Butler/Zags

[Kahns Krazy]

How is there not a thread about that game? What an ending! When we finish the A-10 season 17-0, Butler is going to be two very quality wins when the committee is talking about our seeding.

[danaandvictory]

It was a great game.

As with anything else Butler-related, the sports media has reacted to it with restraint. I think Jeff Goodman credits Brad Stevens for teaching him to love again. Andy Katz was referring to the special and treasured place in every basketball fan's heart that Gonzaga and Butler should hold. Butler is like Cialis for these hacks.

I enjoy Butler and wish them well but my God do they make people say some stupid things.

[xudash]

How is there not a thread about that game? What an ending! When we finish the A-10 season 17-0, Butler is going to be two very quality wins when the committee is talking about our seeding.

I only caught the very end of it.

Obviously, it must have been going back and forth all game long. What was the largest lead either team had?

Understanding that it's mainly about "just win baby", it was very obvious that Gonzaga lost a game that they otherwise had in the bag at the end.

I do have one other observation, and it's about Hinkle Fieldhouse. I respect the tradition of the building. I respect that it is a National Historical Landmark. But it is cheesy and old. All of those billboard/placards that line the place look terrible. It makes the place look like a flea market, which is hard for me to opine on, because I've never been to a flea market. I guess that's what I would expect to see if I went to one. Their floor is over-the-top hideous. I'm sure it will look great once the renovation takes place, assuming they ever do put the money together for that. I wouldn't trade the Cintas Center for that place for anything. It just looks dank and dusty.

[GoMuskies]

I went to a KU game at Allen Fieldhouse last year, and when I got back to work the next day one of the KU blowhards here asked me how I liked it. I told him it reminded me of going to a game at Hinkle. I don't think he's talked to me since.

[GuyFawkes38]

Really isn't that impressive of a win. Playing at home, Butler should have won with relative ease.

IMHO, strong possibility for a one and out this year for the bulldogs. I know that would really disappoint the passionate Butler fans on this board and the college basketball community as a whole, but that's just how I see it.

[Masterofreality]

It was a great game to watch and was a fine show.

I'm not as anti-Butler as others, although I was no fan of that cheap shot artist Hayward. I'm glad they beat the cute Zaggies.

The Zags continue to stick in my craw. I still can't believe that we've lost to them 3 straight times. Gonzaga has been to 1, that's ONE Elite 8 and 4 Sweet 16's. Xavier has more of each. Neither team has made a Final 4 but Gonzaga still just seems to have this status...even when they are not that good.

I know that they're better than XU this year and I'm glad we're no playing them, this year but I would like to start up a series with them again.

[xubrew]

It was a great game to watch and was a fine show.

I'm not as anti-Butler as others, although I was no fan of that cheap shot artist Hayward. I'm glad they beat the cute Zaggies.

The Zags continue to stick in my craw. I still can't believe that we've lost to them 3 straight times. Gonzaga has been to 1, that's ONE Elite 8 and 4 Sweet 16's. Xavier has more of each. Neither team has made a Final 4 but Gonzaga still just seems to have this status...even when they are not that good.

I know that they're better than XU this year and I'm glad we're no playing them, this year but I would like to start up a series with them again.

That's an interesting point. I have some theories as to why. Well, they're more like hypothesis than theories. The truth is I don't know why the spotlight on Gonzaga is as bright as it is. I'm not saying they arent extremely accomplished. They are. I just don't know why it's brighter for them than for other programs that have done just as much, if not more.

-Gonzaga's Elite Eight run in 1999 was a great story. Any non-major program who makes a deep tournament run is a great story. Theirs was the first to occur in the DirecTV Mega March Madness era. So, literally, the whole country could watch. LMU had a great run and a great story as well, but theirs occurred at a time when four games were being played at once, and the country was at the mercy of whichever game CBS decided to air. Gonzaga did it when eveyrone could watch. Does that have something to do with it?? I dunno. Just an idea.

-The next year, they did it again. Or at the very least they got to the Sweet Sixteen and played in some showcase OOC games that got them attention.

-The next year, they were in the Sweet Sixteen....again.

-The next year, they lost in the first round, but by that point they were regulars in the rankings, and ESPN had signed a deal with the WCC, so they were on more and more.


George Mason had a good run, but it was short lived. Davidson had a good year and a half, but didn't stay. They were definitely the top stories of their day, but they didn't stay the top story. Gonzaga is, though. Maybe it's because everyone remembers how much fun that Elite Eight run was, and it's fun to watch them keep playing and beating good teams. I don't know. It's just an idea. The media does like them....a lot. I know what. I'm not sure as to why. To their credit, they continue to play the kind of showcase out of conference games that keep them on TV and make them desitination programming for college hoops fans.

[muskiefan82]

That's an interesting point. I have some theories as to why. Well, they're more like hypothesis than theories. The truth is I don't know why the spotlight on Gonzaga is as bright as it is. I'm not saying they arent extremely accomplished. They are. I just don't know why it's brighter for them than for other programs that have done just as much, if not more.

-Gonzaga's Elite Eight run in 1999 was a great story. Any non-major program who makes a deep tournament run is a great story. Theirs was the first to occur in the DirecTV Mega March Madness era. So, literally, the whole country could watch. LMU had a great run and a great story as well, but theirs occurred at a time when four games were being played at once, and the country was at the mercy of whichever game CBS decided to air. Gonzaga did it when eveyrone could watch. Does that have something to do with it?? I dunno. Just an idea.

-The next year, they did it again. Or at the very least they got to the Sweet Sixteen and played in some showcase OOC games that got them attention.

-The next year, they were in the Sweet Sixteen....again.

-The next year, they lost in the first round, but by that point they were regulars in the rankings, and ESPN had signed a deal with the WCC, so they were on more and more.


George Mason had a good run, but it was short lived. Davidson had a good year and a half, but didn't stay. They were definitely the top stories of their day, but they didn't stay the top story. Gonzaga is, though. Maybe it's because everyone remembers how much fun that Elite Eight run was, and it's fun to watch them keep playing and beating good teams. I don't know. It's just an idea. The media does like them....a lot. I know what. I'm not sure as to why. To their credit, they continue to play the kind of showcase out of conference games that keep them on TV and make them desitination programming for college hoops fans.

What everyone needs to realize is that they talk about Butler and Gonzaga because it is unusual. It is commonplace for Xavier to be in the tourney and win some games. It just isn't noteworthy anymore because it happens often.

[xubrew]

What everyone needs to realize is that they talk about Butler and Gonzaga because it is unusual. It is commonplace for Xavier to be in the tourney and win some games. It just isn't noteworthy anymore because it happens often.

I'm pretty sure Butler has more tournament wins than we do in the past decade, and has spent more time in the rankings than we have over the last six or seven years.

For whatever reason we don't attracked the media the way flypaper attracks flies. Those teams do. I personally don't have a huge problem with that because I don't pay much attention to the media, and don't really spend a lot of time thinking about why they're attracked to what they're attraced to. They like Butler and Gonzaga, though.

[GuyFawkes38]

I have no problem with Butler receiving a lot of media attention. Making back to back national championships is impressive. I'm of the opinion that Butler was very lucky to do so and that they likely won't make another Final Four in the next 30 years. But that's irrelevant. It's impressive and deserves media attention.

Gonzaga is a different story. I think one of things that's important to appreciate is that the college basketball scene west of the Rocky Mountains sucks. There's UCLA, Arizona, and Gonzaga. Football and the NBA dominates. ESPN and other media companies have to try to build up their college basketball viewer base west of the rockies. And they do that by trying to build up the Gonzaga program to more than it really is, IMHO (same thing with St. Mary's.....the media is desperately searching for some sort of excitement).

[paulxu]

This generated a little discussion as it appears the backboard light was on before the ball left his fingers.
The replay from behind the basket seemed to indicate it was a good shot. Whatever.
Light, horn, whistle, or clock....Hinkle has never had its timing sh$t together. And still doesn't.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BBBuhxWCYAAKSaM.jpg:large

[Kahns Krazy]

For whatever reason we don't attracked the media the way flypaper attracks flies. Those teams do. I personally don't have a huge problem with that because I don't pay much attention to the media, and don't really spend a lot of time thinking about why they're attracked to what they're attraced to. They like Butler and Gonzaga, though.

Holy shit, dude. Does that look even remotely right to you?

[Kahns Krazy]

This generated a little discussion as it appears the backboard light was on before the ball left his fingers.
The replay from behind the basket seemed to indicate it was a good shot. Whatever.
Light, horn, whistle, or clock....Hinkle has never had its timing sh$t together. And still doesn't.



It was damn close. The only thing that matters on the end of game is the light. It couldn't have been more than an inch out of his hand, but when I watched it, it looked like it was good to me.

[xudash]

I have no problem with Butler receiving a lot of media attention. Making back to back national championships is impressive. I'm of the opinion that Butler was very lucky to do so and that they likely won't make another Final Four in the next 30 years. But that's irrelevant. It's impressive and deserves media attention.

Gonzaga is a different story. I think one of things that's important to appreciate is that the college basketball scene west of the Rocky Mountains sucks. There's UCLA, Arizona, and Gonzaga. Football and the NBA dominates. ESPN and other media companies have to try to build up their college basketball viewer base west of the rockies. And they do that by trying to build up the Gonzaga program to more than it really is, IMHO (same thing with St. Mary's.....the media is desperately searching for some sort of excitement).

Guess what's coming in spades for Xavier. Forget the other teams that will comprise the new conference, because I get that they'll receive their own significant pub. But Xavier will receive some serious media attention from the winning bidder because it will be one of the bell weather programs in the new conference. Xavier is a keystone to the new conference's success.

Brew, not sure about the rankings side of it, but we've been to the Dance the last 9/10, where Butler has been the last 6/10, and I think they have a total of one more win than X in that period, but I'm not sure about that.

Overall, it was a College Gameday gig. Seriously, I missed it, so I couldn't tell you how it looked or how well it went off.

I have to imagine that the CGD crew will find its way to the CC at some point. It will look a lot more impressive at our place, as compared to holding it in an 80+ year old zeppelin hanger.

[vee4xu]

X has been building a program since 1983. The team has been very good for a very long time. So much so that people come to expect Xavier to be good year-in-and-year-out. Xavier set the blueprint for teams like them to have good programs. That is true for both Gonzaga and Butler. Having Gameday at Butler is all about ESPN front running like they usually do. That is not to take a shot at Butler, but at ESPN who likes things new and pretty, just like their Sports Center anchors. Butler is new and pretty, but they live in a shanty of a house. However, we had to hear last night about the ambiance, the allure, the history, etc from some chick standing in the top row of the upper level with a freaking snow cone for crying out loud.

Xavier is the gold standard for basketball AND academic excellence for non-big conference teams and will remain so for many years. For people who know basketball, they know it. For the beautiful people who rely on ESPN for their news and what is hot or good, then Butler and Gonzaga will be their pick because of being a media darlings. If not for X, there would be no Butler of Gonzaga as they exist today. There is hype and there is real. Overall, since 1983, Butler and Gonzaga are hype and X is real. All one has to do is look at how many NBA players all three programs have produced and the case for X can be rested right there.

[Juice]

X has been building a program since 1983. The team has been very good for a very long time. So much so that people come to expect Xavier to be good year-in-and-year-out. Xavier set the blueprint for teams like them to have good programs. That is true for both Gonzaga and Butler. Having Gameday at Butler is all about ESPN front running like they usually do. That is not to take a shot at Butler, but at ESPN who likes things new and pretty, just like their Sports Center anchors. Butler is new and pretty, but they live in a shanty of a house. However, we had to hear last night about the ambiance, the allure, the history, etc from some chick standing in the top row of the upper level with a freaking snow cone for crying out loud.

Xavier is the gold standard for basketball AND academic excellence for non-big conference teams and will remain so for many years. For people who know basketball, they know it. For the beautiful people who rely on ESPN for their news and what is hot or good, then Butler and Gonzaga will be their pick because of being a media darlings. If not for X, there would be no Butler of Gonzaga as they exist today. There is hype and there is real. Overall, since 1983, Butler and Gonzaga are hype and X is real. All one has to do is look at how many NBA players all three programs have produced and the case for X can be rested right there.

Did you know Hoosiers was filmed in Hinkle? Holy hell, if I have to hear that one more time from ESPN I am going to beat my face in with the back of a hammer.

[drudy23]

They went to back to back national title games...out of whatever rinky dink conference they came from...think about that.

You guys act like they haven't done anything. Not only that, they are solid every year, and their kids play above their potential, which speaks volumes of their coach.

They have my respect.

[mohr5150]

Did you know Hoosiers was filmed in Hinkle? Holy hell, if I have to hear that one more time from ESPN I am going to beat my face in with the back of a hammer.

This isn't anywhere near as annoying as having to hear about the Brent Spence Bridge or Skyline Chili every time the shootout comes around.

[muskiefan82]

I'm pretty sure Butler has more tournament wins than we do in the past decade, and has spent more time in the rankings than we have over the last six or seven years.

For whatever reason we don't attracked the media the way flypaper attracks flies. Those teams do. I personally don't have a huge problem with that because I don't pay much attention to the media, and don't really spend a lot of time thinking about why they're attracked to what they're attraced to. They like Butler and Gonzaga, though.

It's the 30 years of winning tradition that they don't have. It's expected here.

[xubrew]

Holy shit, dude. Does that look even remotely right to you?

Now that you point it out....no.

[xubrew]

X has been building a program since 1983. The team has been very good for a very long time. So much so that people come to expect Xavier to be good year-in-and-year-out. Xavier set the blueprint for teams like them to have good programs. That is true for both Gonzaga and Butler. Having Gameday at Butler is all about ESPN front running like they usually do. That is not to take a shot at Butler, but at ESPN who likes things new and pretty, just like their Sports Center anchors. Butler is new and pretty, but they live in a shanty of a house. However, we had to hear last night about the ambiance, the allure, the history, etc from some chick standing in the top row of the upper level with a freaking snow cone for crying out loud.

Xavier is the gold standard for basketball AND academic excellence for non-big conference teams and will remain so for many years. For people who know basketball, they know it. For the beautiful people who rely on ESPN for their news and what is hot or good, then Butler and Gonzaga will be their pick because of being a media darlings. If not for X, there would be no Butler of Gonzaga as they exist today. There is hype and there is real. Overall, since 1983, Butler and Gonzaga are hype and X is real. All one has to do is look at how many NBA players all three programs have produced and the case for X can be rested right there.

There is no one, and I mean NO ONE, outside of this message board that would agree with that statement. That is borderlined insanity. Gonzaga and Butler paved their own way, and they would have done it had Xavier never even existed. Nothing that either program has done was the result of anything that Xavier did for them. You really have to use your imagination to think otherwise.

[LA Muskie]

The Zags continue to stick in my craw. I still can't believe that we've lost to them 3 straight times. Gonzaga has been to 1, that's ONE Elite 8 and 4 Sweet 16's. Xavier has more of each. Neither team has made a Final 4 but Gonzaga still just seems to have this status...even when they are not that good.

I know that they're better than XU this year and I'm glad we're no playing them, this year but I would like to start up a series with them again.

Well their Sagarin rating over the last 10 years is better than ours, and not by an insignificant margin. So they have that going for them...

[xubrew]

When Xavier fans talk about Butler and Gonzaga, they sound like Dayton fans. If I were to change the names of the teams around, you would never know the difference.

[LA Muskie]

They went to back to back national title games...out of whatever rinky dink conference they came from...think about that.

You guys act like they haven't done anything. Not only that, they are solid every year, and their kids play above their potential, which speaks volumes of their coach.

They have my respect.

Mine too.

[LA Muskie]

When Xavier fans talk about Butler and Gonzaga, they sound like Dayton fans. If I were to change the names of the teams around, you would never know the difference.

Couldn't agree more.

[vee4xu]

There is no one, and I mean NO ONE, outside of this message board that would agree with that statement. That is borderlined insanity. Gonzaga and Butler paved their own way, and they would have done it had Xavier never even existed. Nothing that either program has done was the result of anything that Xavier did for them. You really have to use your imagination to think otherwise.

Yours is a very broad statement and impossible to prove. However, I understand it is your opinion and respect the fact that you expressed despite being unable to prove it. Mine too is an opinion. Too bad you don't have the same flexibility in others expressing it.

[GoMuskies]

Frankly, in 1999 Xavier hadn't really done anything more than have a "nice" program that won a lot in the regular season and had gone to one Sweet Sixteen ever. I can't imagine Gonzaga used that as a blueprint for anything. We were basically a hair above Murray State at that point (and that's not near the "insult" that a lot of people will think it is).

[xubrew]

Vee, can you prove your statement about how if it weren't for X that Butler and Gonzaga would not exist as they do today??

You said that Xavier has been solid since 1983. Do we owe all our success to Penn?? They made the FF in 1979. They are an academic centric university from a non-major conference. Saying that we owe everything to Penn is every bit as plausible as what you're saying.

What about Cleveland State?? I believe they were the first #14 seed to ever advance in 19836. Did that pave the way for Xavier's win over Missouri the following year?? Do we owe those program definining wins from the late 80s to them??

My statement, which you describe as very broad and impossible to prove, was made in response to your statement, which I also believe to be impossible to prove because it is simply incorrect. Can you prove that it is?? Can you point to anything that indicates Gonzaga and Butler would not be where they are today if it weren't for Xavier?? What is one thing thing that Butler and Gonzaga have as a result of something Xavier did for them??

[xudash]

When Xavier fans talk about Butler and Gonzaga, they sound like Dayton fans. If I were to change the names of the teams around, you would never know the difference.

That is borderline insanity.

[bobbiemcgee]

Each built their own program the way they wanted. Similar circumstances but that's about it. I grew up a couple blocks from Butler and never heard a thing about X. Same true around Cincinnati with X, I assume. All great programs. Different is, Everybody knows these teams now. Thx TV.

[X-band '01]

Butler is a program - Barry Collier to Thad Matta to Todd Lickliter to Brad Stevens.

Gonzaga may be one of the last programs to have a lifer like Mark Few. Stevens could be a lifer-in-waiting.

[GoMuskies]

It was Dan Monson who got it started there, though.

[bleedXblue]

All 3 programs have built a brand and following by winning consistently over the last 10+ years. I respect both programs and hold no animosity towards either.

[X-band '01]

It was Dan Monson who got it started there, though.

I haven't forgotten about Munson - people forget that Gonzaga's first NCAA Tournament win back in 1999 included a win over a Minnesota team that had mass suspensions because of academic fraud going on in their program. Monson was unable to fix that mess. Tubby Smith is having his best season at Minnesota to date - I could see them winning a game or two in the NCAAs this year.

[GuyFawkes38]

It's fun to hate Butler. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Why can't we have some fun with that without posters like Lamuskie writing condescendingly about how we are obligated to love them because they are a much better program than us, and brad Stevens is a great coach and blah blah blah.

[vee4xu]

Vee, can you prove your statement about how if it weren't for X that Butler and Gonzaga would not exist as they do today??

You said that Xavier has been solid since 1983. Do we owe all our success to Penn?? They made the FF in 1979. They are an academic centric university from a non-major conference. Saying that we owe everything to Penn is every bit as plausible as what you're saying.

What about Cleveland State?? I believe they were the first #14 seed to ever advance in 19836. Did that pave the way for Xavier's win over Missouri the following year?? Do we owe those program definining wins from the late 80s to them??

My statement, which you describe as very broad and impossible to prove, was made in response to your statement, which I also believe to be impossible to prove because it is simply incorrect. Can you prove that it is?? Can you point to anything that indicates Gonzaga and Butler would not be where they are today if it weren't for Xavier?? What is one thing thing that Butler and Gonzaga have as a result of something Xavier did for them??

I never suggested I could prove it. I said it was an opinion just like yours. Re-read my post instead of typing based on what you think you read.

[Nigel Tufnel]

It makes the place look like a flea market, which is hard for me to opine on, because I've never been to a flea market.

You think they sell fleas at flea markets, don't you?

[XUFan09]

Forgot who said it, but Xavier has one more tournament credit than Butler, which means they have one more recent win than the Bulldogs. Basically, Xavier has consistently gone midway through the tournament, whereas Butler has fluctuated between the championship game and an early exit. It evens out to about the same credits, more than any other potential member of the new conference.

[xubrew]

Yours is a very broad statement and impossible to prove. However, I understand it is your opinion and respect the fact that you expressed despite being unable to prove it. Mine too is an opinion. Too bad you don't have the same flexibility in others expressing it.


I never suggested I could prove it. I said it was an opinion just like yours. Re-read my post instead of typing based on what you think you read.

I'm curious to know what it is that makes you feel that way. I never thought it was anything other your opinion. I also don't think of myself as not having flexibility in letting others express your opinion. Are you flexible to having your opinion critiqued and questioned??

Look, if I came of as harsh, that wasn't my intent. I behave in this place like I'm around a bunch of guys sitting around drinking beers and talking about X hoops. I'm also pretty sure I lead the league in typos. In a lively discussion where opinions differ, I often say things like "That's insane," or "That's crazy," or something like that. A lot of people do. I'm the same way on here. I don't actually think you're insane or that your opinion isn't valid. If that's the impression you got, then that wasn't the impression I wanted to convey.

Having said that, I am astounded. How is it that you think Xavier had anything to do with Butler or Gonzaga's success??

[xudash]

You think they sell fleas at flea markets, don't you?

Actually, I think people probably can get lucky, finding stuff of some value or usefulness at them. If fleas are available, I imagine they come free.

Xavier, Butler and Gonzaga's programs all deserve respect. No problem there. But, IMHO, Xavier has the best overall program of the three, especially in terms of facilities, fanbase and overall business acumen. NOT ONE OF US HAS WON A NC YET. Each has built admirable resumes in their own right.

When I do consider Butler, I tend to think of Hinkle. If you like old historic buildings, then no problem; that's your prerogative. I firmly enjoy the fact that we're blessed with the Cintas Center, because Hinkle truly looks like a dump on television. You can have respect for another program and still recognize its deficiencies. You can provide your opinion on what you believe those deficiencies to be.

[Xavier]

I actually thought Hinkle looked good on National TV. Now, it is not a place that gets recruits but nethier is Cintas. It was a couple of years ago, but ESPN did an inside look at Dukes place...no wonder they are so good.

[vee4xu]

I'm curious to know what it is that makes you feel that way. I never thought it was anything other your opinion. I also don't think of myself as not having flexibility in letting others express your opinion. Are you flexible to having your opinion critiqued and questioned??

Look, if I came of as harsh, that wasn't my intent. I behave in this place like I'm around a bunch of guys sitting around drinking beers and talking about X hoops. I'm also pretty sure I lead the league in typos. In a lively discussion where opinions differ, I often say things like "That's insane," or "That's crazy," or something like that. A lot of people do. I'm the same way on here. I don't actually think you're insane or that your opinion isn't valid. If that's the impression you got, then that wasn't the impression I wanted to convey.

Having said that, I am astounded. How is it that you think Xavier had anything to do with Butler or Gonzaga's success??

I'm a big boy so don't worry about being too harsh.

[Kahns Krazy]

Now that you point it out....no.

Heh. I was just blowing you a little crap. I've been guilty of listening to the voice in my head without paying attention to the words I'm typing.


Frankly, in 1999 Xavier hadn't really done anything more than have a "nice" program that won a lot in the regular season and had gone to one Sweet Sixteen ever. I can't imagine Gonzaga used that as a blueprint for anything. We were basically a hair above Murray State at that point (and that's not near the "insult" that a lot of people will think it is).

+1. The Murray State reference is spot on, and I don't think anyone is using them as a blueprint for success.


You think they sell fleas at flea markets, don't you?

Fleas are free. In 20 years, they might be called "bedbug markets".

[trojanhorse]

Xavier is the gold standard for basketball AND academic excellence for non-big conference teams and will remain so for many years. For people who know basketball, they know it.

All-Time NCAA Tournament Record - X gets the Nod by 2 in 16 more games.
School Games Wins Losses Winning Pct.
Butler 27 18 11 0.62
Xavier 43 20 23 0.465

Academic All-Americans - Last 5 years. I didn't know if you meant Academics as it relates to the team or the University.
School 1st Team 2nd Team 3rd Team Total
Butler 3 3 2 8
Xavier 0 0 0 0

[PMI]

It's fun to hate Butler. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Why can't we have some fun with that without posters like Lamuskie writing condescendingly about how we are obligated to love them because they are a much better program than us, and brad Stevens is a great coach and blah blah blah.

