Unpopular Opinions

[DS729]

I like it when the same teams enjoy success, I also hate all mid-majors in college basketball(examples: Butler, VCU, FGCU, George Mason).

Jesus. Do you also root for the villains in movies, and enjoy watching people from Walmart run small family-owned businesses out of existence too?

Meh, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I have nothing against mid-majors and underdogs in general, but I do feel like something is wrong whenever the Dukes and UCLAs of basketball are not relevant during the season. Same goes for the Yankees in baseball, Celtics and Lakers for NBA, and USC and Texas in college football.

Exactly, I like the fact that the best teams stay on top. I enjoy Texas, Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and other well known teams to be ranked in NCAAF. In NCAAB I like it when MSU, OSU, Syracuse, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, and other well knowns do good. I dislike the "cinderella stories" in the tournament because they destroy what I like to see, old prestigious universities battling it out in March.

Man, something must be wrong with you woodshacksz. Who doesn't like a good underdog? I don't know. Maybe because I'm from a city that practically worships one (VCU). I love it when teams like Butler, and George Mason show up and hand it to the big guys.

[woodshackzac]

I like it when the same teams enjoy success, I also hate all mid-majors in college basketball(examples: Butler, VCU, FGCU, George Mason).

Jesus. Do you also root for the villains in movies, and enjoy watching people from Walmart run small family-owned businesses out of existence too?

Meh, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I have nothing against mid-majors and underdogs in general, but I do feel like something is wrong whenever the Dukes and UCLAs of basketball are not relevant during the season. Same goes for the Yankees in baseball, Celtics and Lakers for NBA, and USC and Texas in college football.

Exactly, I like the fact that the best teams stay on top. I enjoy Texas, Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and other well known teams to be ranked in NCAAF. In NCAAB I like it when MSU, OSU, Syracuse, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, and other well knowns do good. I dislike the "cinderella stories" in the tournament because they destroy what I like to see, old prestigious universities battling it out in March.

Man, something must be wrong with you woodshacksz. Who doesn't like a good underdog? I don't know. Maybe because I'm from a city that practically worships one (VCU). I love it when teams like Butler, and George Mason show up and hand it to the big guys.

You're a loser

[-kj]

...really? That's your retort?

Keep it non-personal, all.

[crashcarson15]

I can kind of see where he's coming from, actually. The whole "who's gonna be the midmajor this year in the Final Four?" thing that's happened lately is getting a little stale.

Also, I don't like Butler. Though I think I've discussed this in depth before.

[woodshackzac]

I can kind of see where he's coming from, actually. The whole "who's gonna be the midmajor this year in the Final Four?" thing that's happened lately is getting a little stale.

Also, I don't like Butler. Though I think I've discussed this in depth before.

Yes, people stray away from the great programs and want to see the mid majors cap off a mediocre season with a few upsets.

[DS729]

I can kind of see where he's coming from, actually. The whole "who's gonna be the midmajor this year in the Final Four?" thing that's happened lately is getting a little stale.

Also, I don't like Butler. Though I think I've discussed this in depth before.

It seems to me that you disliking Butler would be very similar to the way I dislike VCU.

And yes, the media hypes up mid-major runs a lot. But expecting a mid-major to make a final four every year is a bit of an overreaction. George Mason's, Butler's, and VCU's don't grow on trees. Look what happened to Murray St.

[mad43dog]

I love grey facemasks.

woo hoo

[illwauk]

I like it when the same teams enjoy success, I also hate all mid-majors in college basketball(examples: Butler, VCU, FGCU, George Mason).

Jesus. Do you also root for the villains in movies, and enjoy watching people from Walmart run small family-owned businesses out of existence too?

Meh, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I have nothing against mid-majors and underdogs in general, but I do feel like something is wrong whenever the Dukes and UCLAs of basketball are not relevant during the season. Same goes for the Yankees in baseball, Celtics and Lakers for NBA, and USC and Texas in college football.

Exactly, I like the fact that the best teams stay on top. I enjoy Texas, Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and other well known teams to be ranked in NCAAF. In NCAAB I like it when MSU, OSU, Syracuse, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, and other well knowns do good. I dislike the "cinderella stories" in the tournament because they destroy what I like to see, old prestigious universities battling it out in March.

You realize Duke was basically a glorified mid major until the 90s, right?

And Ohio State is hardly a historic basketball power... unless you mean Oklahoma State.

[charger77]

Really?

[The_Admiral]

Usually it seems like college basketball fans are amenable to mid-majors getting involved whereas it's the football fans who get giant alien space bugs up their asses if anyone deemed unworthy dares to break their circlejerk of Traditional Prestigious Institutions. Silence, you glorified junior college!

[Billy B]

I like it when the same teams enjoy success, I also hate all mid-majors in college basketball(examples: Butler, VCU, FGCU, George Mason).

Jesus. Do you also root for the villains in movies, and enjoy watching people from Walmart run small family-owned businesses out of existence too?

Meh, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I have nothing against mid-majors and underdogs in general, but I do feel like something is wrong whenever the Dukes and UCLAs of basketball are not relevant during the season. Same goes for the Yankees in baseball, Celtics and Lakers for NBA, and USC and Texas in college football.

Exactly, I like the fact that the best teams stay on top. I enjoy Texas, Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, and other well known teams to be ranked in NCAAF. In NCAAB I like it when MSU, OSU, Syracuse, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, and other well knowns do good. I dislike the "cinderella stories" in the tournament because they destroy what I like to see, old prestigious universities battling it out in March.

