Showing posts with label College Basketball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label College Basketball. Show all posts
Tom Izzo v. Bruce Weber FT Shooting Contest
Before the Illini upset #5 ranked Michigan St, Bruce Weber challenged Tom Izzo to a free throw shooting contest in an effort to raise money for Coaches vs Cancer. To quote Tom Izzo
Just as predicted, Izzo won the challenge 9 to 7, and both coaches pledged to donate $20k for cancer research. Kudos to them both. Maybe i'll put up a video of me draining it from the line one day. I'll challenge Izzo for his title any day
"It's something Bruce and I both believe in and this is a great way to let people know how much the cause matters to us."They believe in fighting cancer...as opposed to all those other Big 10 coaches who are totally against it. I love unorganized events like these that put athletes outside their comfort zone. Like the bowling match today prior to the Super Bowl between Chris Paul and LaMar Woodley(Chris Paul won). I pegged the contests as a 9 to 7(out of 10) victory for Tom Izzo, who is notorious for dominating the charity stripe. Luckily we have video evidence in HD
Just as predicted, Izzo won the challenge 9 to 7, and both coaches pledged to donate $20k for cancer research. Kudos to them both. Maybe i'll put up a video of me draining it from the line one day. I'll challenge Izzo for his title any day
Experts in College Basketball
Every year we here people telling us how to figure out our brackets. During this time of year, there's nothing really big happening in sports (But Sexy Rexy, what about the WBC? 1) That just recently started and it's not every year. 2) Like I said nothing really BIG happening) so ESPN is forced to talk about March Madness. Every single person and their mother is telling us who to pick. This year, the President weighed in on the issue. And every year people are wrong. NCAA places teams unnecessarily too high and unnecessarily too low, the average fan doesn't know too much about any real mid-major teams, and the single elimination format all are reasons that people fill out their bracket wrong and end up ripping it up after the first three days.
Now ESPN sounds like they can have some real nice analysis here. I heard guys like Digger Phelps explain why teams will win based on certain player match ups and certain defenses teams are prone too/ teams can execute. For example, Digger helped me to know that LSU is a good match up for UNC because of the defense LSU players can execute and the lack of defense by UNC (Sure, UNC beat LSU by 14, but who cares about outcomes, right?). However, no matter what, upsets are bound to happen.
But sometimes, as the analysts loves to do, ESPN makes some mistakes. Here's something my brother pointed out to me:
"Bob Knight thinks part of Memphis' problem is that it played mediocre teams to finish the season. Bob feels that this is the best thing that could have happened to the Tigers."
What? Is it a problem or not? I'm confused. Plus, my favorite thing about the quote is that when Bob Knight THINKS, Memphis is in trouble. But when Bob Knight FEELS, everything's okay for Memphis. The moral according to ESPN? Don't think, just feel. (The above sarcasm is also from my bro)
Now the Final Four is different. You have to win four games to get there and the best teams, the vast majority of the time, tend to make it to the Final Four. In fact, as this site always loves, you can create statistical analysis to determine the Final Four, The Championship Game, and the Winner of it all. A Georgia Tech professor actually created a formula to determine The Final Four and above
Thus formula over the past few years have proven to be extremely accurate. But again, this doesn't help for the four earlier round where many who can create a points edge on the people in your pool
I understand why ESPN has so much coverage dedicated to March Madness. They have to. They're a 24/7 sports news station. They also have to have analysis and predictions. But what I think is important here, is that you really don't listen to those predictions. There's so many conflicting viewpoints between analysts and the fact it you can;t use any logic or reason to say who's gonna win, at least in the first few rounds. So if you're bracket is still competitive and you enjoy college basketball, have fun for the next few weeks or so. But as for me, I'm going to tune out ESPN and focus all of new attention on fantasy baseball drafting. Only one more week baby!
Now ESPN sounds like they can have some real nice analysis here. I heard guys like Digger Phelps explain why teams will win based on certain player match ups and certain defenses teams are prone too/ teams can execute. For example, Digger helped me to know that LSU is a good match up for UNC because of the defense LSU players can execute and the lack of defense by UNC (Sure, UNC beat LSU by 14, but who cares about outcomes, right?). However, no matter what, upsets are bound to happen.
But sometimes, as the analysts loves to do, ESPN makes some mistakes. Here's something my brother pointed out to me:
"Bob Knight thinks part of Memphis' problem is that it played mediocre teams to finish the season. Bob feels that this is the best thing that could have happened to the Tigers."
What? Is it a problem or not? I'm confused. Plus, my favorite thing about the quote is that when Bob Knight THINKS, Memphis is in trouble. But when Bob Knight FEELS, everything's okay for Memphis. The moral according to ESPN? Don't think, just feel. (The above sarcasm is also from my bro)
Now the Final Four is different. You have to win four games to get there and the best teams, the vast majority of the time, tend to make it to the Final Four. In fact, as this site always loves, you can create statistical analysis to determine the Final Four, The Championship Game, and the Winner of it all. A Georgia Tech professor actually created a formula to determine The Final Four and above
Thus formula over the past few years have proven to be extremely accurate. But again, this doesn't help for the four earlier round where many who can create a points edge on the people in your pool
I understand why ESPN has so much coverage dedicated to March Madness. They have to. They're a 24/7 sports news station. They also have to have analysis and predictions. But what I think is important here, is that you really don't listen to those predictions. There's so many conflicting viewpoints between analysts and the fact it you can;t use any logic or reason to say who's gonna win, at least in the first few rounds. So if you're bracket is still competitive and you enjoy college basketball, have fun for the next few weeks or so. But as for me, I'm going to tune out ESPN and focus all of new attention on fantasy baseball drafting. Only one more week baby!
Why I Hate College Basketball, Part II: Conference Tournaments
While sure I did not write Part I, I feel there's another aspect of college basketball that sucks that wasn't mentioned before, conference tournaments.
In every other sport, how a team does in the regular season determines the playoffs seeding. Not in college basketball. In the college game, it's not only the regular season but also "a pre playoffs" or the conference tourny that determines March Madness seeding (and speaking of March Madness, can we please change the title of that considering most of the tournament now takes place in April). See, after your regular season, all the teams in your conference play each other. The winner of this tournament gets an automatic bid to the Big Dance. So, if your team sucks and even has a losing record, you still have the opportunity to go Dancing (let's see how many "Cinderella" references I can make in this post, so far I'm at 2. Does anyone remember Illinois last year? They SUCKED with a capital "S" yet they still had the opportunity to be a low seed Cinderella (3) team because they made it to the Big Ten finals. Now luckily (well not for me being a fan but luckily from an objective position) Illinois lost to Wisconsin (who was #1 in the Big Ten), but Illinois never should have had the opportunity to go in the first place.
Now I understand the nature of playoffs is reduced to luck, and especially in college basketball where the Big Dance (4) is single elimination and where anything can happen, but teams for the most part earned the right to be given a chance. If you play hard and play well throughout an entire season, you should have the opportunity to make the playoffs. But if you get lucky and just so happens to win three or four games, what makes you so good to go Dancing (5)?
Look at teams like Cleveland St who beat 17th overall ranked Butler. Does winning one lucky game against a ranked opponent means who DESERVE to be a part of the 64(5) teams. No. Butler, who beat opponents all year long deserved to and should have been the winner of Horizon conference, but instead it's Cleveland St. Now Butler is going to be in the tourny, but now Horizon conference will have two teams going instead of one. This means that teams on "the bubble" is now eliminated. There are a handful of teams that played pretty well to deserve to go Dancing (6) but now can't because of sheer luck by teams like Cleveland St. The winner of these conference games weakens the overall quality of the bracket tournament because they force more deserving teams out.
Now, I'm not advocated against automatic bids, to the contrary. I like automatic bids, just not from conference tournament play. I think the automatic bid though should come from regular season play and not tournament play. That way, Butler would automatically go and teams like Cleveland St., who had the opportunity all season long to win the Horizon conference, don't get to go.
Now one argument I heard against this was that people love Cinderella (7) teams. Fans love teams like George Mason, a low seed that everyone counted out yet plays well, and these conference games not only allow fans to watch Cinderella's (8)to emerge like Cleveland St but also allows more of these types of team to play in the Big Dance (9). Here's the thing, 1) how many people truly watched all these minor conferences like the Horizon tournament? I can't imagine very many except for fans of the particular schools and 2) Do people honestly think upsets won't occur if there isn't conference tournaments? I would argue that upsets would occur more frequently because more quality teams (teams that have proven themselves over the course of an entire season) would play over teams that just got lucky within 3-4 games. I guarantee you major upsets will occur and teams like George Mason will happen without conference tournaments.
