[StanfordMatt]

Agree to disagree, Papa John? Gonzaga, UNC and Alabama may all have been undervalued, but those losses were still big upsets and still would have been even if each opponent's seed was bumped a few slots higher. UNC was 18-13 in 1999-00, Alabama was 17-12 in 2003-04. The fact that each team went on to win one or two more games after beating Stanford does little to change that. Going back through those brackets, none of those three slayed any more giants after beating Stanford. They were simply the beneficiaries of wide open brackets. Wide open brackets and upsets happen - it's the nature of March Madness. We just happened to be on the wrong end of far too many upsets during Monty's tenure.

Monty's legacy at Stanford is undeniable. I'm not disputing that. I just think that it can do without overly flattering rationalizations.

[StanfordMatt]

Agree to disagree, Papa John? Gonzaga, UNC and Alabama may all have been undervalued, but those losses were still big upsets and still would have been even if each opponent's seed was bumped a few slots higher. UNC was 18-13 in 1999-00, Alabama was 17-12 in 2003-04. The fact that each team went on to win one or two more games after beating Stanford does little to change that. Going back through those brackets, none of those three slayed any more giants after beating Stanford. They were simply the beneficiaries of wide open brackets. Wide open brackets and upsets happen - it's the nature of March Madness. We just happened to be on the wrong end of far too many upsets during Monty's tenure.

Monty's legacy at Stanford is undeniable. I'm not disputing that. I just think that it can do without overly flattering rationalizations.