Running 2010 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament thread

So we should give them major props for narrowly beating a mediocre-at-best MSU team (a team that just lost on its own floor to UNC, to show just how crappy they are). I'm not saying they will fold.

I'm saying that a lack of good free shooters could very well be a downfall, the way it was for Memphis against Kansas. Memphis wins that game if they make their free throws late in the game.

 

As dreunc pointed out the little things are what get you beat this late in the year. Missed free throws, poor ballhandling, missed screens, etc. Cornell doesn't make those mistakes.

I mentioned this on another thread but what Cornell and UNI are doing shows you what happens when guys stay together for 3-4 years. That type of team cohesiveness and experience can overcome a talent gap in a lot of cases.

Calipari is not a good bench coach IMO but I think this UK team has enough talent to overcome that. It is certainly better than his Memphis team that, according to the NCAA, didn't play in the championship game two years ago.

 

If you look at the whole season as a tournament of sorts, Kentucky's road has been plenty hard. I don't think Zag is saying that Cornell had an easy road as compared to a No. 1 seed, which would be ludicrous, but rather "easy" compared to what a 12 seed should face.

I don't necessarily agree. I don't have research in front of me, but it seems like most 12 or 13's or any lower seeds that get through have the dumb luck of facing each other in the second round.

That being said, I don't think it's fair to compare Cornell's route to the Sweet 16 to Kentucky's. Kentucky's should be easier, because Kentucky's season was much harder.

 

And both UNI and Cornell have good, seven-foot centers who can handle, for one game at least, any center in the country.

These teams each have a damn good chance of winning this weekend. I would give Cornell a 25% chance of winning and UNI even money.

 

The jackassery of this post shows two things - you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to basketball and you haven't figured out that using 2,500,678,978 words in a post doesn't make it any less idiotic nor does it make you any more sport.

Please show me genius where I said Kentucky or anyone else for that fucking matter had a tougher road to the Sweet 16 than Cornell.

You can't because I didn't because my point - which no surprise went over your head (again, the three concussions explain a lot) -- had nothing to do with comparing the road of Cornell to other teams but rather it had everything to do with taking a look at an important factor in why Cornell has advanced like it has.

Never once but I'll slow down because you are every bit of a blockhead and can't ever admit when you are talking out of your ass -- have I said that -- What I did say, however, is that a big part of Cornell's story is that they got TWO FAVORABLE MATCHUPS to get to the Sweet 16.

In other words, two teams that they really matched up well with and that was as big of a reason that they have made this run.

I know, it is a hard concept for you because you'd rather spout of some ignorant idiocy about AP rankings -- as if generic team X ranked 12 and generic team Y ranked 15 is the same thing as taking a look at who those teams are, what their strengths and weaknesses are and matching them up with Cornell.

I know that takes some intelligence and knowledge of the actual game of basketball and you have neither, but try to keep up.

And as for legitimate Final Four contenders - yes, every year there are only about six to eight of them and if you had any clue about what it takes to win big in the NCAA Tournament - i.e. a couple of legitimate NBA players - you'd understand this - it is why George Mason and Penn are the wet dreams of mid-major fans because they are EXTREME EXCEPTIONS (and that is being generous).

Now, can upsets happen yes, they can and do, but the bottom line is if you look at the history of the NCAA Tournament and the Final Four, there are some very real truths about what it takes to get there.

And the fact that you are still trying to make an argument that both Temple and Wisconsin were legitimate final four contenders confirms that you ARE silly, not too mention clueless.

And once again - you prove yourself to be talking out of your ass and both sides of tyour mouth as just a few posts ago you admit that Cornell was a bad matchup for Temple. So which was it?

Oh that is right, I forgot, Temple was ranked No. 12 so matchups don't matter.....

 

Nobody is comparing Kentucky's route to the Sweet 16 to Cornells -- oh wait, one person is because he got his ass shown to him quickly and now is falling into his usual routine of --let's muddy the waters and try to change the arguments by throwing 3,456,768,699 word posts of jackassery out there and hope nobody notices.

 

Temple's best big man is 6-9. Cornell's is 7-0.

Temple's starters grabbed 11 rebounds. Cornell's grabbed 19 and Foote did not have a foul called on him the entire game.

I know a lot of you get pissed when I preach size, but in basketball, when one team has a seven-footer and your best guy is three inches shorter, that is a bitch to overcome.

 

No, I'm saying some of you should stop making declarative statements about Kentucky's inability to win close games and/or the fact that their players don't care as much about winning as players from other teams because there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

 

And for the record, in the pool I am involved in -- more people picked Cornell over Temple in the first round than they other way around.

By a lot.

So it has nothing to do with hind sight.

Northern Iowa getting to the Sweet 16 is a shock, they didn't match up well at all with Kansas on paper and needed the Jayhawks to play at less than their A game to win.

Cornell, however, is not a shock, not even a little because, again, basketball is almost always about MATCHUPS, not AP rankings, MATCHUPS.

And for that matter, Washington, who is far more of a legitimate Final Four team looking at their talent than either Temple or Wisconsin, being int he Sweet 16 is not a shock either.

 

I never said once that they don't care as much. In fact, I never even came close to implying it. I don't know where you're getting that from, and I would rather you stop putting words in my mouth. What I'm saying is that poor free throw shooting could very well be a downfall in a tight game.