There has been much discussion about the similarities between GMU's basketball success and that of the law school and the economics department. Pete Boettke and Alex Tabarrok on Slate.com here (and the interesting side bar here). Also see Radley Balko for FoxNews.com about GMU and George Mason the man here. Obviously, the sports coverage itself has been pervasive, as expected. (BTW, this weekend I'm at a Liberty Fund conference where I'm the only GMU alum, and there has been a lot of buzz about GMU. All the interest in the program among the other conferees has been a delight.)

But does GMU have a chance?

Consider the argument (attributable to Boettke?) that the top programs are more vulnerable to early player exit to the NBA, and that "senior led teams are more effective than freshman led teams. No matter how good freshman players are, a senior player of similar skill level will outcompete the freshman player 8 out of 10 times." (That's Boettke.) In fact, GMU starts 3 seniors (and 2 soph's) and gets 21 minutes from a junior. Meanwhile, of the 7 Gators that play more than 12 mins/game, 4 are sophomores, 2 are juniors, and the other is a freshman. While Florida's five starters average 10 or more PPG, none of their players averaged double figures prior to this year.

In short, tonight's game will come down to Mason's experience and tenacity vs. FU's talent and new chemistry. If the "money ball" idea wins out, GMU will advance. I really hope so, because it'll be great for Coach Larranaga and the Patriots, but also because I'll be joining the gang at the APEEs in Vegas tomorrow and the final is Monday night. How great would that be?

Comments are open....