(02-27-2014 12:35 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  In my opinion, comparing our 2008 year and Wichita State this year isn't even close. Compare their non-conf schedule to ours that year. Not even close. (And as a side note, C-USA was tougher then the Shocker's conference)

Our 2008 squad was one of the most complete teams in college basketball over the past decade. We deserved our seed.

I do think, though, if they finish the year undefeated, coming off a FF appearance last year, they deserve a #1 seed.

No question they're good, and if they win out, unquestionably deserving of a #1 seed.

I don't care who you play-- winning 35 games in a row is almost unheard-of.

If someone played The Citadel, Presbytarian, Grambling St., Houston Baptist, and NJIT and won 35 in a row I'd still be impressed.

(02-27-2014 12:44 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  If someone played The Citadel, Presbytarian, Grambling St., Houston Baptist, and NJIT and won 35 in a row I'd still be impressed.

I agree.

Unfortunately many are not impressed with beating the likes of SMU, UAB, Houston, UTEP, East Carolina, Tulsa, Southern Miss, Marshall, UCF, Tulane and Rice many times in a row.

Latest bracketology from lunardi has us playing these guys in 3rd round, 8 vs 1 in st louis.

How would we match up? Take it or not?

Would rather not be a 8 seed but it seems like this is the weakest #1 at least.

(02-27-2014 02:09 PM)HiTiger Wrote:  Latest bracketology from lunardi has us playing these guys in 3rd round, 8 vs 1 in st louis.

How would we match up? Take it or not?

Would rather not be a 8 seed but it seems like this is the weakest #1 at least.

I'll take it if it means we are in the 3rd round.

And they should deserve #1 seed. To go undefeated in a super accomplishment no matter what, because everyone seems to succeed in beating themselves at least a couple of games a year.

(02-26-2014 01:31 PM)ncrdbl1 Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 12:36 PM)John44932 Wrote:  30-0? Anyone could do that in an easy conference.

Do not care which conference you are in. You do not put a two loss team ahead of an undefeated team in the polls.

You do every time the undefeated team is in a weak conference and doesn't have a quality win.

(02-26-2014 01:33 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 01:31 PM)klkuhn30 Wrote:  A weak conference combined with a weak non-con schedule=30 wins and a second round loss. The shockers made a good run last year but lost a few players this season, they are still good but their non conference wins are vs Tenn, DePaul, BYU and Alabama. It's not who they have beat to make it to #2 it's that they haven't lost while other teams keep losing. I think if they get a 1 or 2 seed they should win their first game but will struggle in the second game against a field that has lots of decent teams in the middle.

Thank you, Seth Davis...now tell us why Memphis should have been a 2 seed in 2008.

Didn't say that team deserved a 2 seed. The 07-08 team, while in a weak conference had quality wins over UConn, #24 USC, #5 Georgetown and # 17 Arizona. The only thing that will keep Wichita from locking down a guaranteed 1 seed is the fact that their quality win was over St Louis, who also is currently ranked #10 but for the same reason, and not over a higher ranked team. When you have an easy schedule and don't lose while other teams continue to lose you will climb the ladder. Take Louisville for example, they have won one and lost two games against top 25 teams all year, they are in a good conference and don't lose while everyone else loses. That makes them move up.

(02-27-2014 02:43 PM)klkuhn30 Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 01:31 PM)ncrdbl1 Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 12:36 PM)John44932 Wrote:  30-0? Anyone could do that in an easy conference.

Do not care which conference you are in. You do not put a two loss team ahead of an undefeated team in the polls.

You do every time the undefeated team is in a weak conference and doesn't have a quality win.

While St Louis would be a quality win now, at the time they played them it really wasn't. Kind of like our win vs OK State. Looked great then when they were highly ranked, our loss looks worse now since the lost 7 straight games.

(02-27-2014 03:02 PM)klkuhn30 Wrote:  

(02-27-2014 02:43 PM)klkuhn30 Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 01:31 PM)ncrdbl1 Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 12:36 PM)John44932 Wrote:  30-0? Anyone could do that in an easy conference.

Do not care which conference you are in. You do not put a two loss team ahead of an undefeated team in the polls.

You do every time the undefeated team is in a weak conference and doesn't have a quality win.

While St Louis would be a quality win now, at the time they played them it really wasn't. Kind of like our win vs OK State. Looked great then when they were highly ranked, our loss looks worse now since the lost 7 straight games.

?? and from what bucket of knowledge do you ascertain this?

By this same logic, would Marquette have been a quality win early in the year because they are ranked? Or Illinois?

The truth is that these teams prove who they really are over the course of the season. Wichita will get credit for beating a top 25 RPI team on the road, regardless of where they were ranked at the time that they played them.

On the flip side, even if Oklahoma State ends with a RPI of 40 for instance, we would get some consideration that our win was higher quality because 1) They were full strength with Micheal Cobbins AND Marcus Smart… 2) Marcus Smarts suspension was partial cause of them continuing to slide. So in a sense a different team was truly played then the one played now. Its like beating Memphis in 1993 with or without a healthy David Vaughn