Re: Well thats all folks
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2014 12:47 am
Westbrook#36 wrote:Bill Marsh wrote:R Jay wrote:Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.
Clearly Villanova?
Kind of hard to make that argument when Creighton not only won just as many league games as Villanova did but literally blew the doors off Nova - not once but twice.
No, actually it's a very easy argument to make. Going by the math I've been taught since grade school;
16-2 > 14-4
If you want to try to put some weak spin on it and include BET records(weak because neither Nova or Creighton won it); still using grade school math
16-3 > 16-5
If want to try claim Creighton was better than Villanova last year, you have to ignore that Creighton lost to Providence, St. John's, Xavier, and Georgetown.
BTW Bill, the poster you quoted is a Creighton fan, and you're arguing against him that Creighton was clearly the best team in the BE.
Westbrook, you're making an argument. It's unnecessary.
I'm opposing the idea that Villanova was CLEARLY better. While one can make the argument you do, one can also make the argument that both teams won 16 games against conference competition regardless of who won the tournament.
16 = 16
Head-to-head, which is always the first tiebreaker, Creighton was 2-0 vs Villanova and both were blowouts.
2 > 0
The fact that Creighton lost 2 more games is a function of the fact they earned the right to play 2 more games by getting to the conference tournament finals. Villanova list that opportunity by blowing its first round game against an inferior opponent. Winning big games in the clutch matters. Losing opportunities to get more games is the nature of single elimination tournaments. There are no 2nd chances, which is why these are pressure games. Losing a first round game is like missing the front end of a one-and-one. You might just as well have missed both free throws. It counts the same way.
It doesn't matter which argument is right. (Neither is.) The fact that a legitimate argument can be made at all nullifies the statement that Villanova was CLEARLY the best team in the conference. They weren't.
Regardless of the statement being made by a Creighton fan, it's legitimacy has to stand on its own merits, not on it's source. Just as your argument must stand independent of the fact that you're a Villanova fan, as I recall.