How is you bracket?


C

C.O.G.

Go PB!!
<TABLE class=tborder id=post1656007 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px"><TABLE cellSpacing=6 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD noWrap>

philharmonic
user_offline.gif
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_1656007", true); </SCRIPT>
Living History!!!
</TD><TD width="100%"> </TD><TD vAlign=top noWrap>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- / user info --></TD></TR><TR><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_1656007><!-- message, attachments, sig --><!-- icon and title -->
icon1.gif
Re: Craziest NCAA Tourney 1st Round ever!
<HR style="COLOR: #000080; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000080" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->G-Town, The Irish and Texas ruiened my bracket!!!

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Of those, only Georgetown let me down. I do not know how to compare overall how I am doing compared to others. I am talking about the illegal brackets I bought at work.
 



As it looks now, Ohio State has a great shot at going to the Final Four. Boy, everyone said Duke was going to be the first No. 1 seed to fall. Guess that was a miscalculation.
 
Last edited:
Down Goes Kansas

:lol::lol::clap::clap::clap:

Them boys from Northern Iowa pudding rate is about to sky rocket.
 



1. My bracket's so messed up its not even a good joke.

2. As far as I'm concerned, this year's tourney is just proof that the NCAA can expand to 96, 128, or just let them all in. There is enough parity to allow it.

3. The saving grace for me would be if somebody knocks off Kentucky.

4. The only thing I know for sure is that my overall pick, Kansas, won't win it.

5. I'm just going to flip a coin when bracket picking from now on out.

6. If somebody picked all 63 or 64 winners this year, they must have been Flash-Forwarded for three weeks.

Regards.
 
Last edited:
UNI was ranked in the top 25 UNI so I knew they had a chance. They just played their game. The swac should be on the same level as the mid-majors but that's another thread.
 
2. As far as I'm concerned, this year's tourney is just proof that the NCAA can expand to 96, 128, or just let them all in. There is enough parity to allow it.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Although anyone can win at any time, those other teams had several chances in the regular season to win, then another chance in thier conference tournament. Let them go to the NIT, where they can make a run and have a real chance to win it. I enjoy those games too.
 
PsychoJag said:
No. It only shows that other teams have upped their game and you can't expect the usual suspects to win. The playing field is level.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of it has to do with the depth of traditional powers. If guys stayed 3-4 years in college, all these "upsets" wouldn't happen as frequently.

I was thinking the other day that it would have been possible to see Derrick Rose, Tyreke Evans and John Wall all at Memphis. Kevin Durant would still be at Texas in with Greg Oden playing with Evan Turner at Ohio State.

All the No. 1 seeds this year had tremendous flaws. As I said the other day, I would not be shocked if multiple No.1 seeds failed to make the Elite Eight.

When you had Georgetown, New Mexico, Temple and Vanderbilt seeded as high as they were, it showed the lack of depth in the field this year.

Aside from Kansas and Villanova losing none of the other so-called upsets were a surprise to me at all.
 
Lewis said:
I disagree. Although anyone can win at any time, those other teams had several chances in the regular season to win, then another chance in thier conference tournament. Let them go to the NIT, where they can make a run and have a real chance to win it. I enjoy those games too.
Click to expand...

You are right. I don't want to see 96 or 128 teams. That is bad basketball right there. You had Illinois crying to get into the tournament and they had 14 losses. The St. Marys, Cornells, Northern Iowas and Ohios don't come from really deep conferences in terms of talent. Winthrop was horrible at basketball.

As much as I love that college basketball is a little bit more fairer to college football, I don't want to see a bunch of average teams in the NCAA Tournament.
 
kendrick said:
I think a lot of it has to do with the depth of traditional powers. If guys stayed 3-4 years in college, all these "upsets" wouldn't happen as frequently.

I was thinking the other day that it would have been possible to see Derrick Rose, Tyreke Evans and John Wall all at Memphis. Kevin Durant would still be at Texas in with Greg Oden playing with Evan Turner at Ohio State.

All the No. 1 seeds this year had tremendous flaws. As I said the other day, I would not be shocked if multiple No.1 seeds failed to make the Elite Eight.

When you had Georgetown, New Mexico, Temple and Vanderbilt seeded as high as they were, it showed the lack of depth in the field this year.

Aside from Kansas and Villanova losing none of the other so-called upsets were a surprise to me at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah. IMO College Basketball should do like Football and require players to stay 3 years.

I prefer this year's tourney because I'm sick of seeing the same handful of teams win every year.
 
Lewis said:
I disagree. Although anyone can win at any time, those other teams had several chances in the regular season to win, then another chance in thier conference tournament. Let them go to the NIT, where they can make a run and have a real chance to win it. I enjoy those games too.
Click to expand...

I don't think that there is any stopping it, Lewis. Most of those other teams don't really want to go to the NIT, anyway. They will just see this tournament as providing proof that anybody can beat anybody. Additionally, the T.V. contract is coming to an end, with an opt out clause for the NCAA in effect soon for the final three years. Money will talk and drive that decision more than anything else. They might not let them all in, but my money's on it will expand and the NIT will probably go away.

Regards.
 
PsychoJag said:
Yeah. IMO College Basketball should do like Football and require players to stay 3 years.

I prefer this year's tourney because I'm sick of seeing the same handful of teams win every year.
Click to expand...

I understand why football players have to stay in college three years due to the physical nature of the sport. You can't expect an 18 or 19-year-old kid to be physically and mentally ready to play in the NFL. An 18 or 19-year-old basketball player can make a significant contribution to an NBA team.

But if college basketball players had to stay 3 years, Kansas, Villanova and Georgetown more than likely don't lose and you will see traditional powers win all the time, which has happened since the creation of the tournament.

I know right now we are caught up in what Northern Iowa did, but once the Final Four comes around more than likely a traditional power is going to be holding up the championship trophy again.

Sure, the George Masons of the world will make a run every once in a while. However, the lowest seed to win the NCAA Tournament was a No. 8 seed. That was nearly 30 years ago.

I swear as much as we say we love winners in this country, we sure to love to celebrate the one-hit wonders when it comes to the NCAA Tournament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top