March Madness Nonsense in July

[brevity]

In what can only be described as a massive killer of time in the college basketball offseason, and maybe a reason to stay indoors, NCAA.com (https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-07-17/help-us-pick-greatest-college-basketball-starting-5-all-time) has put forth a single-elimination bracket of 32 schools, each with an all-time starting five. Matchups are staged on the NCAA March Madness Twitter account (https://twitter.com/marchmadness), and winners for each round are determined in the smartest, fairest, and most reasonable way: Internet voting.

8521

The polls started last week and the Sweet 16 is three-quarters done, with 11 chalk choices, plus Arizona instead of Maryland. Here is a completed matchup chosen at random.

8522

You may be wondering, "Who came up with that five?" Well...


Players and teams were selected and seeded by Andy Katz and the NCAA.com editorial team based on a combination of legendary status, on-court performance and career achievements.

So, arbitrary. UNC advanced easily, despite the choice of point guard. Duke also advanced into the Sweet 16 against California, which is not nearly as satisfying as it would have been 25 years ago.

8523

I think that the lack of Lamond Murray may have worked in Duke's favor.

[JasonEvans]

Oh yeah, this is gonna be a waste of my time.

I won't even get started on some of the ridiculous picks to be "starters" for each of these teams, but the fact that this LSU team only barely (54-47) beat this Texas team tells me there are going to be real problems with this thing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/ad_img/1021058068191182848/EauUAW9v?format=jpg&name=orig

-Jason "in real life, Pistol Pete, Bob Petit, and Shaq beat that Texas team by at least 30 points" Evans

[NSDukeFan]

Oh yeah, this is gonna be a waste of my time.

I won't even get started on some of the ridiculous picks to be "starters" for each of these teams, but the fact that this LSU team only barely (54-47) beat this Texas team tells me there are going to be real problems with this thing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/ad_img/1021058068191182848/EauUAW9v?format=jpg&name=orig

-Jason "in real life, Pistol Pete, Bob Petit, and Shaq beat that Texas team by at least 30 points" Evans
Those are some great matchups. Do you take Shaquille O’Neal or Chris Mihm? Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf (Chris Jackson in college) would also be a nightmare matchup fo Ford or Augustin.

[kAzE]

To be honest, that California team arguably has just as much talent as the Duke team, if not more. That perimeter trio of Jason Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Jaylen Brown is unbelievable . . . .

In the end, I think Duke would be just slightly favored in that match up, because our front court of Laettner and Battier seems better defensively than their Ryan Anderson/Shareef duo, but they have a pretty sizable advantage with Kidd and KJ. That's a crazy back court. I dunno how Hurley and Redick would be able to handle Kidd's size (6'5") and KJ's explosive athleticism and scoring ability.

Grant vs Jaylen would be a wash defensively, but Grant has much higher upside on offense. Grant is the only real elite athlete on that Duke squad, whereas the Cal team has 4 pretty damn good athletes.

We would have to go deeper than the starting 5 for Duke to have a significant advantage in this (in a real game situation).

I think if I were to pick a real competitive starting 5, throwing Duke accomplishments out, I'd go with:

PG: Kyrie Irving
SG: JJ Redick
SF: Grant Hill
PF: Jayson Tatum
C: Elton Brand

Sorry Laettner . . .

[tbyers11]

Oh yeah, this is gonna be a waste of my time.

I won't even get started on some of the ridiculous picks to be "starters" for each of these teams, but the fact that this LSU team only barely (54-47) beat this Texas team tells me there are going to be real problems with this thing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/ad_img/1021058068191182848/EauUAW9v?format=jpg&name=orig

-Jason "in real life, Pistol Pete, Bob Petit, and Shaq beat that Texas team by at least 30 points" Evans

Well, Bob Pettit is 85 years old, Rudy Macklin is 60, and Pistol Pete is deceased. So LSU winning by only 7 seems about right :D

[jimsumner]

Ty Cobb was visiting Florida in the early 1960s, watching some spring-training games.

A reporter recognized him and struck up a conversation.

"Mr. Cobb, how do you think you would do against today's pitchers?"

"Oh, probably about .300, maybe .310."

"That surprises me. I thought you would answer with a higher number."

"Well, you have to remember, I am 70 years old."

