soccer10k

I only had GW winning the first round so I'm not too miffed about this.

UGH! GW down 13-2 to Vandy right now.

A&M looking good now.

Holy smokes. Texas A&M only up 1 on Penn now. This is not good as I have them going to the Final Four.

Campbell again for Butler and they have a 9 point lead.

I did. Come on ODU! Me too. In fact, if ODU wins that, and the rest of the games stand as is, I'll be perfect through the first two batches of games... :D Same here, nothing to be excited about yet, but a lot better than last year so far when I threw my bracket out on the first weekend. (no joke, 3 of my 4 final four teams lost in the first weekend.) I was pretty good last year. My bracket didn't fall apart until the Sunday Elite 8 games. I had both UConn and Villanova going to the Final Four. Kansas hurt me early on though. But I was pleased since my bracket wasn't killed after the first weekend like it generally is.

Can we trade Mariotti to another paper in a different city so he can write crappy articles about other teams?

Washington State on a 13-0 run dating back to the first half. They're now up 35-28 on ORU.

Great play by WSU to end the half. WSU made a bucket with around 5 seconds left. ORU went to inbound the ball quickly and a WSU guy stole the ball and laid it in. WSU down 2 at half.

Love the jab at Dusty.

That's one thing you can count on CBS for: unbelievably dumb coverage choices and decisions to switch or not switch to other games. They really do a poor job. Then they switch over to the BC-TT game for about 10 seconds when BC was up 7 and the game was all but over. Now they've finally gone to the Maryland-Davidson game with just 1:12 left. Their coverage better improve when there isn't a local team playing.

CBS is really starting to piss me off. They aren't switching over to the Texas Tech-BC or Maryland-Davidson games even though the Stanford-Louisville game is over.

Is Macias available?

Why is it ridiculous? People are jumping to conclusions based on one game. Do you say a baseball hitter sucks because he goes 0-4 with 4 K's one day? Of course not. He had one bad day just like Stanford is having one bad game.

Hooray for small sample size and making a judgment on one game. if you don't think any of the teams I listed would have given Louisville a better game today you're the biggest homer ever Wait, people are complaining about Stanford at 18-12 and you want Iowa at 17-14? Brilliant.

Hooray for small sample size and making a judgment on one game. why does it piss you off so much that people are saying stanford didn't deserve a bid? Because they did deserve a bid. They had better wins and a better resume than other teams (Illinois and Arkansas). And, in this case, it's not just Stanford. It's people making a judgment based on one game and using that game to show why a team did or didn't deserve a bid. Like I said earlier, Drexel lost in the first round of the NIT and I hear people saying (not necessarily on NSBB) that the loss proves Drexel didn't deserve an NCAA bid. If Illinois wins their first round game, people (most likely on here) will say that it proves that Illinois deserved a bid to the tourney. Illinois and Arkansas both had higher RPIs and SOS'. Stanford was 18-12. 18-12. They were SIX games over .500. Their RPI was 65. You're not going to convince me that they belonged in the tournament. Arkansas was 7-9 in the SEC West. 7-9. You should not be eligible to receive an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament if you can't even finish .500 in your conference. As I said before, Illinois would have finished 7-9 had they played OSU and Wisconsin twice instead of two of a the bottom feeders twice. Best wins: Arkansas: Southern Illinois, Vanderbilt, WVU Illinois: Indiana (2), Michigan St., Missouri, Stanford: UCLA, Oregon, Washington State, USC, Virginia, Texas Tech

They were the last team revealed on the CBS selection show but I would think Illinois, Arkansas, and Old Dominion were all picked after Stanford.

Hooray for small sample size and making a judgment on one game. why does it piss you off so much that people are saying stanford didn't deserve a bid? Because they did deserve a bid. They had better wins and a better resume than other teams (Illinois and Arkansas). And, in this case, it's not just Stanford. It's people making a judgment based on one game and using that game to show why a team did or didn't deserve a bid. Like I said earlier, Drexel lost in the first round of the NIT and I hear people saying (not necessarily on NSBB) that the loss proves Drexel didn't deserve an NCAA bid. If Illinois wins their first round game, people (most likely on here) will say that it proves that Illinois deserved a bid to the tourney.

As for best picks, LSU beating Duke in the Sweet 16 and going to the Final 4 last year is my favorite in recent memory. Almost everybody had Duke going to the Final Four. Others from last year: -A&M over Syracuse in the first round -Wisconsin-Milwaukee over Oklahoma in the first round -#7 seeds Georgetown and Wichita State over #2 seeds OSU and Tennessee respectively to go to the Sweet 16 On the other hand, I did have Kansas going to the Final Four last year. #-o

Cuse was a 3 that year.

Hooray for small sample size and making a judgment on one game.

Stanford deserved to get in, they're just playing horrible right now. Just because a team plays poorly in the first game doesn't mean that team didn't deserve a berth. Conversely, just because a team wins their first round game or plays well doesn't mean they necessarily deserved a spot in the tournament. Same goes for the teams that were left out. Just because Drexel lost their first round NIT game doesn't mean that they didn't deserve to play in the NCAA tournament. Oh, and just to clarify, this only goes for the bubble teams. They were 18-12. They didn't deserve to get in. There's no point in arguing it anymore anyway. Maryland leads by one at the half. Arkansas didn't deserve to get in (7-9 in the SEC, please). Illinois didn't deserve to get in (9-7 in the Big 10 and they only played Wisconsin and OSU once each when if they would have played those teams twice and Minnesota and Northwestern once they would have gone 7-9). Stanford did deserve to get in (10-8 in Pac-10 playing every team twice). Stanford had wins over UCLA, Oregon, Washington State, and Arizona. What was Illinois' best win..Indiana? Please. And the committee agrees with me since Stanford was an 11 seed which means they weren't the last team in.

Stanford deserved to get in, they're just playing horrible right now. Just because a team plays poorly in the first game doesn't mean that team didn't deserve a berth. Conversely, just because a team wins their first round game or plays well doesn't mean they necessarily deserved a spot in the tournament. Same goes for the teams that were left out. Just because Drexel lost their first round NIT game doesn't mean that they didn't deserve to play in the NCAA tournament. Oh, and just to clarify, this only goes for the bubble teams.

Stanford getting hammered by Louisville right now.

You're going to be so sad when my bracket becomes the "Perfect Bracket" and KU gets dropped by Kentucky in the 2nd round. :D Nine quintillion to one begs to differ. :D