you can spin it any way you want to but jimmyhat was correct. george mason making the final 4 does nothing but help us. i am not sure to what degree but it helps and definitely does not hurt.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164255]forget how well George Mason has done in the tournament. look at their resume before the tournament started and youâll see that they didnât deserve to get in, especially when compared to inconference foe Hofstra or other teams like Cincinnati. To me it doesnât matter if GM has beatin Mich State, UNC, or UCONN, they didnât deserve to be there to begin with. If they are such a quality team then what does it mean that Hofstra (virtually the same in every way) beat them twice in two weeks at the end of the season?
Apparently everyone believes that the committe made an excellent choice in picking GM, but what about Utah State and Air Force, teams that had no reason being there. How far did they go? I guess everyone is having short term memory loss. The committee got lucky, their teams and seedings were horrific (exs: tenn #2, gw #8). Please donât let one lucky team make you forget.
George Mason is no Gonzaga.
Can you imagine an LSU/George Mason championship game? Ratings might be lower than Fox News Rising.[/QUOTE]
George Mason has every right to be in the tourney, Hofstra got screwed they deserved to be in the tourney as did Missouri St. I guess going by your logic Mich. St, UNC and UConn had no business being in the tourney since they lost to Gearge Masonn who didnât deserve to be inâŚ
Utah St. and Air Force deserved to be in as much as Seton Hall did. Hofstra, Missouri St. and and Cincy deserved to be in ahead of all three. BCS schools have every advantage as far as making the Tourney and if they donât get in they have no one to blame but themselves.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164255]forget how well George Mason has done in the tournament. look at their resume before the tournament started and youâll see that they didnât deserve to get in, especially when compared to inconference foe Hofstra or other teams like Cincinnati. To me it doesnât matter if GM has beatin Mich State, UNC, or UCONN, they didnât deserve to be there to begin with. If they are such a quality team then what does it mean that Hofstra (virtually the same in every way) beat them twice in two weeks at the end of the season?
Apparently everyone believes that the committe made an excellent choice in picking GM, but what about Utah State and Air Force, teams that had no reason being there. How far did they go? I guess everyone is having short term memory loss. The committee got lucky, their teams and seedings were horrific (exs: tenn #2, gw #8). Please donât let one lucky team make you forget.
George Mason is no Gonzaga.
Can you imagine an LSU/George Mason championship game? Ratings might be lower than Fox News Rising.[/QUOTE]
you are rightâŚGeorge Mason is no Gonzaga. Gonzaga went home 2 games before George Mason did. Who are you? Billy Packerâs kid?
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164255]forget how well George Mason has done in the tournament. look at their resume before the tournament started and youâll see that they didnât deserve to get in, especially when compared to inconference foe Hofstra or other teams like Cincinnati. To me it doesnât matter if GM has beatin Mich State, UNC, or UCONN, they didnât deserve to be there to begin with. If they are such a quality team then what does it mean that Hofstra (virtually the same in every way) beat them twice in two weeks at the end of the season?
Apparently everyone believes that the committe made an excellent choice in picking GM, but what about Utah State and Air Force, teams that had no reason being there. How far did they go? I guess everyone is having short term memory loss. The committee got lucky, their teams and seedings were horrific (exs: tenn #2, gw #8). Please donât let one lucky team make you forget.
George Mason is no Gonzaga.
Can you imagine an LSU/George Mason championship game? Ratings might be lower than Fox News Rising.[/QUOTE]
Dude, what are you smoking? George Mason in the finals would be one of the most compelling stories in a while. The rating for an underdog going for it all would be huge.
Some of you guys think that all of the basketball-watching world stops being interested if Duke, UNC, Kansas, Mich, UConn, Kentucky, etc arenât in the mix. Not true. Iâll be much more interested in a GM/whoever final than two of the big cats lining up. Iâve seen too much of that already.
Like Roy Williams said a few years ago, I donât give a shit about Carolina. Lots of people in the Midwest probaly feel the same about UNC and a lot of other ânameâ programs.
I agree with hootie. A George Mason vs either LSU/UCLA (especially UCLA) is a ratings winner. The worst scenario is a Florida/LSU matchup for CBS.
a george mason victory over ucla could be the most talked about championship game for a long time.
George Mason has every right to be in the tourney, Hofstra got screwed they deserved to be in the tourney as did Missouri St. I guess going by your logic Mich. St, UNC and UConn had no business being in the tourney since they lost to Gearge Masonn who didn't deserve to be in.......Utah St. and Air Force deserved to be in as much as Seton Hall did. Hofstra, Missouri St. and and Cincy deserved to be in ahead of all three. BCS schools have every advantage as far as making the Tourney and if they donât get in they have no one to blame but themselves.
