volahoma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2009
- Messages
- 50
- Likes
- 128
Even when the tournament was only 16 and 24 teams, that wasn't an uncommon occurrence. When you have a final fours with Alcindor for 3 years and Walton for three years and a couple of their no. 2s, there's only 3 spots to go around. What about Walton, David Thompson, Keith Wilkes and Tom Burleson in a final four. Along with Marquette's players . Look at the listPretty dumb that they don't include anyone on 1st team unless they played in the Final Four
So essentially it’s a formality that defies logic?Even when the tournament was only 16 and 24 teams, that wasn't an uncommon occurrence. When you have a final fours with Alcindor for 3 years and Walton for three years and a couple of their no. 2s, there's only 3 spots to go around. What about Walton, David Thompson, Keith Wilkes and Tom Burleson in a final four. Along with Marquette's players . Look at the list
The NCAA all tournament teams, for the most part compiled with players in the FF, is like a Who's Who in the NBA
Maybe...I don't know. If you have a guy who scores 37 points in a narrow Elite 8 loss, I can see an argument for him being first team all tournament.Well, you have basically 25-30 players competing in a final four. Whether the field is 64 or less, the guys that performed at a high level throughout the tournament, including the final four make the 1st team. It's actually a lesson in logic
More of a lesson in how illogical their selection process is. It’s as illogical as Alabama being ranked ahead of Tennessee at the end of the season simply because they made the final four.Well, you have basically 25-30 players competing in a final four. Whether the field is 64 or less, the guys that performed at a high level throughout the tournament, including the final four make the 1st team. It's actually a lesson in logic