We made the top 25

[mviale]

argumentative

[leever]

argumentative

Seriously?  Chicos?  No Way!

[ringout]

False Choice.


The two have nothing to do with one another.

Chicos,

believe it or not, I agree that the best team doesn't always win the NCAA tournament. 
I'm not sure what the false choice is.  Let me reword the question.

Would you rather be good and be the No. 1 team in the country (ala Kentucky 2003, Pitt 2011) or the winner of the NCAA Tournament (Syracuse 2003, UConn 2011  OR OUR Marquette Warriors in 1977)?  The number 1 team in the country could be overall No1 seed going into the tourny or No. 1 in the final rankings (as determined by a poll that doesn't require the winner of the tourny to be declared No. 1)

My vote is winning the tournament.  Why have it then?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos,

believe it or not, I agree that the best team doesn't always win the NCAA tournament. 
I'm not sure what the false choice is.  Let me reword the question.

Would you rather be good and be the No. 1 team in the country (ala Kentucky 2003, Pitt 2011) or the winner of the NCAA Tournament (Syracuse 2003, UConn 2011  OR OUR Marquette Warriors in 1977)?  The number 1 team in the country could be overall No1 seed going into the tourny or No. 1 in the final rankings (as determined by a poll that doesn't require the winner of the tourny to be declared No. 1)

My vote is winning the tournament.  Why have it then?

That's why it's a false choice.

It's like asking would you rather win the lottery at $50Million or have a job that pays $150K per year plus 2% annual raise for the next 30 years.  It's a no duh answer, it's also a false choice.


Let's flip the question.....say you're New Jersey Institute of Technology and you go 0-27 in the season but win your conference tourney because you got hot for 4 days.  Does that mean you had a good season?  Does that justify success?   

The tournament is there to crown a tournament champion and by default, a NCAA champion.   With the logic you are using, you're putting 100% on the tournament results.  I don't.  Great teams can lose in the tournament having one bad night or running into a hot team.  Does that wipe out what you did in the regular season?  Does that dismiss everything?  I've always felt you split the season into different parts.  The Post Season, the Conference Season, and the non-Conference Season.  I think the way some people act here is if you bounce in the first round of the NCAAs your season sucked, furthermore if you win two games in the NCAA tournament it trumps anything you did in the regular season.  Sorry, I don't see it that way. 

Our team is a perfect example.  We had a very good post season...two Big East wins and two NCAA wins.  We had an average Conference season and an average non-conference season (some might argue below average since we lost every meaningful game...Vanderbilt, Gonzaga, Wisconsin, Duke, etc...unless UW-Milwaukee is considered meaningful). 

The tournament is the tournament. Great teams can lose in it.  Average teams can get hot and win some games (VCU anyone), etc.  I treat them separately....you don't.  It's free country. 

[tower912]

Froman used to make the same argument to you when you would argue the opposite.   Times change.

[Lennys Tap]

Bo routinely beat Izzo in the regular season. Izzo regularly outshone Bo in the championship season. Bo is very well thought of as a coach. Izzo is iconic. End of argument.

[tower912]

Will Calhoun be known as one of the few coaches (Wooden, Knight, Rupp, Allen, K) who have won 3 or more National Championships or for his BEast success?    Do you remember the 94 team's season record or their Sweet 16 run?     Did the O3 team win the CUSA tourney?    Who remembers the 77 team was lucky to get in without being reminded of it?    Lenny nailed it.    Bo has a winning record against Izzo and a better conference record.    Which one is considered a good coach, which one is considered a near legend?

[ringout]

When Chicos asked the question "Does the Best team win the tourney?"  I thought it was a fair question based on all the upsets in this years tourney. Based on this quote, now  I know it  was another question with an agenda.  

Our team is a perfect example.  We had a very good post season...two Big East wins and two NCAA wins.  We had an average Conference season and an average non-conference season (some might argue below average since we lost every meaningful game...Vanderbilt, Gonzaga, Wisconsin, Duke, etc...unless UW-Milwaukee is considered meaningful).[quote/]

Chicos, you are the Most Opaque Man in the World.  Seriously, what is your beef with Marquette?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Bo routinely beat Izzo in the regular season. Izzo regularly outshone Bo in the championship season. Bo is very well thought of as a coach. Izzo is iconic. End of argument.

Some guy named Al McGuire disagrees with you.  End of argument

[ChicosBailBonds]

Ringout, I'd add to it that the reason I feel this way is because of how the "playoffs" work in the NCAA.  Only the NFL can compare.  In the NBA, NHL, MLB, etc, the best team almost always wins because you have 5 or 7 game series to determine the best.  It allows for an "off night" or running into a hot team.

In the NFL and NCAA tournament, it does not.  This is why the "best team" often doesn't win.  It also allows for "average" teams to do damage.  Seattle Seahawks, VCU, etc, etc.

