cohenzone
Old Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 19,278
- Reaction Score
- 24,178
We've probably all heard this "hard to beat" phrase many times. I think it's not true because when it's uttered, team A has, as with this case, already beaten team B twice. They just had to win one game at that point. Why would what happened in the past make it any harder? You've already proven yourself to be the better team twice. The odd of winning one more game should be with you. Now if Muffet said, "We're going to beat Uconn the next three times we play them". That would be hard to do.
Not so sure that ND proved themselves to be the better team in the first game. They won under the rules, but at best that was an even game and one that UConn did not play its best. The last two games were almost mirror images in the way they played out. These teams are pretty even.
On the other hand, for example, UConn is a better team than St. John's even though the record is 1-1, and that is not meant to take anything away from the fact that St. John's won the first game. I believe that UConn would beat St. John's 8 or 9 times out of 10, but St. John's got that one when it counted.