R-E-L-A-X

[Lennys Tap]

"they were overrated and that's why they didn't make the FF."

Totally made up quote (liar) which totally misses the point (over your head).

Keep digging.

[wadesworld]

Totally made up quote (liar) which totally misses the point (over your head).

Keep digging.

Digging? No need. You literally said they weren't a top 10 team in the country and tried to get people to bet you that they didn't finish with a top 2 seed in the NCAA Tournament. You got it wrong big guy. But keep digging in on it.

[Archies Bat]

Wades and Lenny:

Thursday I was reading Scoop and the bet you made with the loser self-banning for a year.

At that point I thought about suggesting you reduce the bet, because I thought you both added good insight to the board, but was busy with turkey stuff and did not get back online.

After reading the last page or two of this thread, I realized how much I enjoyed the turkey.

[Lennys Tap]

Wades and Lenny:

Thursday I was reading Scoop and the bet you made with the loser self-banning for a year.

At that point I thought about suggesting you reduce the bet, because I thought you both added good insight to the board, but was busy with turkey stuff and did not get back online.

After reading the last page or two of this thread, I realized how much I enjoyed the turkey.

Funny (and accurate). Apologies, Archie. I'm officially done - when a guy starts "quoting" you with things you never said it's past time to quit the back and forth.

[Archies Bat]

Funny (and accurate). Apologies, Archie. I'm officially done - when a guy starts "quoting" you with things you never said it's past time to quit the back and forth.

No  apologies necessary.  Welcome home.

[Floorslapper]

Your obsession with polls/bets on a one-and-done tournament result is baffling.

Obsession?  Nah.  I just like getting down to the nuts and bolts.  How people vote, and/or are willing to "invest" their money, speaks to their level of conviction/confidence.  The Intelligencia here vacillate on the regular, and have a great habit of couching things with multiple caveats etc.

P.S. - The bet offer also is extended to you - I've got Duke in the Sweet 16, and Marquette not:  $100 each?

[Floorslapper]

I'm curious as to whether Ners would prefer Marquette finish the year 26-5, get a 2 seed, and lose to  7 seed in the 2nd round. Or finish 20-11 but win 2 games, make the S16 and come up one possession short of the elite 8.

Would take the 20-11 scenario, every single year over the 2 seed/26-5 scenario.

[BM1090]

Would take the 20-11 scenario, every single year over the 2 seed/26-5 scenario.

I respect your opinion but honestly do not understand it. A team that's a 10 seed that makes the S16 has far more flaws than the 2 seed that plays one bad game at the wrong time. To each their own.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The regular season vs. postseason success is an interesting and great question. I don't think there's necessarily a right answer. For me, I would definitely enjoy the 11 seed making the Sweet 16 more, but I think the 2 seed losing in the round of 32 means the team had a better season. Gun to my head I think I take the 2 seed that loses early. As much as the fans enjoy a Sweet 16 appearance, I don't think it does much for your program. No one remembers who made the Sweet 16 in a given year. But I do think winning and being consistently good throughout a season helps build your program. Now an 11 seed that makes the Final Four? I would pick that every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not sure about Elite Eight.

[GB Warrior]

The regular season vs. postseason success is an interesting and great question. I don't think there's necessarily a right answer. For me, I would definitely enjoy the 11 seed making the Sweet 16 more, but I think the 2 seed losing in the round of 32 means the team had a better season. Gun to my head I think I take the 2 seed that loses early. As much as the fans enjoy a Sweet 16 appearance, I don't think it does much for your program. No one remembers who made the Sweet 16 in a given year. But I do think winning and being consistently good throughout a season helps build your program. Now an 11 seed that makes the Final Four? I would pick that every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not sure about Elite Eight.

It's really hard to calibrate expectations and how wildly different they are for some programs, and it's hard to get out of the mindset that the postseason is the only thing that matters. In the NFL - a league built with parity in mind, it's understandable a fan believes it's Super Bowl or bust. In baseball, we need to recognize that a successful season means something very different depending on your market.

Everyone wants to win a championship or compete for it, but that realistically is not every NCAA teams ceiling. And in a postseason like the NCAA, where they don't do reseeding, winning 5 straight games with the randomness involved does not always result in the best team winning it all.

