The most wonderful time of the year - NCAA TOURNEY BABY!
 

What a great time of year. Why, would you ask, do I consider this the greatest sporting event known to man?

The first three games of the day: an overtime game with a 15 (Robert Morris) almost beating a 2 (Villanova), a double overtime game (BYU over Florida), and a 1 point upset with Old Dominion over Notre Dame.

Love. The. Tournament.

*whew*

Nearly lost a 1/4 of my bracket on that one.....

I am different than the normal person, I suppose, in that no matter who I have selected on my bracket I cheer for the upsets. I have Nova (eventually losing to Duke in the regional finals, I believe - don't have my bracket with me), but would have loved to see Robert morris beat them.

Scaeagles' comments accord with an observation I heard on sports talk radio the other day: that the NCAA tourney is the only major sporting championship that gets less interesting as it progresses.

It's the time of year when I hear way too much about the local small college and how they will be a spoiler. I hope they are crushed by Purdue.

:blank stare:

Basketball.

It's like Hockey except

The nets are up in air
The 'puck' is bigger
Wood for ice
Sneakers for skates

Which is amazing since it doesn't start out all that interesting. For all of the excitement about possible upsets, in 25 years, a #16 has never beaten a #1. That's 100 games. Only 11 times has the spread been <10 points. Madness!

Murray State over Vandy at the BUZZER! Another amazing game! All four games thus far have been amazing!

And I do agree, Strangler....the best part of this tournament is the first four days.

You forgot:
Far fewer fights

And goaltending is illegal.

Watching some of these games I'd say that's more a like guideline than an actual rule.

No Survivor.

I hope you're happy Leo.

I am happy....but the tourney is the ultimate game of Survivor! One and done! GET OFF THE ISLAND, BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

I always love seeing Georgetown lose.

What an amazing first day. While it was wonderful to watch and track, I must make the assumption that today cannot come close to matching how amazing the first day was.

Lehigh has a player named Buchberger. I kept hearing them say it as Buttberger and thought it was funny in my 13 year old juvenile sense of humor sort of way.

Go Boilers.

So pirates are playing? Is there rum?

Want to know what I heard - and giggled about - every time the announcers mentioned Chism from Tennessee?

28/32 after the first round. One of my best starts ever.

bracket here

Losing Georgetown hurts, but my Final Four is so whack, if it hits nobdy else in contention will have it.

My start SUCKS! One of my worst ever (24/32), but that's OK - I'll lose every flippin game gladly if the games can stay as entertaining....and speaking of that, VILLANOVA LOSES TO ST. MARYS! What an incredible game.

One reason I find myself cheering for the mid majors is that their style of basketball fits in more with the purist that I am. So many of the big schools have guys that are just better athletes that most of their game is isolation where the coach wants his great athlets to create. Mid majors usually dont have the completely dominant athletes and have to play team ball. Some of the offensive sets I see Ohio or St. Marys or Cornell run are just beautiful.

Villanova?

Oh Oh. I had them all the way to the final four.

Basketball is a stupid game.

You are dead to me.

Moonliners death to me aside, there was some incredible basketball last night. Love to see Syracuse lose and that was a great game, and the double overtime thriller of Xavier and Kansas State was amazing. My kids were in bed so I couldn't scream at all the amazing shots and plays....what a game.

As much as I found myself rooting for Xavier, that missed call when K-State tried to foul at the end of regulation was bad. The ref has got to know that the team up by three will probably foul to prevent the other team from getting a three-point shot off.

Yeah, that was pretty awful. But hats off to the kid who hit all three (granted, he shoots over 85%, but that's pressure). Also hats off to the other kid (Crawford?) who has seemingly unlimited range.

As a coach, though, I never want officials considering what the strategy of a team might be and have calls ready based on that. While impractical, they should be emotionless and be completely unaware of the score or situaiton.

I went and checked. Turns out my alma mater did make the tournament and they even won two games. But they're out now so I can continue not being aware of it.

I do like how looking at an NCAA Tournament bracket does feel like trying to follow cricket commentary. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel about AARP beating NAMBLA by 23. Oops, that was ARPB beating WIN (now that is a name just begging for an ironic ass kicking) by 17.

My father in law is a member of the North American Mortgage Brokers Association. He wears shirts that have large letters of NAMBA. I ALWAYS misread it and do a double take.

As a coach, I'd let the officials know we are going to foul in that situation.

Which brings up the question - why do they even bother having an "intentional foul" rule on the books anymore?

That is an interesting question. It should be reworded as a foul made without effort to make a play on the ball.

Huh. Apparently I was overly hasty in making that assessment.

If Baylor wins one more game and Kentucky takes it all then Basketball will be a very sweet game after all.


(Yes, unlike Scaeagles it's all about the brackets for me, at least at this point where all the schools I have any tie to are long gone.)

GO BUTLER!

Unlike Moonliner who is all about the bracket, I was in a great spot in my pool (80 entries, I was in 5th) and if K State won today and Kentucky didn't win it all I was going to win. However, I found myself cheering for Butler.

