Live upset thread!

[waroriole]

It was a great shot, and his dive onto the floor after it is almost more famous of an image than the shot itself. But nobody is talking about Valpo-Ole Miss in a "Best Tournament Games Ever" list. It was a fun first round upset, but nothing more than that.

Fact is, the further along in the tournament, the bigger the game. Thus, if there is a great game later on in the tourney, it's a bigger game.

I'm not sure how that's even debatable.

I would argue any game in the first weekend would have to be pretty epic to make a Top 20 Tournament games list. Maybe even Top 50.

There are plenty of first round games that are considered "Top 20 or 50" tourney games. Princeton-UCLA, Princeton-Georgetown, Ole Miss-Valpo just to name a few off the top of my head. They may not have been as meaningful, but were great games nonetheless.

[YardBirds13]

There are plenty of first round games that are considered "Top 20 or 50" tourney games. Princeton-UCLA, Princeton-Georgetown, Ole Miss-Valpo just to name a few off the top of my head. They may not have been as meaningful, but were great games nonetheless.

I definitely agree they were great games, but definitely not Top 20 games.

Maybe Top 50, and I'd say the only one that fits that is maybe, maybe Princeton-UCLA.

Most first round games that are buzzer beater, great ending type games just aren't played at the high level of games later in the tournament.

It would be interesting to try and put together a list of greatest tourney games ever. As I'm coming up with some in my head, I've got a TON already, and they are all Regional Finals- on.

[Birds of B'more]

There are plenty of first round games that are considered "Top 20 or 50" tourney games. Princeton-UCLA, Princeton-Georgetown, Ole Miss-Valpo just to name a few off the top of my head. They may not have been as meaningful, but were great games nonetheless.

I think part of the reason why some people don't think of early round games among the all-time best is because they are mostly shown regionally and many people only get to see highlights or a few minutes of it. When a team like Princeton plays well enough to keep up with the defending champ in UCLA, and then beats them with the game on the line at the very end, I find it hard to argue that they didn't play at a high level.

[YardBirds13]

I think part of the reason why some people don't think of early round games among the all-time best is because they are mostly shown regionally and many people only get to see highlights or a few minutes of it. When a team like Princeton plays well enough to keep up with the defending champ in UCLA' date=' and then beats them with the game on the line at the very end, I find it hard to argue that they didn't play at a high level.[/quote']

It's because most of the time when that happens, it takes the higher seeded team playing poorly to lose.

When you get later in the tournament, you can have two great teams both playing very well. Usually (again, not always) for a big upset in Round 1 or 2 to happen, the better team has to play poorly.

Has nothing to do with the regionally televised thing.

[Birds of B'more]

It's because most of the time when that happens, it takes the higher seeded team playing poorly to lose.

When you get later in the tournament, you can have two great teams both playing very well. Usually (again, not always) for a big upset in Round 1 or 2 to happen, the better team has to play poorly.

Has nothing to do with the regionally televised thing.

I think it absolutely does. Would you think as highly of yesterday's game if you barely even got to view it, if at all?

And as for your first statement, why do you assume that early round upsets are the result of the higher seeded team playing poorly? Why isn't it about the lower seeded team playing better than anyone could have expected? I think that is the beauty of the NCAA Tournament and what makes the best games IMO. To me, the #1 and #2 all-time best Tournament games are the NC State/Houston and Villanova/Georgetown games, respectively......and yes, I do see the irony since I'm advocating for early round games and both of those were championship games. But if I really gave it some thought I'm certain that there would be several early round games in my Top 20.

[YardBirds13]

I think it absolutely does. Would you think as highly of yesterday's game if you barely even got to view it' date=' if at all?

And as for your first statement, why do you assume that early round upsets are the result of the higher seeded team playing poorly? Why isn't it about the lower seeded team playing better than anyone could have expected? I think that is the beauty of the NCAA Tournament and what makes the best games IMO. To me, the #1 and #2 all-time best Tournament games are the NC State/Houston and Villanova/Georgetown games, respectively......and yes, I do see the irony since I'm advocating for early round games and both of those were championship games. But if I really gave it some thought I'm certain that there would be several early round games in my Top 20.[/quote']

To each his own I guess. I just think the best games are played when the stakes are the highest, and to me, that's later in the tournament.

I'm not sure what I would consider the best game in tournament history. I'd have to pick one I personally saw, as I wasn't even alive for the GTown-Nova or Houston-NC State games. I was really too young to remember Duke-Kentucky (which if I could include games I don't personally remember would have to be #1.)

The game I most remember watching and thinking how awesome that just was was either Arizona-Kentucky in the '97 title game, UCONN-Duke in the '99 title game....Those are two of the best I can remember. This would be a fun thread, to try and go back through the years and come up with say the best 5 games from each tournament, then come up with a Top 50 or something.

[YardBirds13]

How about Gonzaga/Arizona 2OT a couple years ago? Final was like 94-92? I thought that was a pretty sick game, not too deep in the tournament though.

2nd round of the '03 tournament, Arizona was a 1 seed and escaped, eventually losing in the Regional Finals to Kansas and Roy Williams in another great game.

That game would be considered for sure, a great one.

[Birds of B'more]

To each his own I guess. I just think the best games are played when the stakes are the highest, and to me, that's later in the tournament.

I'm not sure what I would consider the best game in tournament history. I'd have to pick one I personally saw, as I wasn't even alive for the GTown-Nova or Houston-NC State games. I was really too young to remember Duke-Kentucky (which if I could include games I don't personally remember would have to be #1.)

The game I most remember watching and thinking how awesome that just was was either Arizona-Kentucky in the '97 title game, UCONN-Duke in the '99 title game....Those are two of the best I can remember. This would be a fun thread, to try and go back through the years and come up with say the best 5 games from each tournament, then come up with a Top 50 or something.

That's understandable. Which I think lends credence to my point that a regionally televised game probably keeps early round games from being mentioned by a lot of people. If you don't personally see the game, then it's not going to be etched in your memory as one of the best ever. Thanks for making me feel old, though.

Just an addendum to the NC State/Houston game. NC State barely got out of the 1st round that year (not to mention that they barely got in the tournament at all, but that's another matter). But I still remember watching them play Pepperdine in the first round and NC State made a remarkable final minute comeback to force OT. They actually wound up going to a 2nd OT before NC State won it. Not sure it would make my Top 20, but I'd at least give it some consideration. Another one that comes to mind was in 1995 when Tyus Edney drove the length of the court to make a layup at the buzzer to beat Missouri. I think that was a 2nd round game.