| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
acsuc99
Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Posts: 725
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/07/15 12:14 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Creme puff has Maryland and Oregon State paired together?? After Oregon State's rather pathetic loss to the 9 seed in their conference, surely Maryland-OSU are not gonna be paired 1-2 in the same region are they? That would be the weakest 1-2 pairing ever! OSU should be a 3 seed based on what I saw. And we all know Maryland's season is a product of moving to the slow soft Big Ten? Right??
|
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 7:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
new version up as of this morning 3/9:
My biggest question so far is why is Northwestern an 8 and Rutgers a 7. Northwestern has fewer losses, better RPI and SOS and beat Rutgers twice. hello.
The other comment is that since Louisville can't host, whoever is the 7 seed against them wins the lottery since they will get to host.
Arizona State was in the same situation, but the P12 cleared the deck for them to host by moving the gymnastics tournament to Utah instead.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 8:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
new version up as of this morning 3/9:
My biggest question so far is why is Northwestern an 8 and Rutgers a 7. Northwestern has fewer losses, better RPI and SOS and beat Rutgers twice. hello. |
He's had Rutgers ranked about two seeds higher than I would all season long, and I have no idea why.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 8:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
new version up as of this morning 3/9:
My biggest question so far is why is Northwestern an 8 and Rutgers a 7. Northwestern has fewer losses, better RPI and SOS and beat Rutgers twice. hello. |
I dunno. Maybe it's OOC - Northwestern played Arizona State (L), Gonzaga (W) and DePaul (W), while RU played Tennessee (L), North Carolina (L), Arkansas (W) and LSU (W). Or maybe it's the Northwestern loss to Penn State, which was brutal, even if it was by 1 point and on the road.
While I think RU is solidly in the tournament, I've been wondering in general about whether Creme has been putting them too high.
|
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 8:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Gonzaga got upset in the WCC Semifinals, meaning San Diego's bubble has burst, and the WCC Auto-bid could end up being at at-large bid stealer if Gonzaga is still hanging by a thread as an at-large:
Here's my two cases for who the Last 4 in / out are now:
Scenario 1 Love for WVU (I think this is more likely)
Miami
Arkansas
West Virginia
Gonzaga
Scenario 2 Hate for WVU
Miami
Arkansas
Gonzaga
Tulane
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 8:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
Gonzaga got upset in the WCC Semifinals, meaning San Diego's bubble has burst, and the WCC Auto-bid could end up being at at-large bid stealer if Gonzaga is still hanging by a thread as an at-large:
Here's my two cases for who the Last 4 in / out are now:
Scenario 1 Love for WVU (I think this is more likely)
Miami
Arkansas
West Virginia
Gonzaga
Scenario 2 Hate for WVU
Miami
Arkansas
Gonzaga
Tulane |
WVU is at RPI 77, 7-11 in the B12, 5-7 in its last 12 games, first round loss in B12 tourney. It's not what I'd call a profile that gets you into the tournament. (And, actually, since at least 2000 the committee's never given an at large to a team with an RPI that bad and neither pilight nor I can remember a team with a record 2 games below .500 in conference getting a bid.)
For what it's worth, I'm not really feeling it for Tulane, either - RPI of 49, but 1 RPI top 50 win and 2 sub-RPI 100 losses.
|
|
CBiebel
Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 1055
Location: PA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 10:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| CBiebel wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
Also of note: there are 11 Old Big East teams among the 64.
What could have been except for football. |
Seriously. I know some of you blame ND (not accurate, IMO. Even ND joining the BE in Football couldn't have saved them from the poaching, IMO), but I think most ND W. BBall fans really wish the old BE would have stayed as it was. |
For a poster who accuses others of arrogance you need to look in a mirror. Not every post is about Notre Dame. LOL
|
I didn't mean to imply that you were. I was just doing a "preemptive strike." Football was definitely what drove this. Football is a big issue when you mention ND and with ND's previous deal with the Big East, Football was often a sore spot with other fans. Hence my preemptive strike.
I figured that if I didn't add that, there would likely be a response (not saying from you) along the lines of ND being partly to blame. It's not like your coach has refrained from making a comment suggesting that or anything...' '
Coming from a ND perspective, I think it would be better if you had some sports with different conference setups than that of other sports. At one time, for example, ND had Football independent, most of the other sports in one conference (Big East), Hockey in another conference (CCHA), Men's Lacrosse in another (Forget which one), and Fencing I don't think even had a conference. Even the Big 10 for a long time didn't sponsor Hockey, so various members were in different hockey conferences.
As it is now, ND is mostly independent in Football (they're playing 5-6 ACC teams each year as part of the agreement), are in the American East in Hockey (I guess the ACC doesn't have enough Hockey programs...), and all the rest in the ACC (the ACC just started sponsoring Fencing, although only 4 programs (ND, Duke, UNC, and BC) have programs).
