A few posters here seem to be thinking we aren't getting any respect. We are a #9 seed that was likely missing the tourny without Jalen's 65 footer. Granted we look like a different team the past 2.5 games but it is what it is.
^^^Almost all of this.^^^
Let's be clear: a first round win is going to make the tournament a success. From 1985 to now, the expected wins in the tournament for a 9 is 0.58. One win is overperforming against seed expectations. Let me repeat:
beating Colorado is already overachieving.
If we expand it to 8/9s
Year: 8/9s who beat the 1 - wins after beating the 1:
1985: 8 Villanova - 4 (Champs)
1986: 8 Auburn - 1 (E8)
1990: 8 UNC - 0 (S16)
1992: 9 UTEP - 0 (S16) (vs. 1 Kansas)
1994: 9 Boston College - 1 (E8)
1996: 8 Georgia - 0 (S16)
1998: 8 Rhode Island - 1 (E8)
(vs. 1 Kansas)
2000: 8 UNC - 2 (FF)
2000: 8 Wisconsin - 2 (FF)
2002: 8 UCLA - 0 (S16)
2004: 9 UAB - 0 (S16)
2004: 8 Alabama - 1 (E8)
2010: 9 Northern Iowa - 0 (S16) (vs. 1 Kansas)
2011: 8 Butler - 3 (Runner-up)
2013: 9 Wichita State - 2 (FF)
2014: 8 Kentucky - 3 (Runner-up)
2015: 8 NC State - 0 (S16)
-------------------------------------
There have been 31 tournaments since the expansion of the NCAAs to 64 teams. In those 31 tournaments, there have been 248 8 or 9 seeds, and 124 matchups between the 1 seed and the 8/9. The 8/9 seed is 17/124 in that matchup: a 13.7% winning percentage. The teams that do win, only win an average of 1.17 games beyond the upset.
Further, of those scant 17 wins, only
5/17 wins have come from the 9 seed, and only 2 of those 5 have won another game beyond that.
That said, in 2 of the last 3 NCAAs, a Final Four participant has come out of that spot.
Beat Colorado, and maybe we can be the odds. But the odds say we're doomed.