Perfect Bracket?

[crimsondevil]

Hadn't seen this posted anywhere:

There's a bracket on the NCAA site that is perfect through the first weekend (story link (https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/bracketiq/2019-03-28/1-perfect-bracket-remains-world-were-tracking-it-sweet-16); actual bracket (https://bracketchallenge.ncaa.com/picks/bracket/2550349)).
A relatively chalky year like this one so far is how it could happen - there are 2 brackets on ESPN with only 1 miss. Still, picking 48 out of 48 games is impressive.

FWIW, he's got Gonzaga over UK in the final (Duke and UVA also to the FF). All chalk for this round, so we'll see if it survives the evening.

[Phredd3]

All chalk for this round, so we'll see if it survives the evening.

It needs a big comeback from Tennessee to survive even the first pair of games.

[DU82]

It needs a big comeback from Tennessee to survive even the first pair of games.

You were saying...

[Phredd3]

You were saying...

80-80. Comeback isn't complete, yet.

Edit: But getting there. 82-80 on the dunk.

[duke4ever19]

Woah.

So . . . what do we think about that foul call on the three?

Was there clear contact? I missed the replay.

[Phredd3]

Woah.

So . . . what do we think about that foul call on the three?

Was there clear contact? I missed the replay.

Seemed pretty clear contact to me, mostly on the follow, but they call it on the follow all the time when the clock isn't running down, so it seems they should call it when it is.

[dukelifer]

Perfect no more

[duke4ever19]

Seemed pretty clear contact to me, mostly on the follow, but they call it on the follow all the time when the clock isn't running down, so it seems they should call it when it is.

Just rewatched it. I agree. Contact on the follow. It looks like that KO'd the Volunteers. They are a mess now.

Edit: I'm going to go outside and work on my free-throws on behalf of both teams.

[fisheyes]

Wasn't the Purdue guy out of bounds at the end of regulation? Missed that one, no?

[gocanes0506]

Seemed pretty clear contact to me, mostly on the follow, but they call it on the follow all the time when the clock isn't running down, so it seems they should call it when it is.

He barely got him on the leg on the follow through. With as much contact that is allowed elsewhere, they call that little contact? That little contact that no barring on the shot?

[duke4ever19]

He barely got him on the leg on the follow through. With as much contact that is allowed elsewhere, they call that little contact? That little contact that no barring on the shot?

I was wondering how blatant others felt the foul was to justify granting Purdue a potential game winning foul shot.

[moonpie23]

i definitely thought it was a foul.......and he wasn't out of bounds when he shot it....

[Acymetric]

I was wondering how blatant others felt the foul was to justify granting Purdue a potential game winning foul shot.

You just can't make contact on a (non-desperation heave) 3. They'll let contact go inside sometimes but they're hardly ever going to swallow the whistle on that shot. Can't expect even the slightest contact there to be ignored.

[Phredd3]

I was wondering how blatant others felt the foul was to justify granting Purdue a potential game winning foul shot.

I thought he got him fairly substantially with the shoulder after the release. Seeing it live, I thought it was a foul, but I can certainly understand those who don't agree.

[gocanes0506]

I was wondering how blatant others felt the foul was to justify granting Purdue a potential game winning foul shot.

If it changes the shot sure or a body check because he’s flying out there uncontrolled, sure. A graze across the thigh on the way down, no.

So much worse contact happening without a call. Add in the context of the foul call, makes it so much worse.

[Pghdukie]

Was the ref on that play TV TEDDY ?

[crimsondevil]

Oh well, jinxed it. Still, picking every game the first 2 rounds is an acomplishment in itself.

[killerleft]

Wasn't the Purdue guy out of bounds at the end of regulation? Missed that one, no?

No, he was inbounds.