Sweet 16/Elite 8 discussion thread

[jdj4duke]

Duke had a more disappointing season, UNC played up to or even exceeded mid-season expectations.

You, sir have become tedious. UNC has gotten plenty of props here for turning what started as another iffy season into a very good one (but let's not reset that #7 preseason ranking into "midseason expectations"). Stretching that season as being better or less disappointing than Duke's based on one more game in the NCAA, or even as the conference's Most Improved" doesn't cut it. Yes, UNC was the mythical "regular season champion". Duke, again, won the ACC tournament which is the only conference automatic bid. We had more wins, fewer losses, and yes, we got pummeled in the sweet 16.

You may want to go jump on Pitt, too for their early departure (and every other higher seed that lost to a lower). And for all of us Duke fans who had to live through every Tar Heel complaint last year that we "had the trournament handed to (us)", didn't have to play anyone, had all the higher seeds lose, and on and on and not true anyway, I give you Marquette. As I further recall, there was fear and trembling that UNC would never get by the 'Cuse. Well, in fact they didn't have to. Congrats on your Elite 8. Nonetheless, I will take 2 over you, and the ACC tourney, over getting to the Elite 8, especially after pummeling an 11 seed instead of a team that no UNC fan wanted to face.

As someone else pointed out, it's a Duke board. UNC gets a fantastic amount of praise, credit, and even-handedness here, even though we want them to lose. Please, trying to turn their season this year into one better than ours, on this board, based on one game in the NCAA against an overmatched opponent, is not only a losing argument, but bad manners. Congrats to the Heels on a terrific turnaround from last year. Now please, take, and keep, that junk outta here.

[ncexnyc]

Had company for supper tonight. An OSU fan who was more than happy to watch the heels go down in flames. All I have to say is Ding, Dong, the Witch is Dead!

Tomorrow at work should be somewhat bearable.

[kong123]

You, sir have become tedious. UNC has gotten plenty of props here for turning what started as another iffy season into a very good one (but let's not reset that #7 preseason ranking into "midseason expectations"). Stretching that season as being better or less disappointing than Duke's based on one more game in the NCAA, or even as the conference's Most Improved" doesn't cut it. Yes, UNC was the mythical "regular season champion". Duke, again, won the ACC tournament which is the only conference automatic bid. We had more wins, fewer losses, and yes, we got pummeled in the sweet 16.

You may want to go jump on Pitt, too for their early departure (and every other higher seed that lost to a lower). And for all of us Duke fans who had to live through every Tar Heel complaint last year that we "had the trournament handed to (us)", didn't have to play anyone, had all the higher seeds lose, and on and on and not true anyway, I give you Marquette. As I further recall, there was fear and trembling that UNC would never get by the 'Cuse. Well, in fact they didn't have to. Congrats on your Elite 8. Nonetheless, I will take 2 over you, and the ACC tourney, over getting to the Elite 8, especially after pummeling an 11 seed instead of a team that no UNC fan wanted to face.

As someone else pointed out, it's a Duke board. UNC gets a fantastic amount of praise, credit, and even-handedness here, even though we want them to lose. Please, trying to turn their season this year into one better than ours, on this board, based on one game in the NCAA against an overmatched opponent, is not only a losing argument, but bad manners. Congrats to the Heels on a terrific turnaround from last year. Now please, take, and keep, that junk outta here.

I think there is a difference between a "better" season and one that was the most "disappointing".

As far as UNC getting handed something because we played Marquette in the sweet 16, so what? We played Washington in the third round. They beat Arizona in the PAC 10 championship game, so doesn't that make Washington the PAC 10 Champion. Does that make Washington better than Arizona? Washington was also higher ranked on your beloved Kenpom rankings. Does that make them better than Arizona? In fact, if you look at those ratings, UNC played better competition in Washington and Kentucky than Duke faced all year, other than UNC. So maybe you should be happy with your Sweet 16 loss and realize that it could have been worse if you actually played someone this year.

[cbnaylor]

So maybe you should be happy with your Sweet 16 loss and realize that it could have been worse if you actually played someone this year.

Well after stating that comment, I believe you should lose a pitch fork over that. That's a little childish to say that Duke didn't play anyone this year. Come on now. If we are going to go this route, didn't we beat Butler? I believe they are in the Final Four.

[devildeac]

I think there is a difference between a "better" season and one that was the most "disappointing".

As far as UNC getting handed something because we played Marquette in the sweet 16, so what? We played Washington in the third round. They beat Arizona in the PAC 10 championship game, so doesn't that make Washington the PAC 10 Champion. Does that make Washington better than Arizona? Washington was also higher ranked on your beloved Kenpom rankings. Does that make them better than Arizona? In fact, if you look at those ratings, UNC played better competition in Washington and Kentucky than Duke faced all year, other than UNC. So maybe you should be happy with your Sweet 16 loss and realize that it could have been worse if you actually played someone this year.

We did play "someone this year" and we beat them 2 out of 3, IIRC.

