... or will you?

To people in this area, yeah. Across the country? No.



But if it were to happen, I think it would test this boards' shiny new server I would think.

Are you out of your mind?

There was a buzzer beating 3 pointer made to tie a ****ing NC game.

The game included all the top teams in the tourney which has NEVER happened.

Whats a bigger NCAA moment?

Please, I'm all ears.

It also featured a future NBA MVP putting on a ridiculous show, the core of the winningest team over a four-year span in NCAA history (unofficially, natch) at their peak, a comeback from a 9 point deficit with 2 minutes left leading up to said buzzer beater, and probably some other good stuff but I haven't been able to watch since that night so v:deevee:v

Already bought my Gators gear, and I'm thinking about doing a hybrid chomp the wheat move.

... god DAMNIT so close


I'm just saying, don't sleep on the Hoos.

@BlumbbergOTB
Five-Star 2012 Basketball recruit Devonta Pollard visiting #Mizzou on an official today...2nd visit to MU.



http://i371.photobucket.com/albums/o...fz/gladje4.gif

Haith on espnu right now...

Talking about Bowers injury and next opp...

That'd be aight.

Katz: MU is a trendy pick
CFH: All about m/ups, we are a tough m/u. English, Denmon nicked

Biggest game =/= Greatest game =/= Biggest moment

So Nick Wright actually made sense just now.

Missouri's best is better than anyone's best, but Missouri's slightly below average game gets beat.

Kansas's best can lose to the best of several other teams in the league if that team plays its best game, but Kansas's slightly below average can still win ballgames.

I think he's balls on. If Mizzou plays 6 games at it's peak capacity, it will win the national championship. There are simply too many weapons on that squad to lose if they're locked in.

However, that never happens in the NCAA tournament, which is why Kansas may be better situated to advance than MU. Kansas may be able to win that game that inevitably pops up in the round of 32 or the Sweet 16 where they don't have their A game.

Gimme 4 wins, guys. Just gimme 4 wins...

Wow...no shit?

I never figured we'd hear from him again. Aight, Haith - make me look like an asshole again. You've done a bangup job of it thus far...

Forgive him, the Universe started in 1990 for him.

If you mention 1979, it might cause his brain to implode. There are others, but please, it just doesn't seem right to pick on the brain-damaged kid.

KU vs MU would have a hard time topping the KU - Memphis final in 2008 on a national scale.

For the KC area, of course it would be the biggest ever.

Either way I would love to see it.

seriously dude. You're 12. Grow up

Kentucky's best is better than anybody's best. They outclass everyone this year. Of course, they'll probably end up losing somewhere along the line, that's just the way this tournament is.

Landing him would be the biggest get in team history both for it's impact and its symbolism.

Plucking a 5* recruit out of the heart of SEC country would establish Mizzou as a long-term force.

I agree with that.

"My city is the bestest city in the world and we don't allow guns!"

Have another MGD 64, Sally.

Not true. Kentucky can catch fire and score 80. Mizzou can catch fire and score 95.

A defensive team's upside is lower than a 3-point shooting team's upside. Defensive teams are more likely to play at or near their ceilings, though.

In just the 2000s there were better TV ratings in 00,01,02,05,07,10 for the NCAA title game than in '08

This is Pollard's second visit to Columbia, and he's paying his own way.

He has yet to visit Georgetown or Kentucky, two of the teams thought to be among his leaders.

Not saying it's a guarantee or anything, but those are encouraging factors.

That's a fair statement - but only because Kentucky's would knock Mizzou out of theirs, if that makes any sense.

What makes Kentucky so dangerous is that they can play offense almost as well as Mizzou, but they have the size, length and athleticism to play lock-down defense as well.

If they play that game, they'll simply knock Mizzou right out of their game and Mizzou will end up giving you a 58 point effort on 40% shooting. In other words, Wright's suggestion of both teams playing their 'best' game is an impossibility for an MU - UK matchup.

I agree that Kentucky has the most talented team in the country and it's not even really that close. But if they go out there and don't put max effort into their defense and allow Mizzou to get hot, Mizzou can simply out-score them. Mizzou can put 4 shooters on the floor that are capable of a 20+ point night every night, as well as Ratliff and his otherwordly FG%.

Mizzou's offense is better than Kentucky's, but Kentucky's defense is the wildcard that would change the matchup.

