so you can stop bitching about sendek for two seconds and start bitching about media bias or some other bullshit. add some variety.

anyway:
http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/alltime/bracket

the '83 team gets a 16 seed and the '74 team gets a 2 seed.

and the '83 Houston team gets a 10 seed which makes a TON of sense (i mean i know they had dream and glide, but if they were that much better.....)

3/22/2006 5:12:28 PM

I figured the '90 unlv team would get a #1 seed. hell, if they hadn't thrown the '91 game on purpose, they would've had back to back championships

3/22/2006 5:16:19 PM

Quote :

"Team to appreciate all over again: N.C. State (1974). If you do nothing else as a result of participating in this poll, review your David Thompson clips and footage. There was a time, before the blow, when he left you gasping for air and grasping for words to describe him. Revisit that time, if only in your imagination."

3/22/2006 5:33:24 PM

unlv didnt throw that game. they got outplayed. watch it sometime its on classic all the time.

3/23/2006 12:16:51 AM

We were probably the worst national champion winner ever...so I don't see the big deal in being a #16. Also, Houston probably beats us 7 or 8 out of 10 times that year. I don't see the big deal.

Although I do think the '74 team should have been a #1 seed. Although it's hard to argue against the other #1 seeds.

3/23/2006 12:22:18 AM

^ what about Villanova. people gave them no chance against Georgetown much like our 83' team. they had to play the perfect game just to beat them by 2 points. They shot an NCAA record high percentage of 78.6% (22-28). there have been a few other teams out there that were worse than ours. from what i hear we were actually supposed to be pretty good that year, but we had some injuries that hampered us up until the ACC tournament.

3/23/2006 12:44:39 AM

WHERE'S UNCC AND CORNBREAD MAXWELL???

3/23/2006 12:47:03 AM

^^We were pretty good that year...but even at full strength we were the third best team in the ACC behind UNC and Virginia.

That Villanova team is a good argument. You could probably name one or two more teams...but we were still one of the worst National Champions. But hey...you won't see me complaining. We might have been one of the worst National Champions, but we were probably one of the best tournament teams. The games we won that year in the ACC tournament and NCAA tournament were pretty fucking ridiculous. I would have had multiple heart attacks if I were alive that year.

3/23/2006 1:04:37 AM

UCLA has 10 teams in that bracket, 7 of them in one region.

I love how in this one thing it says we have one of the top 4 teams(not a #1 seed but that analyst making the predictions has us going to the "Final Four") in history, as well as it says we were involved in what could be considered the greatest college game in history (NCSU 103, Marylaned 100 in OT).

3/23/2006 8:43:04 AM

unlv threw that game. there is shit written about that game all the time. SI even did a feature on it and it showed photos of unlv players in hot tubs with bookies and other gambling figures. that team was about as unbeatable as they come. Duke was good, but I still don't think they could've hung with that unlv team in a legit game.

3/23/2006 8:47:44 AM

Haha. I was like 9 but I remember watching that game and thinking to myself why the hell aren't LJ and Augmon playing hard..

The only dude out there that was worth a damn that game was Anderson Hunt..

3/23/2006 8:55:38 AM

I'd take worst national champion over best runner-up any day.

3/23/2006 9:05:22 AM

^^yeah, I remember my dad saying to me "this game has to be fixed." I was only like 11, but I can remember unlv just looking like they didn't care.

3/23/2006 9:26:45 AM

If you actually read the whole thing, they ending up choosing the '74 team as a final four team. So, really they are like a number one seed. Those UCLA teams are tough to top.

3/23/2006 10:50:33 AM