[_Gary]

In fact, if you look at those ratings, UNC played better competition in Washington and Kentucky than Duke faced all year, other than UNC. So maybe you should be happy with your Sweet 16 loss and realize that it could have been worse if you actually played someone this year.

What the heck?!! Give me a break on that one, kong. The eyeball test told me all I needed to know in regards to AZ. They didn't have players chucking up half-court shots when there were 4 seconds left on the clock. I can't believe any sane person would think, after watching both teams and how the played in the Tournament, Washington is better than Arizona. That's just silly.

Oh, and how do you jump right back up to having two pitchforks when you had dropped to one last night? I've been posting at the DBR for almost 15 years and while I know I'll never have the buds to give me any pitchfork points, I'm shocked that you've jumped back up to two over night. What's up with that?

The bottom line is that neither team made it to the Final Four. Both were capable of doing so but ran into teams that were shooting a higher than normal percentage from three, while both Duke and UNC (I think, the stats may not back me up because I haven't looked) shot under their avg from three. In this tournament, more times than not, that's a recipe to getting beat.

Props on turning your season around.

[jdj4duke]

As far as UNC getting handed something because we played Marquette in the sweet 16, so what? .

That is exactly my point. All year we heard from UNC fans that Duke didn't play anyone last year in the tournament. Nonsense. Similarly, UNC played who was next, and the argument could clearly be made in turn that your deeper run in the NCAA this year was only because an 11 seed took out what was on paper a more imposing opponent for UNC. That argument means just as little as the constant blathering last year from UNC fans that we "had an easy path." Play and beat who is in front of you.

I didn't say I was happy with a Sweet 16 exit. I did say I wouldn't trade getting one more NCAA win for the two wins over UNC and the ACC championship. I would guess that most folks will remember the 3 Duke-UNC games and the ACC Championship more than the Elite 8 or Sweet 16 conclusions.

You beat who you played in the tournament. You pulled multiple games from out of the fire into the W column. You got congrats from me and a lot of others here on turning last year's disaster into a fine season. What else would you like, short of us asking for UNC tee shirts and honorary degrees?

[arnie]

I think there is a difference between a "better" season and one that was the most "disappointing".

As far as UNC getting handed something because we played Marquette in the sweet 16, so what? We played Washington in the third round. They beat Arizona in the PAC 10 championship game, so doesn't that make Washington the PAC 10 Champion. Does that make Washington better than Arizona? Washington was also higher ranked on your beloved Kenpom rankings. Does that make them better than Arizona? In fact, if you look at those ratings, UNC played better competition in Washington and Kentucky than Duke faced all year, other than UNC. So maybe you should be happy with your Sweet 16 loss and realize that it could have been worse if you actually played someone this year.

And to futher emphasize Kong's points; Carolina did not really lose yesterday. Harrison Barnes was fouled on both 3 pointers he missed near end of game (according to Barnes); but he has forgiven the officials, since they are "human". I guess the forgiveness was given, since without it he might be suspended for a game in the unlikely event he returns.

[Duvall]

And to futher emphasize Kong's points; Carolina did not really lose yesterday. Harrison Barnes was fouled on both 3 pointers he missed near end of game (according to Barnes); but he has forgiven the officials, since they are "human". I guess the forgiveness was given, since without it he might be suspended for a game in the unlikely event he returns.

Whoa - did he really say that? Remarkable.

[kong123]

Whoa - did he really say that? Remarkable.

i guess he should probably provide a quote or two?

[Troublemaker]

Carolina fans will play the "overachievement" card, haha, even though they were one of the 5 most talented teams in the country. Luckily, I wrote a preseason post describing how loaded they were so I can now pooh-pooh their "surprising" season:

You're right. If someone has projected UNC as top 10, it is based purely on talent and not previous accomplishments as a team. But a lot of raw talent they DO have, perhaps top 5 in the country in raw talent. I wouldn't be shocked, for example, if NBA scouts preferred Zeller over Miles, Henson over Mason, Barnes over Singler, and Bullock over Smith, or possibly 4 out of 5 starting positions. Now, obviously, in some of those cases the edge in preference (if it even exists) would be very small, and in some cases the Duke player's experience makes him the much better player in the comparison, and I would expect Duke to be the better team, of course. Just saying, this UNC team is very talented and we should have high expectations for them. How disgusted would we be if, in March, Roy Williams wins National Coach of the Year for building a top 15 team out of all this talent? I think I personally would be pretty disgusted, so I'm going to do my part in keeping some reasonable expectations for them. A nice bounce-back season for the Heels should be expected.

And yes, UNC, with that frontcourt and that point guard and Barnes on the wing and Strickland as a defensive stopper, was loaded. Not a great team due to youth, but a very good one due to overall talent. If I'm a UNC fan, I'm greatly disappointed that the Heels couldn't take advantage of the bracket opening up for them the way it allegedly opened up for Duke last season. Let's face it, by tip time of the UK-UNC game, you kind of had to view that game as perhaps the de facto national championship. UNC advances and they would've had too much size for UConn, VCU, or Butler to handle. Beat UK and UNC wins the national championship 80% of the time, imo. Instead, no Final Four, no ACC championship, go 1-2 against Duke including getting embarrassed in the winner-take-all rubber match against a Duke team missing its best player. Carolina fans will be thinking about that opportunity missed all offseason.