I would always take the final 4 and the feeling of being SO CLOSE over a strong regular season and an early exit. And in general, I think I'd irrationally gravitate toward postseason success...there aren't so many games in a season where you can 'enjoy the ride' as easily as MLB or NBA, which factors into the postseason taking on a greater - albeit a bit unrational - importance

[Cheeks]

Still feel Duke isn't a lock for the Sweet 16?

UVA was a lock for Sweet 16 last year according to everybody not named UMBC

[Cheeks]

I'm surprised anyone would argue with this. Watching Duke play, it's hard to imagine anyone being able to hang with them by March, even if they have some hiccups along the way.

I remember this kind of talk in the 90's with UNLV....a virtual guarantee to win it all.....but they didn't.

[Cheeks]

Which of the "new 200" D1 teams are the powerhouses? How are they standing in our way? During Al's era we were surpassed only by UCLA and on equal footing with UNC. We were better than Duke, Kentucky, Indiana, Kansas and every other D1 program. Why? Because Al was head and shoulders better than the guys he was going up against. I'll grant you there are more challenges for little catholic schools today than there were in the late 60s and the 70s, but Al (like Jay Wright today) would have been up to the task. No doubt in my mind.

Some years we were, some we weren't. We beat IU once in that period.  Our winning percentage was #2 back then, but we also were an Independent which helped that record a bit.  Remember that for some time only conference champs went to the tournament, meaning some insanely good  teams didn't...independents didn't have to deal with that restriction.

It isn't a matter of the new 200 schools, the point is with television schools that weren't powers now are.  Gonzaga being one of the more obvious ones.  Xavier was a running joke prior to the 1990's.  Butler isn't a power, but again a program that was a complete also ran prior to the Video age.  Arizona another one.

Back in Al's day the talent was horded by less teams with more scholarships.  Today the talent is spread out and available to many schools due to less scholarships and the ease by which families, etc can watch junior play.  The elite teams back in Al's day May have been better than today, at least among their peer set.   

[Galway Eagle]

This argument about the sweet 16 vs early exit plus regular season success is so stupid. I struggle to believe many fans would take Jimmys senior year over say the 08-09 team (pre James' injury). One we were running through opponents, ranked in the top 10 and got to see four of MU's all time greats crush it (5 if you count jimmy not crushing it). The other we were receiving a couple votes occasionally and had a close loss to just about everybody and figured we were due for another quick exit.

[jesmu84]

Obsession?  Nah.  I just like getting down to the nuts and bolts.  How people vote, and/or are willing to "invest" their money, speaks to their level of conviction/confidence.  The Intelligencia here vacillate on the regular, and have a great habit of couching things with multiple caveats etc.

P.S. - The bet offer also is extended to you - I've got Duke in the Sweet 16, and Marquette not:  $100 each?

Again, dumb. Want to bet seed or total win? That's far more of an accurate assessment of a team. Results in a one loss tournament is too much relying on luck/chance

Edit: I have confidence in Marquette. In terms of chances of making the S16, I would have more confidence in Duke over Marquette. But I still wouldn't bet on Duke, Kansas, Gonzaga or Kentucky as a S16 team. Nothing to do with confidence. Everything to do with a poor bet

[Newsdreams]

Again, dumb. Want to bet seed or total win? That's far more of an accurate assessment of a team. Results in a one loss tournament is too much relying on luck/chance

Edit: I have confidence in Marquette. In terms of chances of making the S16, I would have more confidence in Duke over Marquette. But I still wouldn't bet on Duke, Kansas, Gonzaga or Kentucky as a S16 team. Nothing to do with confidence. Everything to do with a poor bet

All about matchups and any team can have a bad day.

[Goose]

The way I see it, making S16 is becoming more and more difficult. Having a program that year in and year out capable, or expected, to make S16 is my standard. The game has changed so much over the past decade that even top seeds struggle to advance in March. Being a seed with higher expectations is the goal, and being in position to advance is how I judge programs.

[Galway Eagle]

The way I see it, making S16 is becoming more and more difficult. Having a program that year in and year out capable, or expected, to make S16 is my standard. The game has changed so much over the past decade that even top seeds struggle to advance in March. Being a seed with higher expectations is the goal, and being in position to advance is how I judge programs.

Could you elaborate a bit? Like 4 of Creans ncaa births we were a team capable of a sweet 16 we just didn't show up in the tournament or were injured. Is that good or do you mean a program that actually shows up for the tournament no matter seed?

