Can all the mid-major lovers quit playing the Drexel card now?

[panerd]

8th place power conference team on the road against poor Drexel. Result: NC State wins. Highlights of the game include all the poor Drexel fans with their witty anti-NCAA committee signs. Here is something to consider... Maybe the conferences are called power conferences because their teams are better then the teams that are called mid-major? And for every George Mason there are years and years of UCLA's and Dukes.

Here is hoping dessert is Syracuse getting stomped tommorow night at the Garden.

[JonInMiddleGA]

It's more likely you'll hear something like "well, they were flat after the disappointment" blah blah blah.

[molson]

Historically, denied bubble teams play like crap in the NIT, and that's understandable.

[panerd]

Dola:

I am sure one of the excuses is going to be that Drexel just didn't have it in them after the snub. Well I would sure love for a team with that kind of character and coaching being put in a tournament for the NCAA title.


(And I really don't have any hatred or opinion at all about Drexel. But every year we have to hear this bullshit story about why the Big 10, SEC, Big 12, etc don't deserve to take most of the bids. And every year there is basically the same result)

[adubroff]

NC State did just beat Duke, VA, VA Tech and press UNC for 38 minutes in the last week. I don't know if Drexel losing to them by 7 necessarilly invalidates the arguement they should have made the tournament.

Also, we're only one year away from a CAA team making the final 4 so I don't think this holds weight:

(And I really don't have any hatred or opinion at all about Drexel. But every year we have to hear this bullshit story about why the Big 10, SEC, Big 12, etc don't deserve to take most of the bids. And every year there is basically the same result)

[Toddzilla]

Historically, denied bubble teams play like crap in the NIT, and that's understandable.Yeah...how did Virginia Tech fare in 1985?

:D

[panerd]

NC State did just beat Duke, VA, VA Tech and press UNC for 38 minutes in the last week. I don't know if Drexel losing to them by 7 necessarilly invalidates the arguement they should have made the tournament.

Also, we're only one year away from a CAA team making the final 4 so I don't think this holds weight:

Except the part that is always conviently left out of this season's Drexel/George Mason argument is that George Mason actually won the CAA regular season title last season (not third place like Drexel). The Big 12 only got four teams in. Would you would put the CAA up there with them?

[Hammer755]

Did people simply forget that Drexel finished fourth in their conference?

[st.cronin]

Did people simply forget that Drexel finished fourth in their conference?

People were able to forget about Duke's conference record.

[sooner333]

BTW, This is a NC State team that played their FIFTH game in SIX days. They got to play in Tampa, go home and immediately leave for Philadelphia.

[adubroff]

Except the part that is always conviently left out of this season's Drexel/George Mason argument is that George Mason actually won the CAA regular season title last season (not third place like Drexel). The Big 12 only got four teams in. Would you would put the CAA up there with them?

Should we totally discount the Big 12 because OK State lost to Marist in the NIT? By the way, if I were looking for a bid for Drexel there are at least two Big Ten teams who I think should have not have gotten in (Purdue and Illinois), one SEC team (Arkansas), and one Pac Ten team (Stanford). Besides Drexel, I'd have added Cuse, Air Force and Kansas St. I think.

I think Drexel's out of conference resume is better than George Mason's was last year. I think Mason's conference resume was better, obviously (two more wins). I think Mason proved last year that a mid major can compete in today's college game with the big boys, although the new NBA draft rules may shift that back a bit, we'll have to see.

[LloydLungs]

George Mason was somewhat of an aberration, in that in general, mid major teams are not as good as the TOP power conference schools. I think it could be another two decades till another mid gets in the F4 (a real one, not Memphis/Temple/UMass/UNLV types). However, mid majors have proven over and over again that there is pretty much no difference between the top mids and the middle-of-the-pack 4-7th type power schools. There are usually a couple of mids in the sweet 16, and a couple of power 4-7th place schools, and the rest the cream of the crop from the power leagues. I'm unclear as to how some NIT game between Drexel and NC State proves that mid majors suck any more than an NIT game between Marist and Oklahoma State vindicates them. Seriously guys, NIT results?

