Old Titan Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Well, I don't think that's at all what he's saying. Note that "eliminate" is your word, not his, and by using it you are in fact giving your own interpretation of his view of Bracketbusters. The losing teams are only "eliminated" (if that is what you insist on calling it) because they weren't under serious consideration to begin with. The victory would be a boost to the winner. Losing the game wouldn't eliminate the loser from contention, because they were never in contention in the first place. And thus I believe his stance is far more "win-win" than you seem to think. Now, do I agree with his stance? Not really. But if you're going to take issue with his opinion, at least view his opinion in the same light that he gave it in. *sigh* Let's go over this again - one last time, though. If you don't get it after this, you're just not listening. WHAT LUNARDI SAID: "Neither team (Oral Roberts or Nevada) can make a legitimate at-large argument without a win over the other. Fundamentally, that's what BracketBusters is supposed to be all about." WHAT I SAID: I disagree with Lunardi's assessment of the two teams on its face. I can't speak for Nevada, but ORU ALREADY has a resume worthy of at-large consideration WITHOUT a win over a Nevada. It stands on its own merit. ORU or Nevada shouldn't have to prove themselves AGAIN just to satisfy the subjective opinions of the Lunardi's of the world, and run the risk (in Lunardi's eyes) of confirming any suspicions with a loss. BrackBusters should NOT "fundamentally" be about making good mid-major teams look bad - it should be about making good mid-major teams look even better. Consider it this way: Lunardi is implying from the get-go that ORU and Nevada (and, I can tell you from past experience with the man, ALL mid-majors) enter the BracketBuster with their glass half-EMPTY, and a loss in the BB totally drains the glass of any bubbliciousness. I say a top team in the BB has a glass half-FULL, which by all rights should STAY half-full even with a BB loss, but OVERFLOWS with bubblosity with the added effervescence of a BB victory. Verstehen Sie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Verstehen Sie? How many languages are you conversant in, anyway? Get it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BasPlayr Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Wow, OT breakin it down! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 How many languages are you conversant in, anyway? Get it? شكرا لك على هذا النوع بالذات من قوله Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeagleman5 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Any Top 50 RPI team in a nationally televised ESPN game for ORU is fine with TheEagleman.....my best guess is Long Beach State or Northern Iowa...but still 6 days to go before the matchups are announced....Wichita State would be the dream game for Mabee Center.....Crowd would be so big that Minyard would have to scan tickets himself.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Blood Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 *sigh* Let's go over this again - one last time, though. If you don't get it after this, you're just not listening. WHAT LUNARDI SAID: "Neither team (Oral Roberts or Nevada) can make a legitimate at-large argument without a win over the other. Fundamentally, that's what BracketBusters is supposed to be all about." WHAT I SAID: I disagree with Lunardi's assessment of the two teams on its face. I can't speak for Nevada, but ORU ALREADY has a resume worthy of at-large consideration WITHOUT a win over a Nevada. It stands on its own merit. ORU or Nevada shouldn't have to prove themselves AGAIN just to satisfy the subjective opinions of the Lunardi's of the world, and run the risk (in Lunardi's eyes) of confirming any suspicions with a loss. BrackBusters should NOT "fundamentally" be about making good mid-major teams look bad - it should be about making good mid-major teams look even better. Consider it this way: Lunardi is implying from the get-go that ORU and Nevada (and, I can tell you from past experience with the man, ALL mid-majors) enter the BracketBuster with their glass half-EMPTY, and a loss in the BB totally drains the glass of any bubbliciousness. I say a top team in the BB has a glass half-FULL, which by all rights should STAY half-full even with a BB loss, but OVERFLOWS with bubblosity with the added effervescence of a BB victory. Verstehen Sie? No I've understood all along. You disagree with Lunardi's assesment that ORU and Nevada (who are we kidding, you don't give a rip about Nevada) are already bubble teams. Because