Dude, domer .... why do you have to put such LARGE pictures in your signature??

It makes it hard to scroll through, man!

Hot takes thru 3 games in Indy:

Dayton brought more people than anyone but Kentucky.

NKU's young fan base is very impressive.

Cocky is the best hidden gem in D1.

(03-17-2017 04:48 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 04:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  In fact, of the remaining four games for the top 4 seeds, which of these do people think will have the smallest margin of victory??

1 Kansas v 16 UC Davis
2 Duke v 15 Troy
2 Kentucky v 15 N Kentucky
3 UCLA v 14 Kent State


I'm gonna go for N Kentucky, but I have no idea why.

Kent St... They will push UCLA.

And UCLA will punch them back for pushing them.

(03-17-2017 09:51 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 04:48 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 04:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  In fact, of the remaining four games for the top 4 seeds, which of these do people think will have the smallest margin of victory??

1 Kansas v 16 UC Davis
2 Duke v 15 Troy
2 Kentucky v 15 N Kentucky
3 UCLA v 14 Kent State


I'm gonna go for N Kentucky, but I have no idea why.

Kent St... They will push UCLA.

And UCLA will punch them back for pushing them.

As it was written, so it came to pass, but at least at +19.5 to +20, UCLA did not cover the spread.

Teams in Final 32 by conference:

ACC ........ 6
BIG ......... 5
Big 12 ..... 4
SEC ........ 4
PAC ......... 4
Big East .... 3
WCC ......... 2
AAC .......... 1
A10 .......... 1
CUSA ........ 1
MVC ......... 1

Look at the WCC trying to come up in the world.

(03-18-2017 05:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Teams in Final 32 by conference:

ACC ........ 6
BIG ......... 5
Big 12 ..... 4
SEC ........ 4
PAC ......... 4
Big East .... 3
WCC ......... 2
AAC .......... 1
A10 .......... 1
CUSA ........ 1
MVC ......... 1

How do the people who clamor for more mid and low majors in the tournament, to spice up the first two rounds, reconcile that stance with this??

SI, for example, says this:

Quote:The only way to re-energize the early days of the tournament is to allow more access for smaller leagues. And the only way to do that is give them better representation on the NCAA selection committee. Five of the 10 members are from the six top basketball conferences. And seven of the 10 hail from FBS schools. When half the committee comes from six conferences, it shouldn’t be a shock when they make up more than 80% of the at-large field.

http://www.si.com/college-basketball/201...ate-dayton


This article, more generally, slammed the seedings all around.

What do you want them to do, rig it so it's full of mid-majors? No one is ever gonna be totally happy with who gets in and the seeds but it just is what it is. Unlike football, middles can earn respect and rankings on the court so they have every opportunity. It's not the committee's fault the AAC and MWC was down or that other conferences besides the A-10 can't pick up the slack.

Which conferences/teams/games were most screwed by mis-seeding?

ACC - wins:
Notre Dame 5 over Princeton 12 - no
FSU 3 over FGCU 14 - no
Virginia 5 over UNCW 12 - no, but fairly close game
UNC 1 over TSU 16 - lol no
Duke 2 over Troy 15 - no
L'ville 2 over JSU 15 - no, but somewhat close

ACC - losses:
Wake 11 to K St 11 - no, First Four ... is what it is, just trying to get into the tournament
VT 9 to Wisc 8 - no
Miami 8 to Mich St 9 - no

Big Ten - wins:
Purdue 4 over Vermont 13 - no, but somewhat close
Wisc 8 over VT 9 - no
NW 8 over Vandy 9 - no
Michigan 7 over OK St 10 - no
Mich St 9 over Miami 8 - no

Big Ten - losses:
Minn 5 to MTSU 12 - *YES*, absolutely horse___t draw for Minn, way underseeded for MTSU
Maryland 6 to Xavier 11 - borderline, but I'm going no on this

Big 12 - wins:
WV 4 over Bucknell 13 - no, but fairly close
Iowa St 5 over Nevada 12 - no
Kansas 1 over UC Davis 16 - lol no
Baylor 3 over NM St 14 - no

Big 12 - losses:
K St 11 to Cincy 6 - no, I think K St has to be grateful that they even got in
OK St 10 to Mich 7 - maybe? Michigan is a buzzsaw ... I could see that even at the end of regular season

SEC - wins:
Florida 4 over ETSU 13 - no
Kentucky 2 over N KY 15 - no, but fairly close
Ark 8 over S Hall 9 - no
SC 7 over Marq 10 - no

SEC - losses:
Vandy 9 to NW 8 - going with no on this one

PAC - wins:
Arizona 2 over UND 15 - no
UCLA 3 over KSU 14 - clearly no ... I think a lot of people were thinking yes, or they just hate Ball that much
Oregon 3 over Iona 14 - also clearly no
USC 11 over SMU 6 - no, USC has to be grateful to make it

Big East - wins:
Nova 1 over MSM 16 - no
Butler 4 over Winth 13 - no
Xavier 11 over Mary 6 - seems like a no

Big east - losses:
Prov 11 to USC 11 - no, First Four ... is what it is, just trying to get into the tournament
S Hall 9 to Ark 8 - seems like no
Creigh 6 to URI 11 - perhaps you could argue this a yes ... but URI was a surprise team in from A10, right?
Marq 10 to SC 7 - again perhaps you could argue this a yes based on the blow out ... but don't think much was/is expected from SC?


