There is no way that's him.vball10set;1593040 wrote:I think it's this guy?
http://www.goxavier.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/matt_stainbrook_798906.html
It IS him, but when he played for Western Michigan.ernest_t_bass;1593054 wrote:There is no way that's him.
I'm not denying that State struggled mightily in the non-conference. On top of that, the ACC was really good this year, so the road didn't get any easier for the Pack once it started conference play. But N.C. State did slowly get better and better as the year moved along. I think it's fair to wonder how well N.C. State and, say, Dayton would have fared if they had switched conferences this season.Prescott;1592990 wrote:I could also see State defeating a St.Louis team that was less than impressive down the stretch, but that doesn't mean N,C.State belonged in the tournament.The invitation is based on a season long resume. Victories or losses in the tournament are irrelevant.If that were true then one could argue that highly seeded teams that lose to a lower seeded team didn't belong in the tournament.
You can make an argument like that almost every year. I say any mid major team has AT least 5 loses in one of the top 4 (BT, ACC, B12 and PAC) in any given year. Even the mid majors who get 1 seeds.reclegend22;1593059 wrote:I'm not denying that State struggled mightily in the non-conference. On top of that, the ACC was really good this year, so the road didn't get any easier for the Pack once it started conference play. But N.C. State did slowly get better and better as the year moved along. I think it's fair to wonder how well N.C. State and, say, Dayton would have fared if they had switched conferences this season.
DumbAzubuike24;1593293 wrote:Flagrant 1 on Iowa. This one is over. Clearly a grab, no intent to play the ball there.