committee top 16 | The Boneyard

committee top 16

Vowelguy

Vowelguy

Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
26,060
Reaction Score
70,652
uconn 1 & somehow Louisville is #4

  1. uconn
  2. so carolina
  3. stanford
  4. louisville
  5. texas a&m
  6. nc state
  7. maryland
  8. arizona
  9. ucla
  10. baylor
  11. oregon
  12. georgia
  13. tenn
  14. wva
  15. indiana
  16. ky
 
Georgia as a 3 seed? Hmh..... that's a huge left field choice. Wonder what they've done.
 
brackets:
A -- UConn, Arizona, Baylor, Tenn
B -- So Car , MD, UCLA, W Va
C -- Stanf, NC St, Georgia, Indi
D -- Lou, Tx A&M, Oreg, Ky
 
Oregon as a 3 is hard to fathom to me. I know the computer polls love them, but I don't see it. They're 0-4 against Stanford, Arizona and UCLA currently. Best win is...Washington St. (x2)?
 
.-.
.-.
I think if Jose keeps winning now that they are out of Covid protocol, they will crack the top 16 next reveal. As will Michigan if they keep winning. One of the SEC teams or WV will drop out.
 
Vowelguy said:
baylor got nailed, but I think legit
Expand ...
Creme always seems to overvalue Baylor, even though their typically (not always) weak schedule is so obvious. Creme goes on to say that he felt Baylor would be a #2 seed, but closer to a #1 seed than a #3 seed. Really, Creme? Based on what? One victory over #14 West Virginia, and two losses to non-Top 16 Arkansas and Iowa State? Give me a break!
 
Last edited:
southie said:
Creme always seems to overvalue Baylor, even though their typically (not always) weak schedule is so obvious. Creme goes on to say that he felt Baylor would be a #2 seed, but closer to a #1 seed than a #2 seed. Really, Creme? Based on what? One victory over #14 West Virginia, and two losses to non-Top 16 Arkansas and Iowa State? Give me a break!
Expand ...
Yeah those were pretty stunning comments from him.
 
I know this is an unusual season; but, the committee seems very inconsistent. For some, they seem to penalize teams more for their losses than they reward them for their wins; Arkansas and NC State are good examples. For others, they don't seem to be looking at quality wins (plural) at all; Baylor and West Virginia are good examples.

Like Andy Landers stated, NC State has wins at South Carolina and at Louisville; and, losses at Virginia Tech and North Carolina. That equals a #6 overall national seed?

Like Carolyn Peck stated, Texas A&M has more "quality wins" than a lot of teams ranked ahead of them, and they avenged their loss at LSU with a win at home against LSU; still, I think the #5 overall national seed is pretty accurate as they don't have a win over a Top 10 seeded team. But, does Louisville (I haven't checked)?

Where is Arkansas? Wins against UConn and Baylor, and that doesn't get you into the Top 16? Two of their losses are against Texas A&M.

West Virginia in at #14? Based on what? A home win against Tennessee, but losses to a bad team like Oklahoma (at home) who won't be making the NCAA tourney, as well a loss at Oklahoma State?
 
Last edited:
.-.
southie said:
Creme always seems to overvalue Baylor, even though their typically (not always) weak schedule is so obvious. Creme goes on to say that he felt Baylor would be a #2 seed, but closer to a #1 seed than a #2 seed. Really, Creme? Based on what? One victory over #14 West Virginia, and two losses to non-Top 16 Arkansas and Iowa State? Give me a break!
Expand ...

35 points for the game. Baylor still own your owns your Horns. And still owns the B12. Keep being whiny jealous.

The Committee created a huge ball of hate that will be rolling down I-35 to the Tourney.
 
Vowelguy said:
Yeah those were pretty stunning comments from him.
Expand ...
I'm not surprised, though. A few seasons ago he was the only one pimping Baylor as a national #1 seed (instead of Miss. State) despite Baylor's much weaker schedule. When the committee put Miss. State as a #1 seed and Baylor as a #2 seed, he threw a tantrum during the post-bracket discussion (if I remember correctly).
 
Adriacus said:
35 points for the game. Baylor still own your owns your Horns. And still owns the B12. Keep being whiny jealous.

The Committee created a huge ball of hate that will be rolling down I-35 to the Tourney.
Expand ...
Spare me. Nobody is talking about Texas versus Baylor in this thread. Try to be objective. This is a discussion about the seedings. Tell us all who are Baylor's quality wins this season?
 
Just as a general question, how do you fairly rank the Pac-12 teams when none of them played a real non-conference schedule? I don't think the NET and the other ranking systems can really apply to a conference that only played amongst themselves.
 
.-.
I think they laid an egg with this one... TAMU should be a #1. Lville is overrated and MD got gifted. I'm not a Baylor fan but #10 is too low. They deserve MD's spot in my opinion. Michigan got robbed and GA got gifted their spot. WV? Are you serious? But no AR?
 
Glenn said:
I think the brackets have been adjusted so that teams avoid conference foes. So Baylor and UCLA get swapped so UCLA does not get grouped with Arizona
Expand ...
I really hate that the basketball committee bumps up/down teams seed-wise to avoid "potential" intra-conference matchups 3-4 rounds deep into the tournament. Neither women's volleyball nor women's softball do this (and maybe not even women's soccer); they seed teams based on their established criteria, and just let the chips fall where the may, even if that means intra-conference matchups occur in Sweet 16 or Elite 8. I believe the only thing they strictly try to avoid are round of 64 and round of 32 intra-conference matchups.
 
Last edited:
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,497
Messages
4,578,574
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom