If it was your team

[give me heart]

Who are you suggesting did not deserve to be on it?

Are you suggesting that a biased media made the right choices. Honestly. Weems was 13 for 47 and Leonard was 11 for 36. Weems had one good game and that was against Creighton. Lawson, McDermott and Durley had two good games and should have been considered.

[MVCfans]

Who are you suggesting did not deserve to be on it?

Are you suggesting that a biased media made the right choices. Honestly.

Biased by......? I think that most of us are willing to listen to your argument, but you've yet to offer an example of someone who should/should not have been on the all tourney team. Therefore, I'd say they got it right.

[SubGod22]

Who are you suggesting did not deserve to be on it?

Are you suggesting that a biased media made the right choices. Honestly.

Biased by......? I think that most of us are willing to listen to your argument, but you've yet to offer an example of someone who should/should not have been on the all tourney team. Therefore, I'd say they got it right.

[give me heart]

Who are you suggesting did not deserve to be on it?

Are you suggesting that a biased media made the right choices. Honestly.

Biased by......? I think that most of us are willing to listen to your argument, but you've yet to offer an example of someone who should/should not have been on the all tourney team. Therefore, I'd say they got it right.

Do you truly think 13 for 47 is worthy of all tourney? I tried to stay away from negative examples. It makes it look like you're tearing a kid down and thats far from what I want. Do you still stand by they got it right. Honestly!

[MVCfans]

Do you truly think 13 for 47 is worthy of all tourney? I tried to stay away from negative examples. It makes it look like you're tearing a kid down and thats far from what I want. Do you still stand by they got it right. Honestly!

Simple question - who do you suggest replacing? And who are you replacing him with?

[SubGod22]

Answer the question of who should have been on it other than the ones they chose. You've given no argument for somebody else. Until you do, this is pointless.

[dgreenwell3]

Give Me Heart,
I didn't know those statistics but a broad thought on statistics with fans: When they work for them, it's all about the numbers but when they don't it's all about the eye test. That is not pointing either way but just telling you it's beating ur head against a wall..

[dgreenwell3]

I would rather have Durley but I don't know the stats.

[give me heart]

Answer the question of who should have been on it other than the ones they chose. You've given no argument for somebody else. Until you do, this is pointless.

Lawson, McDermott and Durley had two good games and should have been considered.

[SubGod22]

Answer the question of who should have been on it other than the ones they chose. You've given no argument for somebody else. Until you do, this is pointless.

Lawson, McDermott and Durley had two good games and should have been considered.

Durley was practically non-existant the first game and had a good 2nd game. Lawson and Mac were both solid in their two games. But I don't think I'd put them above anyone that made the list.