My only beef is when people start shooting off that the best mids would go 0-16 or 1-15 in a power league. That's crazy -- a typical good mid getting 8 home games against name schools would do some damage. They'd likely bust out an 8-10 win conference season and end up right where they were before, on the bubble.

[SuperGrover]

NC State did just beat Duke, VA, VA Tech and press UNC for 38 minutes in the last week. I don't know if Drexel losing to them by 7 necessarilly invalidates the arguement they should have made the tournament.

Also, we're only one year away from a CAA team making the final 4 so I don't think this holds weight:

Understand though that NC State was the 10th seed in the ACC tourney. 10. WELL behind FSU and Clemson. 10.

The ACC is a monster this season. I think both tournaments will prove it.

[miami_fan]

Dola:

I am sure one of the excuses is going to be that Drexel just didn't have it in them after the snub. Well I would sure love for a team with that kind of character and coaching being put in a tournament for the NCAA title.


(And I really don't have any hatred or opinion at all about Drexel. But every year we have to hear this bullshit story about why the Big 10, SEC, Big 12, etc don't deserve to take most of the bids. And every year there is basically the same result)

And every year there is a big conference school that gets blown out by a smaller school (5-12 matchup for instance). Does that mean the bigger school did not deserve its bid? Either they deserve the bid or they did not deserve it. What happens during the tournement does not prove or disprove the worthiness of the bid.

[wade moore]

Except the part that is always conviently left out of this season's Drexel/George Mason argument is that George Mason actually won the CAA regular season title last season (not third place like Drexel). The Big 12 only got four teams in. Would you would put the CAA up there with them?

Might want to get your facts straight.

A) Mason finished 2nd last year
B) Drexel finished 4th this year

I'm going to avoid going completely nutso on you and others this thread.

I'll have to read up on how Drexel played. However - to say that one loss to a VERY hot NC State teams means they had no business in the NCAA's is just silly. As others said - should Duke, VA, and VA Tech be discounted because they lost their last games to NC State?

Drexel beat proven High-Major competition this year. They can play with the big boys. They lost this game for whatever reason, that's all.

Edit: For those that don't know, yes i am a CAA Homer.

[lynchjm24]

Edit: For those that don't know, yes i am a CAA Homer.

No reason not to be. The selection process is a joke at this point. The criteria isn't applied consistently, and even worse then naming the teams the seeding is a disgrace.

Anyone who loves the power conferences is going to point at the round of 32 and ask where the mid-majors are. Guess what, the committee had them all playing each other in the first round.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Should we totally discount the Big 12 because OK State lost to Marist in the NIT? By the way, if I were looking for a bid for Drexel there are at least two Big Ten teams who I think should have not have gotten in (Purdue and Illinois), one SEC team (Arkansas), and one Pac Ten team (Stanford). Besides Drexel, I'd have added Cuse, Air Force and Kansas St. I think.

Oklahoma State is probably a bad example for your argument. OSU played most of the season with only 6 healthy scholarship players and a walk on. When you play in a big conference and are forced to play kids that many minutes for most of the season, they're going to wear down. Their performance level dropped significantly as the season went along. They simply didn't have any gas left in the tank.

[CU Tiger]

People were able to forget about Duke's conference record.


Yeah great point.
CAA competition is every bit as intense as ACC...

[Butter]

Should we totally discount the Big 12 because OK State lost to Marist in the NIT?

Anyone going to answer this question?

I think what we should be discussing is that was 2 teams that are playing well enough to be in the NCAA tournament last night (NC State and Drexel). No one would've complained if that were an 8-9 game, not at all.

I agree with whoever said the ACC is a monster this year. I really think their teams will do very well in both the NCAA and NIT this season.

[wade moore]

Yeah great point.
CAA competition is every bit as intense as ACC...

