Look at Long Beach State's schedule and approximate the W/L record for Murray.

 

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/299/long-beach-state-49ers

 

I see Long Beach has possibly two wins over tournament bound teams if X makes it to the dance. MSU has three to my count. LBSt. has played a strong OOC schedule with some close losses but they are still losses.

I see Long Beach has possibly two wins over tournament bound teams if X makes it to the dance. MSU has three to my count.

 

Tell me what you think Murray's record is against the LBSU schedule. Ballpark it for me. 24-1?

Put down your drink of choice and get rid of the attitude, son. I simply expressed an opinion without rancor.

 

Has nothing to do with that. I've always cheered for X. So don't act like I was calling you out just to poke fun and be mean. I was just pointing out that there's room for other teams in mid-major paradise. Murray plays who's in front of them, just like X, just like Butler, just like all the other small schools that get discredited for their schedule (despite the fact that the schools from the BCS conferences are scared to death to schedule them because they can't suffer the indignity of a loss to a "lesser-than"). Your dismissal of Murray sounds an awful lot like those folks who want to slam the door behind them after they've made it.

Good luck getting one of those out of him.

 

Sorry if I'm too harsh for you.

Has nothing to do with that. I've always cheered for X. So don't act like I was calling you out just to poke fun and be mean. I was just pointing out that there's room for other teams in mid-major paradise. Murray plays who's in front of them, just like X, just like Butler, just like all the other small schools that get discredited for their schedule (despite the fact that the schools from the BCS conferences are scared to death to schedule them because they can't suffer the indignity of a loss to a "lesser-than"). Your dismissal of Murray sounds an awful lot like those folks who want to slam the door behind them after they've made it.

 

Who said anything about slamming a door? I said I think they're an 8 to 10 seed. People see 24-1 without looking at the story behind it. They haven't shown that they can compete at that level. If Murray played anywhere near the schedule LBSU has, for example, and was 24-1 I'd say they were a solid 3. Their SOS is in the mid-200s. Come on. You can't have that SOS and get a high seed.

By the way, X has had a rough year by X standards and is only slightly behind Murray in the RPIs.

Sorry if I'm too harsh for you.

 

I actually agree with you about this, but your little tangent about why Clyde feels the way he does was completely unfounded.

Tell me what you think Murray's record is against the LBSU schedule. Ballpark it for me. 24-1?

 

I'd say 19-7 or 20-6. I think MSU will be lucky to get a six or higher seed.

I'd say 19-7 or 20-6. I think MSU will be lucky to get a six or higher seed.

 

OK. So we agree that they haven't earned a 3 or 4 seed. If they get a 6 they should throw a parade in Murray.

Who said anything about slamming a door? I said I think they're an 8 to 10 seed. People see 24-1 without looking at the story behind it. They haven't shown that they can compete at that level. If Murray played anywhere near the schedule LBSU has, for example, and was 24-1 I'd say they were a solid 3. Their SOS is in the mid-200s. Come on. You can't have that SOS and get a high seed.

 

I'm just saying it's wrong to dismiss a team based on conference, which is what the computer numbers, and fans, do. Oftentimes they outrun their expectations, the way Butler does.

 

By the way, X has had a rough year by X standards and is only slightly behind Murray in the RPIs.

 

Which just proves my point. X gets the benefit of the doubt, but for some reason Murray doesn't, even though they've delivered pretty well over the years. X has graduated. Murray's on the cusp. Dismiss them at your own risk. They pass the eyeball test.

I'm just saying it's wrong to dismiss a team based on conference, which is what the computer numbers, and fans, do. Oftentimes they outrun their expectations, the way Butler does.

 

 

 

Which just proves my point. X gets the benefit of the doubt, but for some reason Murray doesn't, even though they've delivered pretty well over the years. X has graduated. Murray's on the cusp. Dismiss them at your own risk. They pass the eyeball test.

 

So you think Arizona was the best team during the season in 1997?

 

First you said X was a mid-major (I'd disagree but that's irrelevant) and now you're saying they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

Do you think Murray beats UC on a neutral court?

So you think Arizona was the best team during the season in 1997?

 

First you said X was a mid-major (I'd disagree but that's irrelevant) and now you're saying they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

Not sure what any of this has to do with anything. I pulled out the mid-major thing as a jab to make you recognize that you were being dismissive of a "lower-level" team the same way fans of BCS conference schools do to teams like X. Guess it didn't register, despite X's history of frustration in getting screwed by the seeding committee. Ergo, my comment about X "graduating" and fans of them "slamming the door behind them" so other "lesser-thans" couldn't crowd them out.

 

Do you think Murray beats UC on a neutral court?

 

I certainly don't see why they couldn't. It's not like UC is particularly impressive.

Not sure what any of this has to do with anything. I pulled out the mid-major thing as a jab to make you recognize that you were being dismissive of a "lower-level" team the same way fans of BCS conference schools do to teams like X. Guess it didn't register, despite X's history of frustration in getting screwed by the seeding committee. Ergo, my comment about X "graduating" and fans of them "slamming the door behind them" so other "lesser-thans" couldn't crowd them out.

 

 

 

I certainly don't see why they couldn't. It's not like UC is particularly impressive.

 

I guess my memory is bad. I've never heard X say they were screwed. You're wasting your time with jabs about X. Jab away but it's not adding any value or getting the rise you're hoping for.

 

So you say Murray is a possible 3 but you don't say unequivocally they would beat UC? I agree with you about that (I'd take UC) but that tells me again that there are too many unknowns with Murray.

OK. So we agree that they haven't earned a 3 or 4 seed. If they get a 6 they should throw a parade in Murray.

 

We agree but many will be screaming on selection Sunday when the pairings are announced. In 2010 Butler went 28-4 playing a tougher schedule and that resulted in a five seed.

I guess my memory is bad. I've never heard X say they were screwed.

 

I'm kind of shocked by that. I heard it every year back when I was still living in the Cincy area, starting with the year they drew Danny Manning's Kansas squad in the first round that fateful year when Byron was the mack.

 

So you say Murray is a possible 3 but you don't say unequivocally they would beat UC? I agree with you about that (I'd take UC) but that tells me again that there are too many unknowns with Murray.

 

My point is that anybody can beat anybody, for the most part. There isn't a huge talent difference between teams once you get below the top four or five squads. That's why Butler has made it to the finals the past two years.