then they aren't the best team.

 

[chuckb]

No. We didn't win tournament so we are not champs. We weren't big 12 champs either.

If OU can't win 6 games in a row...and Kansas could...that makes Kansas the best team.

No it doesn't. I doubt you even believe it.

It means they were playing the best, and probably got the most luck, in the tournament. Congratulations to Villanova. They certainly earned the championship. But it doesn't automatically make them "the best team."

UConn wasn't the best team a couple of years ago. Nova wasn't the best team in '85. NC St wasn't the best in '83 and Kansas wasn't the best in '88. Maybe you'll argue that they were but that only demonstrates how weak your evaluation abilities are.

 

[bgrch1350]

No it doesn't. I doubt you even believe it.

It means they were playing the best, and probably got the most luck, in the tournament. Congratulations to Villanova. They certainly earned the championship. But it doesn't automatically make them "the best team."

UConn wasn't the best team a couple of years ago. Nova wasn't the best team in '85. NC St wasn't the best in '83 and Kansas wasn't the best in '88. Maybe you'll argue that they were but that only demonstrates how weak your evaluation abilities are.

Everything comes down to the tournament. Its about doing enough to get to the tournament and building a team that can go the distance in the tournament.

Luck didn't get any team the championship. You can get lucky one or 2 games but not 6. Somes teams are built to dominate the regular season and some teams are built to win the tournament. In the end, Its all about winning the tournament. its not about having the best overall record going into the tournament.

Uconn didn't get lucky, they had 2 dominant PG's and a good big man. Napier left college with 2 National Championship rings. Kansas wasn't the best during the regular season but they had Danny Manning. S'Cuse wasn't the best during the regular season but they had Carmelo Anthony. Its all about being the best team for the tournament.

Had we won, I don't think anyone would be trying to say we weren't the best team.

 

[thebigabd]

My buddies and I are avid golfers, and we play golf pretty frequently.... 3 times a year we play what we call "majors", just for fun and bragging rights, but there is a trophy on the line.

I lose to one of my buddies about 65% of the time on normal golf outings, but I have won more "majors" than him over the past 5 years by a wide margin.

Who is the better player?

 

[WTSooner]

My buddies and I are avid golfers, and we play golf pretty frequently.... 3 times a year we play what we call "majors", just for fun and bragging rights, but there is a trophy on the line.

I lose to one of my buddies about 65% of the time on normal golf outings, but I have won more "majors" than him over the past 5 years by a wide margin.

Who is the better player?

I don't think that's a very good comparison to way the major sports determine a champion.

 

[bgrch1350]

My buddies and I are avid golfers, and we play golf pretty frequently.... 3 times a year we play what we call "majors", just for fun and bragging rights, but there is a trophy on the line.

I lose to one of my buddies about 65% of the time on normal golf outings, but I have won more "majors" than him over the past 5 years by a wide margin.

Who is the better player?

I take Tiger Woods over both of you.

 

[Northbase]

OU won 12 games in a row, four of those against tourney teams. Does that make us national champs too?

The tourney crowns the hottest team over its final three weeks; that's it. Often that team is genuinely one of the country's best teams -- that applies to Villanova this year -- and sometimes it's even the best team in the country, but there are seasons when it isn't. Just as conference tourney titles don't always go to the conference's best team (ask Villanova if Seton Hall was the Big East's best team this year).

Or ask yourself if KU was the best team in the country in 1988, and see if you get an honest answer.

Also Houston (Phi Slamma Jamma) was probably the best the year they lost.

 

[Swans]

I take Tiger Woods over both of you.

I'm taking both of them over the current Eldrick.

 

[hoopsaustin]

I take Tiger Woods over both of you.

Was this supposed to be funny? I don't get it..

If he said all of his post then said "who's the best golfer?" It would have made sense..