ADVERTISEMENT

Love Princeton….

That was fun. You could tell that Jay Wright loved their style of play during his halftime and postgame comments. Princeton got a break by the fact that they hosted the Ivy Tournament this year. They got a home game in the finals against Yale who had won the regular season 1 seed. I thought Penn outplayed them last Saturday for a majority of that game in the Semifinals. Anyway, I enjoyed that game and it's these types of upsets that make this tourney great.
 
I thought they would not get out of the weekend. Arizona is not the team they were last year. They had some near inexplicable losses this year so I thought they were vulnerable.
 
Didn't Princeton beat Georgetown as a #15 seed back in the 90s? Maybe they are the 1st team to win as a #15 seed twice? :)
 
Didn't Princeton beat Georgetown as a #15 seed back in the 90s? Maybe they are the 1st team to win as a #15 seed twice? :)
No, it was UCLA they beat in 1996. It was a 13-seed over a 4-seed.


They once were a #16 seed that lost 50-49 to #1 seed Georgetown (1989)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pitt79
No, it was UCLA they beat in 1996. It was a 13-seed over a 4-seed.


They once were a #16 seed that lost 50-49 to #1 seed Georgetown (1989)
That was nearly the upset of all time. Princeton had the ball for the last play against the Alonzo Mourning’s Hoyas and never got a shot off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pitt79
Just goes to prove once again that all of this NET garbage and computer models with quad this and quad that are just not reliable indicators of how far a team will advance in the tournament, or if they even deserve to be there. The computers don't take into account human nature, desire and guts. Or plain smarts. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about these quad whatevers and NET's. The sooner they get rid of them, the better.

This is a game played by human beings, not computers. If you want the computer models, make some android robots and let them play the games.
 
No, it was UCLA they beat in 1996. It was a 13-seed over a 4-seed.


They once were a #16 seed that lost 50-49 to #1 seed Georgetown (1989)
I knew they won before as a low seed to a blue blood type high seed.
 
Just goes to prove once again that all of this NET garbage and computer models with quad this and quad that are just not reliable indicators of how far a team will advance in the tournament, or if they even deserve to be there. The computers don't take into account human nature, desire and guts. Or plain smarts. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about these quad whatevers and NET's. The sooner they get rid of them, the better.

This is a game played by human beings, not computers. If you want the computer models, make some android robots and let them play the games.
It does none of that, actually. But hey, keep typing.
 
Princeton has traditionally been a good basketball school, they won the Helms National Championship (Pitt won that before) in 1925 and made the Final 4 in 1965 with Bill Bradley.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT