Does Nova get proximity credit for Penn?clenz wrote:

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Does Nova get proximity credit for Penn?clenz wrote:
UNI88 wrote:Winning the NCAA Tournament doesn't necessarily mean you are the "best team in the country." It means that you were the hottest team in the country at the right time and as a result you are the national champions. There have been plenty of national champs that were not the best team in the country (the 85 Nova team is an excellent example of this). There is no shame in getting hot and winning a Natty.vutomcat wrote:Huh? Talk about someone that needs schooling or medication or something! One of those Big East teams won the tournament! That's not being lucky my man! That's the best team in the country. The same team that you have been watching and couldn't have been more wrong about for TWO entire years! Oh Man! This is great. Take the blinders off man. Just admit you were wrong and give it up.
I appreciate your passion, you definitely demonstrate the fanatic aspect of fan. But just because you strongly believe in your opinion doesn't make it a fact. My opinion is that while Nova was one of the top 4 or 5 teams this year they were not the best team. I think that Carolina or Kansas would have beaten them in a 7 game series. That is the beauty of the NCAA tournament, it's a series of one game winner-take-all match-ups and Nova won each of their match-ups. You are free to disagree with me but your conflicting opinion won't make my opinion any less valid.vutomcat wrote:Agree. Agree. 85 we were the hottest. This year the best.UNI88 wrote:
Winning the NCAA Tournament doesn't necessarily mean you are the "best team in the country." It means that you were the hottest team in the country at the right time and as a result you are the national champions. There have been plenty of national champs that were not the best team in the country (the 85 Nova team is an excellent example of this). There is no shame in getting hot and winning a Natty.
UNI88 wrote:I appreciate your passion, you definitely demonstrate the fanatic aspect of fan. But just because you strongly believe in your opinion doesn't make it a fact. My opinion is that while Nova was one of the top 4 or 5 teams this year they were not the best team. I think that Carolina or Kansas would have beaten them in a 7 game series. That is the beauty of the NCAA tournament, it's a series of one game winner-take-all match-ups and Nova won each of their match-ups. You are free to disagree with me but your conflicting opinion won't make my opinion any less valid.vutomcat wrote:
Agree. Agree. 85 we were the hottest. This year the best.
GF and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum yet we're both wrong and you're right? How much cake do you want to have while you eat it?vutomcat wrote:UNI88 wrote:
I appreciate your passion, you definitely demonstrate the fanatic aspect of fan. But just because you strongly believe in your opinion doesn't make it a fact. My opinion is that while Nova was one of the top 4 or 5 teams this year they were not the best team. I think that Carolina or Kansas would have beaten them in a 7 game series. That is the beauty of the NCAA tournament, it's a series of one game winner-take-all match-ups and Nova won each of their match-ups. You are free to disagree with me but your conflicting opinion won't make my opinion any less valid.
You have a right to your opinion. The numbers support mine more. - see kenpom. And, they played the games and Nova won. Not only did they win, their march through the tournament was amazing. They beat two number ones and a number two. They wrecked most of their opponents on their way to the championship.
You and Gannon Fan are at opposite ends of the spectrum. He thinks the only games that count are the tournament games. You don't feel they reflect much other than identifying the hottest team.
Nova was both this year. The best and hottest. Just my opinion.
UNI88 wrote:GF and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum yet we're both wrong and you're right? How much cake do you want to have while you eat it?vutomcat wrote:
You have a right to your opinion. The numbers support mine more. - see kenpom. And, they played the games and Nova won. Not only did they win, their march through the tournament was amazing. They beat two number ones and a number two. They wrecked most of their opponents on their way to the championship.
You and Gannon Fan are at opposite ends of the spectrum. He thinks the only games that count are the tournament games. You don't feel they reflect much other than identifying the hottest team.
Nova was both this year. The best and hottest. Just my opinion.
GF if I understand his argument was that Nova has underperformed in the Tournament in the past and I agree with the opinion. Nova has vastly underperformed compared to their talent level and expectations. A top seed should make it to the 2nd weekend and they have underperformed if they don't. The Sweet 16 and Elite 8 are acceptable and the Final 4 is successful for a top seed. All major programs underperform occasionally but Nova until this year was doing it pretty consistently.
I'm not trying to demean Nova. They won the national championship fair and square and should be proud of that.
Wrong, I never said all of that. The Big East sucks, that much I did say and it is true (3 years running and only 2 teams total have made it to the second weekend). Hard to argue otherwise and you've proven that it's hard to support the opposite position. The part where you are wrong is that I said it would hurt nova in the postseason as they would be more likely not to get as far as they would if they were challenged more regularly in the regular season rather than just relying on non-conference games to challenge them. I never said that nova would never be successful in the NCAA because of it, so either show me the link where I did say that or admit that you made it up.vutomcat wrote:UNI88 wrote:
GF and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum yet we're both wrong and you're right? How much cake do you want to have while you eat it?
GF if I understand his argument was that Nova has underperformed in the Tournament in the past and I agree with the opinion. Nova has vastly underperformed compared to their talent level and expectations. A top seed should make it to the 2nd weekend and they have underperformed if they don't. The Sweet 16 and Elite 8 are acceptable and the Final 4 is successful for a top seed. All major programs underperform occasionally but Nova until this year was doing it pretty consistently.
I'm not trying to demean Nova. They won the national championship fair and square and should be proud of that.
No one disagreed that Nova had underperformed in the recent NCAA's. I went back and forth with him a bit on the storied history of Nova's success in the tournament but never disagreed with their recent success or lack thereof. GF's main argument for the last two years is that the Big East sucks and Nova would never be successful in the NCAA because of that. He was wrong on that count.
vutomcat wrote: I wouldn't say you are wrong. We just differ on who was the best team in the country. No big deal really. I certainly understand someone having a high opinion on NC and Kansas. They are great programs and had great years.
