Conference Tournies: Pointless?

[FirstTimer]

Heelsox there is no use arguing with this guy. You are right when people resort to personal attacks they don't have an argument anymore so that is all your going to get after each response.

Actually this is what people say when they know they are losing an arguement to an asshole and want to try and feel better about themselves.

If I say the sky is blue and call you a cocksucker it doesn't make the fact that the sky is blue any less true...it just makes me an asshole while stating a fact.

Oh...and it makes you a cocksucker.

 

[kmanharris]

Actually this is what people say when they know they are losing an arguement to an asshole and want to try and feel better about themselves.

If I say the sky is blue and call you a cocksucker it doesn't make the fact that the sky is blue any less true...it just makes me an asshole while stating a fact.

Oh...and it makes you a cocksucker.

That was such a terrible example. You back up your opinion about conference tournaments not being needed by repeating the same thing about teams not "deserving" to make the NCAA tournament just because they win their conference tournament. Who are you to say who deserves it and who doesn't deserve it? You realize your argument is stagnant and you have no other points so you resort to calling people names and attacking them personally instead of throwing out another point.

Back to your terrible example. Saying the sky is blue is a proven fact. Saying conference tournaments are pointless is your opinion so there is a difference when you resort to name calling.

 

[FirstTimer]

That was such a terrible example.

Actually it's a perfect one.

You back up your opinion about conference tournaments not being needed by repeating the same thing about teams not "deserving" to make the NCAA tournament just because they win their conference tournament. Who are you to say who deserves it and who doesn't deserve it?

Someone with a sense of logic and reasoning who knows sports. Oh and Jesus.

You realize your argument is stagnant and you have no other points so you resort to calling people names and attacking them personally instead of throwing out another point.

I just threw out 3 more points in the last post alone.....Not surprising but they flew over your head.

Back to your terrible example. Saying the sky is blue is a proven fact.

So is saying that Davidson is 18-2 and that they won their conference. Or that UNC won the ACC, or Mich St the Big 10...and on and on.

Anything else cocksucker?

 

[kmanharris]

Uhh no you weren't. In fact you completely missed the point. My entire argument is that the games are decided on the court. UNC's #1 ranking wasn't decided there. It was decided by sportswriters and coaches..who all didn't agree. Even your attempts at sarcasm fail miserably.

I didn't read your last post until now but you are proving the point you are trying to fight against. If you are a superior team then it shouldn't matter who you are playing you should win. Using your argument, games are decided on the court. Davidson lost their game and obviously were not good enough to beat Charleston when it mattered so what made you think they could beat a bigger and better team? Curry can't do everything, just because he "nearly" beat WV singlehandedly(word?) doesn't mean anything. Tons of teams "nearly" beat another team but a loss is a loss is a loss.

 

[kmanharris]

Actually it's a perfect one.


Someone with a sense of logic and reasoning who knows sports. Oh and Jesus.


I just threw out 3 more points in the last post alone.....Not surprising but they flew over your head.



So is saying that Davidson is 18-2 and that they won their conference. Or that UNC won the ACC, or Mich St the Big 10...and on and on.

Anything else cocksucker?

You think you have logic and reason but if this was a big deal it would have been changed already.

What 3 points did you throw out in your last post? They didn't seem new or even point worthy as they were just basically saying the same thing.

You can't compare fact to opinion. For a person who uses so much "logic" that isn't very logical.

 

[FirstTimer]

I didn't read your last post until now but you are proving the point you are trying to fight against. If you are a superior team then it shouldn't matter who you are playing you should win.

No that's not my point. You obviously haven't been reading the entire thread. If you go back to the first few posts I specifically point out you just played an entire regular season schedule to show who was better over the course of the long haul. I point out again and again how A regular season crown is a better way of showing the better team over the course of teh season because they were able to be consistantly good over a long period of time and not get a fluke birth based on 4 days of good basketball.

Using your argument, games are decided on the court. Davidson lost their game and obviously were not good enough to beat Charleston when it mattered so what made you think they could beat a bigger and better team? Curry can't do everything, just because he "nearly" beat WV singlehandedly(word?) doesn't mean anything. Tons of teams "nearly" beat another team but a loss is a loss is a loss.

Ok there is so much wrong with this statement it will be tough to sift through...

1. You can't use my arguement at all because you don't even understand what my arguement is. (See above)

2. Davidson beat Charleston when it "counts" in the regular season and lost to them once as well. Then they went 17-1 in their other conference games. If those games "don't count" why play them? Why play 20 games that mean nothing during the regular season?