The difference is Duke was tied for 6th and .500 in the CAA - Drexel was 13-5 with only one loss being to a team below them.

No, the competition isn't equal from top to bottom. But Drexel beat the teams in their conference and had some very solid OOC wins.

I think it's unfair/illogical to compare Duke and Drexel. You should be comparing Drexel and say Arkansas who didn't even have a winning record in their conference.

[wade moore]

Anyway...

The real point I'm trying to make is not to re-hash the argument the 400th time about Drexel's resume.

My point is that them losing to a hot NC State team in the 1st round of the NIT (where btw they got jobbed on seed which plays a factor) does not prove that they didn't belong in the NCAA's. That logic is HIGHLY flawed.

[stevew]

Akron was the team that got totally jobbed. 26 wins, and not even an NIT birth. Stupid banked in 3 by Miami of Ohio and they lost their conference final, and apparently any postseason chance.

[gstelmack]

Oklahoma State is probably a bad example for your argument. OSU played most of the season with only 6 healthy scholarship players and a walk on. When you play in a big conference and are forced to play kids that many minutes for most of the season, they're going to wear down. Their performance level dropped significantly as the season went along. They simply didn't have any gas left in the tank.

FWIW, you just described NC State. And much of State's swoon came because Atsur missed a bunch of games with an injury, leaving them basically 5 healthy players. Some of their young guys are finally stepping up, but State played well despite being very shallow and tired.

[Abe Sargent]

It is wrong that Im sill rooting for WVU to win the NIT?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

FWIW, you just described NC State. And much of State's swoon came because Atsur missed a bunch of games with an injury, leaving them basically 5 healthy players. Some of their young guys are finally stepping up, but State played well despite being very shallow and tired.

That's fine. I think the arguments are flawed for the most part. OSU has not been good for most of the conference season. That was my only point. Saying that a bad B12 team somehow proves a point about conference because they lost by a couple to a solid mid-major team is silly at best. One game for any of these teams in the NIT doesn't prove anything.

[lordscarlet]

Dola:

I am sure one of the excuses is going to be that Drexel just didn't have it in them after the snub. Well I would sure love for a team with that kind of character and coaching being put in a tournament for the NCAA title.


(And I really don't have any hatred or opinion at all about Drexel. But every year we have to hear this bullshit story about why the Big 10, SEC, Big 12, etc don't deserve to take most of the bids. And every year there is basically the same result)

And when a Big 10, SEC, Big 12, etc 3 seed loses in the first round of the NCAA tournament will you talk about how they shouldn't have been there? Upsets happen and you can't use one game to judge whether a selection was appropriate.

[Young Drachma]

I totally couldn't wait to see this happen. This thread, I mean. If Drexel had been a major conference school with the same resume and the same result, everyone would see "well, gee..they were just playing flat."

It's almost if, you wish D1 sports would just send all of the small schools away for good and move on. Because it's clear the only time anybody wants them around is to have someone to schedule that will roll over. With the occasional upset to make themselves feel more "inclusive."

[lordscarlet]

I totally couldn't wait to see this happen. This thread, I mean. If Drexel had been a major conference school with the same resume and the same result, everyone would see "well, gee..they were just playing flat."

It's almost if, you wish D1 sports would just send all of the small schools away for good and move on. Because it's clear the only time anybody wants them around is to have someone to schedule that will roll over. With the occasional upset to make themselves feel more "inclusive."

If the majors want schools they can roll over they definitely wish they had gotten rid of Drexel. ;)

[panerd]

I totally couldn't wait to see this happen. This thread, I mean. If Drexel had been a major conference school with the same resume and the same result, everyone would see "well, gee..they were just playing flat."

It's almost if, you wish D1 sports would just send all of the small schools away for good and move on. Because it's clear the only time anybody wants them around is to have someone to schedule that will roll over. With the occasional upset to make themselves feel more "inclusive."

