"If you are going to go that far back (Kentucky) then you need to consider Tennessee's horrible loss to unranked Chatty. And no, Baylor's best win was NOT against Syracuse. They followed that up with a 19 point drubbing of then #18 MSU, and a week or 2 later a 16 point beatdown of then #18 OK State. They beat then #8 texas by almost 20 so if you rank OSU above Baylor then I guess you put them ahead of Tennessee too."
Losing to Chattanooga isn't as bad of a loss in hindsight. UT-Chat is 20-3 team ranked in the top 25 who also beat Stanford. They're a better team than Michigan State or Oklahoma State.
If Baylor's best wins are against Michigan State and Oklahoma State, two teams that will not make the NCAA tournament this year, then they surely do not deserve a #1 seed. Also, they caught Texas when they started their downward slide and Enemkpali went down with an ACL that game. Would Baylor have won that game had Enemkpali stayed healthy? Probably. But regardless, that Texas team had just loss two of their last three and wasn't the same team that beat Tennessee, A&M and Stanford in Palo Alto.
"Georgia is awful. I mean come on - they beat Auburn by 5, and Vandy by 11. Their victory over aTm says more about how good (or bad) aTm is than how good Georgia is. I mean Auburn is just really really bad. Tenn beat them by 12. You beat Arkansas by 9. you beat Vandy by 8. These are just really bad teams. Sort of like UCONN beating Temple by 10-15 points. If that happened, UCONN fans would be going bananas. And beating Georgia by 8 is no feather in your cap. you can't pick and choose the "statistics" only when they suit your "cause".
Georgia actually beat Michigan State earlier in the year, a team you referenced earlier in this post. And they're a better team than Oklahoma State. The win over Georgia was on par with any win Baylor has had this season, and Tennessee has 6 other wins against better teams.
Where did I pick and choose statistics to suit my cause? I stated that Tennessee has 7 wins over ranked teams, 4 of whom are in the top 15. And actually you picked and chose margins of victory to suit your cause. You can't analyze Tennessee without analyzing Baylor. Baylor had a 4 point victory against a slumping West Virginia team and two 8 point victories against Kansas, a team that lost to Alabama (1-8 in SEC play) earlier this season. These victories are less impressive than the ones you referenced.
At the end of the day, margin of victory doesn't matter for seedings like it does in football. Getting a #2 seed vs. a #1 doesn't eliminate your chances of competing for a championship like it did in football if you were the 5th best team in the country. But I stand by my point, Tennessee is more deserving of a #1 seed at this point in the season than Baylor.
"Bottom line is that there aren't any elite teams like UCONN IMHO, and while I think overall SC and ND have been more impressive than any of the other top 10, I think Baylor has been more consistently impressive than Tennessee. And side note - Kentucky got pummeled by 21 points by Duke. LSU, in the thick of things in the SEC, lost to Tulane... I'm not saying those teams are bad, but to use wins by Tenn over ranked teams outside the top 8 or 10 (where there is a pretty steep drop off) is meh. I will say their win over OSU was impressive..."
You can't have it two ways-that same mediocre Kentucky team has a 10 point win over Baylor, even if it was early in the season. If you don't consider it a good win for Tennessee, it's a bad loss for Kentucky. And I'm still not sure where there's a strong argument for Baylor to get a #1 over Tennessee or Oregon State, other than they haven't lost to any chippies on their schedule yet.
