If it was your team

[dgreenwell3]

So if what you're saying is winning is a determining factor in deciding who should make the all tourney team and MSU lost the championship then why do they deserve three players.

Don't sweat the small stuff.

[TylerDurden]

I have offered to you three players that I saw play that I thought had a good tournament. Posted earlier in the thread

Remember 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.

I wish I would have seen the ''play in round'', because; I saw Mamadou against MSU and he was dominate in that game. Lawson was 11 for 18 and the main reason MSU played CU instead of UNI. McDermott played solid basketball.

Would you rather have 10-19 and 20 boards or 13-47 and 20 boards. Simplistic way to present my point but I watched about every minute of the tourney and was impressed with some of the players I've mentioned and not just because of scoring. It was the affect they had on the game. Poor shooting always has a negative affect. Seriously, folks, a person that shoots 27% for the tourney is not deserving. It cheated someone out of a special honor.

When the voting took place, MSU was losing. Is it being suggested that the voters just felt like MSU would win. It was a biased media voting and that in itself is one of my main points. Fairness, Sportsmanship and Honesty.

No one was cheated. That's hyperbole.

Every vote is bias. Coaches are bias, SIDs are bias, media is bias, fans are bias. But they're rarely bias for the same reason. The Bradley writers aren't bias for Missouri State, neither are the Wichita State and Creighton writers - who all get to vote for the all-tournament team.

Who should vote on these things if not the people who cover the teams all year?

Is it a perfect system? No.

Do they always get it "right"? Probably not.

It's a subjective process during a nine-game tournament. Players from teams who lose before the final have a much lower chance to make the team. Those players have to do something really special. While the players you mentioned played well, they didn't blow the roof off of the place with their play...and their teams lost.

[give me heart]

It's a subjective process during a nine-game tournament. Players from teams who lose before the final have a much lower chance to make the team. Those players have to do something really special. While the players you mentioned played well, they didn't blow the roof off of the place with their play...and their teams lost.

Using your point. Weems didn't come close to blowing the roof off and his team lost. Do some research and find any other player that shot 27% and made the all tourney team. Be prepared to invest alot of time. I have and still come up with zilch. Add to it the fact that three players from the losing team never makes the all tourney team. I have given you a number of examples of worthy players. There are a few others. Those of you that chose to disagree so be it.

For those of you that think it doesn't matter...each of us really don't matter in the grand scope of things. So why play? Because in our own microcosmos of life it does.

[SubGod22]

If you watched every minute of the tournament, you'd realize that Durley was non existent in the Bradley game. He had ONE good game on Saturday and it wasn't enough. The other two you mentioned were solid. Weems did a hell of a lot more than what those numbers you keep throwing out indicate and I don't even like the arrogant SOB. I wish a WSU player would have played well enough to make the team. If that had happened we probably would have been playing on Sunday anyhow. And you don't seem to grasp the fact that the voting was done BEFORE the game was over. So who won and who lost means NOTHING to the voters as nothing was decided when the votes were cast.

[dgreenwell3]

I do agree the system is obviously flawed. I do think Myles was prolly or should have been in the discussion.

[DUBulldog]

I do agree the system is obviously flawed. I do think Myles was prolly or should have been in the discussion.

I was surprised at how well Myles Walker played throughout the tourney. It was certainly more than he had showed me in the limited number of times I saw InSU play during the season. I'm guessing that he was in the discussion.

[dgreenwell3]

Myles really had a coming out of sorts. If he is that good next year we will be very tough to beat with Gant, Smith and Burnett coming in (either Burnett or Smith is likely to redshirt).

[DoubleJayAlum]

I think Weems is the biggest a-hole in the league.

That being said, I don't really care that he made the all tourney team. And, I don't really care that none of my Jays made the team. I'm okay with the unwritten rule that the team is made up of of players from the two teams left competing on Sunday (assuming there wasn't someone who was averaging some unbelievable numbers - like 40pts a game or something for the rest of the tourney).

Also, according to the media types I talked to, at the time they had to submit their votes, MSU was in the lead and expected to win.

[dgreenwell3]

False DoubleJay,
ISU led the entire second half.
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=310652623

[DUBulldog]

False DoubleJay,
ISU led the entire second half.
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=310652623

Well, since MSU was up at half, it's not possible that ISU led the entire 2nd half, but your point is taken....other than the first maybe 30 seconds of the half, ISU didn't trail....but MSU did tie it up 3 or 4 times in the 2nd half, including a couple of times toward the end of the game. All of that is assuming the graph on that page is accurate.