Skip to main content

My Final Four are

...Ohio St., Syracuse, Kentucky, and Duke, with Syracuse defeating Kentucky 78-74 in the finals.

Of the little bit of college basketball that I've watched this year, Syracuse has looked like they have all the necessary tools to win it all, especially if Wes Johnson is healthy. The game that really stuck out for me was their absolute dismantling of Villanova.

Who did you pick?

After the first game starts you should be able to see my entire bracket here.
Labels:

Comments

  1. dannyMarch 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM

    I'm almost afraid to announce my picks. I've watched less college basketball this year than any previous year since I was in middle school. And I watched UConn more than any other team, and they're not even in the tourney. Anyway...

    If this tournament were being played in January, I'd agree that Syracuse would take it all. They're just too injured, in my opinion. I think Duke is weak this year (actually, I think the whole ACC is weak), but they have an easy bracket. I actually picked Nova out of that one, not because I think they're good, but because I think the whole bracket stinks.

    My final 4: Kansas (champ, though I love Evan Turner from Ohio St), Vanderbilt (weak bracket), Nova (painful pick) and West Virginia. I don't expect to do well this year. Sigh.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Marcus MaherMarch 18, 2010 at 10:02 AM

    I'm not sure how well I will do either, but hey it's fun to talk about!

    The Duke/Nova bracket was the toughest one for me. Who do you pick? I struggled between Duke, Villanova and Notre Dame.

    The toughest bracket by far is the Kansas/Ohio St. bracket. Both of those teams plus Georgetown are very legit contenders.

    Syracuse does get the benefit of the #1 seed, so they get a little time to get healthy. I've just been so underwhelmed by everyone else I've watched (which admittedly has been very limited). If they play the way they did against Villanova 3 weeks ago no one will beat them. I wavered between them and Kentucky, but no matter how good John Wall is, I can't pick a team with a freshman point guard to win it all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. dannyMarch 18, 2010 at 11:37 AM

    I picked Notre Dame to lose to Baylor in the 2nd round. I'm always cautious of my Big East bias (which is generally a good bias in the tournament), so I opted to go with Baylor. That was a tough choice, especially since I know a ton of Baylor grads (including my wife), so I'm naturally predisposed to root against them. =)

    Anyway, I picked Villanova as a default pick. Duke just isn't that good.

    You're right, the Kansas bracket is tough. In the end, I think Kansas is the best team in the country (since Syracuse is hurt). I actually have Syracuse losing in the 2nd round to Gonzaga, even though I'm not a Gonzaga fan. I feel the same way about Kentucky as you do. In fact, I have them losing in the Sweet 16 to Wisconsin.

    Anyway, I kind of miss the days in college when I'd stay up until 2am watching unknown Western schools to prepare for the tournament. Those were the days...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Marcus MaherMarch 18, 2010 at 11:49 AM

    Yeah, I miss those days too. I was glued to the TV from the start of championship week on. You know it was very important to watch the America East conference championship game.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Marcus MaherMarch 18, 2010 at 1:23 PM

    Ouch, that loss by Notre Dame hurts...

    ReplyDelete
  6. dannyMarch 18, 2010 at 2:19 PM

    I had ND losing the next round anyway. Losing Nova would have killed me...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Marcus MaherMarch 18, 2010 at 2:23 PM

    Yeah, that would have killed a lot of people. In our office bracket three people have Nova willing it all.

    We're 3 for 3 in games going right down to the wire!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat...
19 comments
Read more

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc...
17 comments
Read more

Book Review: The Great Theologians

In recent decades, one of the biggest problems in the church has been a lack of interest in and attention to church history and historical theology. Lately we have begun to see a correction, but this correction needs to flow down to the laity as well. That is where The Great Theologians: A Brief Guide by Gerald McDermott comes into play. In this book, McDermott highlights eleven of the most influential theologians in the history of the church: Origen, Athanasius, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Schleiermacher, Edwards, Newman, Barth, and Balthasar [1]. Each get between fifteen and twenty pages, in which McDermott provides some brief biographical notes, an overview of some key aspects of their theology, a section detailing what the current church needs to learn from them, a short selection from their writing, questions for group discussion, and suggested further reading. That seems like a lot to fit into fifteen or twenty pages, but McDermott does an admirable job. He selects vigne...
14 comments
Read more