Now I understand why this happens. The same reason college football doesn't implement a playoff- money. Conferences make a lot of money of these tournaments. And if I was the commissioner of a conference like the Horizon league, I would be happy that two if my teams were guaranteed to Go Dancing (9) instead of just one. However, I, as a below average fan, would love to do away with the conference tournaments. Plus, now March Madness could actually be played in the month of March!
Also, total Cinderella references: 9. How many can you spot while watching ESPN? Make a drinking game out of it!
___________________________________________________________
Just an update. the Big Ten finals will be Purdue versus Ohio State. What if Ohio State wins? Are they the best team in the Big Ten? No. Do they automatically deserve to go to the Tournament? NO. Now Purdue, a team guaranteed to make the tourny, could end up winning and then this won't be a problem. But seriously, examples like this happen all time and this just helps strengthen my point.
In every other sport, how a team does in the regular season determines the playoffs seeding. Not in college basketball. In the college game, it's not only the regular season but also "a pre playoffs" or the conference tourny that determines March Madness seeding (and speaking of March Madness, can we please change the title of that considering most of the tournament now takes place in April). See, after your regular season, all the teams in your conference play each other. The winner of this tournament gets an automatic bid to the Big Dance. So, if your team sucks and even has a losing record, you still have the opportunity to go Dancing (let's see how many "Cinderella" references I can make in this post, so far I'm at 2. Does anyone remember Illinois last year? They SUCKED with a capital "S" yet they still had the opportunity to be a low seed Cinderella (3) team because they made it to the Big Ten finals. Now luckily (well not for me being a fan but luckily from an objective position) Illinois lost to Wisconsin (who was #1 in the Big Ten), but Illinois never should have had the opportunity to go in the first place.
Now I understand the nature of playoffs is reduced to luck, and especially in college basketball where the Big Dance (4) is single elimination and where anything can happen, but teams for the most part earned the right to be given a chance. If you play hard and play well throughout an entire season, you should have the opportunity to make the playoffs. But if you get lucky and just so happens to win three or four games, what makes you so good to go Dancing (5)?
Look at teams like Cleveland St who beat 17th overall ranked Butler. Does winning one lucky game against a ranked opponent means who DESERVE to be a part of the 64(5) teams. No. Butler, who beat opponents all year long deserved to and should have been the winner of Horizon conference, but instead it's Cleveland St. Now Butler is going to be in the tourny, but now Horizon conference will have two teams going instead of one. This means that teams on "the bubble" is now eliminated. There are a handful of teams that played pretty well to deserve to go Dancing (6) but now can't because of sheer luck by teams like Cleveland St. The winner of these conference games weakens the overall quality of the bracket tournament because they force more deserving teams out.
Now, I'm not advocated against automatic bids, to the contrary. I like automatic bids, just not from conference tournament play. I think the automatic bid though should come from regular season play and not tournament play. That way, Butler would automatically go and teams like Cleveland St., who had the opportunity all season long to win the Horizon conference, don't get to go.
Now one argument I heard against this was that people love Cinderella (7) teams. Fans love teams like George Mason, a low seed that everyone counted out yet plays well, and these conference games not only allow fans to watch Cinderella's (8)to emerge like Cleveland St but also allows more of these types of team to play in the Big Dance (9). Here's the thing, 1) how many people truly watched all these minor conferences like the Horizon tournament? I can't imagine very many except for fans of the particular schools and 2) Do people honestly think upsets won't occur if there isn't conference tournaments? I would argue that upsets would occur more frequently because more quality teams (teams that have proven themselves over the course of an entire season) would play over teams that just got lucky within 3-4 games. I guarantee you major upsets will occur and teams like George Mason will happen without conference tournaments.
Now I understand why this happens. The same reason college football doesn't implement a playoff- money. Conferences make a lot of money of these tournaments. And if I was the commissioner of a conference like the Horizon league, I would be happy that two if my teams were guaranteed to Go Dancing (9) instead of just one. However, I, as a below average fan, would love to do away with the conference tournaments. Plus, now March Madness could actually be played in the month of March!
Also, total Cinderella references: 9. How many can you spot while watching ESPN? Make a drinking game out of it!
___________________________________________________________
Just an update. the Big Ten finals will be Purdue versus Ohio State. What if Ohio State wins? Are they the best team in the Big Ten? No. Do they automatically deserve to go to the Tournament? NO. Now Purdue, a team guaranteed to make the tourny, could end up winning and then this won't be a problem. But seriously, examples like this happen all time and this just helps strengthen my point.
