wow, he really does not think much of Purdue and the B10.
Would be a great year to make our run.
Would be a great year to make our run.
Lunardi
- Thread starter bonefish1
- Start date
Yeah, I was getting pissed listening to him! Looking at the 8 teams in the quarterfinals of the Big Ten Tournament, I think we have the potential to surprise as a conference and prove some of these so-called experts wrong! I hope our Boilers come ready to play tomorrow and start the tourney season off on the right foot!
I think dartboards and shooting targets should be put up with Lunardi's face on them.
The same goes for a few other college hoops talking heads.
lunardi is a bonehead. I really hope the B1G does well in the NCAAT and shuts that fool up.
Look I dislike Lunardi as much as the next guy but his job is to predict based on what people think the committee is doing.
End of the day - Big Ten is down this year and that hurts us. We also should not have lost to Iowa or Minnesota. Erase those two and we aren't having this discussion.
End of the day - Big Ten is down this year and that hurts us. We also should not have lost to Iowa or Minnesota. Erase those two and we aren't having this discussion.
Bull. What makes the B1G down? Because the more common teams that are in the top tier of the conference aren't this year? It doesn't mean the B1G is down, just other teams are good.
The B1G is what it has always been, a tough conference where any team can beat any other on any given night. We're getting many teams in to the big dance which if the conference were "down" wouldn't happen.
Problem is, the Big Ten doesn't have the body of non-conference wins to prove we aren't down, which is what the tourney seeding is based on. Guess we'll find out next week...
Just stating the facts as people perceive them. It does not help when MSU and IU have off years. It doesn't help that Maryland and Wisconsin fell apart down the stretch. 2 double digit wins against MSU and a season sweep of IU last year- we are talking about getting potentially a 1 seed.
It's has little to do with iu and msu. There were plenty of times when osu, Purdue, Wisconsin, ect were ranked in the top 10 and the conference was respected. We beat all of the top teams in the conference yet still have several bad losses. Nebraska, Iowa, those are bad losses. Michigan has double digit losses and they blew us out. We have shit the bed in catastrophic fashion the last two years in the tourney and also in 2011. If we are going to carry the conference flag, we can't expect people to just overlook our repeated failures when it was our time to shine. Personally I think this team could make the final four. The problem is I could also see them losing by 25 to some Creighton in the first round.
They won't lose to 25 to anybody for one thing.
Secondly, previous tournament failures doesn't have anything to do with this team at all.
Dakich said if IU wins 2 they are in. Would they be the first team ever with 15 losses to make the tourney? In my 5 minutes of research I could not find any one who received an at large bid with more than 14 loses.
I think the hate of the B1G by ESPN has become more and more profound ever since the Big Ten Network came on the scene. I know other conferences now have their own networks, but the B1G was the first and started a trend where ESPN loses money.
Just my biased opinion though.
Just my biased opinion though.
14 has been the record so far. Vandy this year would be the first 15 loss team to get in (assuming they lose a game in the SEC tourney and still get in).
Agree to disagree.
The second part of the statement is the most telling part - we are really the only one who is ranked. Wisconsin and Maryland are hanging on by a thread.
Honestly - none of this matters come next week. Keep on winning and everything else is irrelevant.
I want Lunardi to be wrong, but the pre conference results of the BIG, the 1st round exit of two of the arguably best BIG teams last year, and Purdue's (the best team in the conference) lack of athleticism helps me understand where he and other prognosticators are coming from.
I've been on the road, and haven't watched any of the BIG tourney, but it looks like the games haven't been very close so perhaps the cream is rising to the top and the survivors will make a noise in the big dance.
I've been on the road, and haven't watched any of the BIG tourney, but it looks like the games haven't been very close so perhaps the cream is rising to the top and the survivors will make a noise in the big dance.
That is a very good point. Disney (parent of ABC/ESPN) is on my stock ticker and there are constant articles about ESPN being a problem as they continue to lose viewers. The B1G blazed that trail.
Then the rest are down also. Try the Big 12. When Kansas wins it's 13th consecutive regular season title that tells me Baylor and the rest really stink.
I've been saying this for awhile and why the Big 10 gets so little respect from ESPN if you aren't Izzo, OSU football or UM football.
Keep in mind the only conference network that isn't owned by ESPN is the BTN.
B10 is considered "down" because of the following....
1. You top 4 teams (Purdue, Wisconsin, Minnesota, & Maryland) are 6-10 loss teams & only Purdue is considered a Top 20 team.
2. "The Pack" (Michigan St, Iowa, Michigan, Northwestern) are bubble or just above the bubble type teams.
3. The lower quad of the league (Indiana, Illinois, Penn St, Ohio St, Nebraska, or Rutgers) are all roughly .500 to below .500 teams.
In what would be a "normal year" the B10 would have 6-7 Top 20ish teams (Purdue, Wisky, Maryland, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, OSU). You next tier (Illinois & Iowa) are teams that are more than capable of making the NCAAs & being a Top 20 team. The bottom group (Minnesota, PSU, Rutgers, NW, NB) are teams that can make the tourney, but generally are below .500 in B10 play. This year only 2 teams (MN & NW) are having "up" years. Purdue, Wisky, Maryland, Rutgers are giving you what you expect. MSU, Michigan, Indiana, OSU, PSU, & NB are considered to be having "down years." Thus the B10 is considered down this year.
1. You top 4 teams (Purdue, Wisconsin, Minnesota, & Maryland) are 6-10 loss teams & only Purdue is considered a Top 20 team.
2. "The Pack" (Michigan St, Iowa, Michigan, Northwestern) are bubble or just above the bubble type teams.
3. The lower quad of the league (Indiana, Illinois, Penn St, Ohio St, Nebraska, or Rutgers) are all roughly .500 to below .500 teams.
In what would be a "normal year" the B10 would have 6-7 Top 20ish teams (Purdue, Wisky, Maryland, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, OSU). You next tier (Illinois & Iowa) are teams that are more than capable of making the NCAAs & being a Top 20 team. The bottom group (Minnesota, PSU, Rutgers, NW, NB) are teams that can make the tourney, but generally are below .500 in B10 play. This year only 2 teams (MN & NW) are having "up" years. Purdue, Wisky, Maryland, Rutgers are giving you what you expect. MSU, Michigan, Indiana, OSU, PSU, & NB are considered to be having "down years." Thus the B10 is considered down this year.
I'm still "somewhat" surprised there aren't any anti-trust issues mentioned over this conglomeration.....ESPN hates the fact that the BTN dared to stand-up and play some hard ball.
Sounds like the ACC
1. Top 5 teams have 7-10 losses and top team UNC has a bad loss to IU. (I guess their top 5 are ranked higher, but not sure why)
2. The middle teams are bubble or in Syracuse situation just below
3. Lower 3 teams all below .500
Agree with both of you. SEC football and ACC basketball is what they are all about.
Similar threads