[pfrduke]

What the heck?!! Give me a break on that one, kong. The eyeball test told me all I needed to know in regards to AZ. They didn't have players chucking up half-court shots when there were 4 seconds left on the clock. I can't believe any sane person would think, after watching both teams and how the played in the Tournament, Washington is better than Arizona. That's just silly.

Well, the Huskies did beat Arizona 2 out of 3 this year (and the loss was by a single point at Arizona). Arizona played a great game against us. Washington played a very good game against UNC, before being done in by some poor play down the stretch. I do happen to think that, overall, Washington is a better team than Arizona. I also think that Arizona would have beaten Washington (or just about anyone else) if they played as well as they did against us.

And I really don't understand why you keep emphasizing Overton's shot as the key evidence that shows how bad Washington was or how easy Carolina had it. The Huskies were down 3 with 5 seconds left - it was extremely unlikely under any scenario that they were going to tie the game; and even if they had, a win in overtime was far from guaranteed. It was somewhat silly by Overton, but it's not like that play cost the Huskies the game.

[DukeUva Parent]

i guess he should probably provide a quote or two?

"On the first shot, there was some contact" Barnes said. "I asked the ref about it, he said he didn't see it, that's human error. It happens. The second one, I tried to draw a little contact, he might have clipped me a little bit, but I should have made the shot."

"Human error", too funny. Barnes didn't seem to think there was "human error" in the Washington/UNC game when the foul disparity in the first half was like 12-1 or when almost the entire UK roster fouled out in the game at the Dean Dome.

[moonpie23]

if you actually played someone this year.

whoaaaaa....we played a final 4 team and beat them...you played a final 4 team and lost...

oh, and we beat y'all 66.6 percent of our rivalry games with y'all this year...

[kong123]

"On the first shot, there was some contact" Barnes said. "I asked the ref about it, he said he didn't see it, that's human error. It happens. The second one, I tried to draw a little contact, he might have clipped me a little bit, but I should have made the shot."

"Human error", too funny. Barnes didn't seem to think there was "human error" in the Washington/UNC game when the foul disparity in the first half was like 12-1 or when almost the entire UK roster fouled out in the game at the Dean Dome.

wow, don't spend too much time creating something out of nothing. if Nolan would have said the exact same thing, would you question his sincerity and quote his response as an excuse or some sort of an indication that he is full of himself? hypocrisy at its finest my friends.

[_Gary]

I also think that Arizona would have beaten Washington (or just about anyone else) if they played as well as they did against us.

And I really don't understand why you keep emphasizing Overton's shot as the key evidence that shows how bad Washington was or how easy Carolina had it. The Huskies were down 3 with 5 seconds left - it was extremely unlikely under any scenario that they were going to tie the game; and even if they had, a win in overtime was far from guaranteed. It was somewhat silly by Overton, but it's not like that play cost the Huskies the game.

I think Arizona would have beat Washington if they played as well as they did against both Texas and UConn, for that matter.

The only reason I've mentioned Overton's shot a couple of times is that it really was looney. You have to at least give yourself a chance to win and with that crazy shot he fired up the chances diminished that much more. It was just screwy and not something you'd normally see from any team in that position. At least get the ball over half court and take advantage of the 5 seconds instead of acting like you only had 1 second to shoot. I'm surprised this is being debated as if it wasn't really a very out of the ordinary ending to the game.

[kong123]

whoaaaaa....we played a final 4 team and beat them...you played a final 4 team and lost...

we beat Kentucky once this year, so we beat a final four team as well.

[kong123]

I think Arizona would have beat Washington if they played as well as they did against both Texas and UConn, for that matter.

IF...UNC would have shot 100 percent, they would have blown Kentucky out too. Coulda Shoulda Woulda, you play the game. Both Kentucky and Arizona played a bit better than their average in our respective losses. Its up to our teams to stop that from happening. We both failed and we are both out of the tournament.

[pfrduke]

wow, don't spend too much time creating something out of nothing. if Nolan would have said the exact same thing, would you question his sincerity and quote his response as an excuse or some sort of an indication that he is full of himself? hypocrisy at its finest my friends.

I'm not sure you understand how hypocrisy works - you don't get to create a hypothetical situation, invent how a hypothetical fan would react to that, and then call people hypocrites because the invented hypothetical fan in the invented hypothetical situation reacts the way you say he would react. To my knowledge, Nolan Smith has never said that a ref who missed a call on one of his shots committed "human error." Harrison Barnes did. Someone reacted to the thing that actually happened, as opposed to the made up thing that didn't happen. That reaction is not an example of hypocrisy.

[kong123]

my point is people are more willing to assume the worst for a UNC player, yet give the benefit of the doubt to their player. Sure, the situations may not be an apples to apples comparison, but it still irritates me.

UNC fans do it as well and I do not condone that either. I hate it and I will call it out when I see it.