While I appreciate a little self-deprecation as much as anyone, your whole argument about how and why Davidson made you look stupid is pretty ridiculous and really shows a lack of critical thinking application and judgement when it comes to college basketball.
Let the record show- I am no Davidson homer. I just know what I'm talking about (and I'm not getting paid for it).
Davidson should not have been a surprise to any college basketball professional. To compare 2 wins in a weekend to as improbable a run as George Mason in the FF is not only ignorant, it lacks journalistic credibility. Let's look at the following factors:
*- Davidson brought back an NCAA Tournament experienced team that was up 13 on Maryland (a 4 seed at the time) with 7:30 to play before completely falling apart and losing by 12.
*- Georgetown would've never made the FF last year if not for as equally epic collapse by UNC at the end of regulation and OT in the elite 8. Other than that, on the whole they had the easiest road to the elite 8 of any team beating a 15, 7, and 6 seed.
*- Of Davidson's 6 losses in 2008 they lost @ UNC by 6, @ Duke by 4, @ UCLA by 8 and @ NC State by 1. At some point it needs to cease being coincidental.
*- Georgetown's unbelievable fortune with incorrect end of game calls in 2008 (i.e. Villanova, Marquette) left them in 1st place when they could've easily dropped to 5th in the conference
*- Davidson was the SOLE TEAM mentioned by Tom O' Conner during the NCAA Selection Show, on your network mind you, as a team that he thought could scare people because they were well coached, well disciplined, and have a superstar player. You would think the chair of the Tournament committee might know one or two things about what makes a quality basketball team.
*- Most importantly, it was essentially a home game!
If you combine all of these factors, I can understand how you may have still picked G'Town, but to say that this was some improbable feat which should never have happened is asinine and an insult to the Davidson program. The team can flat out play not just for a mid-major but for any program in D1 basketball. End of discussion.
Finally, college basketball is not some game in a vacuum where the most athletic players always win. Like in any other team sport style of play, tempo, matchups, and other various factors all come into play when one team plays another. Oftentimes a team that uses their athleticsm to blow people over (i.e. G'Town, Tenn, Memphis) often will lose to a team of lesser caliber like Davidson because they overlook key statistics of a winning formula (i.e. giving away too many possessions). The fundamentals are oftentimes under emphasized in these programs and when all of the stars align (like the stars listed above) you get a result to which an average March college basketball fan would be shocked at but for someone who makes a living understanding, analyzing, and textually articulating those thoughts back to the masses this should not be the least bit surprising.
This article is disappointing because I come to this website because the writers are more often than not factually informed, unbiased (or are self-aware enough to state when they may be biased), and accountable. You sir I cannot claim are any of the above.
Everyone in life essentially wants to do a good job at whatever they do. Your writing style seems very entertaining. I'd suggest for your own happiness another topic.