[left_hook_lacey]

That's a sneaky good starting 5 for Wake. I'd take my chances with that 5 against pretty much any other, though I doubt they'll go much farther in this thing.

[JasonEvans]

To be honest, that California team arguably has just as much talent as the Duke team, if not more. That perimeter trio of Jason Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Jaylen Brown is unbelievable

Dissent...

So, obviously we are only looking at these guys as college players, not what they would mature into. I mean, the fact that Bobby Hurley is the PG instead of Kyrie tells you that this is all about college careers**.

Anyway, if we are only looking at college achievement, Jaylen Brown is just an ordinary player. He averaged just 14.6 ppg and was just a terrible shooter (43.1% FG, 29.4% 3FG, 65.4% FTs). Sure, he is a stud athlete, but his skills aren't even in the same area code as the other guys in this game. Heck, Kevin Johnson wasn't all that special of a player. He never even sniffed an All-American team during his time at Cal. And I happen to think that winning matters... a lot... especially for a PG. During KJ's 3 years at Cal, they never finished better than 3rd in the Pac Ten. They made 2 NIT tournaments but never even made the NCAA tourney. Sorry, but to compare those guys to the Duke backcourt is a joke.

-Jason "**- by the way, one could argue pretty hard for JWill over Hurley at PG, one of the very few 2-time POY players in NCAA history... though Hurley is the all-time assist leader with ice cubes running their his veins" Evans

[NSDukeFan]

To be honest, that California team arguably has just as much talent as the Duke team, if not more. That perimeter trio of Jason Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Jaylen Brown is unbelievable . . . .

In the end, I think Duke would be just slightly favored in that match up, because our front court of Laettner and Battier seems better defensively than their Ryan Anderson/Shareef duo, but they have a pretty sizable advantage with Kidd and KJ. That's a crazy back court. I dunno how Hurley and Redick would be able to handle Kidd's size (6'5") and KJ's explosive athleticism and scoring ability.

Grant vs Jaylen would be a wash defensively, but Grant has much higher upside on offense. Grant is the only real elite athlete on that Duke squad, whereas the Cal team has 4 pretty damn good athletes.

We would have to go deeper than the starting 5 for Duke to have a significant advantage in this (in a real game situation).

I think if I were to pick a real competitive starting 5, throwing Duke accomplishments out, I'd go with:

PG: Kyrie Irving
SG: JJ Redick
SF: Grant Hill
PF: Jayson Tatum
C: Elton Brand

Sorry Laettner . . .

Are we talking college or pro, because if it’s college Laettner is first pick for Duke, Hurley and Redick (or J. Dawkins) are not having a problem against Kidd and Johnson and Hill is destroying Brown (at this point that would be college or pro). Anderson and Shareef were definitely no match for Battier and Laettner in college. This should be a hypothetical cakewalk.
I’ll take Duke’s all-time leading scorer and the NCAA champs.

[kAzE]

Dissent...

So, obviously we are only looking at these guys as college players, not what they would mature into. I mean, the fact that Bobby Hurley is the PG instead of Kyrie tells you that this is all about college achievements**.

Anyway, if we are only looking at college achievement, Jaylen Brown is just an ordinary player. He averaged just 14.6 ppg and was just a terrible shooter (43.1% FG, 29.4% 3FG, 65.4% FTs). Sure, he is a stud athlete, but his skills aren't even in the same area code as the other guys in this game. Heck, Kevin Johnson wasn't all that special of a player. He never even sniffer an All-American team during his time at Cal. And I happen to think that winning matters... a lot... especially for a PG. During KJ's 3 years at Cal, they never finished better than 3rd in the Pac Ten. They made 2 NIT tournaments but never even made the NCAA tourney. Sorry, but to compare those guys to the Duke backcourt is a joke.

-Jason "**- by the way, one could argue pretty hard for JWill over Hurley at PG, one of the very few 2-time POY players in NCAA history... though Hurley is the all-time assist leader with ice cubes running their his veins" Evans

That's fine, but I was comparing the players at their peaks. Kevin Johnson was a 4 time 2nd team-All NBA player, which is more than anyone on that Duke team did in the NBA, including Grant. Also, you're kind of underselling his college career, where he averaged 17.2 points and 5 assists on some teams that didn't have a whole lot of talent around him. Also, If Jaylen Brown had stayed in college, he'd have been one of the best players in the country as a sophomore/junior. It doesn't seem fair to compare players who were 22 years old to 19 year olds, so I'd rather compare them as finished products. OBVIOUSLY a senior Grant Hill would absolutely dominate an 18 year old Jaylen Brown, but both at age 23? Brown would at least be able to hold his own, even against the much more talented Hill.