GannonFan wrote:Wrong, I never said all of that. The Big East sucks, that much I did say and it is true (3 years running and only 2 teams total have made it to the second weekend). Hard to argue otherwise and you've proven that it's hard to support the opposite position. The part where you are wrong is that I said it would hurt nova in the postseason as they would be more likely not to get as far as they would if they were challenged more regularly in the regular season rather than just relying on non-conference games to challenge them. I never said that nova would never be successful in the NCAA because of it, so either show me the link where I did say that or admit that you made it up.vutomcat wrote:
No one disagreed that Nova had underperformed in the recent NCAA's. I went back and forth with him a bit on the storied history of Nova's success in the tournament but never disagreed with their recent success or lack thereof. GF's main argument for the last two years is that the Big East sucks and Nova would never be successful in the NCAA because of that. He was wrong on that count.
vutomcat wrote: I wouldn't say you are wrong. We just differ on who was the best team in the country. No big deal really. I certainly understand someone having a high opinion on NC and Kansas. They are great programs and had great years.
But that's not what you brought up in the above quote - you said that I said "nova would never be successful in the NCAA tourney..." - show me where I said that or should I chalk that up to you making stuff up again? You're avoiding the question.vutomcat wrote:GannonFan wrote:
Wrong, I never said all of that. The Big East sucks, that much I did say and it is true (3 years running and only 2 teams total have made it to the second weekend). Hard to argue otherwise and you've proven that it's hard to support the opposite position. The part where you are wrong is that I said it would hurt nova in the postseason as they would be more likely not to get as far as they would if they were challenged more regularly in the regular season rather than just relying on non-conference games to challenge them. I never said that nova would never be successful in the NCAA because of it, so either show me the link where I did say that or admit that you made it up.
No, you said they were "ripe for the picking". You were wrong. They marched through the tournament like Fralinger on New Year's Day in the Mummers Parade.
GannonFan wrote:But that's not what you brought up in the above quote - you said that I said "nova would never be successful in the NCAA tourney..." - show me where I said that or should I chalk that up to you making stuff up again? You're avoiding the question.vutomcat wrote:
No, you said they were "ripe for the picking". You were wrong. They marched through the tournament like Fralinger on New Year's Day in the Mummers Parade.
Oh, and Fralinger finished 3rd this year, South Philly won the string bands. Metaphor failure noted.
bluehenbillk wrote:Now I've seen it all - Nova & Mummers in the same take?
I said in November that nova would make a deeper run this year than in previous years, hard to find fault in that. Heck, I called their early exit in each of the past two years and in this year I called them going deeper. Hard to be more correct than that.vutomcat wrote:GannonFan wrote:
But that's not what you brought up in the above quote - you said that I said "nova would never be successful in the NCAA tourney..." - show me where I said that or should I chalk that up to you making stuff up again? You're avoiding the question.
Oh, and Fralinger finished 3rd this year, South Philly won the string bands. Metaphor failure noted.
Parphrasing GF. Below are a couple other of your posts about Nova- sounds to me like you had no idea Nova would be successful in the tournament based on those and more. And remember your made up Brunson accusation? You are the one who has been proven to make things up.
You sound pretty down on Nova's chances here. Maybe you can find some posts where you expressed some optimism on their tournament chances?
this one ---"nova's going to find it hard to stay afloat while the programs around it try to drag them down"
and then this--"Uh, they were "soft" because they weren't "hardened" through the rigors of a tough regular season. I'm not sure why you have such a hard time understanding that as I've said it over and over"
And finally, here are the recent winners of the Mummers for your viewing pleasure. You will note Fralinger's dominates. If one is going to make a Mummers string band reference equating excellence, Fralinger's is the pick!
2003 Fralinger
2004 Fralinger
2005 Fralinger
2006 Fralinger
2007 Fralinger
2008 Fralinger
2009 Fralinger
2010 Fralinger
2011 Quaker City
2012 Woodland
2013 Fralinger
2014 Quaker City
2015 Fralinger
2016 South Philadelphia
UVA-Villanova is the back half of the home and home from last year. that was a good home and home setup for last year and this upcoming year.vutomcat wrote:Nova out of conference schedule to include Virginia, Notre Dame and Purdue next season. Big 10 and ACC all want a part of the champ.
Penn State made the list (and is ahead of many of those Big East teams). Article loses a lot of credibility with that inclusion.vutomcat wrote:BIG EAST WITH 5 TEAMS IN THE TOP 25 2016 RECRUITS
.
Details, details. I think he took the three teams on the list that used to be in the Big East, grouped them together, and just added it to the total. But again, details.tribe_pride wrote:Who is the 5th? I see Nova at 18, Marquette at 19, St. Johns at 21, and Xavier at 24.
tribe_pride wrote:Who is the 5th? I see Nova at 18, Marquette at 19, St. Johns at 21, and Xavier at 24.
Yes, we're all waiting with baited breath for St. John's to come back from the oblivion. I'm sure this time this class will do it. Are you tapping your ruby slippers together three times just for extra luck?vutomcat wrote:tribe_pride wrote:Who is the 5th? I see Nova at 18, Marquette at 19, St. Johns at 21, and Xavier at 24.
Oops. You're right. Only 4. Still a very nice grab. At a quick glance it appears only the ACC has more in the top 25. The requiem will have to wait for another 4 years I guess.
clenz wrote:This....
This is the epitome of being "small time"
Why the **** would Nova licence that?