collapse

* Seton Hall SOTG

Darryl Morsell

26 points, 5 rebounds,
3 assists, 1 block
36 minutes

2021-22 Season SoG Tally
Lewis3
Morsell3
Kolek2
Elliott1
Ighodaro1
Kuath1
Mitchell1

'20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

GAME THREAD 1-19: THE QUETTE AT NOVA by MuggsyB
[Today at 08:13:40 PM]


2021-22 Big East Conference Results by Uncle Rico
[Today at 08:03:12 PM]


Link for live stream for VU game? by #UnleashKolek
[Today at 08:02:06 PM]


Wear Gold for Lovell Sunday by warriorchick
[Today at 07:56:16 PM]


NM by Dr. Blackheart
[Today at 07:52:25 PM]


Pray for IWB by GooooMarquette
[Today at 07:50:22 PM]


MAKE YOUR VILLANOVA PREDICTIONS HERE by wildbillsb
[Today at 07:01:41 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: @ Villanova

Marquette
73
Marquette @

Villanova

Date/Time: Jan 19, 2022, 7:00pm
TV: CBSSN
Schedule for 2021-22
Seton Hall
72

Author Topic: Is MU Nation Melting Down?  (Read 49432 times)

TJ

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Is MU Nation Melting Down?
« Reply #100 on: January 31, 2011, 07:37:12 PM »
The fact that we were a 6 seed in the first place is the overachievement.  Given what we had on last year's team I don't see how anybody could or would argue otherwise. 
See above.

I've made my points.  I think that last year's team was more talented than you all seem to want to give them credit for.  They did a great job and got some good results, but it wasn't because of magic.  They were a talented bunch that worked hard, played to their potential, and got good results.

I'm done with this for now.  Have a nice day to all.

Lennys Tap

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11171
Re: Is MU Nation Melting Down?
« Reply #101 on: January 31, 2011, 08:35:17 PM »





Again, it depends on where the losses come.  Certainly losing to an 11 seed (when you're a six) is an underachievement.   Had we won the first game, losing to the #3 seed in the 2nd round would not have been an underachivement--it would have been expected.













I get that 3<6<11. So in your simplistic world the 3 seed is always more talented than the 6 seed and the 6 seed is always more talented than the 11 seed. One problem - it's not always true - and you'd know that if you actually paid attention. Washington was red hot coming into last year's tournament and was every bit our equal if not our better. I was sure that the winner of our game would have NO problem with the very overrated 3 seeded New Mexico. So when Washington crushed New Mexico 82-64 you were shocked by what you incorrectly assumed was a monumental over/under performance. For me, the game went as expected.