You realize Duke was basically a glorified mid major until the 90s, right?

And Ohio State is hardly a historic basketball power... unless you mean Oklahoma State.

I'm not sure what your definition of glorified mid-major is, but I definitely wouldn't classify Duke as one. They made it to three final fours in the 80s and four more before Coach K got there. They might not have been the Duke we know today, but they've always been a very good program.

[illwauk]

Usually it seems like college basketball fans are amenable to mid-majors getting involved whereas it's the football fans who get giant alien space bugs up their asses if anyone deemed unworthy dares to break their circlejerk of Traditional Prestigious Institutions. Silence, you glorified junior college!

Spot on... except fans of Big Ten schools don't want to even be bothered with the knowledge that college sports exist outside of their precious, fart-sniffing, institutions. Hockey is the lone exception, in my experience... UW fans seem to really want an in-state rival. But I'm not sure even that would apply to fans of, say, Minnesota or Michigan.

[illwauk]

You realize Duke was basically a glorified mid major until the 90s, right?

And Ohio State is hardly a historic basketball power... unless you mean Oklahoma State.

I'm not sure what your definition of glorified mid-major is, but I definitely wouldn't classify Duke as one. They made it to three final fours in the 80s and four more before Coach K got there. They might not have been the Duke we know today, but they've always been a very good program.

Plenty of schools that aren't thought of as major powers now have stretches of similar dominance in their history... peep the titles won by Loyola-Chicago and UTEP (Texas Western). At most, you could compare Duke of the 80s to Gonzaga of the late 90s and early 2000s.

[Billy B]

You realize Duke was basically a glorified mid major until the 90s, right?

And Ohio State is hardly a historic basketball power... unless you mean Oklahoma State.

I'm not sure what your definition of glorified mid-major is, but I definitely wouldn't classify Duke as one. They made it to three final fours in the 80s and four more before Coach K got there. They might not have been the Duke we know today, but they've always been a very good program.

Plenty of schools that aren't thought of as major powers now have stretches of similar dominance in their history... peep the titles won by Loyola-Chicago and UTEP (Texas Western). At most, you could compare Duke of the 80s to Gonzaga of the late 90s and early 2000s.

I'd call the Loyola and UTEP title seasons flukes, not dominance. Neither of those teams have even been to the Elite 8 besides their championship season. Gonzaga has never made a Final Four. Duke has four Final Fours pre-Coach K (seven pre-90s). They weren't UK, KU, UCLA back in the day, but they have always been a power. They were the 8th school to get to 1000 wins and that was in 1974. I've heard other people (not on here) say similar things about Duke before and it's simply not true. But maybe you assumed I wouldn't know this since Duke plays in a different conference than that of my precious, fart-sniffing institution.

[illwauk]

You realize Duke was basically a glorified mid major until the 90s, right?

And Ohio State is hardly a historic basketball power... unless you mean Oklahoma State.

I'm not sure what your definition of glorified mid-major is, but I definitely wouldn't classify Duke as one. They made it to three final fours in the 80s and four more before Coach K got there. They might not have been the Duke we know today, but they've always been a very good program.

Plenty of schools that aren't thought of as major powers now have stretches of similar dominance in their history... peep the titles won by Loyola-Chicago and UTEP (Texas Western). At most, you could compare Duke of the 80s to Gonzaga of the late 90s and early 2000s.

I'd call the Loyola and UTEP title seasons flukes, not dominance. Neither of those teams have even been to the Elite 8 besides their championship season. Gonzaga has never made a Final Four. Duke has four Final Fours pre-Coach K (seven pre-90s). They weren't UK, KU, UCLA back in the day, but they have always been a power. They were the 8th school to get to 1000 wins and that was in 1974. I've heard other people (not on here) say similar things about Duke before and it's simply not true. But maybe you assumed I wouldn't know this since Duke plays in a different conference than that of my precious, fart-sniffing institution.

I still maintain that "traditional basketball power" implies at least one championship. There's no denying that that's what they've pretty much always been within the ACC, but how much would anyone really think of those 3 Final Four appearances had they fallen back to their pre-1980s levels of relative obscurity? I'm guessing not much more than anyone thinks of Loyola or UTEP's titles nowadays.

I'm sure I'd have to look VERY hard to find an Illini fan who thinks college basketball may as well not even exist in Illinois outside of Champaign.

[RyanMcD29]

Here's one that I'm sure won't go over too well:

I prefer alternates that are recolors over totally new designs (this does not apply towards baseball or soccer but certainly does for football, hockey, basketball, and other sports)

[The_Admiral]

College basketball doesn't really exist anywhere in Illinois right now. What's the best team right now? The Illini? Woof.

[02Rover]

Id be willing to bet that Ohio State has a richer history in college hoops that Okie State does. In the last 10 years definitely, but also historically.

[cappital92]

I don't like when teams use both royal and navy blue, like the St. Louis Blues, the Pistons, and the '00s Cubs.

[OnWis97]

Here's one that I'm sure won't go over too well:

I prefer alternates that are recolors over totally new designs (this does not apply towards baseball or soccer but certainly does for football, hockey, basketball, and other sports)

I kind of feel the same way. I think too much change in design dilutes the team identity.