3. Davidson beat West Virginia this year. I said Curry nearly beat WV single handedly because he obviously didn't beat them all by himself.

Fail again.

You think you have logic and reason but if this was a big deal it would have been changed already.

Already been covered why it's not changed...Conferences make big bucks off the tournaments. It' kept around for cash..not because it makes sense.

You can't compare fact to opinion. For a person who uses so much "logic" that isn't very logical.

The sky is blue... Davidson went 18-2 and won the Southern Conference. UNC won the ACC. Cocksucker.

Those are facts.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

co-sign. The conference tournaments are just one more way to gauge the public for some more money. From a competitive standpoint, its illogical to have a 4-game tournament basically wipe away a 20-game regular season. But, from a financial standpoint, why not play a few more games and grab some extra cash?

The play-in game is possibly the most retarded thing in sports. How did it ever come about? Is adding that 65th team really making a difference in the NCAA tournament? Does ANYONE even watch the Tuesday play-in game?

The play-in game is semi-retarded because there is only ONE of them. If every "#1 seed" had to play a "play-in" winner, the concept would make a lot more sense.

However, then you'd have to expand the number of at-large bids to fill out the "64" team tournament, and honestly, it could be concluded that there are too many teams in the dance already.

As for the original post...I disagree, the concept of a conference tournament isn't pointless. It really is just an extension of the season.

 

[kmanharris]

There is no point in arguing anymore since its just opinion and were going to go in circles but in all honesty firsttimer. Name your 10 games that were better than the one between uconn/syracuse last night. I am really interested to see why you think that game was "overrated."

 

[godspeed]

It's quite argueably the best time of the year.

Why would anyone want to take away the conference tournies, and more great basketball??

They don't matter, they do matter,,,,what''s the big deal?

All the excitement and all these great games we see over the years during championship week, I can't see how a hardcore college bball fan would want to take it away.

 

[FirstTimer]

There is no point in arguing anymore since its just opinion and were going to go in circles but in all honesty firsttimer. Name your 10 games that were better than the one between uconn/syracuse last night. I am really interested to see why you think that game was "overrated."

NC State Houston in 83
UNC GTown in 82
Duke Kentucky in 1992
Nova GTown in 1985
UNC Mich in 1993
Illinois Zona in 2005
Mich St Ind St in 79
Houston UCLA in 68
UNC Kansas in 57
Kansas Memphis 08
Mich Seton Hall 89
Ind Cuse 87

And those are just off the top of my head.

Everyone jizzing themselves over a 6OT game and calling it the best ever it wasn't even the only 6OT game in history or even the longest game ever.

It's overrated because it's not the greatest game ever as a lot of people are saying. By definition it's then overrated.

 

[UMnPluke]

It's quite argueably the best time of the year.

Why would anyone want to take away the conference tournies, and more great basketball??

They don't matter, they do matter,,,,what''s the big deal?

All the excitement and all these great games we see over the years during championship week, I can't see how a hardcore college bball fan would want to take it away.

Agree with this post. From a completely personal and selfish point of view I love the conference tournies and do not want them to go anywhere.

More on topic, I think it is somewhat unfair to have one tournament decide who goes to the dance. This especially applies to the smaller conferences that will not have any at-large bids as a "fluke" team getting hot and winning 4 games will bump a team that dominated the regular season. In the "BCS" conferences I don't think that it makes as much of a difference in the end as the top seeds will get at-large bids regardless, which means that if a "fluke" team wins the tourney they will bump out a bubble team and not a team that dominated their conference during the regular season. I also don't think that the regular season is completely pointless though as you play for a top seed within your conference tourny and therefore an easier road to that automatic bid.

The other thing to note here is that it is 100% up to each conference to determine how their automatic bid is won. These conferences figured out a long time ago that they could cash in on this and make more money if they host a tournament with the automatic bid being the top prize. Because of this, and regardless of the fairness of the system, conference tournaments aren't going anywhere.

 

[FirstTimer]

NC State-Houston
Kansas-Memphis
and possibly Nova-Gtown in 85 are the only ones I would say are equal to or better than that game. Maybe illinois-Zona in 05.

The only ones I haven't seen on that list are Indiana-Cuse in 87 and Houston-UCLA in 68. No one is callin git the greatest game ever, everyone's saying "one of the greatest games ever" huge difference.

Ok. You just put Zona-Ill ahead of Gtown UNC in 82 and Duke and Kentucky in 92. I will just disregard anything else basketball related you ever have to say. Insane.

As to your second thought

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-greatest-college-basketball-game-ever-played