YOU think that those teams are already bubble worthy, you twisted HIS statement into a very pessimistic take on the Bracketbusters concept. But HE very clearly does not think that the teams in question are worthy of an at-large at the moment. And with that in mind his take on Bracketbusters is much more "glass-half-full" than you give him credit for. The real issue is that you believe ORU is at-large worthy, and he does not. (And for the record, I actually agree with you). But because of that issue, you twisted his very positive statement about the potential BracketBusters game into a slam against the two schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I may have met my match in trying to have the last word. Lunardi has for YEARS slighted mid-majors as red-headed step children in his "Bracketology" work for ESPN (which is kinda strange, considering he's a St. Joseph's guy). I think you are giving him way too much credit when it comes to his opinion of the BracketBuster concept. His track record has consistently been about finding (inventing?) reasons to EXCLUDE teams from the Final 64/65/68 mix, as opposed to making cases for their inclusion. Now, feel free to respond, but I'm done - yer givin' me a headache. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORU GRAD Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Give it up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeagleman5 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 A match up with Nevada wouldn't be bad for us either.....TheEagleman just wants to see ORU on ESPN that weekend vs. a top 50 team.....how cool would it be if our win streak was 18 at that point?.....I know that's looking too far ahead for you nervous types.....I probably just jinxed us vs. USD tomorrow night.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 A match up with Nevada wouldn't be bad for us either.....TheEagleman just wants to see ORU on ESPN that weekend vs. a top 50 team.....how cool would it be if our win streak was 18 at that point?.....I know that's looking too far ahead for you nervous types.....I probably just jinxed us vs. USD tomorrow night.... Thanks a lot, Eagleman! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUalum11 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 yahoo sports projects the top 5 games...LINK 1. Saint Mary's (19-2, 8-0) at Creighton (18-2, 8-1) 2. Wichita State (17-3, 8-1) at Murray State (20-0, 8-0) 3. Long Beach State (14-6, 7-0) at Iona (15-5, 5-2) 4. Nevada (16-3, 5-0) at George Mason (16-5, 8-1) 5. Northern Iowa (14-7, 4-5) at Oral Roberts (18-4, 10-0) Why it should happen: If there's a third team in the Valley capable of earning an at-large bid, Northern Iowa is the most likely option. The Panthers have struggled in conference but still boast strong computer numbers thanks to wins over Iowa, Iowa State, Colorado State and Providence. There are a myriad of potential matchups for Northern Iowa, but Oral Roberts seems to make the most sense. The Golden Eagles are a fellow Midwest team with a Top 50 RPI, slim at-large hopes and one of the nation's top scorers in Dominique Morrison. Indiana State (12-9 overall, 3-7 MVC) defeated Northern Iowa (14-8 overall, 4-6 MVC) last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oruvoice Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 Upon seeing where evryone is currently at....I gotta think it's Nevada. That doesn't have the 'sparkle' as a Wichita State matchup, but does mean that we don't have to contend with a huge throng of Shocker fans invading the friendly confines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUalum Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 here is a projection of the TV games from a Creighton fan site...LINK ESPN has continued to expand this event with the hopes they will find the next Butler, George Mason, or VCU — a squad that can serve as the non-power league media darling du jour during the NCAA Tournament. Jay Bilas or Andy Katz wont be coming to the games, nor will the ESPN Gameday crew. The event isn’t for busting brackets anymore; rather, it is strictly for scheduling purposes. By being a part of BracketBusters, the opponent you get requires a return game against the selected opponent within an 18-month period. But even that isn’t set in stone. Creighton hosted Loyola-Chicago in the 2010 BracketBusters. Instead of playing the return game in 2010-2011, the game has been pushed to at least next season. #24 Wichita State @ #39 Murray State (ESPN) #34 St. Mary’s @ #12 Creighton (ESPN) #41 Long Beach State @ #50 Iona (ESPNU) #48 Northern Iowa @ #45 Oral Roberts (ESPN2)–Oral Roberts is enjoying a successful season