Archive

Why "insert team here" won't win the title

  • SportsAndLady
    Had a friend try and tell me KU isn't even in contention for a title, because they have no one outside of Collins...said Aldrich can't shoot, Xavier Henry is a flop, and they haven't beaten anyone all year.

    I guess just name a team (that's in at least somewhat contention to win the title...we don't need to know why Akron won't win the 'ship) and tell why they won't win the championship.
  • Azubuike24
    Just to play a little devil's advocate.

    Kentucky won't win a title because they can't win 6 straight games under the microscope with a young team and against opposition who will do anything to take them out of their game. This includes slowing the game down, committing hard fouls and trying to exploit tempers of a few players. I don't think they can pull out 4 straight games like the Vanderbilt game on Saturday, even if they are the most talented squad on the floor.
  • OneBuckeye
    Ohio State can't win because of depth. If more than one of the starting 5 get in foul trouble they are in trouble.

    Purdue can't win because no one will step up in crunch time. Purdue has a different star every night it seems like... and i don't know if someone will step up every night in the tournament for them... although I am not sure they need someone to do it, but that is all I could come up with.
  • cview
    Syracuse won't win it because in a tournament that offers no room for error the Orange have had a little bit of a tendency to blow big leads or get down by double digits early. Not sure how they'd react to that with their backs against the wall as opposed to simply a regular season game.

    I actually do think the Orange can win it though.
  • SportsAndLady
    I don't think Syracuse can win it, because of OneBuckeye's reason for Purdue....they don't have someone who will step up in crunch time. They play great together as a team, but don't have "that guy" who everyone knows will take the last shot (wall for Kentucky, Collins for Kansas, Reynolds for Villanova, etc.).
  • GOONx19
    YSU won't win the title.
  • buckeyefalls
    1. Michigan won't win the title because they won't be in the dance.
    2. That goes for over 200 other teams.
    3. Every team besides Texas won't win the title because I had a dream that Texas beats Villanova in the final game. Hard for me to believe because I see these two teams with obvious faults, but hey, who is to argue against a dream? lol.
  • SportsAndLady
    it'll be fun to look back on this thread after the tournament.
  • centralbucksfan
    OneBuckeye wrote: Ohio State can't win because of depth. If more than one of the starting 5 get in foul trouble they are in trouble.

    Purdue can't win because no one will step up in crunch time. Purdue has a different star every night it seems like... and i don't know if someone will step up every night in the tournament for them... although I am not sure they need someone to do it, but that is all I could come up with.
    Hmmm, ever watch Etwan Moore? The guy is VERY good, one of the most underrated players in the country. He has stepped up on numerous occasions over the past two years for Purdue.
  • Azubuike24
    I have to agree with CBF. If you are going to count someone like Wesley Johnson as a "step up guy", then E'Twaun Moore is definitely one to count for Purdue. The win in East Lansing a few weeks ago he had a run which single-handedly got them control of that game. Moore is in a group that is probably below the top-top notch performers, but he's more than capable of taking over for a win or 2.
  • centralbucksfan
    Azubuike24 wrote: Just to play a little devil's advocate.

    Kentucky won't win a title because they can't win 6 straight games under the microscope with a young team and against opposition who will do anything to take them out of their game. This includes slowing the game down, committing hard fouls and trying to exploit tempers of a few players. I don't think they can pull out 4 straight games like the Vanderbilt game on Saturday, even if they are the most talented squad on the floor.
    I actually believe, what could do in UK, is the lack of consistant competition throughout the season. Their toughest games in conference, is Vandy, rated and Tenn both near end of top 20 ratings, both good, still not great. They have yet to really play a legit top 10 team, one that matches up with them in certain area's. Their OCC schedule was not good...especially now that UNC and UConn are both where they are. It'll be interesting to see how these young frosh repond when put to a real test, and if they happen to get by one team, there will be yet another waiting.
    Reminds me of Cal teams at Memphis. So so conference, OCC was just ok and that may have cost his teams in the tourney.
  • Rebel_ I.N.S.
    Georgetown won't win the title because of lack of depth & they are way to inconsistent shooting the 3 ball.
  • Azubuike24
    centralbucksfan wrote:
    Azubuike24 wrote: Just to play a little devil's advocate.

    Kentucky won't win a title because they can't win 6 straight games under the microscope with a young team and against opposition who will do anything to take them out of their game. This includes slowing the game down, committing hard fouls and trying to exploit tempers of a few players. I don't think they can pull out 4 straight games like the Vanderbilt game on Saturday, even if they are the most talented squad on the floor.
    I actually believe, what could do in UK, is the lack of consistant competition throughout the season. Their toughest games in conference, is Vandy, rated and Tenn both near end of top 20 ratings, both good, still not great. They have yet to really play a legit top 10 team, one that matches up with them in certain area's. Their OCC schedule was not good...especially now that UNC and UConn are both where they are. It'll be interesting to see how these young frosh repond when put to a real test, and if they happen to get by one team, there will be yet another waiting.
    Reminds me of Cal teams at Memphis. So so conference, OCC was just ok and that may have cost his teams in the tourney.
    I'd buy this if they didn't have a coach who has gone far in the tournament year after year from Conference USA. UK has played tough opponents and in tough environments. There won't be a team who comes out and shocks them by being able to match up man to man. I think only 1 team can do that anyway, and it's Kansas.