I make no apologies. CAA play is not on the same level as ACC/Big East etc. So they should either have their own tournament or except snubbings. Somebody wanted a big 12 vs CAA discussion. Do you really want to go top to bottom with that one? Kansas compares to who? Old Dominion? What about Texas and Texas A&M? Let's drop down to 8th place Mizzou, which directional school came in 8th in the CAA. How about last place Baylor and Colorado? Before conference play they kiced the crap out of non conference teams and had very pretty records. Drexel proved last night that they had no business being in a win 6 in a row tournament when they couldn't win one at home with a chip on their shoulder.

[wade moore]

I make no apologies. CAA play is not on the same level as ACC/Big East etc. So they should either have their own tournament or except snubbings. Somebody wanted a big 12 vs CAA discussion. Do you really want to go top to bottom with that one? Kansas compares to who? Old Dominion? What about Texas and Texas A&M? Let's drop down to 8th place Mizzou, which directional school came in 8th in the CAA. How about last place Baylor and Colorado? Before conference play they kiced the crap out of non conference teams and had very pretty records. Drexel proved last night that they had no business being in a win 6 in a row tournament when they couldn't win one at home with a chip on their shoulder.

So again - are you going to say every High-Major that loses a home NIT/NCAA tourney game in an upset had no business being there?

[panerd]

So again - are you going to say every High-Major that loses a home NIT/NCAA tourney game in an upset had no business being there?


No. But I am going to say that every team that bitched about not making the tournament who goes on to lose their first NIT game looks very foolish. I explained in post #1 that I will feel the same way about Big East darling Syracuse. If any team that qulaified for the tournament loses (small school, mid-major, or power conference) so what? This thread definitely took a direction that wasn't intended. I hope Old Dominion or Va Commonwealth does well. It makes the tournament more fun to watch. Just don't tell me the CAA is on par with the power conferences, they are not.

[LloydLungs]

I make no apologies. CAA play is not on the same level as ACC/Big East etc.

I'm not sure anyone was making that argument. The power six are generally the six best leagues. Doesn't mean there aren't a lot of other good *teams* spread out amongst the lesser leagues that can compete at that level. This is shown to be the case every year. Drexel's 2-1 against major conference middlin teams.

[wade moore]

I'm not sure anyone was making that argument. The power six are generally the six best leagues. Doesn't mean there aren't a lot of other good *teams* spread out amongst the lesser leagues that can compete at that level. This is shown to be the case every year. Drexel's 2-1 against major conference middlin teams.

Exactly. Just because you think the CAA deserved to have 3 teams, doesn't mean you're saying they're on par with the power conferences.

Hell, the ACC had what? 6 or 7 teams?

[RedKingGold]

I can almost actually see Wade's blood pressure starting to rise as the posts accumulate in this thread

;)

[wade moore]

I can almost actually see Wade's blood pressure starting to rise as the posts accumulate in this thread

;)

It's actually gone down as I've gotten more into "rational argument" mode... when I first saw it my BP definitely shot up ;).

[BishopMVP]

It is wrong that Im sill rooting for WVU to win the NIT?Yes, yes it is. Because they're gonna lose tomorrow night at home :p

[BishopMVP]

FTR, I don't even think Drexel is the best mid-major case. Air Force (which blew out Stanford) or Missouri State had as good or better overall profiles, and I think (in my abject homerism) that UMass was the best mid-major team left out. But this whole thread is as silly as the people who say one warm day in January proves Global Warming, or on Deal or No Deal when they look in the case to "see if you made a good deal!"

[panerd]

FTR, I don't even think Drexel is the best mid-major case. Air Force (which blew out Stanford) or Missouri State had as good or better overall profiles, and I think (in my abject homerism) that UMass was the best mid-major team left out. But this whole thread is as silly as the people who say one warm day in January proves Global Warming, or on Deal or No Deal when they look in the case to "see if you made a good deal!"

