This topic contains 24 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by AvatarAvatar dcase 8 years ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #63063
    AvatarAvatar
    TheGuy
    Participant

     Here are my quick initial thoughts on the tourney

     

    – Syracuse? that’s a joke same for Tulsa and Michigan

    – How is UK a 4 seed when A&M is a 3 seed? Kentucky gets a though draw with UNC in their bracket

    – I’d rather be a 11-14 seed than a 7-10 seed

    – Speaking of double digit seeds, "Stone Cold" Stephen F Austin is my cinderalla pick, but West Virginia is a tough matchup.

    – Not sure how S Carolina doesn’t get in, when Vandy does. I thought both deserved it but S Carolina should’ve been in. Frank Martin is regretting sitting Correra vs Georgia know, sucks.

    – Glad Monmouth didn’t get in, sorry you play in a bad conference. Yeah, I’m a jerk.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0
  • #1047867
    AvatarAvatar
    Hype Machine

    St Marys screwed in favour of several BAD teams.

     

    Dominated Gonzaga and WCC all season…lose tournament final and get bounced from the tourney for garbage teams. 
     
    Michigan…please. Total tv ratings based pick. 
     
    Anyhow…i’m hypped for the official bracket contest
     
     
     
     
    0
  • #1047997
    AvatarAvatar
    Hype Machine

    St Marys screwed in favour of several BAD teams.

     

    Dominated Gonzaga and WCC all season…lose tournament final and get bounced from the tourney for garbage teams. 
     
    Michigan…please. Total tv ratings based pick. 
     
    Anyhow…i’m hypped for the official bracket contest
     
     
     
     
    0
  • #1047873
    AvatarAvatar
    Dazzling Dunks and Basketball Bloopers
    Participant

     Way too much credit given to mediocre teams in power conferences. Michigan, Vanderbilt, and Syracuse may have had tougher schedules but St. Mary’s, Monmouth, and St Bonaventure had better seasons.

    Cal was definitely overseeded as a 4. Both Indiana and Maryland were underseeded. The big ten in general didn’t get much respect from the committee even though they still got 7 teams in. 

    Michigan St should have been a one over virginia. I was kind of surprised to see Oregon get a one but I agree with it. 

    Wichita St is one of my sleepers in the field as an 11. I think they will beat Arizona and possibly advance further.

     

     

     

    0
  • #1048003
    AvatarAvatar
    Dazzling Dunks and Basketball Bloopers
    Participant

     Way too much credit given to mediocre teams in power conferences. Michigan, Vanderbilt, and Syracuse may have had tougher schedules but St. Mary’s, Monmouth, and St Bonaventure had better seasons.

    Cal was definitely overseeded as a 4. Both Indiana and Maryland were underseeded. The big ten in general didn’t get much respect from the committee even though they still got 7 teams in. 

    Michigan St should have been a one over virginia. I was kind of surprised to see Oregon get a one but I agree with it. 

    Wichita St is one of my sleepers in the field as an 11. I think they will beat Arizona and possibly advance further.

     

     

     

    0
  • #1047874
    AvatarAvatar
    losnopesos
    Participant

    Good god there’s nothing Duke can do to be in a tough bracket.  The bracket that leaked was 100% correct and it clearly seems that the committee had all of the selections done by Saturday and UK’s win over TAMU wasn’t considered in their seeding.  

    Tulsa?  I’m sure it’s total coincidence that Tulsa got in and the head of the committee is from Oklahoma.

     

    0
  • #1048005
    AvatarAvatar
    losnopesos
    Participant

    Good god there’s nothing Duke can do to be in a tough bracket.  The bracket that leaked was 100% correct and it clearly seems that the committee had all of the selections done by Saturday and UK’s win over TAMU wasn’t considered in their seeding.  

    Tulsa?  I’m sure it’s total coincidence that Tulsa got in and the head of the committee is from Oklahoma.

     

    0
  • #1047884
    AvatarAvatar
    OhCanada-
    Participant

     Tulsa didn’t deserve to be in at all. South Carolina got absolutely robbed they beat Tulsa and Vanderbilt this year. This is as bad as Lilliard missing the all-star game. 