of their own in the Summit League starting 10-0 so far. Since the loss to Gonzaga the Golden Eagles have won 11 in a row. Northern Iowa on the other hand has had some struggles, but yet has been maintaining some good computer numbers to keep their RPI high and have the best chance at getting a third MVC team into consideration for the NCAA Tournament. This would be another true BracketBuster game. The loser goes home hoping to win their conference tournament, especially for UNI who lost to Indiana State on Wednesday night. #128 Oakland @ #104 Butler (ESPNU)–Butler has been to the NCAA Tournament finals the past two seasons and it appears to be a rebuilding year for the Bulldogs. Either way, this game will not necessarily help them. They will still have to win the Horizon League tournament to get the chance for a third straight appearance in the finals. #90 Buffalo @ #67 South Dakota State (ESPN3)–There is always one odd matchup in BracketBusters and this one is it. Nothing really sticks out for these teams other than no matter what happens, they will have to win their conference tournaments to get into the dance. There is no at-large openings here, but they need one more game to fill the TV slate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 While I don't necessarily agree with all that the Creighton writer has to say, he does try to put into context the debate over whether BracketBusters is intended to make good mid-major teams look even better, OR is about eliminating teams that might have been on the bubble otherwise. He basically says it can do both, depending on the match-up. I'm putting my money on either Nevada or Long Beach State at ORU. Here's my predictions for the 13 TV games on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, and ESPN3 (with RPI): Wichita State (24) @ Murray State (39) St. Mary's (34) @ Creighton (12) Long Beach State (41) @ Oral Roberts (45) Northern Iowa (48) @ Iona (50) Akron (54) @ Davidson (49) Nevada (79) @ South Dakota State (67) Drexel (89) @ Ohio (71) Buffalo (90) @ Cleveland State (66) College of Charleston (100) @ Virginia Commonwealth (97) Drake (105) @ Kent State (111) Lamar (108) @ Missouri State (81) Valparaiso (123) @ George Mason (116) Oakland (128) @ Butler (104) and possibly, Indiana State @ either Weber State OR New Mexico State Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManiacAlum Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 For me, at least it gives a little more relevance to the argument that people like Lunardi (and others from what I've read) view this as a 'must-win' resume builder for some teams. Rather than as a 'helper' to showcase certain mid-majors. Which is cool with me, as long as we win. He does try to slip in some Valley homer scheduling though. UNI at ORU and Drake at Cleveland State? Nice try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue82 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 He does try to slip in some Valley homer scheduling though. UNI at ORU and Drake at Cleveland State? Nice try. While the Creighton writer does show some MVC bias, so will the BracketBuster assignment committee. While ESPN will ultimately yield the biggest stick, the Valley's influence isn't far behind. Expect to see at least 5 MVC teams in televised games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabidrabbit Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 While the Creighton writer does show some MVC bias, so will the BracketBuster assignment committee. While ESPN will ultimately yield the biggest stick, the Valley's influence isn't far behind. Expect to see at least 5 MVC teams in televised games. Why not? there are five MVC teams that fit into the top 13 of each side. IMHO, the amazing part is if Summit gets 3 televised games. Two, ORU and SDSU, should happen. Getting either Oakland or NDSU is going to be the pleasant surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue82 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Why not? there are five MVC teams that fit into the top 13 of each side. IMHO, the amazing part is if Summit gets 3 televised games. Two, ORU and SDSU, should happen. Getting either Oakland or NDSU is going to be the pleasant surprise. Thanks for the comments, rabid - I realize now that my post was not clear. I was referring back to the previous post regarding UNI and Drake - but I didn't clarify that well. I fully agree that 5 MVC teams belong in the 13 ESPN games. My last sentence should have read "Expect to see at least 5 MVC teams in televised games, many with higher-marquee opponents than some will think they deserve." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.