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/09/15 11:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CBiebel wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| CBiebel wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
Also of note: there are 11 Old Big East teams among the 64.
What could have been except for football. |
Seriously. I know some of you blame ND (not accurate, IMO. Even ND joining the BE in Football couldn't have saved them from the poaching, IMO), but I think most ND W. BBall fans really wish the old BE would have stayed as it was. |
For a poster who accuses others of arrogance you need to look in a mirror. Not every post is about Notre Dame. LOL
|
I didn't mean to imply that you were. I was just doing a "preemptive strike." Football was definitely what drove this. Football is a big issue when you mention ND and with ND's previous deal with the Big East, Football was often a sore spot with other fans. Hence my preemptive strike.
I figured that if I didn't add that, there would likely be a response (not saying from you) along the lines of ND being partly to blame. It's not like your coach has refrained from making a comment suggesting that or anything...''
Coming from a ND perspective, I think it would be better if you had some sports with different conference setups than that of other sports. At one time, for example, ND had Football independent, most of the other sports in one conference (Big East), Hockey in another conference (CCHA), Men's Lacrosse in another (Forget which one), and Fencing I don't think even had a conference. Even the Big 10 for a long time didn't sponsor Hockey, so various members were in different hockey conferences.
As it is now, ND is mostly independent in Football (they're playing 5-6 ACC teams each year as part of the agreement), are in the American East in Hockey (I guess the ACC doesn't have enough Hockey programs...), and all the rest in the ACC (the ACC just started sponsoring Fencing, although only 4 programs (ND, Duke, UNC, and BC) have programs). |
From memory I believe UConn's coach said that football destroyed the best basketball conference in the country. Now you can infer that he was talking about ND but there were several programs that left prior to the Irish. Seeing how ND remains an independent I doubt he was implying that.
I always assumed they left because they knew that once Diggins left they were back in second class status in the BE. 
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7849
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 9:27 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
Come on, link, that is so patently silly that even this Tennessee fan nearly splattered coffee on the monitor!  I can only assume you had to be joking.... |
I don't know whether Geno (or the UConn men's coach) said that, but John Thompson, Jr. (the former Georgetown coach, not his son) did.
Destruction
And it's at least sort of true. Football drives the bus for schools that play it at the D-I level, and the old Big East couldn't really accommodate the football schools. |
It probably is true, but it's true because some basketball schools like UConn decided they wanted to be football schools, not anything ND did. ND isn't the one that changed its attitude or what it was doing. ND wasn't the one demanding that some completely unrelated football schools like USF be added just to add some more football schools. It was the football dreamers that changed the mentality, destroyed the cohesiveness, and drove a wedge into the conference.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7849
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 12:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I was speaking of this:
I always assumed they left because they knew that once Diggins left they were back in second class status in the BE.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ok then, back to bracketology...
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
FollowtheCardinalRule
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large?
|
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large? |
Which one of these teams do? You need to pick two of these (or more if you don't like Miami and/or Arkansas):
Gonzaga
Arkansas State
Duquesne
Kansas State
Stetson
Tulane
TCU
Washington St
West Virginia
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="ArtBest23"]
| beknighted wrote: |
It probably is true, but it's true because some basketball schools like UConn decided they wanted to be football schools, not anything ND did. ND isn't the one that changed its attitude or what it was doing. ND wasn't the one demanding that some completely unrelated football schools like USF be added just to add some more football schools. It was the football dreamers that changed the mentality, destroyed the cohesiveness, and drove a wedge into the conference. |
Hell, UConn is no different from all the other schools seeking football money. I'm not blaming any school(s). I blaming football's strangle hold on the NCAA and the conference structure. I don't see why women's BB can't be run like hockey. OK, maybe I do know. It's Title IX. A wonderful thing for women's sports but when wcbb is superimposed on a structure developed for football it spreads itself too thin. If there were 350+ hockey programs the quality of competition would be awful until the NCAA's. But the politics of gender requires that all 350+ D1 schools must maintain a D1 women's BB program.
The only viable solution that maintains the current structure is an expended investment in wbb at the jr high and hs level. And turning AAU ball into something other than a showcase for college recruiters.
|
|
FollowtheCardinalRule
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large? |
Which one of these teams do? You need to pick two of these (or more if you don't like Miami and/or Arkansas):
Gonzaga
Arkansas State
Duquesne
Kansas State
Stetson
Tulane
TCU
Washington St
West Virginia |
Arky State can still win their tourney. I like Miami, but not Arkansas.
I assume you have teams such as LSU, DePaul and hell, even Oklahoma State all in.
Say Wichita State loses the Valley to Drake, they're in.
