Here’s a different take on the immovable object meets irresistible force motif.
Psychologically, Tech fans are used to seeing defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. We are just paranoid that way. Loyola is a good team. We are justified in being nervous. National pundits are dismissing our chances.
On the other hand. We are more than just a scrappy team, more than just a blue collar lunch pail team. We are a good team. We have at least three players (I’m being conservative) who have proven they can take over a game and will us to a win.
If we lose it will be because Loyola is good and it was their night (afternoon) to win.
But I don’t think we are going to lose. We are more than a tough out now. We are a good team.
Video going over Loyola's defense
Both GT and Loyola are mentioned in this article on the 7 hottest teams entering the Tournament (FWIW, the other 5 teams mentioned are AL, TX, Houston, SDSU and Liberty). #1 seeds were excluded from consideration.
Unless Teddy Valentine is officiating - then, maybe not.I don't know much about basketball but like football if you score more than them chances are you will win.
Unless Teddy Valentine is officiating - then, maybe not.
I will say I have talked to coaches who like Valentine. They know he is going to be a showboat, but he also is considered one of the refs least likely to be influenced by coaches so they feel you at least get a more evenly called game - even if he likes to insert himself into it. They don't feel he gets intimidated like some refs from big name coaches.
Yeah, I was mostly joking, although I do remember in particular an overtime game he ripped off from us once against Ugag. He is a bit of a showboat.I will say I have talked to coaches who like Valentine. They know he is going to be a showboat, but he also is considered one of the refs least likely to be influenced by coaches so they feel you at least get a more evenly called game - even if he likes to insert himself into it. They don't feel he gets intimidated like some refs from big name coaches.
There are 2 main areas of referring subject to frustration for the fans. You've nailed 1 of them - ability to be influenced by people like the rat-faced rat, aw shucks Roy Williams, and Salty Booger Picking Boeheim. The other 1 is general incompetence. You've accurately portrayed 1 of those 2 areas where TV Teddy generally does well - not being influenced by other coaches. But his general love of basking and celebrating in his incompetence is what drives me batty. Its like he knows its a critical point of a game and a highly emotionally called charge would really get all the cameras on him, so he calls it even when its not justified. Glad he was sent home and I hope he stays there.
I agree with you 100%. I don't like seeing him because I think he inserts himself too much into the game. Just pointing out it is more an issue with fans than with coaches. It is definitely a big issue with fans of most fanbases though.
Seth Greenburg was just on Packer/Durham and made two interesting predictions:
1. GT would be the first ACC team to exit the tournament;
2. Only one ACC team would make it to the Sweet 16
Alllllllllllllllllllrighty then.
I had to rewind it and hear it again - Packer and Durham kind of did that headsnap that conveys "did you just say that?" but just moved on to his next bombshell that only one ACC team would make it to the round of 16.Pastner gave Seth Greenburg a shoutout the other day. What a traitor...
Wow he’s worse as an analyst than when he was at VT... that’s pretty hard to doSeth Greenburg was just on Packer/Durham and made two interesting predictions:
1. GT would be the first ACC team to exit the tournament;
2. Only one ACC team would make it to the Sweet 16
Alllllllllllllllllllrighty then.
His comment can only help us. Bulletin board material.Pastner gave Seth Greenburg a shoutout the other day. What a traitor...
I certainly hope Greenberg is wrong, but he's not without considerable knowledge and experience. He could be dead on.Wow he’s worse as an analyst than when he was at VT... that’s pretty hard to do
I personally disagree and think there is a reason he’s in a booth. Sure he could be dead on just as I could be dead on about him not being a good analyst lol.I certainly hope Greenberg is wrong, but he's not without considerable knowledge and experience. He could be dead on.