Well if we always knew who was going to win what would be the fun in watching the games?

Yes, sometimes here and there a "Cinderella" will make a run in the NCAA Tournament but most of the time in the Final Four you've got the same powerhouses just like in football. Like I said earlier, I like both for their own reasons and have never viewed it as a comparison between which was better/more entertaining.

There are all kinds of ways to determine champions. In the EPL they don't even have playoffs. They just say whoever has the best record at the end of the season is the champion. I'm sure if that's how you grew up watching sports then that's how you would prefer it.

I though like playoff element in sports. The NCAA to me plays just like the NFL. One chance and it's over. I think that's the best. My own personal taste.

That's what I'm saying.

Why the hell would we want to encourage upsets? More critically, why would we want to encourage silly outcomes.

An 'upset' as we define it is generally nothing more than a higher ranking team losing to a lower ranking one. Well hell, all those really are are indictments on the rankings more often than not.

I want a true outcome - that's all. I'm not the least bit interested in adjusting the rules to make it easier for inferior squads to have a hot half, get a fluke bounce and then hold on for dear life.

See, this is what I don't get: Mizzou fans wanting the big powers to win constantly. I don't have any clue why you'd favor such a system. I can see why Alabama or Auburn or LSU would. But why you? Serious question.

The last two posts by Pitt Gorilla and DJ's Left Nut are mind blowing.

That's not the case.

Some seasons the 'big powers' simply aren't as good. Many of Mizzou's 'upsets' this year weren't upsets at all. Mizzou is simply a more talented football team in 2013.

You act as though national powers will be more talented simply by name every single season, but it's not the case. Great programs will have off years. Average to good programs will have great years.

To my eyes, Mizzou is the 2nd most talented team in the SEC this season. You could argue anywhere from 2nd to 5th, but this is a damn good football team that would beat A&M, LSU and Auburn on a neutral field more often than not this season.

And if those teams play, I don't want a 5 point FG that they can have some guy go out there and bomb away for 1/2 the game deciding the outcome. I want a set of true results.

You're talking about program-building to some degree whereas I'm talking about actual gameplay. The NCAA (football) has done a lot to encourage more equity in program building but they have refused to do anything to encourage fluke results on the field. Good. They shouldn't. Try your best to level the playing field so that all teams are on relatively even keel when getting players/coaches and then let them go prove who the most talented team is.

That doesn't happen often enough in college basketball. There are too many silly outcomes.

If your team makes it to the Final 4 in basketball they generate $9.5 million for their conference.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...h-9-5-million/

If your team wins a major BCS bowl game they make upwards of $22 million and when the college football playoffs happen the 5 major conference will get $250 million /yr ($50 million per conference)

I think however that a conference's 2nd BCS team gets a significantly lower payout right? At any rate this is a function of the control conferences have of football money vs the NCAA taking the whole $800M in tourney revenue. You have to think Slive and Delaney are chomping at the bit to take that someday as well.

It is probably the main reason why college football hasn't gone to a full playoff system like the bb tournment, so they can keep all the money to themselves.

And to answer your question you are correct.

That may say more about your ability to comprehend than anything. You appear to be implying that you DON'T want the better team to win most of the time (which I, clearly, do). So, you would rather the worse team win most of the time, make it a flip of the coin, or have the better team win slightly more than not. I'm trying to figure out what that would look like. Tons of penalties/fouls, insane turnovers, crazy luck, overall poor play would likely be the norm. I guess I don't just don't find that compelling.

I have been saying that for a long time. College BB is a horrible product and even Rick Pitino said as much 2-3 weeks ago. Part of that though is the NBA's fault for their age restriction, they should either remove it or do like the NFL does. Hopefully the no hand checking rule will improve the game though I have heard there has been a ton of foul calls in these early games.

Just imagine how much money it would generate if it was actually good!

It makes money because of the tournament and the upset factor. That is where I disagree with Pitt and DJ, that is the best part. I like watching a Davidson with Steph Curry make it to the Sweet 16

I'm not sure you are disagreeing with me. Couldn't Louisville be considered the best team?

Yes. But I admittedly love huge upsets. Who wouldn't love to see Chattanooga beat Alabama in 2 weeks? Obviously Bama fans wouldn't but that would be awesome.

You would've loved the John Wooden era.

It's awesome in terms of a sideshow. It sucks in terms of crowning a legit team as champion.

Then European soccer is right up your alley. The best team always wins. It's mathematical.

Like we've stated before. It's extremely rare for an underdog team to win the Basketball NC. It's great fun for the excitement element but in the end the best teams are always there.

Which champions of the past 20 years do you deem as not legitimate?

Highest seed to ever win it all was Villanova in 1985.

Far more Football Champions since them have been called "illegitimate".

That was a funny post by Saul Good.

UCONN finished 9th in the Big East two years ago.

Except in 97 and 98 right? :p :Poke:

Is that all you got?

If Alabama plays Florida State for the title, it will be the first time teams from bordering states ever play for the championship.

We have 11 years of Pomeroy data and here's where the champ was rated:

2003: Syracuse 5
2004: Uconn 2 (behind Duke who they beat in the FF by 2)
2005: UNC 2 (tick behind Illinois who also made it to the final)
2006: Florida 1
2007: Florida 1
2008: Kansas 1
2009: UNC 1
2010: Duke 1
2011: UCONN 9
2012: Kentucky 1
2013: Louisville 1


He posts nothing backed up by actual data. Ever.