I couldn't agree more. Some people just need to prove to everyone how rational and neutral they are, while others are secure enough with their ability to think logically that they can post like normal sports fans do, without the shackles that an apologist must opine with. To the extent that some here feel like posters such as myself hold an irrational hatred towards Butler and Gonzaga, some have what appears to me to be an irrational apologist syndrome towards programs like those two, and even dayton. It's freaking sports. You're supposed to be free to have enemy programs, teams, coaches, players, etc., even if others want to take a different approach. Some people are so hellbent on being Butler apologists, for example, that they refuse to even acknowledge that the element of luck could possibly play a role in the outcome of a sporting event. That, my friends, is an example of borderline insanity.

Everyone with half a brain knows that Butler and Gonzaga are good programs. We don't need the neutral whores to remind us of that every single time someone takes a shot at them. We have somewhat of a history with both of them, and bitter memories of both of them, so some fans are going to decide not to like them, for those or other reasons. It doesn't mean they truly believe they are Arkansas Pine-Bluff if they choose not to take the time to share their respect of them, or god-forbid, take shots at them.

Both those Bulldog schools can get together in a tiny room and lick it and stick it as far as I'm concerned. I dislike them both and I will not apologize for that.

[vee4xu]

Both those Bulldog schools can get together in a tiny room and lick it and stick it as far as I'm concerned. I dislike them both and I will not apologize for that.

+1

[xudash]

All-Time NCAA Tournament Record - X gets the Nod by 2 in 16 more games.
School Games Wins Losses Winning Pct.
Butler 27 18 11 0.62
Xavier 43 20 23 0.465

Academic All-Americans - Last 5 years. I didn't know if you meant Academics as it relates to the team or the University.
School 1st Team 2nd Team 3rd Team Total
Butler 3 3 2 8
Xavier 0 0 0 0

Vee's reference to academics may have to do with our graduation rate for seniors and overall rank of 11 in the nation for grad rates.

[vee4xu]

Vee's reference to academics may have to do with our graduation rate for seniors and overall rank of 11 in the nation for grad rates.

Thanks, dash. I thought about answering, but then figured, eh what the hell and didn't. But, you are exactly correct, that is what I meant.

[paulxu]

What's wrong with Arkansas Pine-Bluff?

[PMI]

What's wrong with Arkansas Pine-Bluff?

Nothing. Perhaps I should have been more sensitive before comparing a totally innocent lowly SWC program to those Bulldog bastards.

[GoMuskies]

I like Butler and Gonzaga. There, I said it. I will never cheer for f**king Syracuse or Michigan State or Duke or North Carolina or Florida or any of those ilk over Gonzaga or Butler. I like Brad Stevens, and I like Mark Few.

And I think they had some things go their way in their two championship game runs. And I think it's silly to write those two championship game runs off to luck.

[vee4xu]

Hey, to each his/hers own. I don't thing that Butler's Final Fours are luck in total, but any team that wins any championship in any sport has to look back on a season and say, "Wow, were we lucky that day". OSU had luck they year the won the NC. Gamble makes a play against UC in the end zone preserving a win. Illinois goes OT versus OSU, and OSU won. Krenzel to Jenkins on fourth and forever versus Purdue for a TD on the last play of the game and pass interference against The U on the game's last play in the NC. So, Butler had their share of things go their way that year that allow them to capitalize. But, they had a good team and a good coach and took advantage of the situations. That said, I can't stand either Butler or Gonzaga. There, I said it!

[PMI]

Yes, it obviously wasn't all luck.

Yes, it obviously takes some luck for any team to make back to back championship runs.

But the amount of, and highly improbable level of luck that was on Butler's side during those two runs was very high. Certainly unique in my college basketball watching experience. It got to the point where I was just laughing watching their tournament games in 2011.

[paulxu]

I'm glad to see all you guys come out of your closet.
In that spirit, I'd like to point out that UC sucks.
As to all the other schools...meh.

[xudash]

I like Butler and Gonzaga. There, I said it. I will never cheer for f**king Syracuse or Michigan State or Duke or North Carolina or Florida or any of those ilk over Gonzaga or Butler. I like Brad Stevens, and I like Mark Few.

And I think they had some things go their way in their two championship game runs. And I think it's silly to write those two championship game runs off to luck.

It seems as though you take things too literally at times. I don't believe any objective person would take the position that Butler's two runs were all about luck. It should be obvious that luck factors into sporting events. Someone else here already had mentioned the fact that Butler, like Xavier, has also experienced bad luck in the tournament.

To deny that some amount of luck existed for them and most other teams that actually made it to the championship game just seems crazy. That should be especially true for Xavier fans. It was lucky for Buttler that Xavier took Kansas State into exhaustion.

