First 2009 March Madness thread

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by 3kings

There's a sentence I didn't think I would ever here talking about a tourney team (Duquesne is my alma mater). They look like they are turning the corner to respectability.

Question for Ateam, Sniper or any other big hoop fan. Are teams like Pitt or UConn, which will be a 1 or 2 seeds at the worst, have anything to gain by trying to win the Big East Tourny? It seems because of the depth and physical play of that league it takes its toll on teams that have to play 3 or 4 nights in a row.

I've never subscribed to any theory that says losses are good for a team. Now, that doesn't mean that some losses aren't OK and won't hurt but I don't think that as a coach or player, you EVER go in thinking that it's ok if you lose. That's just against everything in the nature of a competitor. The stories are legendary about Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson and how competitive they were in PRACTICES, never wanting to lose. I think it's really overrated how much of a toll it takes on these kids. They are all 18-22 years old and in prime physical condition. If they weren't playing on this stage, they'd be out at some local gym playing for hours and hours straight, day after day. It's comical when people talk about how players are tired on the second night or third night in a row of playing. They aren't. You want to win every game you play in. Period. For teams like UConn and Pitt, the difference could be between being a #1 or #2. As a #2, you theoretically have a tougher path to the title. Not only that but there is also a big lift to being able to claim the conference title. You may not have a lot to gain by winning the conference tournament title but I think you do lose a bit more by not winning it.