I was okay with what you were saying until you stated the above. I just don’t agree with you. I am okay with the “no conspiracy” thing, but it isn’t always about competition… when I point out some of the inconsistencies and favoritism that many of us agree on, you really have no response. When I talk about the specifics of teams like Duke this season, in their game vs. UNCW, you have no reply.
The reason is because you can’t explain it within the context of “competition”. I’ve asked specifically for an opinion or explanation for why Duke shot 42 free throws and the only real answer (because nobody can legitimately explain it any other way) is that they were being favored by the officials. So the next question is why? and the fact that there are 6 teams in the final 16 from the ACC provides another logical possibility, along with the fact that they are a huge draw with a huge fan base along with the fact that they have a very popular coach and a storied history. Combine that with the fact that almost nobody cares about UNC-Wilmington except a handful of their fans and the result is what I saw in that game. There is no other explanation and if this keeps happening over and over, year after year, a pattern develops. You say there is no “conspiracy” and within the context of how you guys represent a conspiracy, I am willing to accept that, but you can’t realistically sit there and say there is no corruption or favoritism and that it is only pure “competition” that we are watching. If that is what you really believe, then you haven’t been watching enough and you live in a fantasy world.
No… it wasn’t “well said”. As I said in my post above, I am willing to digress from my “conspiracy” talk based on your definition of the term, but if you think for a second there is no favoritism, bias or reason to help a team like Duke move on in the ncaa tournament and leave a team like UNC-Wilmington behind then you are not paying enough attention. If you and Harold honestly believe that it is pure competition, free of any corruption, then you just aren’t paying attention and you live in a fantasy world. Why do you think the ncaa signs 10 billion dollar tv contracts? because of all the UNC-Wilmington fans out there? LOL!
This is conspiracy. And when it includes point shaving or momentum changing I find it potential illegal too. You may want to ignore this but the Feds would have investigated a long time ago because of the gambling angle. You can’t possibly deny this.
And to say competition has nothing to do with it? Next you will say golf is a conspiracy.
Who said anything about point shaving? You see, that is the problem. You always take it to the extreme in an effort to discredit what I am saying. That’s weak.
I watched the Duke-UNCW game and it was obvious what Hall was doing. He is good and he can get away with it. There is no way to prove it… nobody was “shaving points” but his calls and the timing of his calls were most certainly momentum changing. It happens, you just don’t understand why it happens, even when I explain it to you. There are others that do and they don’t buy into the conspiracy thing as you explain it. Point shaving… LOL! Nobody is determining the final scores… not the offcials, not the ncaa, not anybody. That is how you are portraying it and it doesn’t exist. They are only providing them with advantages because of the way a game is called. Sometimes, the other team is able to overcome those advantages and play well enough to win… sometimes they are not and often times it isn’t necessary or most of the time the one team is simply better and none of it matters. This is the case in most situations.
Changing momentum delibertly is shaving or changing point outcomes. What you also don’t seem to understand is teams with less talent will often times foul a lot more. In that game they did. But you can’t see that because you are looking for the conspiracy. Hall isn’t a good referee, period.
There is no way to prove this is happening, even when it is obvious.
Did you watch the game? No, you didn’t. But for some reason you seem to think you can comment on something you didn’t actually see. And then you tell me I can’t see something… It is comments like that which ruin your credibility (and around here there isn’t a whole lot of that left). UNCW had a pretty good defensive team and they played a great game. Tell me if any other games involved a team shooting 42 free throws? There were plenty of less talented teams that lost simply because they were outplayed. That was not the case in THIS GAME. I gave you the reasons why it happened. If I were truly looking for a conspiracy I would have mentioned the Northern Iowa - Texas A&M game, but that wasn’t the case in that game. Northern Iowa simply blew a 12 point lead with a minute to go.
Your comments about me looking for something are shallow and condescending. Those are symptoms of an inferiority complex. No need to go there…
JH:Your comments about me looking for something are shallow and condescending. Those are symptoms of an inferiority complex. No need to go there…
SG: Well, what you just wrote was one with the inferiority complex. Get a grip. The fact is, all conspiracy followers are looking for something to prove their conspiracy. There is nothing shallow nor condescending about the truth.
There were 42 free throws because they were driving and shooting on those fouls. The defenders were guarding close and hacked a lot because they were not as talented as Duke. You make the mistake of thinking the number of fouls and free throws always has to be equal to be fair. If it doesn’t, you use that to try to support a theory that a referee is corrupt. I disagree.
Try not to take it personal when the world doesn’t agree with you
I apologize but I just can’t take your comments seriously. I am not looking for something. I watch the games, I analyze the games and when I see obvious bias and/or favoritism I comment on it. If I was “looking” for something I would comment that it is happening in every game, which it doesn’t. Once again, you didn’t watch one second of the game so you don’t know if they were driving and shooting… and I don’t make a mistake of thinking the fouls and free throws have to be even to be fair. Likewise, you don’t know anything if you don’t see a game.
You assume way too many things so your comments can’t be taken seriously.
You are the best kind of fan for the big money tournament of the ncaa… naive and unaware. Duke was not worthy of shooting 42 free throws. No other team came close to taking that many in any tournament game. Maybe, just maybe I might be right.
EDIT NOTE - I missed the fact that Austin Peay shot 37 free throws against Kansas. Kansas won the game by 25 points. Interesting…
no reply because it is simply not worth replying to.
Lots of games that do not “matter” are handled just as badly, thankfully most not so much.
There are approximately 10,000 NCAA division 1 basketball games a year. You point to one and act as if one or a dozen or whatever and think that proves something…
This was a ncaa tournament game… that was very one sided in the way the game was called. In case you forgot, the ncaa signed a contract with cbs to televeise the games over the next 14 years. That contract is worth 10 billion dollars… I know that doesn’t sound like a lot in today’s world when the US is trillions of dollars in debt.
So you don’t believe there is any incentive or reason for the ncaa or its’ officials to hope that certain teams move on in that tournament? You don’t believe that there is any corruptive influence at all in the ncaa as it relates to specific leagues or teams in the ncaa tournament. None, Zero, nothing?
You think the Duke-UNCW game was officiated completely fairly for both teams? There is no bias, there is no intent, the calls are made the same for both teams in an equal and fair manner… hmmmm.
Okay then, I guess there is no reason to discuss it with you any further.
it is quite possible indeed that the answers to these questions are in now way related.
But no the NCAA has no motive to make sure that Duke or BYU or Monmouth finishes well or badly. In case you hadn’t noticed the popular teams change over time. The NCAA does well when the competition is good. The NCAA has done much better with a large tournament and lots of at large invites than it ever did when only champions were dancing…
As to the Duke UNCW game, I neither no nor care the answer to your specific question.
The refs make their names and reputations by calling games as fairly as possible, keeping the teams playing as close to the rules as possible. The game they play, what they get judged on, is not whether a particular team or conference wins. The fact is that one team will win each and every single one of the approximately 10,000 ncaa division 1 basketball games. In every single one of those games “fans,” (short for fanatics, you know the kind of people who see and create conspiracies, ) disagree with many of the calls.
And you are right there is no reason to discuss it any further.
Let’s just imagine, for arguments sake, that there was only one or two teams from the acc, big 12 or pac 12 in this years tournament and that there were multiple teams from the lower tier conferences. How many people would be watching? Does the ncaa not care about viewership? Does CBS not care how many people are watching the games? Do the advertisers not care? Is there zero connection between all of these factors?
Do you even have a clue what is going on in our world?
And I never would be rude enough to claim that your were clueless about this world. Especially when you are asking questions about simple facts that ;are easily discoverable but which you do not bother to actually go look up.
Go check what happens to viewership both short term and long term when cinderellas show up. and then make a name for themselves.
Go check what happens to the teams, the universities.
We all have our slant on things and observe with that slant. Even if it’s just one call that shifts momentum you comment on it. So, you do watch looking for foul play on the refs, league and NCAA. I don’t come from that slant. So, I need proof. Do you understand?
You have people who, like you, believe there is no corruption, favoritism or influence from the “power” schools… that would be Harold.
I have people who, like me, believe there is corruption, favoritism or influence from the power schools… that would be everyone else.
When you say you need “proof” you sound like an atheist. The proof is all around you… with the way the parameters for selection are created, with the way many of the games are officiated, with the way the games are scheduled and the matchups are made, with the money that is involved and how it is distributed.
I can’t help it if you don’t see those things that are right in front of you. I can’t prove anything to you to the extent you expect, just like I can’t prove to the atheist that God exists. For most of us it is all around us, regardless there are those that simply will never believe it. You and Harold should form a club.
I might stop if it weren’t for comments like the one above.
You have implied that you think the ncaa is about competition, not corruption. I think you stated as much. You have also implied that you don’t think there is anything wrong with what you see. When I ask you what you believe, that is what you state and imply. Maybe I am misunderstanding…
Also, nobody is saying much about the fact that BYU is going to New York to play in the final four of the NIT. There is some consolation in this, but not much compensation. I would be happy to discuss this, but nobody is doing that. There is no fish, no Larimer, no Floyd, no anyone else commenting about it.
You simply want to believe there aren’t honest people in the world. We do. You start with the negative and only see the negative. We see the positive and start there. That way, we don’t have a slant on things to begin with. It’s not that we don’t see corruption. It’s just not all corruption forms a conspiracy all encompassing. Has to be tough only seeing the negative in everything.
No, atheists aren’t the only ones that need proof. You do know that as your testimony builds, you are simply gaining more proof
But, when you are talking about things not of faith, then proof is necessary to judge and convict. All you have is suspicion and conjecture.
Remember: “Mike Krzyzewski fires back at Bo Ryan’s (Michigan State) ‘rent-a-player’ dig”
You see, I lost interest in Duke, UNC, UK, Louisville, Kansas and some others. Why watch them anymore? They are bunch of mini nba schools. Something fishy about how many schools on each big conferences are being invited to the ncaa. I see flaws going on. But I do enjoy news flash and if I get a chance to watch this last minute watching Cinderella team beating those guys. The last three games BYU played at home was fun and hope for more wins.
good job here David. A willingness to acknowledge that there is a problem in college basketball yet you can still enjoy the games for the most part. For the most part is an important distinction because that is how I see it. I enjoy most of the games and the way they are called, played, etc. That game between BYU and Virginia Tech was great. That is how I wish the college game would be played and officiated. It’s too bad that we have to sit through games like Duke vs. UNCW. There is good officiating and there is some bad officiating and then there is bias and control, where the officials do everything they can to influence the outcome without making it blatantly obvious… even though it is to the astute eye.
Overall I enjoy the college game, but I know it isn’t totally clean and unbiased competition. That is what I would really like.