We're using 2 completely different scales of measurement, so there's nothing to even argue about, really. And since this is a Twitter poll, people are free to use whatever method they choose. So I'll stick to mine and you can stick to yours :)

[dudog84]

Silly, but entertaining, exercise.

I got a week's worth of enjoyment just seeing Kentucky with a 2 seed. Imagining their hair on fire (figuratively, of course) brings a smile to my face.

[jv001]

Dissent...

So, obviously we are only looking at these guys as college players, not what they would mature into. I mean, the fact that Bobby Hurley is the PG instead of Kyrie tells you that this is all about college careers**.

Anyway, if we are only looking at college achievement, Jaylen Brown is just an ordinary player. He averaged just 14.6 ppg and was just a terrible shooter (43.1% FG, 29.4% 3FG, 65.4% FTs). Sure, he is a stud athlete, but his skills aren't even in the same area code as the other guys in this game. Heck, Kevin Johnson wasn't all that special of a player. He never even sniffed an All-American team during his time at Cal. And I happen to think that winning matters... a lot... especially for a PG. During KJ's 3 years at Cal, they never finished better than 3rd in the Pac Ten. They made 2 NIT tournaments but never even made the NCAA tourney. Sorry, but to compare those guys to the Duke backcourt is a joke.

-Jason "**- by the way, one could argue pretty hard for JWill over Hurley at PG, one of the very few 2-time POY players in NCAA history... though Hurley is the all-time assist leader with ice cubes running their his veins" Evans

Hurley, Christian, Battier, Grant and Jay-Will had the best "refuse to lose" attitudes I can remember. Sorry JJ. GoDuke!

[JasonEvans]

That's fine, but I was comparing the players at their peaks. Kevin Johnson was a 4 time 2nd team-All NBA player, which is more than anyone on that Duke team did in the NBA, including Grant. Also, you're kind of underselling his college career, where he averaged 17.2 points and 5 assists on some teams that didn't have a whole lot of talent around him. Also, If Jaylen Brown had stayed in college, he'd have been one of the best players in the country as a sophomore/junior. It doesn't seem fair to compare players who were 22 years old to 19 year olds, so I'd rather compare them as finished products. OBVIOUSLY a senior Grant Hill would absolutely dominate an 18 year old Jaylen Brown, but both at age 23? Brown would at least be able to hold his own, even against the much more talented Hill.

We're using 2 completely different scales of measurement, so there's nothing to even argue about, really. And since this is a Twitter poll, people are free to use whatever method they choose. So I'll stick to mine and you can stick to yours :)

I hear ya, but it is clear to me that you are using a different criteria than Katz and the NCAA intended. As I said, the fact that Hurley is on there instead of Kyrie tells me that this is about college performance only, not NBA accomplishment. Look at the teams Katz picked... it is abundantly clear he is ignoring what the players matured into as pros. Chris Mihm should tell you that.

Also, not to pick nits but Grant was on more 1st/2nd All-NBA teams than KJ. KJ was 2nd team 4 times, the same as Grant, but Grant also made 1st team once (1997). KJ was a 3 time All-Star while Grant made the All-Star team 7 times.

[DukeTrinity11]

That's fine, but I was comparing the players at their peaks. Kevin Johnson was a 4 time 2nd team-All NBA player, which is more than anyone on that Duke team did in the NBA, including Grant. Also, you're kind of underselling his college career, where he averaged 17.2 points and 5 assists on some teams that didn't have a whole lot of talent around him. Also, If Jaylen Brown had stayed in college, he'd have been one of the best players in the country as a sophomore/junior. It doesn't seem fair to compare players who were 22 years old to 19 year olds, so I'd rather compare them as finished products. OBVIOUSLY a senior Grant Hill would absolutely dominate an 18 year old Jaylen Brown, but both at age 23? Brown would at least be able to hold his own, even against the much more talented Hill.

We're using 2 completely different scales of measurement, so there's nothing to even argue about, really. And since this is a Twitter poll, people are free to use whatever method they choose. So I'll stick to mine and you can stick to yours :)
Most OAD lottery picks who return to college would automatically be considered as one of the best players in college. Their only downfall all along was a lack of game experience and maturity and once that is earned...its light out to the rest of the field.