I know, most folks do.

I'd prefer see a great Duke team take on a great Kentucky squad for a seat at the dance.

The upset is fun in real time, but the consequences are that a team that's ill-equipped to advance often gets piss-pounded.

I rarely root for upsets in football either. I didn't want to see LSU beat Alabama - as a college football fan, I want to see Alabama vs. FSU in the national championship. That's a damn compelling matchup. As a Mizzou fan I'd like to see us upset a team or two, but that's wearing my Mizzou hat.

I recognize why people root for the underdog, I just hate the consequences. I want to see the most talented teams 'survive and advance'.

How many do you need? The Big East in 2011 was the best basketball conference. The SEC in 2013 is the best football conference. UCONN winning the NC would be like Florida winning this year's football title.

It's stupid.

I disagree even though it has broken my heart several times. It is what makes sports fun.

That would suck.

I don't root against greatness just because it's great.

Sports schadenfreude should be restricted to hated rivals. Extending it to great teams just because they keep winning is petty.

UCONN was a #3 seed that year. They weren't a blockbuster team but they were far better than some lousy Florida football team.

The Big East was far better than the SEC is this year in football.

Without Alabama the SEC in football this year is simply another conference.

They were a 5-seed that year. But it's all he could find when asked to prove his assertion.

When a sport as susceptible to fluke upsets as college basketball allows 68 teams into the a single-elimination postseason, it's fun...but it reduces the postseason to a gimmick.

I understand your point but upsets are what makes sports compelling. No one wants to see the same teams win over and over again.

you sure?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_NC...all_Tournament

This happened to me with Duke. Hated them and K forever. Then I woke up one day and thought, "Why do I hate them? Because they're successful?" That's illogical, so I stopped. They win with class and K volunteered to win Gold twice for our country when he doesn't have to. The game is far better and more popular with them. If we lose tonight I won't hate them one bit.

Thanks for spacing out your stupid statements into paragraphs.

1. UCONN was a 3 seed...but a 9 in their own conference tournament.

2. The Big East had the same number of ranked teams as the SEC does...and the Big East had 16 teams.

3. Even if you take out Alabama (why would you?), the SEC would have 7 top 25 teams and 4 top 10 teams. No other conference has more than 4 ranked teams.

Damn, you're completely right, I was thinking of Arizona being the 5 in that Elite 8 game. Props.

Why would it suck? Obviously they weren't great if they couldn't beat them right? It would be the upset of the century.

And as fellow MU fans we should hate Alabama or any of the rest of the SEC. **** em all.

That is because you aren't rivals. That would be like saying MU BB fans shouldn't hate KU bb.

All good. UCONN was akin to Alabama in 2011. Shoot, that team didn't even win it's own division and still was given a chance to play for the national title.

That's what's so great about Basketball over Football in college. All the qualified teams are given a chance to prove themselves on the field and not simply the result of how storied your program is.

Achievement is what makes sports compelling.

Bad teams upsetting good teams because the good team had a lousy day isn't compelling at all. Meanwhile a good team going out there against another good team, both teams play their A games and the 'chalk' wins is compelling as hell.

I do agree with this as well.

The tournament should be 32 teams at most and frankly, I'd be fine knocking it down to 16.

If they expand it again, I'm likely done with the sport altogether.

Baylor trails South Carolina 39-38 in the first half. Dozens of fans are enjoying the action. So far, 29 fouls have been called.

There has been, on average, one foul called every 39 seconds...38 free throws and counting...

Basketball has almost been unwatchable thus far, although I have only watched about 2/3 of one game spread over 2 games.

It's not going to expand. If anything, it will shrink to 32 or even 16 if the super conferences decide to split away from the twerps.

In that were the case, they would have to find a way fill that inventory somehow with the games they cut out. Lower inventory = lower TV dollars, plus the contract with CBS/Time Warner still has 12 years to go I believe.

This thread has exceeded 10,000 posts. Please visit the new thread, bitches.

Why? The number of posts on this one is epic. Why ruin a good thing, did you like New Coke too?

What if I told you that Sagarin ranks this as the third best realignment thread?

Yes, I understood your point and your differentiation and agree with it.

I'd be proud of you for finally proving one of your assertions.

So, the best teams tend to win, which I what I said I prefer. I NEVER said I want the best team to ALWAYS win. What's with you people and reading?

Saul says that's not true.

This thread will never die.

Saul just wanted two threads he could lob unsubstantiated nonsense onto.

Yeah, you dumb****. This is the first time a new thread has been created...despite the whole "NEW new" part of the thread title. You're welcome to stay out of it and only post in the Jayhawk repository. There, you won't be surrounded by opposing team's fans who think you're an idiot. It's full of Jayhawk fans...who think you're an idiot.

Button pressed. 10 points for PB.

I'm still waiting for Saul to tell us who all the undeserved winners of the basketball tournament are. His blather is the whole appeal of this thread for me. Without him the thread isn't nearly as funny.

Plenty Of Court Appeal

Elite teams. Fab freshmen. Buzz-worthy games. Tuesday night was what college basketball needed.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9969376

Kansas looked great last night. That game reminded me of their 2008 game against Florida.

2006?

Yes...meant 2006

Jack Harry says KU got lucky Mizzou turned down Bill Self:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Vl-mQe9Is