    One thing I'll also add is foul shooting. DeMarcus Cousins has become the guy I most want on the foul line outside of John Wall, and that's scary. It always plagued Calipari at Memphis, and it's going to be a slight achilles heel heading into the NCAA's this year.
  • killer_ewok
    I agree with CBF about Etwan Moore.

    Also, if Syracuse needs somebody to take the shot at the end of the game it will be Rautins, maybe Johnson. I don't see anyone other than those two taking the last shot for the Orange.
  • swamisez
    Duke won't win the title because they are inconsistent shooters from outside and haven't developed an inside scoring presence.
  • OneBuckeye
    centralbucksfan wrote:
    OneBuckeye wrote: Ohio State can't win because of depth. If more than one of the starting 5 get in foul trouble they are in trouble.

    Purdue can't win because no one will step up in crunch time. Purdue has a different star every night it seems like... and i don't know if someone will step up every night in the tournament for them... although I am not sure they need someone to do it, but that is all I could come up with.
    Hmmm, ever watch Etwan Moore? The guy is VERY good, one of the most underrated players in the country. He has stepped up on numerous occasions over the past two years for Purdue.
    Give me a better reason. Moore has disappeared in games before but Hummel or someone else usually steps up.
  • SportsAndLady
    swamisez wrote:haven't developed an inside scoring presence.
    Story of the 2nd half to the decade for the Dukies.

    You can't win a title without a valuable big man.
  • swamisez
    SportsAndLady wrote:
    swamisez wrote:haven't developed an inside scoring presence.
    Story of the 2nd half to the decade for the Dukies.

    You can't win a title without a valuable big man.
    Lack of a notable big man
    Michigan State 2000
    Syracuse 2003
    Kansas 2008

    I think it can be done, I would put Zoubek as a senior in the same class as Aldrich as a Frosh. Both were used primarily for defense and didn't show flashes of offensive promise until much later in the season.
  • Laley23
    swamisez wrote:

    Lack of a notable big man
    Michigan State 2000
    Syracuse 2003
    Kansas 2008

    I think it can be done, I would put Zoubek as a senior in the same class as Aldrich as a Frosh. Both were used primarily for defense and didn't show flashes of offensive promise until much later in the season.
    Sorry, bad examples

    Syracuse had a guy. You may know him. He is Carmelo Anthony. Not to mention future lottery pick Hakim Warrick.

    Kansas had 2 very good post options in Darnell Jackson and Darrel Arthur. Both of whom trump what Duke has this year or in past year.

    MSU is pretty good. I think Dukes bigs compare to Granger and Hutson. The other two arent even debatable though. At least, imo.
  • Azubuike24
    KU had Sasha Kaun, Darrell Arthur, Darnell Jackson and Cole Aldrich. They combined for 34 PPG and 22 RPG.

    Duke has Brian Zoubek, Lance Thomas, Mason Plumlee and Miles Plumlee. They combine for 22 PPG and 20.5 RPG.

    Clearly, KU was stronger. Also, KU has more depth and I'd personally take Chalmers, Robinson, Rush and Collins over Singler, Scheyer and Smith.

    Not to say Duke can't do it, but that Kansas team went 37-3, so to compare them to Duke is disrespecting the Jayhawks.
  • slingshot4ever
    Yeah, it appears some people don't realize how stacked that KU team was from top to bottom. Of the 8-9 that played minutes on that team only one will have not played in the NBA (Robinson)
  • johngrizzly
    Syracuse won't win the title because they play zone.

    Villanova won't win the title because they lack an inside presence.

    A Pac 10 team won't win the title because they all suck.

    West Virginia won't win the title because......well they're West Virginia.

    Duke won't win the title because the tournament refs let teams play.

    Kentucky won't win the title because they are to much into thugging.

    Kansas State won't win the title because...(see West Virginia).
  • Azubuike24
    johngrizzly wrote: Syracuse won't win the title because they play zone.

    Villanova won't win the title because they lack an inside presence.

    A Pac 10 team won't win the title because they all suck.

    West Virginia won't win the title because......well they're West Virginia.

    Duke won't win the title because the tournament refs let teams play.

    Kentucky won't win the title because they are to much into thugging.

    Kansas State won't win the title because...(see West Virginia).
    Well considering you covered everyone in the top 8 other than Kansas and Purdue, you believe it will be one of them?
  • johngrizzly
    Purdue, Ohio State, Kansas or Michigan State are my top 4 picks to win it.
  • allstar
    Ohio State will not win because they do not have a consistent inside scorer. I don't think it will be because of depth or lack there of. There will be at least one day off between every game, and I doubt Matta would put them through a rigorous practice the day before a game. However, not having someone who can score inside on their own is a big problem. Teams can shut down Diebler with a good defender, and if Buford is off, they are in trouble. Turner (and Lighty) can't beat a top-notch team on their own.