P
Prescott
Posts: 2,569
Jan 26, 2010 10:00pm
Kentucky, Kansas, and who else.....
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=4858570
BTW, If you are interested, there is a Mark Titus reference near the bottom of the page with a couple of humorous lines.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=4858570
BTW, If you are interested, there is a Mark Titus reference near the bottom of the page with a couple of humorous lines.
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jan 26, 2010 10:08pm
He also says Duke cannot win it all. Interesting.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Jan 26, 2010 11:27pm
I disagree with Purdue. They dont have the horses, or the post game to get ti done.
Not nearly good enough guard play either.
Not nearly good enough guard play either.
S
slingshot4ever
Posts: 4,085
Jan 26, 2010 11:36pm
That is because he knows what he is talking about. About time someone from ESPN didn't conform to the ACC in basketball.wildcats20 wrote: He also says Duke cannot win it all. Interesting.
S
slingshot4ever
Posts: 4,085
Jan 26, 2010 11:38pm
Quote from article:
The Minutes will believe Duke might have a chance to win it all when it sees the Blue Devils actually advance past the Sweet 16 for the first time since Chris Duhon was in uniform.
I believe I posted this on the Duke Clemson thread.
The Minutes will believe Duke might have a chance to win it all when it sees the Blue Devils actually advance past the Sweet 16 for the first time since Chris Duhon was in uniform.
I believe I posted this on the Duke Clemson thread.
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jan 26, 2010 11:38pm
I'm not saying he is wrong.slingshot4ever wrote:That is because he knows what he is talking about. About time someone from ESPN didn't conform to the ACC in basketball.wildcats20 wrote: He also says Duke cannot win it all. Interesting.
S
slingshot4ever
Posts: 4,085
Jan 26, 2010 11:40pm
I thought you might be refuting it given your response of "interesting"
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jan 26, 2010 11:41pm
More of what you said actually. Someone coming out and saying Duke can't win it.slingshot4ever wrote: I thought you might be refuting it given your response of "interesting"
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Jan 27, 2010 12:33am
ESPN hasn't given Duke any credit in years. So this isn't surprising. Of course, Duke is still the network's basketball pride and joy, as the Blue Devils are who America wants to see. There's a reason that only the Lakers have had more televised games on ESPN's family of networks than Duke over the last five years.
That's ESPN, though.
That's ESPN, though.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Jan 27, 2010 12:35am
Agree, and throw BYU in there too. Zero chance.Laley23 wrote: I disagree with Purdue. They dont have the horses, or the post game to get ti done.
Not nearly good enough guard play either.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Jan 27, 2010 12:37am
Yes, if Patty thinks Purdue is winning the national title, he's sorely mistaken. I probably should have stopped reading there.
I'm not mad because I think Duke will win the championship, because I don't think it will. I think Duke, right now, will be as good as it has been the past two Marches. Ford(with an e) is just talking out his ass here.
I'm not mad because I think Duke will win the championship, because I don't think it will. I think Duke, right now, will be as good as it has been the past two Marches. Ford(with an e) is just talking out his ass here.
C
centralbucksfan
Posts: 5,111
Jan 27, 2010 9:31am
If Purdue gets their starting PG, Jackson back, and if he can play up to he has in the past, they could. Purdue is doing what they are doing this year without him. That is impressive to me as Jackson started every game last year.Laley23 wrote: I disagree with Purdue. They dont have the horses, or the post game to get ti done.
Not nearly good enough guard play either.
P
Prescott
Posts: 2,569
Jan 27, 2010 10:51am
Has anybody seen BYU??
BYU defeated Arizona State 81-68 even though their leading scorer, Jimmer Fredette, was 1/10 from the field. Arizona State lost to Duke at MSG by a score of 64-53.The game was tied with 13 minutes left.
I am not saying that BYU is legit. I am saying I have not seen them , so I will reserve judgment.
I would like to see Fredette.He did throw up 49 points on Arizona.
BYU defeated Arizona State 81-68 even though their leading scorer, Jimmer Fredette, was 1/10 from the field. Arizona State lost to Duke at MSG by a score of 64-53.The game was tied with 13 minutes left.
I am not saying that BYU is legit. I am saying I have not seen them , so I will reserve judgment.
I would like to see Fredette.He did throw up 49 points on Arizona.
thedynasty1998
Posts: 6,844
Jan 27, 2010 10:52am
Purdue doesn't have a chance. Other than that, I think the others are realistic, although I'd limit it to about 6-7 teams.
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Jan 27, 2010 10:58am
It's really tough to use the "win it all" term. I think it makes more sense to debate who can make the Final Four. Anyone this year can certainly lose prior to the Final Four. Then again, there is some history of teams making the Final Four, but hardly anyone can cut down the nets unless they were one of the select favorites coming in.
Florida (in 2005) and Syracuse (in 2003) as #3's and Arizona (in 1997) as a #4 are the closest I can remember in recent memory of teams who may have not been on this type of list who ended up winning it all. That suggests, that at most, there are probably 12-15 teams with any shot at all.
