Georges Niang wins CF Field of 64
- Thread starter JStanz51
- Start date
This was clearly demographic voting. I loved Niang but Grayer as clearly the greater player because not only did Grayer put up elite offensive numbers but he was a great defensive player. Probably one of the best in Cyclone history.
If Fizer had stayed 4 years it would have been Grayer vs Fizer in the finals with Fizer winning because of the number of tournament wins.
People underestimate the power of charisma. I think Niang won because it reflects how much the fans love being invovled at ISU. We love our players, and we love getting to know them. No one has ever done it better than Georges. I didn't vote on the finals, mostly because I didn't think my age qualified me for that decision. Grayer's highlights are amazing though.
Grayer is the best player to ever play at ISU. Had he not gotten injured, he would have played double digit years in the NBA.
Grayer and Fizer were easily my top two. Really felt Grayer would win this even with Georges being the obvious recent fan favorite.
Basically the same link posted at top of thread, then you have to go down the page to View Full Bracket. I can't seem to direct link that.
Fun concept, but navigation, ease of viewing results and the fact it wasn't anchored in home-page carousel were flaws. Would've helped to have updated thread or bump of initial thread, I saw numerous posts of fans who said something like, "I didn't vote in that round, wasn't aware of deadline."
Grayer was a 6' 5" forward who averaged 25 points and 9 rebounds his senior year. He may not have been flashy or had the charisma of Niang, but Grayer was definitely the better player at ISU. Also, Grayer loved ISU and hoped to come back to ISU as a coach. (He was hired as an assistant coach at ISU after McD's last year, but wasn't kept on by Hoiberg.)
I understand fans who lean toward players they were able to watch, but I tried to consider stats/impact to include players I was too young to see, used the school history source from cyclones.com as much as I could.
I picked Abdul-Aziz over Stevens in Round 3, sight unseen, even though Barry's impact in Orr's early seasons was huge — and I got to see Stevens in person. (One of the most difficult choices for me in entire tournament). Another player before my fandom was Parker, and I picked him over Thomas.
I watched Uthoff a few times (televised ISU games were rare at the time), I thought he was underseeded at 11 and took him over Royce.
Not saying my decisions are better than anyone else, only that it's possible to evaluate across eras.
I picked Abdul-Aziz over Stevens in Round 3, sight unseen, even though Barry's impact in Orr's early seasons was huge — and I got to see Stevens in person. (One of the most difficult choices for me in entire tournament). Another player before my fandom was Parker, and I picked him over Thomas.
I watched Uthoff a few times (televised ISU games were rare at the time), I thought he was underseeded at 11 and took him over Royce.
Not saying my decisions are better than anyone else, only that it's possible to evaluate across eras.
I need to soften my stance a bit on this comment above:
"Fun concept, but navigation, ease of viewing results and the fact it wasn't anchored in home-page carousel were flaws."
Too harsh to call those "flaws," a bit more visibility would've been a bonus.
"Fun concept, but navigation, ease of viewing results and the fact it wasn't anchored in home-page carousel were flaws."
Too harsh to call those "flaws," a bit more visibility would've been a bonus.
Was Grayer better than Don Smith (Abdul-Aziz)? It would be interesting to find out who Gary Thompson would pick.
I was wondering about this. It's hard to argue against Georges winning. Such a great player and great all around guy.
I'm older than a lot on here, and I never even saw Jeff Grayer play. Let alone the Gary Thompson's of the world. I have a feeling they were actually better players in their time, but it's fun that Georges won nonetheless.
I'm older than a lot on here, and I never even saw Jeff Grayer play. Let alone the Gary Thompson's of the world. I have a feeling they were actually better players in their time, but it's fun that Georges won nonetheless.
Junior year Fizer was the best player we've ever seen. He was on the best team we've ever seen that went the furthest we've ever gotten. I don't see how this is a competition, much less a dominating win for Niang.
I have nothing but love for Georges and what he did for this university, but the voting wasn't "who's the player you're most familiar with that was really good?" Fizer is the best player we've ever had. Yes, I've seen Grayer.
I have nothing but love for Georges and what he did for this university, but the voting wasn't "who's the player you're most familiar with that was really good?" Fizer is the best player we've ever had. Yes, I've seen Grayer.
I expected Georges to win this poll due to his recency and charisma in addition to his skills---but Fizer and Grayer were both better players.
If you want to argue team results-it still goes to Fizer. His junior year ISU lost 2 conference games, both on the road, and both in overtime.
I suspect a high percentage of voters were in diapers when Fizer was here and their parents hadn't even met when Grayer played here.
If you want to argue team results-it still goes to Fizer. His junior year ISU lost 2 conference games, both on the road, and both in overtime.
I suspect a high percentage of voters were in diapers when Fizer was here and their parents hadn't even met when Grayer played here.
Fizer and Grayer probably should've been placed so they couldn't meet until the championship. Similar to real NCAA tournament, bracket imbalance can happen (and you can't try to guess where seeding upsets might occur).
A lot of research and analysis went into setup of the field, and they set parameters for selection, I admire the work. If anything, I might've arranged regions differently.
