So it seems the people at Black Heart Gold Pants have a weekly power poll for Big Ten basketball (aka "The MAC, except self-important!"). And for this week's edition, they did what? Ohhh! They compared each team to a candidate in the Iowa Caucuses! Hmmm, how clever and original!
I'll add one more analogy:
Big Ten Basketball = Hillary Clinton: Both are generally perceived as among the elite, until they actually play. Iowa and New Hampshire = the first two rounds of the NCAA Tournament.
I could go on like this for a while, it's just too easy.
UPDATE: No, I don't really think they stole our idea. Let's face it, it wasn't exactly coming up with nuclear fission. And if you're a fan of Big Ten hoops (and thereby a sadist), BHGP isn't a bad destination.
----------------------------
Monday, January 7, 2008
Hmmm, What a Clever Idea!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
"Biting your style"?
Are you fucking kidding me? What style is that? A blog so boring even meth addicts have a hard time staying awake reading it?
The "Big 10 is overrated argument" won't work in basketball--and considering the Big 10 and the ACC have the most appearances in the Final 4, I think that negates your whole argument.
Try piggybacking traffic from a lesser blog before you start playing with the big boys.
Also may can point out that jebushchrist and OPS were doing blog comparisons before you even had a blog.
Thank you, and goodnight.
I think it's simply adorable that you think we've ever even heard of you before, much less made a conscious decision to imitate you.
OK some stats:
Final Four Frenzy: With Ohio State advancing to the 2007 Final Four, the Big Ten has accumulated the most Final Four appearances with 39 (ACC - 38) and ties the ACC and SEC with the second-most national titles (10) in college basketball history. The Pac-10 leads all conferences with 15 titles. Since the inception of the NCAA Tournament in 1939, the Big Ten has recorded the most appearances of any conference in the Big Dance with 180 (ACC, 167) and has the second-most NCAA Tournament victories with 290 (ACC, 323).
via bigten.com.
But wouldn't you agree that, over say the last decade, the Big Ten hasn't been nearly as deep as the ACC? (I'm not an ACC fan or apologist, by the way.)
The Big Ten has had their recent appearances in the FF between OSU, MSU, IU, Illinois, but they haven't had the sustained strength of programs like UNC or Duke, obviously.
You just contradicted yourself.
ACC UNC and Duke. That is it.
Meanwhile the Big 10 has OSU, Indiana, MSU, Michigan, Iowa (cough, cough), Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn State.
Yeah, we totally suck!
Well, I mentioned programs "like UNC and Duke."
From the Big Ten, who's had sustained success like that year in and year out over the last decade? Michigan State, really. IU would be in that Maryland category. OSU has had their peaks and valleys with last year's team and the Redd/Scoonie squad under O'Brien. Michigan has hit hard times since the Fab 5 years, and UW's been pretty good the last couple of years. Penn State? Come on.
OK princess, some stats for you (in the last 10 years as you requested):
Total Big 10 appearances: 8
Total ACC appearances (meaning Duke/UNC/Maryland): 8 (awwww)
Total appearances by Duke and UNC: 6
Total SEC appearances: 6
Total Big East appearances: 5
Total Pac-10 appearances: 4
# of times two teams from the Big 10 have been in the Final 4: 2
#of times 2 teams from the ACC have been in the Final 4: 1
# of times both Duke and UNC have appeared in the same Final 4: none.
I'm not saying Duke or UNC is bad by any means, but your assumption that both teams have dominated college hoops in the last 10 years is utterly wrong. Here is some advice, if you want a successful sports blog, best not to make wild assumptions without backing anything up.
BHGP owns you!
Once again, I was talking about depth, meaning things like tournament record and the like. And I was also making the argument that UNC and Duke have been at or near the top almost every year recently (minus Duke last year, UNC under Doherty, etc.). The Big Ten seems to have had more up-and-down teams, like I mentioned.
I think we're using different criteria here.
Um, actually no. Your original assumption was that the Big 10 was overrated, comparing us to Hillary Clinton-who mind you is my senator. I clearly proved you wrong, and then some. I'm not even going to address your "up and down teams" point because I have embarrassed you enough.
You say we're using "different criteria", so if the case is that I used facts (I am) and you used drippings from your asshole (you are), then I would agree. If you would stop trying to make circular arguments, stop running around the room like a little bitch (see what I did there?) and admit I just backed you into a corner, we can all just put this behind us.
Also, to accuse someone of plagiarizing is offensive (especially when they clearly didn't), and should not be taken lightly or brushed off.
Welcome to the internets, my friend. It is a cold, cruel world.
You're from New York? That's awesome! I've been, it's great! Big 10 basketball is at best on the level of mid majors. Economics are what keeps it going. You are bound to have teams go deep in the tournament when year after year your conference represents 30% of the viable teams. A few teams go deep, so the cycle continues. Can't wait for selection day to see which two to four undeserving Big 10 teams make it this year.
Couple of final points:
Not sure why Hillary being your Senator is relevant.
As far as criteria, they can be manipulated in many ways. Championships in the last 20 years: ACC 6, SEC 5, Big Ten 2. Final Fours alone aren't the only bellweather of a conference's quality. Is it titles? Is it Sweet 16s? You can shape it any number of ways.
And once again, it was pretty clear (at least I thought) that my post was tongue-in-cheek. Apparently I was mistaken that there is room on the interwebs for sarcasm. My apologies.
But we shall agree to disagree, I suppose.
Post a Comment