Creighton vs Duke - 8:40pm TBS

[GoShockers89]

IMO the truth is Creighton has had probably the best two teams the Valley has had over the past 20 years

What, might I ask, do you base this assertion on?

Seeding in the tournament? Creighton has never been higher than a 6 seed. SIU 2007 (4) and WSU 2012 (5) beg to differ.

Subsequent success in the tournament? Missouri State ('99), Southern Illinois ('02, '07), WSU ('06, '13), etc. say no.

Margin of victory in winning the MVC? Nope, Creighton's best conference record during its championship seasons has been 14-4.



Student loan debt? I will concede this one.

[Deanthonybowdenfan]

IMO the truth is Creighton has had probably the best two teams the Valley has had over the past 20 years, and yet didn't make the Sweet 16 with either

What, might I ask, do you base this assertion on?

Seeding in the tournament? Creighton has never been higher than a 6 seed. SIU 2007 (4) and WSU 2012 (5) beg to differ.

Subsequent success in the tournament? Missouri State ('99), Southern Illinois ('02, '07), WSU ('06, '13), etc. say no.

Margin of victory in winning the MVC? Nope, Creighton's best conference record during its championship seasons has been 14-4.



Student loan debt? I will concede this one.

It is certainly debatable, thats why i said IMO smart one. The Creighton team that got a 6 seed should have gotten a 4, and could have beaten anyone in the country. Seeding doesn't always indicate how good you are. I have watched Valley basketball for years and IN MY OPINION that was the greatest Valley team I have ever seen. This year's team certainly wasn't as good, but I also think they were a better team than their seed indicated. I will say that the SIU team of 2007 may have been as good as any. My point was really that Creighton has had the best chances to go deep, as in having possibly two of the best Valley teams ever, and yet MANY Valley teams that maybe were not quite as good have gone further in the Dance.

[rlh04d]

The Creighton team that got a 6 seed should have gotten a 4, and could have beaten anyone in the country.

Could have beaten anyone in the country ... except 11 seed powerhouse Central Michigan, which went on to lose by 26 points to Duke.

Oh, those dangerous Chippewas. What could one of the best MVC teams in the last 20 years possibly have done against a team that hadn't won an NCAA game since 1975?

Creighton sure does get "unlucky" a hell of a lot in the tournament.

You're welcome to your own opinion. The rest of us will have to make do with facts and results.

[Deanthonybowdenfan]

Your saying the same thing I am. It was the best Valley team I have seen in 20 years, and we just sucked it up in our first game against CMU. I never said it was just bad luck, we just shot it terrible and didnt seem ready to play in the first half. This is my whole point, that its sad we have had a couple great teams that haven't done anything much in the NCAA. Meanwhile many Valley teams that probably weren't quite as good, or at least any better, have made the sweet 16.

[rlh04d]

Your saying the same thing I am. It was the best Valley team I have seen in 20 years, and we just sucked it up in our first game against CMU. I never said it was just bad luck, we just shot it terrible and didnt seem ready to play in the first half. This is my whole point, that its sad we have had a couple great teams that haven't done anything much in the NCAA. Meanwhile many Valley teams that probably weren't quite as good, or at least any better, have made the sweet 16.

I'm definitely not saying the same thing you are

Your argument is that Creighton has some of the best teams the MVC has produced in the last 20 years. And yet every single time these "great teams" make the tournament, they just have "bad nights." For some crazy reason, they can't play more than one game in the tournament without shooting poorly or not coming ready to play.

Sorry, good teams show up ready to play. Good teams play their best on the biggest stage.

Most of the programs in this conference have had a Sweet 16 in the last 20 years, some multiple Sweet 16s ... and Creighton hasn't had one. Great teams win when it counts. Pretenders don't show up in March and get exposed. Creighton's 'great teams' have been exposed because they weren't as good as people (you) thought they were. You don't just get unlucky year after year ... you don't get knocked out by a mediocre 11 seed Central Michigan team because of luck. It's because they just weren't that good, or they choked in the national limelight. Take your pick. Neither gives you the right to call them "the two best teams in the last 20 years." The two biggest frauds, maybe.

It's all right. Some teams rise to the challenge of performing against the best talent ... Wichita State in 2013 and 2006, SIU in 2007 and 2005, Bradley in 2006, Miss St in 2006, UNI in 2010. Success says that every last one of those teams were better than any Creighton team in the last 20 years. Because they proved it on the court, whereas you can only claim it without anything to back it up.

[Deanthonybowdenfan]

Not true. Some times a great team has a bad game and loses to a mediocre central michigan. Kansas lost to UNI, does that mean they weren't a great team? No. It meant they had a bad game coupled with UNI having a great game. Wichita State beat the number one team in the country, does that mean because they won that they are one of the top teams in the country? No, not necessarily.

Just cause two of our great teams lost on a due or die situation, does not mean they weren't great teams. Did they choke? Possibly, but I don't think so, I think they just had bad shooting nights, kind of like how WSU looked like the best 3 point shooting team in the country the second half against the Zags, It doesn't mean they are THAT good of a shooting team.

Wichita State in 2013 and 2006, SIU in 2007 and 2005, Bradley in 2006, Miss St in 2006, UNI in 2010. Success says that every last one of those teams were better than any Creighton team in the last 20 years. Because they proved it on the court, whereas you can only claim it without anything to back it up.