Grant Hill is on a different planet than Jaylen Brown as a basketball player. He had much better handles, was a better scorer and was a MVP candidate in the mid 1990s.

Tatum is a promising player but he wouldn't crack the top 10 all time list of Duke NBA players at this present moment.

1. Grant Hill
2. Kyrie Irving
3. Elton Brand
4. Jeff Mullins
5. Luol Deng
6. Carlos Boozer
7. Corey Maggette
8. Shane Battier
9. J.J. Redick
10. Mike Dunleavy Jr.

I expect Tatum and Ingram to be top 5 Duke NBA players soon enough but its dangerous to extrapolate ahead. Remember, Tyreke Evans peaked as a rookie essentially.

[kAzE]

Most OAD lottery picks who return to college would automatically be considered as one of the best players in college. Their only downfall all along was a lack of game experience and maturity and once that is earned...its light out to the rest of the field.

Grant Hill is on a different planet than Jaylen Brown as a basketball player. He had much better handles, was a better scorer and was a MVP candidate in the mid 1990s.

Tatum is a promising player but he wouldn't crack the top 10 all time list of Duke NBA players at this present moment.

1. Grant Hill
2. Kyrie Irving
3. Elton Brand
4. Jeff Mullins
5. Luol Deng
6. Carlos Boozer
7. Corey Maggette
8. Shane Battier
9. J.J. Redick
10. Mike Dunleavy Jr.

I expect Tatum and Ingram to be top 5 Duke NBA players soon enough but its dangerous to extrapolate ahead. Remember, Tyreke Evans peaked as a rookie essentially.

I never meant to imply that Jaylen Brown was as good as Grant Hill. On a different planet, though? I think you may be getting ahead of yourself there. I said in my post that Hill was a much more talented player, and that's not up for debate, but Jaylen Brown is 21 years old. You shouldn't extrapolate too far ahead, but you also shouldn't cap the ceiling of a 21 year old.

He's potentially a future all-star (I think going by his current career trajectory, this is very likely) and/or All-NBA player (less likely). He's certainly one of the better defenders in the league even as a young kid, and could be an all-defense guy one day. But the point is, we don't know how good he will become just yet. Grant Hill was still a junior at Duke at Jaylen's current age.

Grant is a Hall of Famer. Jaylen most likely will not be that. They are not in the same zip code (or state, or maybe even continent), but surely the same planet.

[kAzE]

I hear ya, but it is clear to me that you are using a different criteria than Katz and the NCAA intended. As I said, the fact that Hurley is on there instead of Kyrie tells me that this is about college performance only, not NBA accomplishment. Look at the teams Katz picked... it is abundantly clear he is ignoring what the players matured into as pros. Chris Mihm should tell you that.

Also, not to pick nits but Grant was on more 1st/2nd All-NBA teams than KJ. KJ was 2nd team 4 times, the same as Grant, but Grant also made 1st team once (1997). KJ was a 3 time All-Star while Grant made the All-Star team 7 times.

Fair enough, I didn't see a set of rules or anything, so my post was based on total career accomplishments, including NBA. It's really hard for the hoops junkie in me to completely ignore that. Surely you wouldn't disagree with me quite as vehemently if we were going by my standards. (J Kidd and KJ as pros are a DISGUSTING back court)

But yes, that would be the correct Duke team if we are taking the college versions of those players, and they would smash that Cal team. But I do think Jay Will has a really good case to crack the lineup over Hurley.

But at the same time, this just becomes an exercise of “who had the best players prior to 2004,” because nobody is ever going to have seniors as good as grant hill ever again. It’s way more interesting IMO to evaluate players based on their peak.

[House P]

winners for each round are determined in the smartest, fairest, and most reasonable way: Internet voting.

In other words, we can probably just pencil in Kentucky as the overall winner, can't we?

Given their fanbase, I don't see Kentucky losing this popularity contest to anyone. This would probably still be the case if the UK lineup consisted of the Harrison twins, Aminu Timberlake, Saul Smith, and Brad Calipari.