Otherwise, beyond this topic of luck is the reality that it is good that Xavier and Butler, and possibly even Gonzaga are becoming conference mates. We all want this better competition, we all want to shed schools like LaSalle and Fordham.

Frankly, it's neither a hate or dislike issue with me, because I firmly believe that Xavier has the best program, certainly among the three schools we are talking about here. We have built a strong program over three decades. We are positioned to continue sustaining a very strong program well into the future.

Importantly, consider this: If it is true tha ESPN Was attempting to pimp it's two historical mid-major favorites, then where do you think this is headed if a network other than that one picks up the media rights For the new conference?

Take the time to look through a longer lens, and you'll see that we are more than just fine in all of this.

Note: Beginning with the paragraph that begins with otherwise, I was making general statements; I wasn't directing any of that at you personally.

[xubrew]

In 2008, Kansas reached the Final Four with just one win against an RPI top 25 team prior to the FF. They beat a #16, #9, #12 and #10 seed. To their credit they beat North Carolina, and then Memphis, but many would argue that they were lucky to beat Memphis.

Three years later, they almost reached the Final Four again without beating anyone seeded better than 9th, but VCU ended up blowing them out.

It depends on how you define luck. Butler's bracket has never collapsed the way Kansas's always seems to. But, Butler has won games in spectacular fashion multiple times. I'm a pseudo Murray State fan, and the game in the round of 32 of Butler's first national title run still rubs me. HIT YOUR FREETHROWS!!!

Like I said, it depends on how you define luck. I consider a team who wins in spectacular fashion against good teams to be less lucky than a team that seemingly never has to play good teams....like Kansas. Even last year, they barely beat #10 seed Purdue and #11 seed NC State, and arguably should have lost both.

[xudash]

In 2008, Kansas reached the Final Four with just one win against an RPI top 25 team prior to the FF. They beat a #16, #9, #12 and #10 seed. To their credit they beat North Carolina, and then Memphis, but many would argue that they were lucky to beat Memphis.

Three years later, they almost reached the Final Four again without beating anyone seeded better than 9th, but VCU ended up blowing them out.

It depends on how you define luck. Butler's bracket has never collapsed the way Kansas's always seems to. But, Butler has won games in spectacular fashion multiple times. I'm a pseudo Murray State fan, and the game in the round of 32 of Butler's first national title run still rubs me. HIT YOUR FREETHROWS!!!

And others would argue that Pitt lost their game against Butler, or Florida lost their game against Butler. Shades of grey or bias or whatever any given fan may see.

[xubrew]

Kansas is lucky, and they drive me crazy. There, I said it.

When you're filling out your NCAA Tournament brackets and are wondering what the big upsets will be, pick the upsets that benefit Kansas.

[kyxu]

If we're going to harp on the seeding en route to the Elite Eight/Final Four, Xavier beat the #14, #7, and #6 seeded teams to reach the Elite Eight in 2008. Then they got blown out by the third (or fourth) best of the Final Four. Glass houses. Butler earns.

[xubrew]

If we're going to harp on the seeding en route to the Elite Eight/Final Four, Xavier beat the #14, #7, and #6 seeded teams to reach the Elite Eight in 2008. Then they got blown out by the third (or fourth) best of the Final Four. Glass houses. Butler earns.

If this is aimed at me, I wasn't talking about Butler. I was talking about Kansas.

So, basically, there was one game where the seeds didn't hold serve, and that was the Sweet Sixteen game. And a #7 and #6 seed is still better than anyone Kansas managed to beat during regular season, conference tournament (minus Texas), or NCAA Tournament during their FF run in 2008. They beat a #16, #9, #12 and #10. In 2011, they beat a #16, #9, #12 and lost to a #11.

Their bracket ALWAYS collapses. En route to the national title game last year, they barely beat a #11 and a #10.

I don't like talking about luck, but if we're going to have that conversation, then Kansas is definitley in the conversation. That's all I'm saying.

[smileyy]

If we're going to harp on the seeding en route to the Elite Eight/Final Four, Xavier beat the #14, #7, and #6 seeded teams to reach the Elite Eight in 2008. Then they got blown out by the third (or fourth) best of the Final Four. Glass houses. Butler earns.

I dunno. That's damning that UCLA team with pretty faint praise.

[PMI]

Kansas is lucky, and they drive me crazy. There, I said it.

When you're filling out your NCAA Tournament brackets and are wondering what the big upsets will be, pick the upsets that benefit Kansas.

Or just pick Kansas to get upset early. Both strategies have worked plenty.


If we're going to harp on the seeding en route to the Elite Eight/Final Four, Xavier beat the #14, #7, and #6 seeded teams to reach the Elite Eight in 2008. Then they got blown out by the third (or fourth) best of the Final Four. Glass houses. Butler earns.

The inherent problem with this comparison is that it completely neglects what happened in the actual games that took places, and instead just looks at what number the seeds of the teams playing were. Would you ever argue that the four one seeds had the luckiest first rounds because they got to play 16 seeds? I never argued that Butler got lucky based on who they got to play. Their luck was in the games themselves, and they got a lot of it, especially the second time around.