If defense of this thread :) I was aiming my hatred at the folks on PTI, around the horn, rome is burning, etc. who couldn't believe Drexel got left out of the tournament and basically telling them to shut the hell up. These same guys will explain to us next Monday why the first two rounds happened the way they did.

[adubroff]

If defense of this thread :) I was aiming my hatred at the folks on PTI, around the horn, rome is burning, etc. who couldn't believe Drexel got left out of the tournament and basically telling them to shut the hell up. These same guys will explain to us next Monday why the first two rounds happened the way they did.

Isn't this exactly what you did with the bids themselves? You waited for a result, then you used it to justify the bids themselves, no?

It'd be different if you'd have written a thread Tuesday morning and said: "Gee I think if Drexel loses, it really weakens the case for them being in the tournament, and if they win, it gives them credibility."

[panerd]

Isn't this exactly what you did with the bids themselves? You waited for a result, then you used it to justify the bids themselves, no?

It'd be different if you'd have written a thread Tuesday morning and said: "Gee I think if Drexel loses, it really weakens the case for them being in the tournament, and if they win, it gives them credibility."

Nah, I'm not that clever. It's not like I am a sportswriter and people want to hear predictions and what I have to say. I hate the bubble stories every year because these teams are battling for the last spots in a 64 team tournament. So it isn't like any of them had that great a season to begin with. I just love that they have to choose a new topic to complain about and that all of the upset Drexel fans got treated to their team showing it had no heart or character. (Or it just wasn't that good)

[wade moore]

Nah, I'm not that clever. It's not like I am a sportswriter and people want to hear predictions and what I have to say. I hate the bubble stories every year because these teams are battling for the last spots in a 64 team tournament. So it isn't like any of them had that great a season to begin with. I just love that they have to choose a new topic to complain about and that all of the upset Drexel fans got treated to their team showing it had no heart or character. (Or it just wasn't that good):rolleyes:

[MrBigglesworth]

Maybe the conferences are called power conferences because their teams are better then the teams that are called mid-major?
If only there was a way to prove that Drexel could play with tournament caliber major conference teams like Villanova and Syracuse.

[timmynausea]

Syracuse and Clemson both had scares but won tonight, and Kansas State is barely beating Vermont (as of a few minutes ago when I left the room.) I have watched more of the NIT than ever before this year. I think the truth is that there really isn't much difference between the middle of the pack power conference teams and the upper tier mid-majors. It's pretty much a toss-up once you get to the last few at large bids and/or NIT games.

[panerd]

If only there was a way to prove that Drexel could play with tournament caliber major conference teams like Villanova and Syracuse.

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.

[BishopMVP]

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.Are you trolling for the sake of trolling at this point, or are you really that oblivious?

[lordscarlet]

Are you trolling for the sake of trolling at this point, or are you really that oblivious?

People are reading my mind tonight.

[illinifan999]

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.

hint: they beat syracuse and nova on the road. so you were right, there was a way to compare them to syracuse.

[MrBigglesworth]

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.
Very true. I kind of wish the NCAA had basketball games before March though, instead of jumping right into the conference tournaments. Maybe even have some of the better mid-major teams play some major teams. Then we could use those games as a sort of guide. That way, if, say, Drexel goes on the road and beats a Villanova or a Syracuse, or if an Old Dominion were to beat a Georgetown, we would know that they were at least on par with those mid-level major teams.

Alas, I fear the only thing to make judgments on are first round NIT games.

[LloydLungs]

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.

Do you just not believe us? Drexel won at Syracuse this season. Look, I even found the boxscore. On the Cuse website even.

http://www.suathletics.com/Sports/basketball/mbasket/2006/Drexelbox12.19.06.asp

Incidentally, although Syracuse did win tonight I wouldn't exactly call that "getting up for the NIT." They almost lost at home to a South Alabama team on a four-game losing streak who hadn't won a game in a month and came from the 21st RPI rated Sun Belt Conference.