The differences in how a champion is determined is so stark compared to just about every other sport, those realities are often not considered and illogically compared to other sports for reasons that make no sense. 

[ringout]

Ringout, I'd add to it that the reason I feel this way is because of how the "playoffs" work in the NCAA.  Only the NFL can compare.  In the NBA, NHL, MLB, etc, the best team almost always wins because you have 5 or 7 game series to determine the best.  It allows for an "off night" or running into a hot team.

In the NFL and NCAA tournament, it does not.  This is why the "best team" often doesn't win.  It also allows for "average" teams to do damage.  Seattle Seahawks, VCU, etc, etc.

The differences in how a champion is determined is so stark compared to just about every other sport, those realities are often not considered and illogically compared to other sports for reasons that make no sense. 

  It seems we are always arguing in parallel universes.  I am not arguing about the merits of how any other sports pick their winners. I am not even arguing that MU belonged in the Sweet 16, but damn was that FUN.

I am arguing that I would rather win the Damn tournament, than any other measure you can provide.

 I'm worn out.    I don't have the energy to make sense of your arguments and listen to the Democrats non stop ankle biting here in WI.

[Lennys Tap]

Some guy named Al McGuire disagrees with you.  End of argument

Nonsense. Al said the best team doesn't always win, and neither I nor most others argue against against that. If the "best" team always won, the oddsmakers in Vegas could annoint a champion and they wouldn't have to play the tournament. That said, when you look at UCONN's and Ohio State's neutral/road record it's not clear to me that the Buckeyes were the "best" this year.

[Lennys Tap]

Ringout, I'd add to it that the reason I feel this way is because of how the "playoffs" work in the NCAA.  Only the NFL can compare.  In the NBA, NHL, MLB, etc, the best team almost always wins because you have 5 or 7 game series to determine the best.  It allows for an "off night" or running into a hot team.

In the NFL and NCAA tournament, it does not.  This is why the "best team" often doesn't win.  It also allows for "average" teams to do damage.  Seattle Seahawks, VCU, etc, etc.

The differences in how a champion is determined is so stark compared to just about every other sport, those realities are often not considered and illogically compared to other sports for reasons that make no sense. 

I would agree that the "best" team (the one with the best regular season record) wins most often in the NBA. Hockey and baseball, though, are every bit as volatile as pro football and college basketball.

Let's be honest here. This is just one final dig at this year's team. Two year's ago, you loved the players (Crean's players) that even our doofus coach (bottom 45 of 345 D1 coaches) couldn't screw up. Last year it was hard for you to be hyper critical but you still managed to rip the guy (who exceeded the "coach of the year" standards that you yourself set) every chance you got (DePaul, ND, WVU, timeouts, not fouling at the end of games,etc,etc,etc). This year you were relentless. TC's guys were all gone so the gloves really came off. You even went after our own players personally, putting them down for everything from their "backgrounds" (jucos,etc) to their "basketball IQs". In questioning their performance you called our guys vile names. That you would belittle their Sweet 16 accomplishment (matchups, crapshoot, etc) and accentuate an alleged regular season dropoff (which Sagarin and Pomeroy basically say didn't happen) is hardly surprising. We get it and we've come to expect it. But coming from a guy who constantly calls others hypocritical, even you should see the irony.

[Marquette84]

I would agree that the "best" team (the one with the best regular season record) wins most often in the NBA. Hockey and baseball, though, are every bit as volatile as pro football and college basketball.

Let's be honest here. This is just one final dig at this year's team. Two year's ago, you loved the players (Crean's players) that even our doofus coach (bottom 45 of 345 D1 coaches) couldn't screw up. Last year it was hard for you to be hyper critical but you still managed to rip the guy (who exceeded the "coach of the year" standards that you yourself set) every chance you got (DePaul, ND, WVU, timeouts, not fouling at the end of games,etc,etc,etc). This year you were relentless. TC's guys were all gone so the gloves really came off. You even went after our own players personally, putting them down for everything from their "backgrounds" (jucos,etc) to their "basketball IQs". In questioning their performance you called our guys vile names. That you would belittle their Sweet 16 accomplishment (matchups, crapshoot, etc) and accentuate an alleged regular season dropoff (which Sagarin and Pomeroy basically say didn't happen) is hardly surprising. We get it and we've come to expect it. But coming from a guy who constantly calls others hypocritical, even you should see the irony.

Nonsense. Al said the best team doesn't always win, and neither I nor most others argue against against that. If the "best" team always won, the oddsmakers in Vegas could annoint a champion and they wouldn't have to play the tournament. That said, when you look at UCONN's and Ohio State's neutral/road record it's not clear to me that the Buckeyes were the "best" this year.

Can you explain why you rely on Sagarin and Pomeroy in one argument, but ignore them in the other?

Both Sagarin and Pomeroy had Ohio State rated as the best team by a fairly decent margin. 

