U of M thread (in the Lions Forum) :)

[nhwbrooklyn]

Almost any team that makes it to the tourney championship had luck on their side at some points. Luck in the games themselves, the matchups, the way the games are called etc... Same is true for MSU and their runs. But ultimately when things counted the most, on the biggest stage college hoops has, it was UofM that made it to the final 4 and championship game this year. Not OSU, not MSU, and not Indiana.

The last team that was so much better than the competition, that didn't need favorable match-ups along the way, and a little luck (or as much luck) was probably that UNC team that steamrolled MSU.

[Kstat]

Is there anything sadder than an MSU basketball fan with an inferiority complex?

What, a national championship and 5 or 6 finals fours during the Izzo era, and as soon as Beilein makes it to one, he's already feeling under-appreciated...lol

[Masspartan]

Different results but not necessarily a different champion.

To discredit accomplishments earned sounds more like a case of sour grapes than anything else.

Edit: NCAA does not have a two out of three format, it is win or go home.

I'm not discrediting anything ... including U-M's nice run through the tourney. Jesus some of you weasels are thin skinned and thick skulled.

Sure sometimes the best team wins it all, but not always and not as often as one might think.

Villanova was a deserving champion as #8 seed ... but they sure as shit were not the best team in the country.

I'm not sure who you are saying is sour ... I'm surely not. I'm also not delusional. State in 2000 was the best team ... when they made the final game in 2009 they were barely a top 10 team.

[Kstat]

Actually, in 2000 Cincinnati was the best team. Then Kenyon Martin went down.

[nhwbrooklyn]

Actually, in 2000 Cincinnati was the best team. Then Kenyon Martin went down.

Kstat fighting the trolling with more trolling.

[Kstat]

Kstat fighting the trolling with more trolling.

Funny, I could have sworn this was the U-M thread...

[SeattleLionsFan]

What I find very odd is how people have held up the tourney model for years in football saying that its the only way to determine who is the best team. And now the tourney doesn't prove anything but the tourney champ?

Shocking!

[Kstat]

little brother logic at its finest...

[nhwbrooklyn]

I for one, I'm actually trying to say UofM deserves lots of credit and acclaim for what they accomplished and have all year (even when some people were "done with them").

Mass is just trolling.

[Masspartan]

What I find very odd is how people have held up the tourney model for years in football saying that its the only way to determine who is the best team. And now the tourney doesn't prove anything but the tourney champ?

Shocking!

little brother logic at its finest...

I've been outspoken on the issue, but once again you haven't been able to read for comprehension SLF.

The NCAA basketball tournament ALWAYS crowns a deserving champion ... which as I've stated does not mean they were they 'best' team.

My contention has always been does the NCAA champion have to be the 'best' team.

And the answer is a resounding no. In almost every sport the NCAA champion is the team that has one it by playing their way. Perhaps they got hot at the right time. Perhaps they were the most 'clutch' team. Who cares. They won it.

Football doesn't give a majority of the teams in the NCAA even a chance to win the game.

Boise State and TCU a few years ago. No chance. And that is wrong.

If one team each from the Big 10, ACC, SEC, PAC-10 all finished their seasons undefeated at least 2 of them (and likely 3 since assuredly a 1 loss SEC team would be more deserving) would not be able to compete for the National Championship.

The "Champions" should be determined on the field and not in the hands of voters. Simple as that.

The "Champion" will be deserving and the 'best' team if they don't win can sit on a list of best teams to have not won anything list.

Kind of like the 1991 U-M hoops squad.

[Masspartan]

I for one, I'm actually trying to say UofM deserves lots of credit and acclaim for what they accomplished and have all year (even when some people were "done with them").

Mass is just trolling.

where is your Spartan pride brother, quit your sucking up ... lol.


pssst .... I have also given U-M credit on a couple of occasions. They had a NICE run in the tourney and played a pretty damn good entertaining championship game.

[SeattleLionsFan]

So you can troll me mass, I don't get to troll back?

[*JD*]

The "Champion" will be deserving and the 'best' team if they don't win can sit on a list of best teams to have not won anything list.

Kind of like the 1991 U-M hoops squad.

In '91, Michigan lost to Colorado in the NIT. They weren't the "best" of anything.

[nhwbrooklyn]

A very underrated Colorado team...

[*JD*]

House Guest was a beast!