A10 - wins:
URI 11 over Creigh 6 - no

A10 - losses:
VCU 10 to St Mary 7 - seems like no?
Dayton 7 to Wich St 10 - *YES*, lots are saying WSU is way underseeded and that Dayton got screwed

AAC - wins:
Cincy 6 over KSt 11 - no

AAC - losses:
SMU 6 to USC 11 - great game, hard to say yes to this ... doubt people are thinking USC is underseeded?




So I only really see two bad ones - both to the champions of one-bid leagues, who were vastly overlooked and perhaps even disrespected with their seeds.

(03-18-2017 11:18 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  middles can earn respect and rankings on the court so they have every opportunity.

SI article I linked has this to say, to that:

Quote:Miller worries that as leagues go to 20-game league schedules—like the ACC in 2019—that mid-majors will continue to have even less chance for top-50 wins. “You’re looking at 25 games against high major foes,” he says of leagues with 20-game conference schedules. “How many more are you going to play? Why would you?”

(03-18-2017 11:02 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(03-18-2017 05:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Teams in Final 32 by conference:

ACC ........ 6
BIG ......... 5
Big 12 ..... 4
SEC ........ 4
PAC ......... 4
Big East .... 3
WCC ......... 2
AAC .......... 1
A10 .......... 1
CUSA ........ 1
MVC ......... 1

How do the people who clamor for more mid and low majors in the tournament, to spice up the first two rounds, reconcile that stance with this??

SI, for example, says this:

Quote:The only way to re-energize the early days of the tournament is to allow more access for smaller leagues. And the only way to do that is give them better representation on the NCAA selection committee. Five of the 10 members are from the six top basketball conferences. And seven of the 10 hail from FBS schools. When half the committee comes from six conferences, it shouldn’t be a shock when they make up more than 80% of the at-large field.

http://www.si.com/college-basketball/201...ate-dayton


This article, more generally, slammed the seedings all around.

What is the goal of those who want to see more teams from outside the six power conferences? Is it just to have more teams for its own sake, or is it to somehow improve the tournament?

Last year there were 32 teams from outside the P6, and 11 of them advanced to the round of 32. This year there were fewer - 30 - teams, and only 6 advanced. The question is whether that is part of an emerging trend, or whether this year is just an aberration.

If we add more mid and low major schools, and they all flame out in the first round, how does that improve the tournament? Would the selection committee rig the seedings, pairing mid and low majors against each other, just to make sure some of them are still playing on the weekend?

As politically incorrect as this sounds, I don't see how giving automatic bids to the bottom 20 conferences (who did not win a single first round game this year) adds much value to this tournament.

(03-18-2017 11:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  If we add more mid and low major schools, and they all flame out in the first round, how does that improve the tournament? Would the selection committee rig the seedings, pairing mid and low majors against each other, just to make sure some of them are still playing on the weekend?

Perhaps they would do that, indeed.

Wouldn't make much sense to get the teams in ... just to have them all lose on Thurs and Fri. The idea is to keep it interesting from Thur - Sun. Then in turns into a P6 tournament, after that.

(03-18-2017 11:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  As politically incorrect as this sounds, I don't see how giving automatic bids to the bottom 20 conferences (who did not win a single first round game this year) adds much value to this tournament.

Purely TV/advertising benefit.

Other than the super bowl, I don't think any other sporting event draws as much interest from non-sports fans and casual sports fans than the first Thur-Sun of March Madness.

(03-18-2017 11:39 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(03-18-2017 11:18 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  middles can earn respect and rankings on the court so they have every opportunity.

SI article I linked has this to say, to that:

Quote:Miller worries that as leagues go to 20-game league schedules—like the ACC in 2019—that mid-majors will continue to have even less chance for top-50 wins. “You’re looking at 25 games against high major foes,” he says of leagues with 20-game conference schedules. “How many more are you going to play? Why would you?”

But unlike football, they can earn their way in and even have goodies like preseason tournaments to help them out with quality wins. So the opportunity is there and the whining needs to stop.

Put Illinois St in, don't pit VCU/Dayton against Saint Mary's/Wichita to rig two out, and I'd bet that 6 number is 9.

Middle Tennessee/Rhode Island showed up Minnesota/Creighton pretty good. And to think the committee would've left both out.

Would they have left MTSU out? 30 wins?

They had a 12 seed, so yes.

Hey guys,

The Big Ten is WAY down.

Like, WAY down.


Hahahahahahhahaha

Says fan of team that was ousted by a 12-seed.

Wisconsin and Nova has been a great gritty game.

Big Ten is WAAAAAAYYYYYY down guys!

Seriously, like WAAAYYY down!