You should believe whatever you want to.

I believe it's cowardly to anonymously accuse someone of a crime through provably false claims and without an ounce of evidence.

We should totally take your word for it, given your record of truthiness so far.

You should believe whatever you want to.

The football water is warm.  The basketball water is not in my opinion. In football, it will be the same old schools getting more money to play.  Viewership won’t go down.

In basketball people like conference tournaments and challenges between conferences during the season but they don’t draw eyeballs like the NCAA tournament.

I’m of the opinion that conferences like the Big East will be fine as they will be brought along to make the tournament a true national championship and not a conference tournament. 

60 football schools is not enough for a basketball championship.  It won’t drive enough interest in my opinion.  A ridiculous amount of people watch the tournament on the first and second weekend because of the underdog and because they want to see how their conference winner does even if it’s not their team.  You can’t underestimate those eyeballs.

The Big East will make the cut for the national championship tournament in its next iteration no matter what.  I think it would still take at least 200 teams to choose from to make it legitimate and keep enough viewership.

Hopefully I and others with this opinion will be right.  If not, no more college basketball viewership for me.

I don't buy your theory that people won't watch.  The Super Bowl still generates high ratings in St. Louis, despite the fact that St. Louis no longer has a team--not only that but their team was unceremoniously uprooted and taken from them.

Twice.

Yet they still watch because it's a major sporting event, not because "their" team is in it.
https://recentlyheard.com/2022/02/18/super-bowl-ratings-higher-in-st-louis-than-los-angeles/

I also think you're ignoring the impact of those who will continue to hype the legitimacy of the championship, starting with the television networks that broadcast it to the conferences that still participate to their still massive fan bases.  You'll be part of a small minority trying to push the "not legit" argument going up against some pretty big megaphones.

Consider a Wisconsin championship in this hypothetical future where Marquette is out of the picture.

Nearly everyone in the state will recognize that championship as legitimate. Every TV network. Every newspaper. Every sports network.  Businesses throughout the state will celebrate "our team's championship" with everything from celebrations for their employees to special promotions (get your exclusive Bucky Championship T-Shirt with a fill-up at Kwik Trip!).  Do you really think you'll win the argument that the championship isn't legit?

It would be disappointing for sure, but I just don't see this evolving the way you think it will.

Starting to think Mr. Bias is a sociopath.

I feel like its more than his sister/good friend/girl he crushed on hard, got swerved/ghosted/dumped by Jimmy in a crappy fashion (likely not treated great), which many 20 year old guys, much less 20 year star athletes, do...and he's not been able to get over it.

If being uncomfortable bowing to a woman beater is a sociopath, then yes I am a sociopath.

I find it interesting that of many people I knew at Marquette with Jimmy, as well as a decade of him being a high profile NBA player/star, you're the only instance and steadfast descriptor of him as such.

But we'll wait for all of these mythical court cases that supposedly substantiate that.

So your stats confirm my statement that there is not a big difference between Herro and Simmons, and that Simmons was the better shooter.

6th man of the year is always going to go to a player on a "great team" that is how those awards work.

Regarding who I'd take. That is an opinion, and I'd take Simmons.

I don't know about you, but less than a percentage doesn't convey "better shooter" to me.  Trying to claim so is just pedantic.  There is more to basketball than shooting percentages, which Herro was better than Simmons in basically all of them.

Herro's advanced stats were much better, he's a better defender.  The notion that Simmons was more of a focus for defenses than Herro is just silly and not based in anything.  He was the Blazers' third leading scorer...after removing Dame and CJ.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but its not based in much other than minute differences in shooting percentages.