Houston, like so many clubs we have seen, shoots abysmally from 3. Some seriously fine Brick Masonry being exhibited by excellent Craftsmen this tournament.
Ha! The Nova/Houston game was certainly ugly, but it's also a couple of very tough defenses that contest everything. There's also been some really good offensive basketball in some of the games. These remaining teams are good for sure, but a bunch of really good teams have been eliminated. That's true in every tourney, but it seems like this year that the field was really raw. As for the champ, I'd say that Kansas looks really good. You might be right about average teams this year, though. Here are some fun facts. During the past 10 tournaments, there has been an average of 2.4 #1 seeds that made the elite eight. This year there is only one (KU). During the past 10 tournaments, the average seed in the Elite Eight was 3.7. This year the average seed in the Elite Eight is 5.9. Here they are. The last two ncaas stand out. 2011...12...13...14...15...16...17...18...19...21...........2022 4.5......2.6...3.5...4.5..2.6..3.0...3.8..4.9...2.3..5.4..........5.9
No, it doesn't. It would make it irrelevant if the argument was that UF fans are the only ones who are irrational, but that was never the argument.
I think this is a product of the watering down of college basketball. Very few players stay for four years, not due to the nBA, but because they can make $ overseas. That leaves fewer veteran players who have had two or three years to develop their shot. Very seldom is there a freshman who comes with the ability to create and make their shots (think Brad Beal). With that, they need a year or two to get up to the speed of the game and learn to anticipate. Not only do we have players leaving early, we have far fewer teams that have played together cohesively, due to the portal. Sorry if this reads like a "get off my lawn" post, but I can't help but think that overall play is getting worse.
[/QUOTE] Except it does. Most programs that have tasted even limited success suffer unreasonable fans. Coaches can't outrun expectations by changing fanbases like they are an article of clothing. It's an overplayed narrative.
Except it does. Most programs that have tasted even limited success suffer unreasonable fans. Coaches can't outrun expectations by changing fanbases like they are an article of clothing. It's an overplayed narrative.[/QUOTE] That's not the argument that people on this board were ever making. We weren't saying that Gator fans are unique to being unreasonable. This is a straw man.
St Peter's is the only thing that stands in the way of a Duke-UNC matchup in the Final Four. They can't possibly knock out UNC, can they?
This is why I brought up the Purdue thing-- It has been suggested by some that the fans ran White off. I'm suggesting that this narrative that fans can run off a coach is overstated because at the end of the day, coaches can't outrun expectations, i.e. fact that unreasonable expectations are so prevalent makes it an irrelevant consideration between jobs. I'm not arguing the straw man that you claim I'm arguing.
Today's results: (2)Villanova defeats (5)Houston 50-44 (2)Duke defeats (4)Arkansas 78-69 Tomorrow's games: (1)Kansas vs (10)Miami 2:20pm CBS (8)North Carolina vs (15)Saint Peter's 5:05pm CBS GO Gators!
I know he's not loved by most outside of Durham but it would be pretty wild if Coach K ends up winning at least one championship in each of the last four decades.
This is starting to look more like the ACC tournament Part II. Have to see what happens tomorrow, but if Miami and UNC wins, ugh.
Your original objection to my original post was that the discord among the Purdue fanbase after the other night doesn't excuse (or rather doesn't "make right") our fanbases's demanding expectations. My reply was that the prevalence of lofty expectations may not justify those expectations but it makes those expectations an irrelevant consideration when choosing between jobs. Apparently, you had a secondary objection to my original post that you decided to raise after my initial reply. You are now attempting to tie back my "irrelevant" comment to this secondary objection. I can't be any clearer than that.