[wade moore]

fwiw, I notice that panerd also wished for Syracuse to lose.

So I'm really not sure what his movitavtion here is besides thinking that if a team doesn't make the NCAA's, that their fans, supporters, and commentators have no right to say the NCAA selection committee made a mistake.

[panerd]

Do you just not believe us? Drexel won at Syracuse this season. Look, I even found the boxscore. On the Cuse website even.

http://www.suathletics.com/Sports/basketball/mbasket/2006/Drexelbox12.19.06.asp

Incidentally, although Syracuse did win tonight I wouldn't exactly call that "getting up for the NIT." They almost lost at home to a South Alabama team on a four-game losing streak who hadn't won a game in a month and came from the 21st RPI rated Sun Belt Conference.

I just don't really care that much to respond to all the posts. I think it is funny that the press had their darling story of a team that got screwed by the NCAA and then lost their first post season tournament game. I really don't care about much more than that. Actually that's not totally true. I also think it is funny that K-State and Syracuse both got "jobbed" from the big dance and really showed their stuff on their home floors tonight.

[panerd]

fwiw, I notice that panerd also wished for Syracuse to lose.

So I'm really not sure what his movitavtion here is besides thinking that if a team doesn't make the NCAA's, that their fans, supporters, and commentators have no right to say the NCAA selection committee made a mistake.

Yes, that was the whole point of the thread. And I am not even against the whining of the fans and commentators as much as I think it is funny when they are proven wrong almost immediately. You seem to know your shit about the CAA (so I don't really have anything to argue with you) But most of the main TV commentators were reading from cue cards about why Drexel was such a huge team to leave out and now they have to go find some other story to chase. My guess is Winthrop will be the next rallying call.

[wade moore]

Yes, that was the whole point of the thread. And I am not even against the whining of the fans and commentators as much as I think it is funny when they are proven wrong almost immediately. You seem to know your shit about the CAA (so I don't really have anything to argue with you) But most of the main TV commentators were reading from cue cards about why Drexel was such a huge team to leave out and now they have to go find some other story to chase. My guess is Winthrop will be the next rallying call.

Yeah, I'm a bit obsessive about the CAA.

I finally realized this was your main gripe and I can see a certain part of it.

I still say that losing in the 1st round of the NIT (especially to a hot team that just beat several of the top teams in the ACC) "proves them wrong". When it comes down to it, I don' thtink it's possible to prove them right or wrong - even if Drexel won the NIT, I don't think it proves people like me that thought they should be in right. I just don't think you can use the results of the NIT to determine who should/should not have been in the NCAA's.

Just like if say Arkansas loses to a 4 seed, it doesn't prove without a doubt that they should not have been in the NCAA's and Drexel should have been. It's not a science, but I think it is a bit telling when a large portion of "experts" disagree with the committee. I also think it's a bit telling when the NCAA committee (chair, whatever) are completely inconsistent in their reasoning for their decisions.


Anyway. I understand why the complaining bothers you. A part of me thinks a lot of it should be done more behind closed doors to fix the process, rather than to the media. But I just don't think you can take this one game and say it proves that anyone did/did not deserve to be in the NCAA's.

[lordscarlet]

I just don't really care that much to respond to all the posts. I think it is funny that the press had their darling story of a team that got screwed by the NCAA and then lost their first post season tournament game. I really don't care about much more than that. Actually that's not totally true. I also think it is funny that K-State and Syracuse both got "jobbed" from the big dance and really showed their stuff on their home floors tonight.

Yet another incorrect statement. :)

[LloydLungs]

I think it is funny that the press had their darling story of a team that got screwed by the NCAA and then lost their first post season tournament game.

As someone who has no life and has listened to hours and hours and hours and hours of bracket analysis from the national media... Drexel's omission drew a lot of the immediate outrage, but in the long run Syracuse has been the "snubbed" media darling, not Drexel. Nevertheless, it sounds more like you just hate the media. I can go along with that, anyway.

