I follow bracketology in the season solely for entertainment purposes. However, it does start to get more meaningful during the last week of the regular season and conference tournament time.

(01-08-2013 08:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  You don't face a team in the first round round (or second round as they call it these days) that you played during the regular season, so we wouldn't play VCU first up.

Are you certain about that? I know that there is a rule about playing conference opponentes in the first two rounds, but I didn't know that there's also a similar rule about non-confernce regular season opponents.

(01-09-2013 10:15 AM)3601 Wrote:  

(01-08-2013 08:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  You don't face a team in the first round round (or second round as they call it these days) that you played during the regular season, so we wouldn't play VCU first up.

Are you certain about that? I know that there is a rule about playing conference opponentes in the first two rounds, but I didn't know that there's also a similar rule about non-confernce regular season opponents.

Yes. The Committee does everything possible to avoid non-conference rematches in the play-in games and the second round. It almost never happens. They try to avoid conference members playing each other until the regional finals, but for a conference like the Big East it is the regional semis.

I would like to see the seed we get if we run the table. We didn't beat anybody in the 2006-2007 season, but yet we got a 2 seed.

Sadly I don't think we'll run the table, but even if we do I'm pretty sure we wouldn't get a 2 seed.

(01-09-2013 04:47 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  I would like to see the seed we get if we run the table. We didn't beat anybody in the 2006-2007 season, but yet we got a 2 seed.

Sadly I don't think we'll run the table, but even if we do I'm pretty sure we wouldn't get a 2 seed.

The 2006-07 Tigers did have a win over #13 Caltucky in Maui and they had 6 top 100 wins overall.

Right now, the 2012-13 Tigers have no top 25 RPI wins, no top 50 RPI wins and just two top 100 RPI wins (vs. #100 Northern Iowa in the Bahamas and @ #78 Tennessee). Currently there are only five top 100 opponents left on the rest of the schedule:

#84 Harvard
#98 Tulsa
@ #53 Southern Miss
#53 Southern Miss
@ #80 UTEP

(01-09-2013 05:45 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 04:47 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  I would like to see the seed we get if we run the table. We didn't beat anybody in the 2006-2007 season, but yet we got a 2 seed.

Sadly I don't think we'll run the table, but even if we do I'm pretty sure we wouldn't get a 2 seed.

The 2006-07 Tigers did have a win over #13 Caltucky in Maui and they had 6 top 100 wins overall.

Right now, the 2012-13 Tigers have no top 25 RPI wins, no top 50 RPI wins and just two top 100 RPI wins (vs. #100 Northern Iowa in the Bahamas and @ #78 Tennessee). Currently there are only five top 100 opponents left on the rest of the schedule:

#84 Harvard
#98 Tulsa
@ #53 Southern Miss
#53 Southern Miss
@ #80 UTEP

Their schedule was very similar to this year and FWIW UK was overrated. According to ESPN they were ranked 22 at the time they played us (based on preseason rankings); they ended up with 12 losses by the end of the season.

(01-09-2013 06:10 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 05:45 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 04:47 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  I would like to see the seed we get if we run the table. We didn't beat anybody in the 2006-2007 season, but yet we got a 2 seed.

Sadly I don't think we'll run the table, but even if we do I'm pretty sure we wouldn't get a 2 seed.

The 2006-07 Tigers did have a win over #13 Caltucky in Maui and they had 6 top 100 wins overall.

Right now, the 2012-13 Tigers have no top 25 RPI wins, no top 50 RPI wins and just two top 100 RPI wins (vs. #100 Northern Iowa in the Bahamas and @ #78 Tennessee). Currently there are only five top 100 opponents left on the rest of the schedule:

#84 Harvard
#98 Tulsa
@ #53 Southern Miss
#53 Southern Miss
@ #80 UTEP

Their schedule was very similar to this year and FWIW UK was overrated. According to ESPN they were ranked 22 at the time they played us and they ended up with 12 losses by the end of the season.

They were #13 in the RPI on Selection Sunday though. That goes down as a darn good win on a neutral court. The 2012-13 Tigers have no win anywhere near that good and it appears the rest of the schedule will not give them a chance for that type of win. Other than that, you are correct. If these Tigers were to win out, their resume would be very similar to that of the 2006-07 Tigers that secured a #2 seed.

What is sad is that there are only 4 of our opponents in the field, and we've already lost to 3 of them.

Good news is that there were a couple of NBE teams in that field that will definitely help us 2 years from now, assuming everything holds together.

It's a shame, basketball-wise, about Boise bolting and SDSU not likely coming into the league. Both of them are projected to be in the field. SDSU is a good team, and would help our S.O.S.

I just wonder if losses impact any other team as much in terms of drastic swings in seeding. I'm curious what our seed would have been had we not beat an unranked Gonzaga team in OT on a last second shot.

Either way I think the media/selection committee locks in our seed ceiling early on. While it can be fun, I wish they would just let the season play out (unless their projections are favorable to the Tigers). Lol

(01-09-2013 06:28 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  I just wonder if losses impact any other team as much in terms of drastic swings in seeding. I'm curious what our seed would have been had we not beat an unranked Gonzaga team in OT on a last second shot.

Either way I think the media/selection committee locks in our seed ceiling early on. While it can be fun, I wish they would just let the season play out (unless their projections are favorable to the Tigers). Lol

That's a good point about losses. That's one thing we have to hang our hat on (so far). No bad losses. Last year, we had one of those (#147 UTEP at home) and that may have contributed to the seed being what it was. It may have meant more than one seeding line too. Could have been two.