As far as the actual rosters for this "contest", Duke appears to be the only team with 3 AP National Players of the Year (Redick, Battier, and Laettner). Three others schools (UCLA, Ohio St, and UNC) could have matched this if different players had been chosen. Looking at the full list of AP NPOYs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Press_College_Basketball_Player_of_the_ Year), Duke is the only school which could have an entire 5 man lineup consisting of AP NPOY winners (by swapping out Hurley and Hill for two of Jayson Williams, Brand, and Heyman).

Duke is also one of three schools with a roster entirely of 1st team AP All Americans. IU and UCONN are the other two.

[kAzE]

So . . . I was thinking about the actual teams, and I think the best 2 teams are Duke and UCLA, with the edge I believe going to UCLA.

As incredible as that Duke lineup is, it's pretty tough to see that team being able to defeat Lew Alcindor, Bill Walton, Reggie Miller, Russell Westbrook, and Gail Goodrich.

True, Westbrook was not yet the unstoppable triple-double machine that he is today as a sophomore at UCLA, he was still an unreal athlete, in a lineup with 4 future hall of famers. That's gotta be the best team in the field.

[JasonEvans]

So . . . I was thinking about the actual teams, and I think the best 2 teams are Duke and UCLA, with the edge I believe going to UCLA.

As incredible as that Duke lineup is, it's pretty tough to see that team being able to defeat Lew Alcindor, Bill Walton, Reggie Miller, Russell Westbrook, and Gail Goodrich.

True, Westbrook was not yet the unstoppable triple-double machine that he is today as a sophomore at UCLA, he was still an unreal athlete, in a lineup with 4 future hall of famers. That's gotta be the best team in the field.

I dissented with you about stuff earlier, but I fully agree with this. Duke has had some truly great players, but no one who comes close to the greatness of Alcindor or Walton. The thought of those two in the post passing out of double-teams to Reggie Miller is terrifying.

[luvdahops]

I dissented with you about stuff earlier, but I fully agree with this. Duke has had some truly great players, but no one who comes close to the greatness of Alcindor or Walton. The thought of those two in the post passing out of double-teams to Reggie Miller is terrifying.

Same with high-low action between Walton and Kareem....

[devildeac]

Same with high-low action between Walton and Kareem...


I see what you did there...

[NSDukeFan]

College Westbrook should not be on the UCLA team ahead of O’Bannon, Collison, Wicks, Wilkes, Tracy Murray, Kevin Love, etc., IMO. I agree UCLA would probably have the strongest team with the twin towers.

[MCFinARL]

Ty Cobb was visiting Florida in the early 1960s, watching some spring-training games.

A reporter recognized him and struck up a conversation.

"Mr. Cobb, how do you think you would do against today's pitchers?"

"Oh, probably about .300, maybe .310."

"That surprises me. I thought you would answer with a higher number."

"Well, you have to remember, I am 70 years old."

"you must spread some comments...." What a great story!

[Truth&Justise]

Ty Cobb was visiting Florida in the early 1960s, watching some spring-training games.

A reporter recognized him and struck up a conversation.

"Mr. Cobb, how do you think you would do against today's pitchers?"

"Oh, probably about .300, maybe .310."

"That surprises me. I thought you would answer with a higher number."

"Well, you have to remember, I am 70 years old."

Classic joke, always lands well.

Larry Bird, on whether the 2012 Olympic Team could beat the Dream Team: They probably could. I haven't played in 20 years and we're all old now. (https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/larry-bird-ends-dream-team-vs-2012-team-010342911--oly.html)

[JasonEvans]

The Sweet 16 is set:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjEPl0aU4AACygn.jpg

Wake over Syracuse and Arizona over Maryland -- both #5 seeds beating a #4 -- are the only upsets thus far.

The UNC vs. Arizona SW16 game (https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1022874261898199042) has begun. Early returns have Carolina leading with 82% of the vote.

[devildeac]

The Sweet 16 is set:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjEPl0aU4AACygn.jpg

Wake over Syracuse and Arizona over Maryland -- both #5 seeds beating a #4 -- are the only upsets thus far.

The UNC vs. Arizona SW16 game (https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1022874261898199042) has begun. Early returns have Carolina leading with 82% of the vote.


They're obviously cheating. Again.

:rolleyes:

[PackMan97]

I'm offended. No way does State's best ever lose to UNC's best. Just ain't gonna happen.

[Reddevil]

I'm offended. No way does State's best ever lose to UNC's best. Just ain't gonna happen.

