I totally underestimated that team. Had it not been for some extreme luck Davidson would have rolled. I'm serious.
I agree. But MU had a whole lot of little plays go against it for the first 38 minutes. CO with an offensive rebound, getting slightly undercut and getting called for a travel. A number of rebounds that slipped off MU fingers out of bounds. Blue and Wilson making nice plays only to step out of bounds. Plus a number of good open shots that just didn't fall. Davidson was very good.
Teams that are very good win.
One thing I'll give these guys credit for - they never give up. MU could have easily folded in the last minute and a half, but they kept driving and believing. I think Davidson thought they had it in the bag in the last minutes and were shocked by hard MU came at them.
Davidson was very good. I hope their fans heard what Buzz said about their program in the post game presser. Stressed Davidson's skill and toughness.
I've been trying to figure .. if we played 10 times, how many would MU win?
I think we'd win 9 of them. MU didn't play well. Yeah, it took a late-game mistake on Davidson's part for us to have a chance to win. MU plays average, shoots average .. we'd not have needed any heroics to win today.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 21, 2013, 08:46:57 PM
I've been trying to figure .. if we played 10 times, how many would MU win?
I think we'd win 9 of them. MU didn't play well. Yeah, it took a late-game mistake on Davidson's part for us to have a chance to win. MU plays average, shoots average .. we'd not have needed any heroics to win today.
I dont know...
take a look at the shot chart. MU missed sooooo many shots within 6 or 8 feet. Nothing against Davidson. But MUs shooting was its own worst enemy today.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 21, 2013, 08:46:57 PM
I've been trying to figure .. if we played 10 times, how many would MU win?
I think we'd win 9 of them. MU didn't play well. Yeah, it took a late-game mistake on Davidson's part for us to have a chance to win. MU plays average, shoots average .. we'd not have needed any heroics to win today.
I actually thought we DID play well, or at least "like us" (as Buzz likes to say), we just shot terrible until the last 2 minutes of the game
Name the games that MU played worse than this:
@Florida
@Louisville
UWGB
(today)
ND, BE Tournament
@Cincinnati
I think we beat this team 9/10 times, simply because
we couldn't have played much worse than this game.
Not going to say they're bad, they won 17 in a row,
made the tournament, but they're not that great, either.
If we made half of the "near the rim" type shots we
usually make, we win this game by 10 or so.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 21, 2013, 08:46:57 PM
I've been trying to figure .. if we played 10 times, how many would MU win?
I think we'd win 9 of them. MU didn't play well. Yeah, it took a late-game mistake on Davidson's part for us to have a chance to win. MU plays average, shoots average .. we'd not have needed any heroics to win today.
Neutral court I'd say 7 out of 10. Vegas was right, Davidson is good.
Al used to say that to go far in the tournament, you had to win one game that you had no business winning.
Let's hope those are prophetic words.
The tournament brings the best out of a lot of teams too. Some higher seeds (like us) play below average and some higher seeds step up. See Gonzaga and Southern.
Quote from: Knight Commission on March 21, 2013, 08:32:23 PM
I totally underestimated that team. Had it not been for some extreme luck Davidson would have rolled. I'm serious.
I don't get why anyone would have underestimated Davidson?
I never saw them play before, but when i did some research on them, i got worried and understood why so many were picking them as an upset in their brackets.
When i do my brackets and look for one of those 12th-14th seed upsets, teams like Davidson spark my interest for a few reasons.
1. Very veteran laden. All five starters back from a team who made the tournament last year.
2. On a roll entering the tournament. They had won 17 straight.
3. A team with multiple good shooters from three. To me, nothing except kids leaving early for the NBA has allowed for mid-major teams to compete in the tournament like the three point shot has. When an underdog can shoot well from three, they almost always have at least a punchers chance.
4. A well coached team. Bob McKillop is well respected by his peers and he had a roster with lots a kids who were juniors and seniors.
Only my allegiance to Marquette prevented me from picking Davidson in my bracket because i thought they were better than a typical 14th seed and MU isn't quite as good as a normal 3 seed.
Good post dude
Quote from: El Duderino on March 21, 2013, 09:43:20 PM
I don't get why anyone would have underestimated Davidson?
I never saw them play before, but when i did some research on them,
kind of answered your own question. YOU did research.