    0
  • #1048015
    AvatarAvatar
    OhCanada-
    Participant

     Tulsa didn’t deserve to be in at all. South Carolina got absolutely robbed they beat Tulsa and Vanderbilt this year. This is as bad as Lilliard missing the all-star game. 

    0
  • #1047888
    AvatarAvatar
    BothTeamsPlayedHard
    Participant

    My guess is that they set up the Kentucky and Texas A&M seeding before the game, and liked setting up a possible Indiana-Kentucky, and UNC-Kentucky/Indiana game on one end and Texas-Texas A&M on the other too much to make a change.

    0
  • #1048019
    AvatarAvatar
    BothTeamsPlayedHard
    Participant

    My guess is that they set up the Kentucky and Texas A&M seeding before the game, and liked setting up a possible Indiana-Kentucky, and UNC-Kentucky/Indiana game on one end and Texas-Texas A&M on the other too much to make a change.

    0
  • #1047890
    AvatarAvatar
    bozman11
    Participant

     Great comments above. 

    Syracuse, mich, Tulsa, Vandy, Colorado don’t belong in the tournament IMO

    i think (and would of liked to see) teams like SD state, Valpo, st Mary’s, Hofstra, st Bonny’s, Evansville and South Carolina should have been in.

    im tired of seeing mediocre teams like Texas, USC, cincy, Texas tech and Pittsburgh getting at large bids instead of some of the mid major teams like from above . 

    Chalk prevails usually, and so I have a KU UK championship… I hate chalk

    0
  • #1048021
    AvatarAvatar
    bozman11
    Participant

     Great comments above. 

    Syracuse, mich, Tulsa, Vandy, Colorado don’t belong in the tournament IMO

    i think (and would of liked to see) teams like SD state, Valpo, st Mary’s, Hofstra, st Bonny’s, Evansville and South Carolina should have been in.

    im tired of seeing mediocre teams like Texas, USC, cincy, Texas tech and Pittsburgh getting at large bids instead of some of the mid major teams like from above . 

    Chalk prevails usually, and so I have a KU UK championship… I hate chalk

    0
  • #1047904
    AvatarAvatar
    ncballer

     Nothing easy for UNC after the first round, barring a possible a gift playing Xavier.  

    0
  • #1048035
    AvatarAvatar
    ncballer

     Nothing easy for UNC after the first round, barring a possible a gift playing Xavier.  

    0
  • #1047908
    AvatarAvatar
    llperez

     in general i prefer seeing mid majors get in over mediocre major teams. I actually watched saint marrys a few times and i liked what i saw, i do think they are good enough to get in. They have real high iq guys who can pass the ball and they move the ball around. But they have no one to blame but themselves for that joke of a schedule. their furthest out of conference road game was a 1 hour bus ride, lol. 

    here’s how i rank the pac12 teams

    1-oregon: finshed the year strong winning their last 8 games and blowing utah out of water in pac 12 title game. Some of the bad early losses were without key players. They have the most athletic pac 12 team top to bottom and their front court in particular can all really move their feet and get out and run. theyseemingly have at least 4 floor spacers on the court at all times, even their 6-10 center shoots around 35% from three. I dont consider them a dominant team or what you would expect from a tradtional one seed, but in a year of parity they can be as tough as anyone.

    2-Cal, 3-arizona are both real good as well and can make runs. Both have freshman in key roles(brown and rabb for cal and trier for zona) which could make or break a team depending on how they play since they are inconsistent

    im not entirely sold on 4-utah. But coach krystowiak gets the most out of his team and they play smart and have a dominant big even though all the perimter guys are just solid.

    USC would be my 5th best team. They have quickness and can really get hot from three point range. Doubt they get out of first weekend though.

    7-Colorado and 6-oregon st both deserved to make it but i dont think either team is all that good and wouldnt be surprised if they both got bounced in round 1.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0
  • #1048038
    AvatarAvatar
    llperez

     in general i prefer seeing mid majors get in over mediocre major teams. I actually watched saint marrys a few times and i liked what i saw, i do think they are good enough to get in. They have real high iq guys who can pass the ball and they move the ball around. But they have no one to blame but themselves for that joke of a schedule. their furthest out of conference road game was a 1 hour bus ride, lol. 

    here’s how i rank the pac12 teams

    1-oregon: finshed the year strong winning their last 8 games and blowing utah out of water in pac 12 title game. Some of the bad early losses were without key players. They have the most athletic pac 12 team top to bottom and their front court in particular can all really move their feet and get out and run. theyseemingly have at least 4 floor spacers on the court at all times, even their 6-10 center shoots around 35% from three. I dont consider them a dominant team or what you would expect from a tradtional one seed, but in a year of parity they can be as tough as anyone.