Florida (in 2005) and Syracuse (in 2003) as #3's and Arizona (in 1997) as a #4 are the closest I can remember in recent memory of teams who may have not been on this type of list who ended up winning it all. That suggests, that at most, there are probably 12-15 teams with any shot at all.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Jan 27, 2010 12:37pm
I saw most of the game they just beat SDSU 71-69, although my online stream disconnected a few times throughout.Prescott wrote: Has anybody seen BYU??
BYU defeated Arizona State 81-68 even though their leading scorer, Jimmer Fredette, was 1/10 from the field. Arizona State lost to Duke at MSG by a score of 64-53.The game was tied with 13 minutes left.
I am not saying that BYU is legit. I am saying I have not seen them , so I will reserve judgment.
I would like to see Fredette.He did throw up 49 points on Arizona.
They're a great shooting team and very fundamentally sound, but they just aren't athletic enough to make a real run at it I don't think. They would need perfect match ups.
Fredette is legit though. He put up around 30 in that game.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Jan 27, 2010 1:06pm
Thats true. But I was basing it off of this years team. Although even with Jackson back, and its a huge if hed be effective, I dont think Johnson is enough in the post to stop teams in the sweet 16 and beyond.centralbucksfan wrote:
If Purdue gets their starting PG, Jackson back, and if he can play up to he has in the past, they could. Purdue is doing what they are doing this year without him. That is impressive to me as Jackson started every game last year.
C
cview
Posts: 351
Jan 27, 2010 6:27pm
Kansas
Kentucky
Syracuse
One of those three will be the national champion. I'd take that list vs the field right now, for sure. I don't think there is a Final Four lock this year the way UNC was in 09 or Florida was in 07 though. Kansas and Kentucky are locks to play for a Final Four berth though IMO. Aside from that, I wouldn't be surprised if anyone else got bounced before even getting to the Elite 8.
Kentucky
Syracuse
One of those three will be the national champion. I'd take that list vs the field right now, for sure. I don't think there is a Final Four lock this year the way UNC was in 09 or Florida was in 07 though. Kansas and Kentucky are locks to play for a Final Four berth though IMO. Aside from that, I wouldn't be surprised if anyone else got bounced before even getting to the Elite 8.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Jan 27, 2010 7:03pm
No locks, but Kansas and Kentucky definitely are the favorites to reach the Final Four this year.
If I were picking a list of teams that I thought had the most legitimate shot of bringing home the hardware, I'd take UK, KU, Syracuse and Nova. Behind the senior leadership and astounding talent of Scottie Reynolds, Nova, despite being guard heavy once again, has a serious shot at winning it all. These are the big four; it's up to the rest of the field to produce a club that is ready to take on the challenge of bringing these teams down.
If I were picking a list of teams that I thought had the most legitimate shot of bringing home the hardware, I'd take UK, KU, Syracuse and Nova. Behind the senior leadership and astounding talent of Scottie Reynolds, Nova, despite being guard heavy once again, has a serious shot at winning it all. These are the big four; it's up to the rest of the field to produce a club that is ready to take on the challenge of bringing these teams down.
C
centralbucksfan
Posts: 5,111
Jan 27, 2010 9:14pm
Well, that does it. Purdue should pack it in for the year I guess. lolthedynasty1998 wrote: Purdue doesn't have a chance. Other than that, I think the others are realistic, although I'd limit it to about 6-7 teams.
Anyone that has followed college basketball for any amount of time...should know NEVER say anyone never has a chance. More times then not, there is at least one team that makes it there that "never" had a chance. IMO, there is NO team that is head and shoulders above anyone this year. There is no "UNC" this year as there was last year.
thedynasty1998
Posts: 6,844
Jan 27, 2010 11:06pm
Many years you have a couple teams that are the odds on favorites, and you have that in Kentucky and Kansas. Then you have the second tier teams that can get to the final 4 and you are not surprised. Then there is that next tier. I think Purdue is in that 3rd category. I actually don't think they are much better than OSU, and I don't think anyone will confuse OSU for one of the top teams.
I would compare Purdue to a Duke, WVU, Kansas State category. They can beat a good team on any given night, but I don't think they are good enough to get through the tourney setting.
I would compare Purdue to a Duke, WVU, Kansas State category. They can beat a good team on any given night, but I don't think they are good enough to get through the tourney setting.
Z
ZeroCool
Posts: 264
Jan 28, 2010 12:08am
in no particular order
duke
texas
kansas
kentucky
sleepers
tennessee
villanova
gonzaga
duke
texas
kansas
kentucky
sleepers
tennessee
villanova
gonzaga
P
Prescott
Posts: 2,569
Jan 28, 2010 12:19am
Villanova is NOT a sleeper. They are a favorite.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Jan 28, 2010 2:00am
Are you computer yelling at him because he chose Duke as a team that could win it all?prescott wrote:Villanova is NOT a sleeper. They are a favorite.
P
Prescott
Posts: 2,569
Jan 28, 2010 10:32am
No. If I wanted to reference duke, I would have referenced duke.Are you computer yelling at him because he chose Duke as a team that could win it all?
Villanova can't be considered a SLEEPER when the team is ranked in the top 4 and has ONE loss.