Washington State is a bit of a headscratcher for me, because they have that marquee win (Maryland, backed up by wins over fellow bubble teams Gonzaga, Dayton, and Washington, but their losses came 8x to the best of the Pac, then to teams such as Michigan, Oregon, and UCLA.
It's a conundrum.
I mean, ergh. I don't like the bubble.
|
|
FollowtheCardinalRule
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="linkster"]
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
It probably is true, but it's true because some basketball schools like UConn decided they wanted to be football schools, not anything ND did. ND isn't the one that changed its attitude or what it was doing. ND wasn't the one demanding that some completely unrelated football schools like USF be added just to add some more football schools. It was the football dreamers that changed the mentality, destroyed the cohesiveness, and drove a wedge into the conference. |
Hell, UConn is no different from all the other schools seeking football money. I'm not blaming any school(s). I blaming football's strangle hold on the NCAA and the conference structure. I don't see why women's BB can't be run like hockey. OK, maybe I do know. It's Title IX. A wonderful thing for women's sports but when wcbb is superimposed on a structure developed for football it spreads itself too thin. If there were 350+ hockey programs the quality of competition would be awful until the NCAA's. But the politics of gender requires that all 350+ D1 schools must maintain a D1 women's BB program.
The only viable solution that maintains the current structure is an expended investment in wbb at the jr high and hs level. And turning AAU ball into something other than a showcase for college recruiters. |
If your convo isn't about bracketology, get the hell out of this thread. That topic has been done to death, and has taken over far too many threads.
Stay, and discuss the thread topic, or take your convo elsewhere.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7849
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 1:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large? |
Which one of these teams do? You need to pick two of these (or more if you don't like Miami and/or Arkansas):
Gonzaga
Arkansas State
Duquesne
Kansas State
Stetson
Tulane
TCU
Washington St
West Virginia |
I've managed to catch a couple of Tulane games, and I like the way they play. I've also seen a little of WVU, and them, I don't. WSU, maybe, but I haven't seen them at all, nor any of the rest of them either. Or did I see TCU getting whomped on by Baylor? I don't remember. I guess I'll say Tulane just for the hell of it.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 2:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
It probably is true, but it's true because some basketball schools like UConn decided they wanted to be football schools, not anything ND did. ND isn't the one that changed its attitude or what it was doing. ND wasn't the one demanding that some completely unrelated football schools like USF be added just to add some more football schools. It was the football dreamers that changed the mentality, destroyed the cohesiveness, and drove a wedge into the conference. |
Hell, UConn is no different from all the other schools seeking football money. I'm not blaming any school(s). I blaming football's strangle hold on the NCAA and the conference structure. I don't see why women's BB can't be run like hockey. OK, maybe I do know. It's Title IX. A wonderful thing for women's sports but when wcbb is superimposed on a structure developed for football it spreads itself too thin. If there were 350+ hockey programs the quality of competition would be awful until the NCAA's. But the politics of gender requires that all 350+ D1 schools must maintain a D1 women's BB program.
The only viable solution that maintains the current structure is an expended investment in wbb at the jr high and hs level. And turning AAU ball into something other than a showcase for college recruiters. |
If your convo isn't about bracketology, get the hell out of this thread. That topic has been done to death, and has taken over far too many threads.
Stay, and discuss the thread topic, or take your convo elsewhere. |
First, I'm the one who started this thread, and I didn't find anything objectionable in the mild diversions from the original topic. It's conversation.
Second, there's just over 40 posts in this thread, and nearly half are not strictly about bracketology, starting with the sixth post on the first day, which was over a week ago. It's not like this thread has had a really narrow focus from the beginning.
You're certainly free to start your own thread and demand strict orthodoxy if you object to how this one has progressed for over a week.
Last edited by ArtBest23 on 03/10/15 3:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66928
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 2:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large? |
Which one of these teams do? You need to pick two of these (or more if you don't like Miami and/or Arkansas):
Gonzaga
Arkansas State
Duquesne
Kansas State
Stetson
Tulane
TCU
Washington St
West Virginia |
Stetson being in the mix despite no top 100 RPI wins (and only one top 150 win) is amazing to me.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/10/15 2:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
| FollowtheCardinalRule wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| ok then, back to bracketology... |
Does Gonzaga really merit an at-large? |
Which one of these teams do? You need to pick two of these (or more if you don't like Miami and/or Arkansas):
Gonzaga
Arkansas State
Duquesne
Kansas State
Stetson
Tulane
TCU
Washington St
West Virginia |
Stetson being in the mix despite no top 100 RPI wins (and only one top 150 win) is amazing to me. |
Ark with a 6-10 and KSt with a 7-11 conf record are pretty far out there to me. And Wash St with an RPI of 71 and WVU with a 76. Has anybody with an RPI of 76 ever made it? Why are they in the discussion.
|
|
|
|
