Big East Conference BET Results

[muguru]

Guru....talent on the floor doesn't play the same way every game....and the opposing talent can have an impact.

I have acknowledged that numerous times. NO ONE wins every game. That's not the argument or the point here. I have already explained myself on this...if(by using the eye test on judging teams talent) a team has better talent then their opponent and it's a fairly sizable difference, then if said team loses regardless of venue, to me it's an inexcusable loss. I don't care if the name on the front of your jersey is Marquette, Nevada, UT-Martin etc. The same standard applies. I just happen to be a Marquette fan, so I am more intimately familiar with them and the opponents in the Big East.

And yes, It's not bragging but I watch a TON, and I do mean a TON of college basketball during the year, so I probably watch more games/teams than a majority of people.

[muguru]

If Marquette had won every game, they'd be undefeated and 1st in the polls and net rankings.

If Marquette has lost all its games, they'd be winless and probably not listed in net rankings or ranked at all.

IMO, Marquette should win every game.  That would be the better of the two choices.  If they had beaten the Badgers, then we'd be higher in net rankings and I think 78 out of 75 times, we should beat them.  The problem is, we have too many snowflakes who think losing a game is fine if we were supposed to lose but in reality we should win those games because that's what we should do.  In my day, the coach would be fired after every loss and the players would have to run around Milwaukee until they passed out to teach them that losing isn't acceptable under any circumstance.

Aren't you adorable. Typical of your generation. Smart ass with absolutely NO viable argument to dispute something, because you lack the fundamental/experience and knowledge to do so. So let's just be a sarcastic, dbag when we don't have the answers to counter what someone says.

[Galway Eagle]

The "eye test" is why people believe Powell is the run away BE POY and a legit NPOY candidate. The numbers and analytics is why Howard is the clear front runner.

Between the two I'll take the numbers, they don't lie. Eye test is why my dad picks out dominant mid major players as people who should be NPOY and all American candidates.

[Uncle Rico]

If your eye test says that MU should beat any Big East team on the road 9 times out of 10, you need glasses.

Because you're a computer hipster who gets everything handed to him on a silver platter and participation trophies, you've never experienced real basketball by watching it.

Also, did you ever see WarGames?  Of course not, because If you had, you'd know computers are the enemy

[Uncle Rico]

Aren't you adorable. Typical of your generation. Smart ass with absolutely NO viable argument to dispute something, because you lack the fundamental/experience and knowledge to do so. So let's just be a sarcastic, dbag when we don't have the answers to counter what someone says.

Nah, I don't argue with old people who have all the answers when they clearly do not but think their experience of ignorance is somehow superior to people who use multiple tools to analyze things

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Jeesus christ...point to me were I said that?? You people are GREAT and I mean the best their is at twisting my words to whatever you want them to say. No one but me knows what goes into my evaluations when it comes to judging games/talent.

Okay

Here's how I look at a game when MU plays..again everyone is different...I go into a game when I see a match up and I ask myself, who would win this game 9 out of 10 times regardless of where it's played. I don't apply that to just MU, but anyone. And then because of that, I bank on the fact that this won't be that "one time". Because after all, it's 1 time out of 10, that team might win that game.

9 out of 10 times, regardless of where they play.

And later in the same post:

I have news for you, if MU can't/wouldn't beat the dumpster fire that is DePaul 9 out of 10 times, or SJU 9 out of 10 times etc, then there is something VERY wrong. I don't care where that game is played...

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I have already explained myself on this...if(by using the eye test on judging teams talent) a team has better talent then their opponent and it's a fairly sizable difference, then if said team loses regardless of venue, to me it's an inexcusable loss. I don't care if the name on the front of your jersey is Marquette, Nevada, UT-Martin etc. The same standard applies. I just happen to be a Marquette fan, so I am more intimately familiar with them and the opponents in the Big East.

So in your eyes, MU has had inexcusable performances every season since 1971. That's 49 straight years of inexcusable performances....yet MU has only fired two coaches during that stretch. That's a lot of excusing of the inexcusable.