[GoMuskies]

I don't believe any objective person would take the position that Butler's two runs were all about luck.

It's just PMI, really.

[xubrew]

Or just pick Kansas to get upset early. Both strategies have worked plenty.



The inherent problem with this comparison is that it completely neglects what happened in the actual games that took places, and instead just looks at what number the seeds of the teams playing were. Would you ever argue that the four one seeds had the luckiest first rounds because they got to play 16 seeds? I never argued that Butler got lucky based on who they got to play. Their luck was in the games themselves, and they got a lot of it, especially the second time around.

PMI, I'm just curious to know where you draw the line between pulling out a close game and being lucky.

I know where my line is. It's when something out of the ordinary happens (IE Butler v Pitt in the 2011 round of 32, or Kansas playing upset winners time after time after time after time, or X v OSU in 2007). I'm just curious where yours is, and how it ties in to Butler. They won a lot of close games in spectacular fashion. Do you attribute any close win to luck?? Had PItt not committed such a stupid foul, it still would have sent the game to overtime, and since Butler had led most of the way, it isn't too outrageous to think they would have won.

[GoMuskies]

The only Xavier win I can ever recall attributing solely to luck was that Wofford game a few years about when the missed FT got tipped way the hell up in the air and splashed straight down to force double or triple OT. Someone on that Xavier team must have been living right.

Completely irrelevant, I know, but I still can't believe Xavier won that game.

[PMI]

PMI, I'm just curious to know where you draw the line between pulling out a close game and being lucky.

I know where my line is. It's when something out of the ordinary happens (IE Butler v Pitt in the 2011 round of 32, or Kansas playing upset winners time after time after time after time, or X v OSU in 2007). I'm just curious where yours is, and how it ties in to Butler. They won a lot of close games in spectacular fashion. Do you attribute any close win to luck?? Had PItt not committed such a stupid foul, it still would have sent the game to overtime, and since Butler had led most of the way, it isn't too outrageous to think they would have won.

I remember you asked me this exact question before, so I search it. Rather than write paragraph after paragraph on this thread again, just resort back to this thread if you're interested in my answer: http://www.xavierhoops.com/showthread.php?19850-Butler-article-with-praise-for-X&highlight=butler+luck

[PMI]

It's just PMI, really.

Nah, again, I'm not saying they're all about luck. I'm saying that Butler's runs included more luck than you usually see. It was quite the outlier in the luck department, and they frankly were the kind of team that needed that kind of luck, especially the second time. It's OK if you don't agree, but let's not put words in my mouth. Even the Dante Jackson buzzer beater took some skill.

[xubrew]

I remember you asked me this exact question before, so I search it. Rather than write paragraph after paragraph on this thread again, just resort back to this thread if you're interested in my answer: http://www.xavierhoops.com/showthread.php?19850-Butler-article-with-praise-for-X&highlight=butler+luck

You're memory is a lot better than mine. Hell, I don't remember what I did this morning.

[PMI]

You're memory is a lot better than mine. Hell, I don't remember what I did this morning.

I find my memory to be more a curse than a blessing, quite honestly.

But one thing I didn't remember until re-reading parts of that thread was the article the guy wrote after the ODU game calling Butler's win squarely on the shoulders of luck. That's going even farther than I was. I guess I'm not the only one who felt like Butler had fortune on their side, even after mentioning almost every single time that those assholes actually did play well too. I'm not sure what else people want from me, short of changing an opinion that I'm very confident in, and which was formed after watching every second of every one of the games, and remembering.

[GoMuskies]

I want recognition of my excellent gambling prowess, since I had Butler on the ML against Syracuse back in '09. I also had a decent sized parlay with Butler ML/Xavier ML that I'm still bitter about. That would have been a real nice way to start my weekend in Vegas.

[PMI]

I want recognition of my excellent gambling prowess, since I had Butler on the ML against Syracuse back in '09. I also had a decent sized parlay with Butler ML/Xavier ML that I'm still bitter about. That would have been a real nice way to start my weekend in Vegas.

Against Vegas, I would rather be lucky than ANYTHING else, any day.

[kyxu]

If this is aimed at me, I wasn't talking about Butler. I was talking about Kansas.


It wasn't aimed at you.

[GuyFawkes38]

It seems like some people have a moral inclination against appreciating luck ("luck...teams make there own luck and that's that").

That's silly. If we take the advance stats seriously (which I think we all should), you have to take luck seriously. Read Kenpom's work on luck. It's fascinating. It's a big factor, especially in a one and done tourney.

[LA Muskie]

It seems like some people have a moral inclination against appreciating luck ("luck...teams make there own luck and that's that").

That's silly. If we take the advance stats seriously (which I think we all should), you have to take luck seriously. Read Kenpom's work on luck. It's fascinating. It's a big factor, especially in a one and done tourney.

This is obviously true. That quote simply means that you have to put yourself in position to take advantage of luck when it comes. In general that means being within striking distance at the end.