Midstate01
Posts: 14,766
Mar 21, 2013 10:01pm
Vcu is going to give michigan fits.
Ironman92
Posts: 49,363
Mar 21, 2013 10:01pm
Alton badly overmatched with their PG out due to drugs and their other guard has the flu....VCU is quick.
Pulling hard for Akron #15 is a local kid and #14 rides the end of the bench but is my wife's 2nd cousin.
Pulling hard for Akron #15 is a local kid and #14 rides the end of the bench but is my wife's 2nd cousin.
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Mar 21, 2013 10:02pm
Watching the New Mexico/Harvard game.
New Mexico's screens involve a lot of movement by the stationary guy so far early in the game.
New Mexico's screens involve a lot of movement by the stationary guy so far early in the game.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:03pm
Anyone here have Harvard? The Crimson might put up more of a fight than some think.
I'm really anxious to see if Tony Snell can keep up his torrid outside shooting. If not, I think New Mexico will look much less impressive than it did in the MWC tournament. They are not really a high-powered offensive team. They looked that way last week because of Snell, but I think that may have been more of an aberration.
I'm really anxious to see if Tony Snell can keep up his torrid outside shooting. If not, I think New Mexico will look much less impressive than it did in the MWC tournament. They are not really a high-powered offensive team. They looked that way last week because of Snell, but I think that may have been more of an aberration.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Mar 21, 2013 10:04pm
Hope so, I got VCU winning it.Midstate01;1411406 wrote:Vcu is going to give michigan fits.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:05pm
I haven't been watching the game, but Colorado State is number one in the country in offensive rebounding. Missouri is a team that struggles inside to rebound. I think the Rams are a bad matchup. Also, Missouri has Frank Haith. They'd be better off letting the mascot coach.ccrunner609;1411410 wrote:Colorado st is playing out of their ass
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Mar 21, 2013 10:07pm
I've not watched a lot of New Mexico this year, but I don't really understand the hype. To me they're a poor man's Ohio State. Good defensively, but less scoring capability than even the Bucks.Fly4Fun;1411409 wrote:Watching the New Mexico/Harvard game.
New Mexico's screens involve a lot of movement by the stationary guy so far early in the game.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
Mar 21, 2013 10:07pm
In case anyone was wondering how bad the MAC was this year, this should prove it.
The only two teams worth anything were Ohio and Akron, and though they both won 24+ games it's because 14 were against the rest of that shit conference. Ohio lost their NIT game and Akron might lose by 50.
The only two teams worth anything were Ohio and Akron, and though they both won 24+ games it's because 14 were against the rest of that shit conference. Ohio lost their NIT game and Akron might lose by 50.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Mar 21, 2013 10:07pm
I lol'd at the unofficial mascot of Colorado State.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:10pm
While I know what Colorado State's numbers are, I'm not gonna lie, I made up that about Missouri haha. I had no idea what their rebounding numbers are. I've only watched half a Missouri game all year (UK), but I imagine Oriakhi has helped a lot.ccrunner609;1411416 wrote:misouri is 3rd in the country in rebounding
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:11pm
The larger reason for Missouri struggling, though, is that Frank Haith isn't going to win anything significant in any tournament involving basketball. He is an awful coach.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Mar 21, 2013 10:12pm
Besides everyone's ACT scores, this is the most honest thing I've ever read on this website. I'm still laughing. Reps!reclegend22;1411425 wrote:While I know what Colorado's numbers are, I'm not gonna lie, I made up that about Missouri haha. I had no idea what their rebounding numbers are. I've only watched half a Missouri game all year (UK), but I imagine Oriakhi has helped a lot.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:17pm
Lol. After rereading my original post, I went right into that lie without hesitation. Not sure what that says about me. Kinda scary hahase-alum;1411428 wrote:Besides everyone's ACT scores, this is the most honest thing I've ever read on this website. I'm still laughing. Reps!
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Mar 21, 2013 10:32pm
Happy for the Pac 12/10. I feel they were disrespected with 12 seeds and they both won. LOL. EZ. :thumbup:
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Mar 21, 2013 10:33pm
I hate Kirk for New Mexico. He strikes me as the kind of unathletic big white scrub that would put up 16-18 points in a win over Ohio State, leading me to break several of my possessions.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Mar 21, 2013 10:42pm
Harvard raining shots. Crimson hanging tough. Glad that I took Arizona into the Sweet 16. I'm not sure New Mexico is going to make it. If they do, they'll probably play better in round two. But, when Tony Snell plays like a human, they aren't really that awe-inspiring.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Mar 21, 2013 10:49pm
Pac-12 looked good today. Big 12 looks like shit.
Edit: Whoops, forgot Missouri is SEC now haha. Oklahoma State and Missouri are really the only teams expected to win that have looked like shit.
Edit: Whoops, forgot Missouri is SEC now haha. Oklahoma State and Missouri are really the only teams expected to win that have looked like shit.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Mar 21, 2013 10:59pm
The games have been pretty disappointing this evening, for the most part.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Mar 21, 2013 11:03pm
se-alum;1411453 wrote:The games have been pretty disappointing this evening, for the most part.
Harvard going to take down New Mexico and the trash MWC.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
Mar 21, 2013 11:07pm
Akron currently on pace to set the new record for worst loss by a MAC school in the tournament (current record is 32 by Ball State in 1986) and worst loss by a 12 to a 5 since the tourney expanded (35 points)
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Mar 21, 2013 11:24pm
Akron loses 88-42. Anybody who picked them should be automatically disqualified from their bracket pool.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Mar 21, 2013 11:25pm
That's why I said, "for the most part". 6 of 8 games have been blowouts.sleeper;1411455 wrote:
Also, how good could Minnesota have been if not for transfers? Cobbs and Iverson are darn good players.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Mar 21, 2013 11:25pm
To be fair, didn't they have 3 guys out?
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Mar 21, 2013 11:26pm
Minnesota is a good team. They will reach the elite 8 minimum.se-alum;1411461 wrote:That's why I said, "for the most part". 6 of 8 games have been blowouts.
Also, how good could Minnesota have been if not for transfers? Cobbs and Iverson are darn good players.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Mar 21, 2013 11:28pm
They had 6 of their top 7 players in terms of minutes per game. And I don't care if they were missing the whole starting 5, they got more than doubled up. 88-42!sleeper;1411462 wrote:To be fair, didn't they have 3 guys out?