[muguru]

The "eye test" is why people believe Powell is the run away BE POY and a legit NPOY candidate. The numbers and analytics is why Howard is the clear front runner.

Between the two I'll take the numbers, they don't lie. Eye test is why my dad picks out dominant mid major players as people who should be NPOY and all American candidates.

It depends on who's eyes are seeing what...you can't group everyone into the same category. Some people are MUCH better with the eye test than others. Just the way it is. Also, a lot of the Powell love for POY is because SH is in 1st place, it's really no more than that...so that's really a "numbers" thing, and pure laziness.

[muguru]

Nah, I don't argue with old people who have all the answers when they clearly do not but think their experience of ignorance is somehow superior to people who use multiple tools to analyze things

Not implying it's superior...but you obviously are implying numbers are superior. They aren't...the BIG difference is, I have also accepted the use of computers/numbers to analyze things. The younger generation like yourself doesn't know about the eye test, because you haven't really had to rely on it in your lifetime.

Let me give you one clear example where the "eye test" is FAR more accurate then the numbers...Take a look at Auburn..their computer #'s all year have been better then what they really are. A lot of people have said that. Why?? because simply watching them play tells you they aren't as good as their numbers say they are. Anyone that trusts their eyes can see that. But you younger folks look at their great computer #'s and go "oh wow, Auburn is really good again this year" and that's what you consider to be gospel "well, the #'s say they are really good, so they are". And don't get that there ARE things that can/will show the numbers aren't totally reliable. They lie sometimes.

I mean...can you tell a hot chick when you see one?? Or do you have to have a computer with analytics and numbers to determine which one's are hot and which one's are not?? See what I'm saying??

[Uncle Rico]

Not implying it's superior...but you obviously are implying numbers are superior. They aren't...the BIG difference is, I have also accepted the use of computers/numbers to analyze things. The younger generation like yourself doesn't know about the eye test, because you haven't really had to rely on it in your lifetime.

Let me give you one clear example where the "eye test" is FAR more accurate then the numbers...Take a look at Auburn..their computer #'s all year have been better then what they really are. A lot of people have said that. Why?? because simply watching them play tells you they aren't as good as their numbers say they are. Anyone that trusts their eyes can see that. But you younger folks look at their great computer #'s and go "oh wow, Auburn is really good again this year" and that's what you consider to be gospel "well, the #'s say they are really good, so they are". And don't get that there ARE things that can/will show the numbers aren't totally reliable. They lie sometimes.

I mean...can you tell a hot chick when you see one?? Or do you have to have a computer with analytics and numbers to determine which one's are hot and which one's are not?? See what I'm saying??

The numbers say Auburn is wildly overrated

[muguru]

The numbers say Auburn is wildly overrated

I think you're turning a corner here Rico...you are admitting that numbers aren't perfect and they can/do lie, right?? What's interesting about this is, they eyes in this example are the only reliable thing you can use to evaluate Auburn(because you admit the #'s aren't reliable with them). There would be no other way to know that the numbers say Auburn is better then what they really are. The eyes know...but again, you also have to know what you're looking at/for.

[Uncle Rico]

I think you're turning a corner here Rico...you are admitting that numbers aren't perfect and they can/do lie, right?? What's interesting about this is, they eyes in this example are the only reliable thing you can use to evaluate Auburn(because you admit the #'s aren't reliable with them). There would be no other way to know that the numbers say Auburn is better then what they really are. The eyes know...but again, you also have to know what you're looking at/for.

The eyes tell me they're wildly overrated

[NickelDimer]

Why people actually argue with or try to rationalize with guru is beyond me.

I learned a long time ago it takes two to have a dysfunctional relationship. Some get off on it and it's usually the ones who claim to be the most outraged by him.

[Galway Eagle]

It depends on who's eyes are seeing what...you can't group everyone into the same category. Some people are MUCH better with the eye test than others. Just the way it is. Also, a lot of the Powell love for POY is because SH is in 1st place, it's really no more than that...so that's really a "numbers" thing, and pure laziness.

So what you're basically saying is *your eye test is the one that's right. Not "the eye test" because of course everybody can draw different conclusions when seeing the same thing. Numbers don't have that bias

[Mr. Nielsen]

Villanova outscored Temple 50-26 in the 2nd half to win by 20. Whatever happened at halftime worked.