[Floorslapper]

I respect your opinion but honestly do not understand it. A team that's a 10 seed that makes the S16 has far more flaws than the 2 seed that plays one bad game at the wrong time. To each their own.

You posed a great question.  Others have chimed in with alternatively good thoughts to my initial take. 

Guess for me, the deciding factor was the tournament success, versus regular season "success."  The floor hope would be that we are a program that is a consistent NCAA team - so how we get there isn't quite as important to me - as is the fun/excitement/achievement/milestone that goes along with making Sweet 16s.

It would sting worse to be a high seed, high hopes, high expectations and to bow out early.

[brewcity77]

The regular season vs. postseason success is an interesting and great question. I don't think there's necessarily a right answer. For me, I would definitely enjoy the 11 seed making the Sweet 16 more, but I think the 2 seed losing in the round of 32 means the team had a better season. Gun to my head I think I take the 2 seed that loses early. As much as the fans enjoy a Sweet 16 appearance, I don't think it does much for your program. No one remembers who made the Sweet 16 in a given year. But I do think winning and being consistently good throughout a season helps build your program. Now an 11 seed that makes the Final Four? I would pick that every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not sure about Elite Eight.

I agree with this. Honestly, short of a Final Four, I'll take the seed and a conference title over a Sweet 16 or even Elite Eight. I love watching that second weekend, but having a title like that is something that's legitimately worth being proud over, whereas few people remember who made up even the Elite Eight in any given year.

[BM1090]

You posed a great question.  Others have chimed in with alternatively good thoughts to my initial take. 

Guess for me, the deciding factor was the tournament success, versus regular season "success."  The floor hope would be that we are a program that is a consistent NCAA team - so how we get there isn't quite as important to me - as is the fun/excitement/achievement/milestone that goes along with making Sweet 16s.

It would sting worse to be a high seed, high hopes, high expectations and to bow out early.

I get it. NCAA wins are exciting. Great feeling as a fan and I'd probably enjoy it in the moment more than I enjoyed a Big East title. I just think 5 years after the fact, I'm gonna appreciate the 25 win team more than the team that caught lightning in a bottle.

[Lennys Tap]

Edit: I have confidence in Marquette. In terms of chances of making the S16, I would have more confidence in Duke over Marquette. But I still wouldn't bet on Duke, Kansas, Gonzaga or Kentucky as a S16 team. Nothing to do with confidence. Everything to do with a poor bet

Poor bet? Duke will almost assuredly be a #1 seed this year. To make the S16 they wink have to beat a 16 seed and an 8/9 seed winner. They'll be a massive favorite in game 1 (99%) and a very solid favorite in game 2 (75-85%) so the odds of them winning both are between .99x.75 and .99x.85 or approximately 74% and 84%.

IOW, not a poor bet, but one you make every time.

[jesmu84]

Poor bet? Duke will almost assuredly be a #1 seed this year. To make the S16 they wink have to beat a 16 seed and an 8/9 seed winner. They'll be a massive favorite in game 1 (99%) and a very solid favorite in game 2 (75-85%) so the odds of them winning both are between .99x.75 and .99x.85 or approximately 74% and 84%.

IOW, not a poor bet, but one you make every time.

Fine. I still wouldn't make the bet.

And, it still reflects zero of my confidence in Duke. Or Marquette.

[Floorslapper]

Poor bet? Duke will almost assuredly be a #1 seed this year. To make the S16 they wink have to beat a 16 seed and an 8/9 seed winner. They'll be a massive favorite in game 1 (99%) and a very solid favorite in game 2 (75-85%) so the odds of them winning both are between .99x.75 and .99x.85 or approximately 74% and 84%.

IOW, not a poor bet, but one you make every time.

Good analysis Lenny.

Fine. I still wouldn't make the bet.

And, it still reflects zero of my confidence in Duke. Or Marquette.

Jes - You should cash in on what you referred to as the "dumb bet" I offered.

So, $100.  I've got Duke in the Sweet 16.  You don't.  Deal?

We can remove MU from the equation.

[jesmu84]

Good analysis Lenny.

Jes - You should cash in on what you referred to as the "dumb bet" I offered.

So, $100.  I've got Duke in the Sweet 16.  You don't.  Deal?

We can remove MU from the equation.

No thanks