2002-03 Jays- record: 29-5 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 79.1 to 64.8 =14.3 pts. , Final Rank = 15 ap poll
2005-06 Shox- record: 26-9 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 69.2 to 61.9 =7.3 pts. , Final Rank= NR ap poll (this was your 5 seed btw lol)
2006-07 SIU- (the 4 seed) record: 29-7 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 62.9 to 56.2 =6.7 pts. , Final Rank= 14 ap poll

Not that stats tell the whole story , BUT you asked for facts and stats are the only facts. So there you go. SIU in 2007 certainly has a case, but one loss in the NCAA tournament doesn't mean you are automatically not as good as a team that wins an extra game in the Tourney. Looks to me , based on the stats, that we just had a bad game against CMU, of course I already knew this without the stats but you wanted them.

[shocktheheart]

Not true. Some times a great team has a bad game and loses to a mediocre central michigan. Kansas lost to UNI, does that mean they weren't a great team? No. It meant they had a bad game coupled with UNI having a great game. Wichita State beat the number one team in the country, does that mean because they won that they are one of the top teams in the country? No, not necessarily.

Just cause two of our great teams lost on a due or die situation, does not mean they weren't great teams. Did they choke? Possibly, but I don't think so, I think they just had bad shooting nights, kind of like how WSU looked like the best 3 point shooting team in the country the second half against the Zags, It doesn't mean they are THAT good of a shooting team.

Wichita State in 2013 and 2006, SIU in 2007 and 2005, Bradley in 2006, Miss St in 2006, UNI in 2010. Success says that every last one of those teams were better than any Creighton team in the last 20 years. Because they proved it on the court, whereas you can only claim it without anything to back it up.

2002-03 Jays- record: 29-5 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 79.1 to 64.8 =14.3 pts. , Final Rank = 15 ap poll
2005-06 Shox- record: 26-9 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 69.2 to 61.9 =7.3 pts. , Final Rank= NR ap poll (this was your 5 seed btw lol)
2006-07 SIU- (the 4 seed) record: 29-7 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 62.9 to 56.2 =6.7 pts. , Final Rank= 14 ap poll

Not that stats tell the whole story , BUT you asked for facts and stats are the only facts. So there you go. SIU in 2007 certainly has a case, but one loss in the NCAA tournament doesn't mean you are automatically not as good as a team that wins an extra game in the Tourney. Looks to me , based on the stats, that we just had a bad game against CMU, of course I already knew this without the stats but you wanted them.

WSU was a seven seed in 2006. If you are going to state these as facts, please get the facts correct.

[Deanthonybowdenfan]

My bad. Honest mistake. Your 5 seed had numbers much more similar to Creighton's 2002-03 team.

[shocktheheart]

Not true. Some times a great team has a bad game and loses to a mediocre central michigan. Kansas lost to UNI, does that mean they weren't a great team? No. It meant they had a bad game coupled with UNI having a great game. Wichita State beat the number one team in the country, does that mean because they won that they are one of the top teams in the country? No, not necessarily.

Just cause two of our great teams lost on a due or die situation, does not mean they weren't great teams. Did they choke? Possibly, but I don't think so, I think they just had bad shooting nights, kind of like how WSU looked like the best 3 point shooting team in the country the second half against the Zags, It doesn't mean they are THAT good of a shooting team.

Wichita State in 2013 and 2006, SIU in 2007 and 2005, Bradley in 2006, Miss St in 2006, UNI in 2010. Success says that every last one of those teams were better than any Creighton team in the last 20 years. Because they proved it on the court, whereas you can only claim it without anything to back it up.

2002-03 Jays- record: 29-5 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 79.1 to 64.8 =14.3 pts. , Final Rank = 15 ap poll
2005-06 Shox- record: 26-9 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 69.2 to 61.9 =7.3 pts. , Final Rank= NR ap poll (this was your 5 seed btw lol)
2006-07 SIU- (the 4 seed) record: 29-7 , Avg. Margin of Victory: 62.9 to 56.2 =6.7 pts. , Final Rank= 14 ap poll

Not that stats tell the whole story , BUT you asked for facts and stats are the only facts. So there you go. SIU in 2007 certainly has a case, but one loss in the NCAA tournament doesn't mean you are automatically not as good as a team that wins an extra game in the Tourney. Looks to me , based on the stats, that we just had a bad game against CMU, of course I already knew this without the stats but you wanted them.

You could add both WSU teams from the last two years
2011-2012 WSU: Record: 27-6 Avg margin of victory: 77.1 to 62.4= 8.7 pts, Final Rank: NA (5 seed)
2012-2013 WSU: Record 28-8 still playing Avg margin of victory: 69.7 to 60.8= 8.9 pts, Final Rank: TBD (9 seed)

[rlh04d]

My bad. Honest mistake. Your 5 seed had numbers much more similar to Creighton's 2002-03 team.

And while our 5 seed team was very good, and had a great year, our 2006 team was better, despite not having as good of a regular season.

Our 2012 team, as far as I'm concerned, had much more talent than our 2006 team. But our 2006 team was a better team. And that's why they went to the Sweet 16.

As for Gonzaga, they had a very good team. They were one of the best teams in the country. But losing in the second round proves they weren't the #1 team in the country. And despite their record, and probably being the most talented team they've ever had, they weren't the best team they've had.