If you're going to argue that those two services validate that there was no regular season dropoff, how can you not accept them at their word when they identify Ohio State as the best team?

[NersEllenson]

Let's be honest here. This is just one final dig at this year's team. Two year's ago, you loved the players (Crean's players) that even our doofus coach (bottom 45 of 345 D1 coaches) couldn't screw up. Last year it was hard for you to be hyper critical but you still managed to rip the guy (who exceeded the "coach of the year" standards that you yourself set) every chance you got (DePaul, ND, WVU, timeouts, not fouling at the end of games,etc,etc,etc). This year you were relentless. TC's guys were all gone so the gloves really came off. You even went after our own players personally, putting them down for everything from their "backgrounds" (jucos,etc) to their "basketball IQs". In questioning their performance you called our guys vile names. That you would belittle their Sweet 16 accomplishment (matchups, crapshoot, etc) and accentuate an alleged regular season dropoff (which Sagarin and Pomeroy basically say didn't happen) is hardly surprising. We get it and we've come to expect it. But coming from a guy who constantly calls others hypocritical, even you should see the irony.

Game. Set. Match.  This is why I choose to have the signature I've got..it really is futile to engage in a debate with Chicos, as trying to debate against hypocrisy is impossible.

[Lennys Tap]

Can you explain why you rely on Sagarin and Pomeroy in one argument, but ignore them in the other?

Both Sagarin and Pomeroy had Ohio State rated as the best team by a fairly decent margin. 

If you're going to argue that those two services validate that there was no regular season dropoff, how can you not accept them at their word when they identify Ohio State as the best team?

Pomeroy and Sagarin weigh all games the same, so MU vs MU regular season is a fair comparison. I would suggest that post season games be given MUCH more weight. This accounts for UCONN reaching (for me) at least equal footing with OSU and MU '11 exceeding MU '10.

[JoeSmith1721]

Is the AP going to come out with a final poll?

[Marquette84]

Pomeroy and Sagarin weigh all games the same, so MU vs MU regular season is a fair comparison. I would suggest that post season games be given MUCH more weight. This accounts for UCONN reaching (for me) at least equal footing with OSU and MU '11 exceeding MU '10.

If NCAA tournament success is weighted much more than the regular season, doesn't it follow that the 2011 Big East represents a decline in league quality from 2009, when 5 Big East teams made the Sweet 16, compared to only 2 this year?

[brewcity77]

Is the AP going to come out with a final poll?

They already did. The AP final poll comes out the last week before the NCAA Tournament. They do not do a post-tournament poll.

[Lennys Tap]

If NCAA tournament success is weighted much more than the regular season, doesn't it follow that the 2011 Big East represents a decline in league quality from 2009, when 5 Big East teams made the Sweet 16, compared to only 2 this year?

Well, we were comparing 2011 to 2010, not 2009, but regardless, I think that when a team that ties for 9th, 10th, and 11th place in the Big East wins the national championship it speaks volumes for the strength of the conference. Has any other conference in any other year produced a 9th-10th-11th place team that made a Sweet 16 (the Big East had 2 this year) let alone a national champ?

[Coleman]

Bo routinely beat Izzo in the regular season. Izzo regularly outshone Bo in the championship season. Bo is very well thought of as a coach. Izzo is iconic. End of argument.

This.

[MUBurrow]

Can I ask what we are even fighting about here?  I thought everyone is pretty much saying that the NCAA is much more prestigious and we would all trade a greater degree of regular season success for tournament success.  But on the other hand, the tournament isnt as great an indication of a team's objective talent level and quality of play as an entire 30+ game regular season. What's the debate?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Can I ask what we are even fighting about here?  I thought everyone is pretty much saying that the NCAA is much more prestigious and we would all trade a greater degree of regular season success for tournament success.  But on the other hand, the tournament isnt as great an indication of a team's objective talent level and quality of play as an entire 30+ game regular season. What's the debate?

It's if you like Buzz or Crean, and you can't like them both.

2 men enter, 1 man leaves.

[ChicosBailBonds]

They already did. The AP final poll comes out the last week before the NCAA Tournament. They do not do a post-tournament poll.

Which is absolutely appropriate.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Well, we were comparing 2011 to 2010, not 2009, but regardless, I think that when a team that ties for 9th, 10th, and 11th place in the Big East wins the national championship it speaks volumes for the strength of the conference. Has any other conference in any other year produced a 9th-10th-11th place team that made a Sweet 16 (the Big East had 2 this year) let alone a national champ?

So if that's the case, the Horizon League must be the second best league in the country and the Colonial one of the four best?  Just think how stupid that is.

People put WAY to much credence on the results of the tournament to extrapolate how good a conference is or how good a particular team is.  They seem to totally forget a team, an average one, can get hot for a few weeks (VCU) and have success.  VCU couldn't even win it's own small conference but yet they are the "4th best team...or 6th best team in the country"?  Laughable.