March 5, 20179 yr You don't think a Duke/UNC/Louisville ACC Champ deserves a 1 seed? That's not what I said.
March 5, 20179 yr This one is always a great game to watch, I cannot stand either team but I am a college basketball fan and that game is a must watch. However, it still keeps it's place right behind U.K./U.L. ...:popcorn: ..........As for the cheap shot artist of college basketball, Grayson Allen . Yep, he did it again, That kid doesn't belong in college basketball. ....period. JMO I thought he threw his elbow much higher than necessary when he hit the NC player in the face. To that extent it was not a "basketball move." The refs called a dead ball technical as opposed to a flagrant. What is the difference in penalties between these two fouls? Was Allen assessed a personal foul on the technical? I guess the "dead ball" part of it came into play because the NC player had just body-bumped him a fraction of a second before and the ref was in the process of calling that foul. I don't know the rule but it seems to me that the "ball died" awfully quickly and that actual play was continuing or at least winding down. The two fouls were bang-bang.
March 5, 20179 yr You don't think a Duke/UNC/Louisville ACC Champ deserves a 1 seed? I think North Carolina or Louisville winning the ACC tournament would deserve a #1 seed don't think Duke would probably a #2 seed, but not a #1 imo.
March 5, 20179 yr What did you mean? That I don't think Duke deserves a 1 seed with 6-7 conference losses. I have no problem with UNC getting a 1 seed for winning the conference with only 4 conference losses (I think) but they still don't deserve the overall #1 even if they do win out. As for UL, I would have had no problem with them getting a 1 seed either, prior to their loss to Wake.
March 5, 20179 yr This one is always a great game to watch, I cannot stand either team but I am a college basketball fan and that game is a must watch. However, it still keeps it's place right behind U.K./U.L. ...:popcorn: ..........As for the cheap shot artist of college basketball, Grayson Allen . Yep, he did it again, That kid doesn't belong in college basketball. ....period. JMO Kind of the way I felt about Rasheed Wallace.
March 6, 20179 yr I thought he threw his elbow much higher than necessary when he hit the NC player in the face. To that extent it was not a "basketball move." The refs called a dead ball technical as opposed to a flagrant. What is the difference in penalties between these two fouls? Was Allen assessed a personal foul on the technical? I guess the "dead ball" part of it came into play because the NC player had just body-bumped him a fraction of a second before and the ref was in the process of calling that foul. I don't know the rule but it seems to me that the "ball died" awfully quickly and that actual play was continuing or at least winding down. The two fouls were bang-bang. The call on Dukie cheapshot was a dead ball technical, I am not positive but I believe that a F1 or F2 intentional is called on a live ball play. I agree that these were basically the same regardless with the only exception being the dead ball vs. live ball foul. I heard the lame cover up excuse by the commentator that Allen was just clearing the defender out with his arm , nothing flagrant or intentional. That's a load of crap and we along with anyone with an inkling of bb knowledge knows it. As you said, the forearm was way to high to be an attempt to get around the defender, if I am going to do that then the arm is used as more of a "hook move" around the body to gain leverage and advantage going by. Not a "Forearm Shiver" to the face. That shot was intentional, should have been an F1 giving a PF as well, 2 ft's and the ball out of bounds to UNC. Actually, an F2 with ejection could have been called but it was imo one of the two.
March 6, 20179 yr Kind of the way I felt about Rasheed Wallace. :thumb: There are and have been several at both schools as well as others like that. No one player has the patent on it.
March 6, 20179 yr Only one that has a chance at a #1 seed would be UNC, the other two it just isn't happening. For Louisville the loss to Wake Forrest killed them.
March 6, 20179 yr #1 seeds look like this in my opinion heading into this weekend 1. Kansas 2. Gonzaga 3. Villanova 4. UNC Thoughts??
March 6, 20179 yr #1 seeds look like this in my opinion heading into this weekend 1. Kansas 2. Gonzaga 3. Villanova 4. UNC Thoughts?? I agree with the 4 but might move Nova to the #2 one.
March 6, 20179 yr #1 seeds look like this in my opinion heading into this weekend 1. Kansas 2. Gonzaga 3. Villanova 4. UNC Thoughts?? Maybe UCLA?
March 6, 20179 yr The #1 seeds should be: 1. Villanova 2. Kansas 3. UCLA 4. UNC But Gonzaga will be in there somewhere unfortunately...
March 6, 20179 yr :sssh: Don't count it out , we are talking about the NCAA + Duke love affair. :popcorn: There is no Duke/NCAA love affair. If anything the NCAA holds a microscope over Duke and UK while turning a blind eye to North Carolina and Kansas who are the true darlings of college basketball and the media. If Duke and UK would actually unify in their fight to expose UNC and Kansas for the frauds they are then maybe some good could be accomplished.
March 6, 20179 yr Maybe UCLA? UCLA would only get one if they win the PAC and if one or more of the top 4 lose in the conference tournaments. UCLA's resume is not very good. That is why they are projected a #3 seed in most brackets.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.