    2-Cal, 3-arizona are both real good as well and can make runs. Both have freshman in key roles(brown and rabb for cal and trier for zona) which could make or break a team depending on how they play since they are inconsistent

    im not entirely sold on 4-utah. But coach krystowiak gets the most out of his team and they play smart and have a dominant big even though all the perimter guys are just solid.

    USC would be my 5th best team. They have quickness and can really get hot from three point range. Doubt they get out of first weekend though.

    7-Colorado and 6-oregon st both deserved to make it but i dont think either team is all that good and wouldnt be surprised if they both got bounced in round 1.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    0
  • #1047930
    AvatarAvatar
    PrecociousNeophyte
    Participant

     Why do some of you guys think South Carolina should have gotten in. Lost to Georgia 3 times, Missouri!!!!!, Mississippi State, got blown out by Kentucky by 30 at home, and played one of the softest non conference schedules I have ever seen. Their only good win was at Texas A&M. To me that was an easy call leaving them out

    0
  • #1048060
    AvatarAvatar
    PrecociousNeophyte
    Participant

     Why do some of you guys think South Carolina should have gotten in. Lost to Georgia 3 times, Missouri!!!!!, Mississippi State, got blown out by Kentucky by 30 at home, and played one of the softest non conference schedules I have ever seen. Their only good win was at Texas A&M. To me that was an easy call leaving them out

    0
  • #1048102
    AvatarAvatar
    machu46
    Participant

    At the end of the day, the reason teams like Syracuse got in and teams like Monmouth and St. Bonaventure did not is because Syracuse beat good teams and the other two didn’t.

    When you’re a mid-major or a small conference team, you need a strong out of conference resume or basically a perfect conference record to stand out.  Monmouth beat Notre Dame and USC, but the rest of their wins were all basically crap.  The vast majority of their schedule were RPI 200+ teams.  Having 4 losses in such a terrible conference is hard to get around.

    With St. Bonaventure, they had three or four good wins, and they all came in conference play.  I think they had a better resume than a team like Monmouth, but it just pales in comparison to Syracuse.

     

     

    0
  • #1047972
    AvatarAvatar
    machu46
    Participant

    At the end of the day, the reason teams like Syracuse got in and teams like Monmouth and St. Bonaventure did not is because Syracuse beat good teams and the other two didn’t.

    When you’re a mid-major or a small conference team, you need a strong out of conference resume or basically a perfect conference record to stand out.  Monmouth beat Notre Dame and USC, but the rest of their wins were all basically crap.  The vast majority of their schedule were RPI 200+ teams.  Having 4 losses in such a terrible conference is hard to get around.

    With St. Bonaventure, they had three or four good wins, and they all came in conference play.  I think they had a better resume than a team like Monmouth, but it just pales in comparison to Syracuse.

     

     

    0
    • #1048110
      AvatarAvatar
      dcase
      Participant

      Also keep in mind that Monmouth had 3 losses to RPI 200+ teams.  When it comes to St. Bonaventure, I thought they should have been over Tulsa but not the Cuse.  As you said they didn’t have as many quality wins as SU plus they lost their head to head matchup.

      0
    • #1047980
      AvatarAvatar
      dcase
      Participant

      Also keep in mind that Monmouth had 3 losses to RPI 200+ teams.  When it comes to St. Bonaventure, I thought they should have been over Tulsa but not the Cuse.  As you said they didn’t have as many quality wins as SU plus they lost their head to head matchup.

      0
  • #1048108
    AvatarAvatar
    Andrew1984
    Participant

     I have a 14 (SFA), two 13s (Hawaii and Iona) and two 12s (Chattanooga and Yale) advancing.

    0
  • #1047978
    AvatarAvatar
    Andrew1984
    Participant

     I have a 14 (SFA), two 13s (Hawaii and Iona) and two 12s (Chattanooga and Yale) advancing.

    0

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login