But Hofstra and Missouri State did not get in the tournament, head to head Hofstra and Missouri st beat out george mason in the regular season, that is my point.
You arenât using my logic at all. My logic says a team should get into the tournament based on how well they do overall in the regular season, not how well they do in the ncaa tournament. However, when you have to compare similar teams such as Hofstra and GM, how well they faired against each other should have some impact in the decision. Top teams are going to lose in the tournament, thats the nature of the beast, my focus is on whether or not there (George Mason and others) regular season warrants them being in the tournament to begin with. Should we put teams in the tournament because they might do well or put teams in that have earned the spot.
I also dont agree that Seton Hall should have gotten in over all those teams you listed, just as I donât think Utah State or Air Force should have been there. Obvsiously one or two teams are unexpectantly going to make the dance every year. This year there were alot more of those kinds of teams, esp when compared to who shouldve been in.
you are right...George Mason is no Gonzaga. Gonzaga went home 2 games before George Mason did. Who are you? Billy Packer's kid?
What?
When I said George Mason is no Gonzaga I was saying GM is nothing like the Gonzaga of a few years ago, a team that actually had the program to come back every year like they have. Sorry if you didnât get that. I dont even know why I responded to your comment.
Dude, what are you smoking? George Mason in the finals would be one of the most compelling stories in a while. The rating for an underdog going for it all would be huge.Some of you guys think that all of the basketball-watching world stops being interested if Duke, UNC, Kansas, Mich, UConn, Kentucky, etc arenât in the mix. Not true. Iâll be much more interested in a GM/whoever final than two of the big cats lining up. Iâve seen too much of that already.
Like Roy Williams said a few years ago, I donât give a shit about Carolina. Lots of people in the Midwest probaly feel the same about UNC and a lot of other ânameâ programs.
Iâll admit I might be wrong, it probably would be the most compelling stories in sports inawhile. I just prefer the top two teams to play each other in the National Championship if it happens to work out that way.
As a sidenote-Iâm not a fan of any of those teams you listed.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164289]But Hofstra and Missouri State did not get in the tournament, head to head Hofstra and Missouri st beat out george mason in the regular season, that is my point.
[/QUOTE]
And he responded with other teams that were less deserve than GMU that got in.
And he responded with other teams that were less deserve than GMU that got in.
George Mason is just one of the teams i saw that shouldnât have gotten inâŚalong with Air Force, Utah State and Seton Hall when compared head to head with the teams that didnât get in. My argument is simply if George Mason got in, then Hofstra shouldve gotten in, but if you really look at RPI then Cincy and Missouri STate should have been more in the mix. I have no problem giving a mid-major conf how ever many teams (including the MVC), if they deserve it.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164296]George Mason is just one of the teams i saw that shouldnât have gotten inâŚalong with Air Force, Utah State and Seton Hall when compared head to head with the teams that didnât get in. My argument is simply if George Mason got in, then Hofstra shouldve gotten in, but if you really look at RPI then Cincy and Missouri STate should have been more in the mix. I have no problem giving a mid-major conf how ever many teams (including the MVC), if they deserve it.[/QUOTE]
If you add Hofstra, Cincy and Missouri State, and take out AFA, Utah State and SHU, GMU is still in.
youâre still missing the point, but im tired of repeating myself.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164298]youâre still missing the point, but im tired of repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I get your point but itâs a non-issue. There are snubs and surprises every year. They just normally are through being talked about by the end of the first weekend. This time, somebody borderline got hot.
[QUOTE=NinerNation Inc.;164298]youâre still missing the point, but im tired of repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I missed your point.
Name that elusive fourth team that should have gotten in over GMU.
I missed your point.Name that elusive fourth team that should have gotten in over GMU.
North Dakota State
You could also ask the question, âWhat George Mason in the Final 4 means to the NCAA Tournament.â Iâve heard talk in the past about greedy b******* wanting to create their own BCS-style Tournament - thus killing the NCAA Tournamentâs field of 65. Followers of this theory believe that eliminating the mid-majors from a championship tournament would generate more money and more interest in the so-called âpower conferencesâ.
A cinderella run by GM is a great reminder why the NCAA Tournament is so enjoyable the way it is.
i think we should just include all 330 teams to the tournament, play 4 rounds a week until we have a champion. that way everyone has an equal chance.