[Crim]

There actually was a way to compare them to Syracuse, but that would have required them to actually win one of their games and advance in the NIT. But apperently only the power conference teams are able to get up for the NIT and the other teams are just too let down.

I mark this as the point at which panerd stopped making any sense. Up til this point, agree or disagree, I could at least see that he had a point to make. Alas, one misstep, and he suffers credibility drain.

[Crim]

It's not a science, but I think it is a bit telling when a large portion of "experts" disagree with the committee.


I think most of the "experts" (I like that you put the word in quotes) just copy off each others' papers anyway. Which is to say, a consensus among the talking head crowd is an illusion in most cases.


btw, reading further, I see that panerd is making more sense again. One bad post and I'd given up on him... shame on me, I suppose.

[wade moore]

I think most of the "experts" (I like that you put the word in quotes) just copy off each others' papers anyway. Which is to say, a consensus among the talking head crowd is an illusion in most cases.


btw, reading further, I see that panerd is making more sense again. One bad post and I'd given up on him... shame on me, I suppose.

I can't really disagree with you too much here. I certainly recognize that there's a good chance if say Syracue and Drexel are in and Arkansas and Illinois are out that they're all up in arms that Air Force didn't get in - or whatever.

[adubroff]

I think most of the "experts" (I like that you put the word in quotes) just copy off each others' papers anyway. Which is to say, a consensus among the talking head crowd is an illusion in most cases.


I think if you ask ten people what color the sky is you will most likely get a consensus in most cases too, even ten media people.

[Crim]

I think if you ask ten people what color the sky is you will most likely get a consensus in most cases too, even ten media people.

I think you took a wrong turn on your way to the Pete Rose thread... but...

What I mean is that the "experts" help one another, whether through collusion or unconciously, by being in lockstep on what the big issues are. I'm generalizing, of course, but consider: I'm some schlub on a local radio station. When the brackets come out, and it's time for my drive-time 3pm-6pm weekday show, I've got easy material just by flavorizing what Vitale or somebody else said on ESPN the night before. I get instant credibility, by talking about the basketball programs that got jobbed intelligently, and in return Dickie V gets credibility in return as a net effect of all the local dorks all over the country who are parroting his takes.

I don't think there's such a vested interest in agreeing on the color of the sky, adubroff, which has much fewer at-hand stats to sort through to arrive at one's opinion.

[adubroff]

What I mean is that the "experts" help one another, whether through collusion or unconciously, by being in lockstep on what the big issues are. I'm generalizing, of course, but consider: I'm some schlub on a local radio station. When the brackets come out, and it's time for my drive-time 3pm-6pm weekday show, I've got easy material just by flavorizing what Vitale or somebody else said on ESPN the night before. I get instant credibility, by talking about the basketball programs that got jobbed intelligently, and in return Dickie V gets credibility in return as a net effect of all the local dorks all over the country who are parroting his takes.


My point wasn't that they don't copy and parrot one another, I know that happens (consciously or subconsciously). My point is two fold:

1) If there are 50 media people out there and 40 of them crib, then there's still ten who thought about it. At worst, the other 40 are just doing the public's research for them, by seeking out opinions and parrotting them. If you want to invest the 40 with some level of ability to determine "quality of source" then they are basically presenting you a consensus of true experts (rather than Joe Schlub who uses a coin to determine his sports opinion).

2) Just because it's a consensus doesn't mean it's incorrect, no matter what people are basing their opinion on. There are a lot of consensus (consensi?) that are based strongly on the opinion of a few influence makers which can end up being correct, or will at least be believed to be so.

[Crim]

I accept your points, adubroff, particularly number 1, however I don't think they invalidate mine. I think we may be talking about varying degrees of the same phenomena.

[RedKingGold]

Bump for all the people who said the CAA was overrated and that Duke was a deserving 6th seed because of their "difficult conference"

[wade moore]

Bump for all the people who said the CAA was overrated and that Duke was a deserving 6th seed because of their "difficult conference"

I heart RKG.