[Herman Cain]

 Nova Non Conference win by big margin over  Temple very help to the Big East Cause.

[MUUWUWM]

Thanks for the score.....now some get back to arguing.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Jeesus christ...point to me were I said that?? You people are GREAT and I mean the best their is at twisting my words to whatever you want them to say. No one but me knows what goes into my evaluations when it comes to judging games/talent.

I have news for you, if MU can't/wouldn't beat the dumpster fire that is DePaul 9 out of 10 times, or SJU 9 out of 10 times etc, then there is something VERY wrong. I don't care where that game is played...one more time for the tone deaf...I JUDGE BASED ON THE TALENT ON THE FLOOR. My eyes do NOT deceive me. You grew up in an era of computers, you have relied on them and numbers your whole life. People your age don't know about the eye test(or have the experience with it) because you didn't spend a lot of your life having to use it like us older generation has. That's just a fact. Believe it or not, the more you do something, the better you get at it..strange how that works...the better you get at it, means the more reliable it is.

You've now attacked multiple posters based on their perceived age. Please share, oh wise one, how old are you?  I'm curious how many years of wisdom your posts are based on.

Also, saying someone younger than you doesn't know about the eye test is laughable.

[The Sultan]

Jeesus christ...point to me were I said that?? You people are GREAT and I mean the best their is at twisting my words to whatever you want them to say. No one but me knows what goes into my evaluations when it comes to judging games/talent.

I have news for you, if MU can't/wouldn't beat the dumpster fire that is DePaul 9 out of 10 times, or SJU 9 out of 10 times etc, then there is something VERY wrong. I don't care where that game is played...one more time for the tone deaf...I JUDGE BASED ON THE TALENT ON THE FLOOR. My eyes do NOT deceive me. You grew up in an era of computers, you have relied on them and numbers your whole life. People your age don't know about the eye test(or have the experience with it) because you didn't spend a lot of your life having to use it like us older generation has. That's just a fact. Believe it or not, the more you do something, the better you get at it..strange how that works...the better you get at it, means the more reliable it is.

I'm older than you and think TAMU is more right than you are.

[Pakuni]

Believe it or not, the more you do something, the better you get at it..strange how that works...the better you get at it, means the more reliable it is.

Your posts are a real outlier to this theory.

[Newsdreams]

First, than vs then. How old is guru? 90? I mean calling everyone son, boy, child. Is he for real or a rodent troll? If for real then help is needed.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

The thing of it is, the internet and message boards are weird...because it can make people be disingenuous as they want to be. What I mean is, I'm guessing that a decent number of people that continually rip on me for bringing up that MU's home loss to PC was inexcusable..privately felt the exact same way. But because I express it here, the en vogue thing to do is to bash it, even though privately they feel the same way.

Hold on...So lots of people secretly agree with you but they pretend to criticize you because that is more popular???

Your mental state is certainly...something.

[GooooMarquette]

Why people actually argue with or try to rationalize with guru is beyond me.

It's kind of a game. We (or at least I) don't expect him to listen to reason, but it's fun to show how ridiculous his expectations are.

[GooooMarquette]

Your posts are a real outlier to this theory.

Spot. On.

[GooooMarquette]

You people make everything more complicated then it needs to be...I have NEVER said this or implied this...I will say this ONE more time...JUDGE IT BY THE TALENT ON THE FLOOR VIS A VIS YOUR OPPONENT. It's really that simple. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not infallible(nothing is) but if you use that(and your confident in your abilities to judge said talent) and made bets on the better, more talented team(regardless of anything else) you will be right, FAR more then you will be wrong. There's no hidden secret etc. Numbers do not tell you everything..they tell you some things, but stop the damn reliance on numbers so much...especially with a system(numbers) that can be gamed.

I'm not making anything complicated. Sometimes kids play their best game, sometimes they play kinda well but not their best, and sometimes they play really poorly even though they are really talented. It is simply treating the players (and the coaches) as though they are...human.

Imagine that....