I just did a blind bracket. The championship was Mizzou - KU, with MU the winner.

It would be interesting to see how Ratliffe would match up against Anthony Davis.

Makes sense being that 2008 was the largest attended tourney ever.

Poorly.

Davis would spent a lot of time pulling Ratliff away from the rim on defense. Granted, I don't think he's as strong on the defensive blocks as Rat, but I think he could gas Ratliff on the defensive end and take his legs out from under him.

Ratliff can't jump, but one of his greatest strengths is his legs - both in his ability to run the court and his ability to use his lower body strength to establish position. If Davis can get to setting him off screens, etc... and using that mid-range game of his, he could really wear Ratliff out.

I honestly prefer a Sullinger matchup to a Davis one.

Uh oh... just noticed that Kansas is set up for their classic "loss to a mid-major" exit with Saint Mary's in rd. 2

Interesting way of looking at it, and I think it touches on something that was discussed here yesterday... KU can grind it out, but as far as I know, it's at least up in the air on whether MU can do the same.

As far as his comments, I know Kansas can play with Kentucky and Duke and Georgetown and Missouri because they've done it, and I wouldn't say all of those games were Kansas' best (@Columbia was probably the closest we'll ever see).... of course, they only won 2 of those games, so I don't have a problem with what he said... I think it's pretty accurate.

But, I wouldn't say the only team that can beat Missouri is Missouri, like he implies... they might have a higher ceiling than Kansas if they're playing their best basketball, and they might provide more problems than just about any team in the tournament, but it's still a game of matchups and a team could make a bunch of guarded 3s or present a matchup problem like KSU... just like Kansas, I don't think it's just a matter of how well they're playing.

So the fact that a few thousand more people showed up in person a tournament is what led to the national television ratings being down that year?

Whatever you say, Joan.

(raises an appletini)

I may be waaaay off base here, but how is it possible for 43,000+ to impact the TV ratings?

lololololololol

I'm not sure that's exactly what he meant either, though.

I think he meant that they're capable of beating anyone at any time if they are on, regardless of their opponent. However, failing to have all 7 guys locked in doesn't mean they've beaten themselves.

I don't think he expects Missouri to be locked in across the board (afterall, I'm not sure it's happened yet this year - though it sure looked like it might for about 25 minutes against KU in Lawrence). He's just saying they're capable of it.

OK, good. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one that thinks Wickedson's logic is flawed here.

It would be perfectly valid if the United States was actually a small island nation of about 78,000 people.

But something tells me the math doesn't quite check out here.

I was just sayin that it was bigger than MU-KU in the final on a national scale.

I don't really see how that's a stretch.

Saul saying that it the 2008 Champ game not being in the top 25 is what me lol.

The 2010 Title game had almost 71,000 in attendance. That's around 28,000 more than in '08. How could it possibly have had higher TV ratings?

This makes sense...

...if "Missouri's slightly below average game" means a lack of focus, a bad shooting night, etc; or a situation like that where they're forced into playing another team's game, then I think it's pretty accurate. Obviously, they haven't run into the latter (well, or former) very often this year.

It wasn't a top 5 matchup that decade. No way was it a top 25 matchup all time. It was an incredible GAME. It was not that compelling of a matchup. They have no history against each other. There was no "larger than life" player (ie Patrick Ewing, Tyler Hansbrough).

The buildup to that game was just like any other game.

Larger TVs in the homes of those watching.

Good point. I went from a 50" to a 55" HDTV in 2010.

Population growth?

LMAO

It was an unseasonably cold Spring in 2008 and a large percentage of the country had to burn their TVs to stay warm.

Great NC matchups off the top of my head:

MSU - Indiana State (duh)
UNC - Georgetown
UNLV - Duke
UNC - Michigan

Kentucky isn't just a fantastic defensive team. They have the 2nd best offensive efficiency in the NCAA behind Missouri. Their overall ceiling is above anybody.

It's a wickedson world and we're just living in it.

The build up of that Final Four was huge. The teams might not have had much history together but contained one team with a good history of accomplishment, a larger than life coach, and a superstar player that is currently destroying the NBA.

The other team was a blue blood of college basketball that had just come off winning one of the biggest games in their history which included another "larger than life" player in Tyler Hansbrough.

Oh, and the other team involved in the whole deal is just another blue-blooded UCLA program which included NBA ALL Stars Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, and Darren Collison.

There's a reason why more people bought tickets to this tournament than any other ever played.

But yeah, it doesn't make the top 25. LMAO

Hey, anytime the finals manage to be the 7th highest rated finals in the decade, its clearly destined for historic significance

So were they shoving about 1.2 million people into Memorial Stadium every Saturday? Afterall, I'm told that lousy television ratings are actually a sign of intense fan interest, so they must've been shoving all those Beaker-hungry football fans somewhere...

This is a reach even by wickedson standards. Its like wickedson is wickedsoning himself.

So how would you guys rank the historic significance of Mizzou's final four appearances?

That's quite the moving target.

Interesting breakdown on espn about Mizzou's seeding:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...caa-tournament

Uh uh, fellas. We got the Memphis fan all pissed off.

Though, in fairness, they get pretty defensive when you start talking about a Finals appearance that didn't actually happen.

If only we could purchase players as well as Coach Cal could purchase players...

I don't even know what started this, honestly, but it just seems like such a weird thing to be arguing about, especially when you have no evidence for how your school would compare. Both programs are awesome, but Kansas is one of the clear-cut elite programs and I don't understand how that's a point of contention.


goodness me, a college sports team i follow broke the rules and it was revealed that a player on said team might NOT be too interested in schoolwork. i am shocked and appalled and also eight years old.

I feel as guilty watching college sports as I feel about paying attention to the stuff Vince McMahon shits out.

You've got Frank Haith. Doesn't seem to be an issue.

Don't tell him about 1973.

He'll yell at you about all the beer he drinks.

Look, I've read what Hathaway said, but it just doesn't make sense.

If the committee truly though Mizzou was the 4th 2 seed, they'd have put us in the bracket with Kentucky. Or they'd have sent us out East to square off against Syracuse.

It just doesn't pass the sniff test. I know what he said, but I don't think that's what he meant.

In either event, I'm over it. I'd have thrown some serious coin at tickets to STL, but its water under the bridge at this point and the atmosphere in Columbia will be insane so I'll be okay.

Besides, I'm still sweating that Florida/VA matchup. I'm not going to start taking the Sweet 16 for granted here.

Looks like Wickedson and UP are kindred spirits.

You could flip MSU and Mizzou, and I'd have been happy. This isn't much different, so I'm cool with it.

The second round worries me as well. But I think the Tigers can win it if they come out focused and play their game. The Tigers seem to stumble early in the tournament in their history, so I will probably be more nervous about the first weekend more than anything.

I think the MSU half of the bracket might be the tougher half. Memphis is not a team I would want to see in the second round.

Nah, I'd just hang back and wait for the sanctimonious preachers from Larryville to start making shit up again - kinda like those 2 championship banners you fellas have hanging for 1922 and 1923; when did you guys actually get awarded those 'titles' again? (Here's a hint: It was closer to WWII than WWI)

Except UP has a dong.

Was about to say...

Let me make sure I understand this. We Mizzou fans are not allowed to have a discussion about the historical significance of previous Final Four match ups since our school has never appeared in one?

Gotcha! :thumb:

Yes. Exactly!

I'm a Chiefs fan, and the Chiefs have never won a basketball game, so I can't talk about basketball.

The S curve isn't perfect... it's obvious why they would want both Duke and Kentucky in Atlanta, and MU couldn't be in the East since OSU couldn't be in the West with MSU. There are oddities like that every year... I think a lot of that could have been solved by putting MSU in St. Louis and UNC in Phoenix, but maybe they didn't think one really deserved their region over the other, so they shipped them both. I think there's a pretty good give and take across the board, as far as seed and region.

6th of the decade, actually. Considering it was 2 small market teams, I'd say that's pretty good. Anyone who watched that game would tell you it's an instant classic.

The debate isn't whether or not it was a good game. Wickedson is trying to say that it was a more significant game than a KU/MU matchup in the finals would be. In other words, it's just Wickedson being Wickedson.

Well A MU KU game Would mean more to the people round these parts. Who really gives a crap if the rest of the country likes it or not.

Potential recruits from parts outside the midwest who might be considering a school like MU.

She only drinks wine coolers on weekdays.

Chiefs won a charity basketball game in my hometown back in 1970

Pollard is actually visiting today for his second visit now that you mention it...

Shut it Nebraska fan :D