College Basketball Random Chatter 2013-2014 Season

• Azubuike24

  

  MSU really only beat UK because of an incredibly slow start. That was the kind of game where UK really outplayed them for about the last 15-20 minutes of the game.
  
  Had the game gone on another 2 minutes or so, it would've been a different outcome.
  
  With that said, I'm very surprised by this result in East Lansing. I can see MSU struggling in a tournament or on the road, but at home? Against a big game opponent? Surprising.
• reclegend22

  

  Azubuike24;1548034 wrote:MSU really only beat UK because of an incredibly slow start. That was the kind of game where UK really outplayed them for about the last 15-20 minutes of the game.
  
  Had the game gone on another 2 minutes or so, it would've been a different outcome.
  
  With that said, I'm very surprised by this result in East Lansing. I can see MSU struggling in a tournament or on the road, but at home? Against a big game opponent? Surprising.

  And struggling to win at home against the Columbia Lions. That is simply something that veteran, No. 1 in the nation, national title contenders do not do. Teams like Duke or Kentucky -- who are either average defensively and lack front court play, such as the Blue Devils, or really young and still blending together, such as the Cats -- sure. But not a team like MSU.
  
  We are witnessing a pattern.
• Classyposter58

  

  Arizona is pretty beast. Kansas too
• Mulva

  

  reclegend22;1548036 wrote:And struggling to win at home against the Columbia Lions. That is simply something that veteran, No. 1 in the nation, national title contenders do not do.

  Arizona was down 19 in the first half to Drexel.
• Azubuike24

  

  reclegend22;1548036 wrote:And struggling to win at home against the Columbia Lions. That is simply something that veteran, No. 1 in the nation, national title contenders do not do. Teams like Duke or Kentucky -- who are either average defensively and lack front court play, such as the Blue Devils, or really young and still blending together, such as the Cats -- sure. But not a team like MSU.
  
  We are witnessing a pattern.

  Is it a surprise though?
  
  I mean, many said MSU should be #1 to start the year because they had returning talent. However, I think many would've put the likes of Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, Arizona, Florida, Syracuse and maybe others ahead of them in-terms of potential. You then have another group of very experienced teams like Oklahoma State, Ohio State and Louisville, who maybe were there with MSU in-terms of potential.
• reclegend22

  

  Mulva:
  
  That game wasn't in Tucson, either. It was in Madison Square Garden, closer to Drexel than to Arizona. And Drexel is actually a decent team with some talent. Columbia was picked to finish in the back of the pack in the Ivy League.
• Mulva

  

  A #1 team shouldn't trail by 19 points in the first half in any circumstance.
• Laley23

  

  Lets also not forget MSU is crippled by the fact that Gary Harris is a 3 pt shooter right now. He has an ankle sprain and has been battling cramps because he can't practice.
  
  Not an excuse per se, but remember when he took off last year as a freshman and MSU was awesome...then his back spasms started and they lost a bunch of games to end the year?? MSU has a little depth, but their All American is essentially a spot up shooter who can't defend. It's crippling their offense as Izzo likes I run it through a dominant wing.
• Midstate01

  

  reclegend22;1548022 wrote:I don't care what anyone says, Michigan State is not anywhere close to the No. 1 team in the nation. It's a joke. I've watched them play several times now, and based on tonight and the down-to-the-wire game with Columbia in which Columbia was within one possession with under a minute to play, I've seen all I need to see.

  I don't think they've looked like the number 1 team either. But they'll get better and better all year. To experienced not too.
  
  
  But the close game argument isn't a great one. Duke probably should have lost to Cleveland state if not for some awful officiating.
• reclegend22

  

  Midstate01;1548061 wrote:I don't think they've looked like the number 1 team either. But they'll get better and better all year. To experienced not too.
  
  
  But the close game argument isn't a great one. Duke probably should have lost to Cleveland state if not for some awful officiating.

  I think you mean Kentucky should have lost to Cleveland State (or that Duke should have lost to Vermont). Either way, that was my point above about teams like Duke and Kentucky. They started the season with clear uncertainties. Sure they were ranked high, but Duke has absolutely no front-court (center position) and has played mediocre defense at best for most of the year; and Kentucky is relying heavily on freshmen this season, with the Wildcats' two best players -- arguably -- being first-year guys in Randle, Johnson and the point guard Harrison.
  
  Michigan State, on the other hand, is a veteran team. Even with Gary Harris' bad ankle, it's a team that is loaded with experience and probably should not have trouble with a bottom-feeder Ivy League team at home. JMO.
• SportsAndLady

  

  Still think Kansas is the best team in the country. That Villanova loss came out of nowhere, and there's no excuses there. But I'll take them over any team in America.
• reclegend22

  

  Villanova is actually a good team, too. Ryan Arcidiacono, James Bell and JayVaughn Pinkston make up a great trio for the Wildcats. Right now, I'd have Arizona and Kansas at the top.
• reclegend22

  

  Mulva;1548045 wrote:A #1 team shouldn't trail by 19 points in the first half in any circumstance.