What a game.

*sigh*

Time to start scouting talent and making notes for next years brackets.

One of the podcasts I listen to had something like 18 experts on to give their picks before the tournament. They were all pretty much unanimous that Kansas would win and Duke would be the first #1 out of the tournament.

Good to know that sports experts are just as bad as financial experts.

I get really mad when I listen to some of the sports guys. Seth Davis on CBS doesn't get it. When Syracuse lost, he said "this just makes it all the easier for Kansas State to make the final four". He has no respect for the mid majors and thinks when one knocks off a power that it only means it's easier for other powers. Ticks me off. Give the kids some props.

But i have good news for my pool. I'm in an 80 person pool, and if Duke makes the championship game and loses (doesn't matter to who), I win! Guess everyone else is as hosed as I am.

That Duke-Baylor game was something. Like two heavyweights slugging it out in the middle of the ring.

I'm thinking, maybe, James Tillis & Gerrie Coetzee.

Can the minor league basketball championships truly be won by a bunch of white kids shooting threes underhanded from half-court?

Last second buzz-beater puts Stanford in women's Final Four. Woot!

I saw that.

However, all the wonen's tournament is this year is a contest on 1 side of the bracket to determine who gets to be anihilated by UConn.

We'll see about that.

I realize those be fightin' words to you, but in all honesty, do you really believe anyone can beat UConn?

I'll do it myself. Hell, I'll spot 'em an H.

96 teams? 96 teams!? Laaaame.

I agree - completely lame.

The way I see this they are trying to accomplish a couple things.

First, they don't want to have to make the tough decisions as far as leaving out a Rhode Island or a Florida and making those controversial decisions.

Secondly, they want ticket revenue. The money this event takes in in mind boggling. In 1990, I went to the first and second round games in Tuscon at the University of Arizona, and the price was $45 for decent seats. Same set of tix now (well, last time I checked was a coupleyears ago) was over $200.

Also, this allows those they deem as the top 32 to essentially get a first round bye and forces the mid majors to play an extra game, most likely on the Monday or Tuesday before the first game, giving their coaching staff less time to focus on how to beat the higher seeds.

I hate everything about the idea of increasing the size of the tournament. Everything. Well, I don't begrudge them their revenue, but i still hate it.

Except that all it does is shift that decision, it doesn't eliminate it. There is still a dividing line and controversial decisions will still have to be made. I suppose the schools left out will be incrementally smaller and less talented than before, but I don't see it as being any less of an issue.

And I suppose, taking the more positive spin, it will help more, smaller, schools get in on some of that revenue

But this isn't even a problem worth the effort of solving. I was looking and since the '85 expansion, only 7 teams ranked lower than 5th have even made it to the Final Four. Admittedly, IF they do make it to the Final Four, they then have pretty good odds. Of those 7, 4 made it to the championship game, and 2 of those won. And the lowest seed to have won the championship was a #8. It's hardly like major teams have been consistently edged out by mids.

They are in the selection process, though, because of the requirement of each conference champion getting a spot (thus the expansion to 65 teams with the play in game when a new conference was formed a few years ago - didn't want to eliminate an at large bid). At least that's how many perceive it, especially those who look at the mid majors as teams that don't belong in the tournament, and there are many who look at it that way.

If the first round of 64 teams is so very exciting (as it seemed to be when this thread was started) even though it is known that about 40 of them have essentially zero chance of winning it all it seems to me another round with even more unworthy teams wouldn't hurt the enjoyment much.

Though for the major conferences I assume this will so expand the opportunities to get into the tournament that it will significantly reduce even further the value of the conference championship tournaments.

I'm not a fan of college basketball (or even professional basketball) so it is moot to me, but since 96 teams only brings post-seasons hopes (27.7% of all possible) onto a parity with the stingier major professional sports leagues (NFL: 25%, MLB: 26.7%; NBA: 53.3%; NHL: 53.3%; MLS: 50%) and we like to pretend that college sports are more amateur and egalitarian than the dirty world of big money professional athletics it seems like a reasonable move to me. But if one doesn't like it, can't one just ignore the first round and start watching when it is again down to 64 teams just as before (and people who hated the expansion to 64 teams can wait until it is 32 to care).

I think we've found Scaeagles' Achilles heel of victimology.

What an incredible game, what an incredible tournament. Would have loved for Butler to have won it, but Krzyzewski is a classy guy, who is always gracious in victory (and defeat).

That last shot was really, really, close.

I have to say, I probably enjoyed the game more knowing my brackets were long since dead.

Brackets....sigh. My one money poll that I was informed I was going to win should Duke win their semi final....I was deceived. Unintentionally. But I still took second, meaning I win 30% of the pot. Not too bad.

Sadly, in my non money pool amongst my family members, my 8 year old daughter has bragging rights as the only one who took Duke. Sigh.

So...Steph....odds on UConn-Stanford? I say UConn by 16.

Well, I was off by 10 - Stanford made a game of it.

Isn't that their first game in their winning streak that they won by only single digits?

I do believe it is.

Damn.