I absolutely agree. Indiana's best does not lose to them either. We will see how that plays out.

The legendary UCLA teams did not have much of a gauntlet to navigate back then and are probably overrated. (The first basketball game I ever saw was Thompson and the Wolfpack beat Walton and UCLA - on TV, but then I was hooked on ACC basketball forever.)

As time goes by, some players and teams become legendary which skews reality. How some faired in the NBA vs how they actually played in college twists things too. Thompson, Towe, Burleson, etc. along with the cardiac kids would be a very tough out. Any team with Laettner, Hurley, and Hill on it would be a major challenge as well. Yes, I am biased, but teams trump pure talent, and while unc, ky, ks, and ucla can put out as much talent as anyone, if this actually played out somehow, I would not be surprised to see a Wolfpack / Blue Devil final. Of course there was only one undefeated team and like it or not, an all time Indiana team would be a Knightmare!

[House P]

Voting is now open in the Duke-Florida matchup. Duke currently has a very small lead (54% vs 46%). To me that's pretty strong evidence of the level of "Duke hate" out there. If this contest was based on basketball ability and not (lack of) popularity, Duke should win a blowout.

- Duke's roster for this competition consists of 3 AP NPOY winners and 2 first team AP All Americans (one of which, Grant Hill, was generally considered to be the 2nd best player in the country his senior year).

- Florida's roster has 0 first team AP All Americans, 1 second team All American (Joakim Noah), 1 third team All American (Al Horford) and 3 guys who failed to make any AP All American Team.

###########################

The Elite 8 is all but set on the other side of the bracket with two matchups which interest me from a "who is most popular" standpoint: UNC vs Indiana and KU vs UK. These may be 4 of the 5 largest fanbases in college basketball. While I strongly suspect that UK will win the whole contest*, I wonder who will give UK the closest game.

Which of the following matchups do folks think will be closest?

-UK vs KU
-UK vs UNC
-UK vs Indiana (if they somehow get past UNC)
-UK vs whoever they will face in the championship game (UCLA?)



*Unless an unexpectedly large number of participants actually base their vote on basketball ability and choose UCLA over UK.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Voting is now open in the Duke-Florida matchup. Duke currently has a very small lead (54% vs 46%). To me that's pretty strong evidence of the level of "Duke hate" out there. If this contest was based on basketball ability and not (lack of) popularity, Duke should win a blowout.

- Duke's roster for this competition consists of 3 AP NPOY winners and 2 first team AP All Americans (one of which, Grant Hill, was generally considered to be the 2nd best player in the country his senior year).

- Florida's roster has 0 first team AP All Americans, 1 second team All American (Joakim Noah), 1 third team All American (Al Horford) and 3 guys who failed to make any AP All American Team.

###########################

The Elite 8 is all but set on the other side of the bracket with two matchups which interest me from a "who is most popular" standpoint: UNC vs Indiana and KU vs UK. These may be 4 of the 5 largest fanbases in college basketball. While I strongly suspect that UK will win the whole contest*, I wonder who will give UK the closest game.

Which of the following matchups do folks think will be closest?

-UK vs KU
-UK vs UNC
-UK vs Indiana (if they somehow get past UNC)
-UK vs whoever they will face in the championship game (UCLA?)



*Unless an unexpectedly large number of participants actually base their vote on basketball ability and choose UCLA over UK.

UK versus UNC is the only remaining match up I am curious about. My horse sense tells me there are more obnoxious baby blue folks out there, but I am admittedly biased.

I guess Indiana could win, but I have a difficult time justifying it based on anything other than rabid fandom. Which is, I suppose, what this is all about after all.

[JasonEvans]

Totally meaningless exercise... but people need to go vote right now (https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1024323808935563265)as we are currently tie 50%-50% with Florida. 6000+ total votes so far... let's make a difference here and at least reach the final 8.

[JasonEvans]

Totally meaningless exercise... but people need to go vote right now (https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1024323808935563265)as we are currently tie 50%-50% with Florida. 6000+ total votes so far... let's make a difference here and at least reach the final 8.

Now 54-46, Florida. The Duke hatred tsunami strikes again.

[dudog84]

Now 54-46, Florida. The Duke hatred tsunami strikes again.

I kinda want Florida to win. Shows this ridiculousness for what it is.