  While I'm more inclined to agree with you, Drexel is 5-2 with wins over teams from the SEC (Alabama) and Big East (blow-out victory over Rutgers) and had UCLA on the ropes in Pauley, ultimately losing by five. That is a good team. Arizona played them at a neutral site. And ended up waking up and essentially dominating the Dragons over the final 25 minutes of the game.
  
  Comparing any of that to Michigan State escaping a basement Ivy League team in the Breslin Center who has lost to Portland and Elon is just not fair.
• lhslep134

  

  Mulva;1548045 wrote:A #1 team shouldn't trail by 19 points in the first half in any circumstance.

  Whatever you say dude. If we take care of business Sat vs. UNLV we'll be the new #1. Meaningless, but would still feel good.
• lhslep134

  

  Also Arizona's wins @SDSU and over Duke are better than anyone else's except for UNC (Louisville and MSU).
• Midstate01

  

  reclegend22;1548065 wrote:I think you mean Kentucky should have lost to Cleveland State (or that Duke should have lost to Vermont).

  I think I need more sleep... this watching games at their es times has me all fd up.
• birddog23

  Will this be one of those years come tourney time that field will be wide open? Seems like a lot of parity right now in college basketball.
• centralbucksfan

  Azubuike24;1548034 wrote:MSU really only beat UK because of an incredibly slow start. That was the kind of game where UK really outplayed them for about the last 15-20 minutes of the game.
  
  Had the game gone on another 2 minutes or so, it would've been a different outcome.
  
  With that said, I'm very surprised by this result in East Lansing. I can see MSU struggling in a tournament or on the road, but at home? Against a big game opponent? Surprising.

  Woulda, coulda, shoulda. UK SHOULDA lost to Cleveland St on their home court as well. Anyone who follows MSU, knows they are a traditionally slow team out of the gate. I don't think you can ever question how Izzo teams are playing by years end or how they will do in the tournament. Especially when we are only a few weeks into a season.
• Azubuike24

  

  I don't get the UK SHOULDA lost to Cleveland State. I mean, they pretty much rolled over CSU in the last 8 minutes. I mean yes, they were getting outplayed for the first 30 minutes, but games are 40 minutes.
  
  That's like saying any team that was down, should have lost. It's not at all the same comparison as what I said about the MSU game.
• SportsAndLady

  

  Azubuike24;1548298 wrote:I don't get the UK SHOULDA lost to Cleveland State. I mean, they pretty much rolled over CSU in the last 8 minutes. I mean yes, they were getting outplayed for the first 30 minutes, but games are 40 minutes.
  
  That's like saying any team that was down, should have lost. It's not at all the same comparison as what I said about the MSU game.

  I think he's saying if UK should have beat msu, Cleveland state should have beat uk
• lhslep134

  

  Azubuike24;1548298 wrote:I don't get the UK SHOULDA lost to Cleveland State. I mean, they pretty much rolled over CSU in the last 8 minutes.

  With some very questionable calls. That's where the shoulda comes in (not for me, I'm speaking for others). Personally, I take any stock into who "should" have won the game, all I care about is who actually did.
• Azubuike24

  

  He totally bypassed the caveat on that was that we are discussing MSU as the #1 team and comparing their performance to that ranking. SHOULD UK have won? No, not really, because they didn't win. But in the context of discussing them as the #1 team was why I made the point. It was an easy reference point for me because I'm a UK fan, but this wasn't at all a UK discussion.
• centralbucksfan

  Azubuike24;1548320 wrote:He totally bypassed the caveat on that was that we are discussing MSU as the #1 team and comparing their performance to that ranking. SHOULD UK have won? No, not really, because they didn't win. But in the context of discussing them as the #1 team was why I made the point. It was an easy reference point for me because I'm a UK fan, but this wasn't at all a UK discussion.

  I completely understood what you were talking about. You didn't understand my point.
  As far as MSU? Well, rankings are rankings. We all realize they don't mean much at this time of year. MSU started up near the top. They beat top ranked UK, so they were obviously next in line. Zona will be there next. Then who? Who really cares. Your questioning a team and a coach who almost yearly, at years end, is clicking as well as anyone and is one of the most consistant tournament teams every year. I don't know how good MSU is. But they are good. They have a legit big man and a pretty darn good pt. They have a lock down defender. And Izzo is about as good as anyone as putting the rest of the peices of the puzzle(role players) together as there is. I'd say by seasons end, they will be as good as anyone and will be a 2 seed at worst, probably a 1 seed.
• reclegend22

  

  Ole Miss just got Marshall Henderson'd. Rebels down two with 15 seconds to play and Henderson shoots a turnaround 30-footer without looking that didn't come within five feet of the backboard.
  
  Kansas State prevails.
• SportsAndLady

  

  reclegend22;1548638 wrote:Ole Miss just got Marshall Henderson'd. Rebels down two with 15 seconds to play and Henderson shoots a turnaround 30-footer without looking that didn't come within five feet of the backboard.
  
  Kansas State prevails.

  I had Ole Miss +1.5, so fuck Henderson
  
  He was annoying that entire game..had a 3 on 1 at one point in the game and he pulls up for a 3. Fucking trash that guy is