[CU Tiger]

I amintain that the ACC is still THE power conference this year.
And I maintain my dancing in the hall for Duke's demise.

If only not for that clock error(ehich clearly sent both teams off in opposite directions)....













We too could have lost to VCU:D

[molson]

I don't get how people can use individual tournament game results to try to validate or condemn the selection of the field. (And that goes for both sides of the argument in this thread).

The selection committee evaluates an entire season - when a 12 seeds upsets a 5, that doesn't mean their seedings should have been switched. It's called an upset.

[RedKingGold]

I don't get how people can use individual tournament game results to try to validate or condemn the selection of the field. (And that goes for both sides of the argument in this thread).

The selection committee evaluates an entire season - when a 12 seeds upsets a 5, that doesn't mean their seedings should have been switched. It's called an upset.

This whole snub thing is not something I take seriously. I'll agree that there were decent reasons to put Drexel/Syracuse in and leave Stanford/Arkansas out and vice versa.

I'm an admitted Big East homer who lives in Philadelphia and as great respect for teams from smaller conferences (A-10, CAA, Patriot, etc.)

[Easy Mac]

I amintain that the ACC is still THE power conference this year.
And I maintain my dancing in the hall for Duke's demise.

If only not for that clock error(ehich clearly sent both teams off in opposite directions)....













We too could have lost to VCU:D

Only if they made VCU a 5 seed.

[MrIllini]

I think Missouri State should've had Duke's place in the tourney. Would've fared just as well. :rolleyes:

[Wolfpack]

Congrats to VCU and the CAA. You realize you just took down the worst Duke team in a dozen years which finished 7th in the ACC. VCU, of course, was the best the CAA had to offer to do it and still only won by two.






OK. Now that my "ACC homer" obligation is met: well done! *clap* *clap* *clap* :D

I do support the ACC in the NCAAs, but two teams I clearly have no problems with losing are Duke and Carolina. I had to scrape my jaw off the floor when I saw that UNC was struggling with lil' ol' Eastern Kentucky at one point before suddenly regaining their senses. Would that have ranked up there with Virginia-Chaminade in terms of upsets of all time had it happened?

[Butter]

Would that have ranked up there with Virginia-Chaminade in terms of upsets of all time had it happened?

Considering Carolina was up 39-12 at one point, it would've been the biggest upset of all time, period.

[lordscarlet]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a 16 seed has never won? Sounds like a pretty big upset to me.

[molson]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a 16 seed has never won? Sounds like a pretty big upset to me.

But at least a 16 seed is division 1 - so I don't know if it would hold a candle to what Chaminade did.

[lordscarlet]

But at least a 16 seed is division 1 - so I don't know if it would hold a candle to what Chaminade did.

Sorry, not trying to say it's bigger than Chaminade, just a big upset.

[Pumpy Tudors]

A 16 seed has won in the NCAA tournament, and they did it on the 1 seed's home floor.

OK, so it happened in the women's tournament a few years ago, but maybe that's THE BIGGEST UPSET EVAR!!!

[MJ4H]

A 16 seed has won in the NCAA tournament, and they did it on the 1 seed's home floor.

OK, so it happened in the women's tournament a few years ago, but maybe that's THE BIGGEST UPSET EVAR!!!

I was actually there for that game in Palo Alto. Arkansas played Hawaii on that court right after that game and we got there (the band) early enough to watch both. That trip was more fun than any men's basketball trip I ever went on in the pep band in college. Got to stay out in San Francisco for the better part of two weeks after Arkansas won that mini-tournament and then went on to win the entire Region the following week and make it to the Final Four.

[MJ4H]

dola: by the way the 16 seed was Harvard and they won on Stanford's home court. Right before my very eyes! Then Arkansas beat Harvard (after beating Hawaii), moved on to play Kansas and then Duke to make the Final Four. OK I know THREADJACK but it was really fun.