Running 2010 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament thread

I didn't say YOU said that -- someone else said that Cousins and Wall and company will have the NBA on their mind while the Cornell kids will be thinking about winning a championship because they are "a TEAM and not a bunch of rented stars" - I responded to your post about missing free throws along with ALL of the other tired cliches about Kentucky's players and team that are thrown around here.

Stop being so fucking defensive.

 

I'll stop being defensive when you stop being an argumentative jackass who feels the need to take down everyone instead of just arguing the points they make.

 

I am not trying to take down anybody -- I'm just tired of people who don't have a fucking clue about basketball making stupid comments that make it seem as if they don't even watch the fucking games.

I'm not being argumentative, but I'm not going to allow this love affair with mid-majors go on without at least trying to submit a dose of reality into the discussion.

 

Yeah but taking a look at how the two teams actually match up on the floor is meaningless, Temple is ranked higher, that is all that matters..... :

 

I agree with you -- experience, particularly when you have a team like Cornell who has what, four or five guys who have played together for three years and have been in NCAA Tournaments and whatnot, can be a great neutralizer of talent.

But I disagree that means that Kentucky can't win a close game against Cornell.

 

Temple WAS favored, but there was a marked line-move towards Cornell
in the pregame market. Marketmakers got caught, and were burned on the game, since they simply pitched Temple too high. No matter what they knew, the marketmakers felt they couldn't make Cornell the favorite at the open -- though it would have been a very good idea, from the perspective of the books.

 

Memphis? Who? What? A paragon of virtue, I tell you! :

No one can defend Calipari with a straight face. It's like listening to Rove.

 

A forbidden subject around here.....

 

Fran Dunphy is a terrible tournament coach. That still isn't enough to make it a favorable matchup.

I feel like Cornell and Northern Iowa with their 28 wins each deserved better seeds. Its obvious St. Marys also deserved a better seed.

It's obvious Georgetown, Wake Forest, Texas and some others should have had higher seeds.

 

They would have made a killing. Everyone would have flocked to Temple and when they didn't cover Vegas would have been able to afford .99 cent buffetts again.

 

It is if Temple doesn't have the size, either inside or on the perimeter to match up with Cornell.

It is if Temple isn't as good offensively as Cornell nor does Temple have as many weapons as Cornell.

It is if the one area that Temple, as good as it has been defensively, is vulnerable is giving up 3-pointers, something Cornell is very good at.

It is if defensive-minded, offensively-challenged teams historically don't fare very well in the NCAA Tournament (see Pitt and Wisconsin, two teams with a zillion regular season wins since 2000 and what, one, two trips to the Elite Eight between them, as exhibit A of this), particularly against teams who can legitimately score from multiple positions.

If you look at the matchup on paper there wasn't a one more tailor-made for Cornell among the five seeds than Temple.

Oh but I forgot, Temple was ranked in the top 15 of the AP.......