NC State should not have been a #1 seed | The Boneyard

NC State should not have been a #1 seed

Go complain to the NCAA committee... and here is something to snack on

square.jpg
 
.-.
DaddyChoc said:
Dessert?
Expand ...

Ha... well there is a Krispy Kreme on the way back from the restaurant, and I almost stopped.. but I thought about it.. and was like.. what would the Boneyard say.

bluedevil said:
Can I recommend a good Statin with your meal?
Expand ...

Well they gave me a baked potato instead of mashed potatoes with cheddar... so that's a bit healthier.
 
.-.
Well, A&M is also volunteering for this thread, and Baylor didn't look overwhelming today.

NC State beat South Carolina, and Louisville twice. Thems the facts.


edit--oops, A&M a #2 seed, my bad; well anyway they certainly shouldn't have been up a seed line they were in the running
 
Last edited:
nwhoopfan said:
Well, A&M is also volunteering for this thread, and Baylor didn't look overwhelming today.

NC State beat South Carolina, and Louisville twice. Thems the facts.
Expand ...

And Baylor's best victory before today was Iowa State or Texas
 
If UCONN beats Baylor to advance to the final four, they play the winner of Arizona/ Indiana. A much easier path to the finals than the other side of the bracket with Louisville, South Carolina, Maryland, & Stanford fighting it out.
 
We can't just go by one game. Every team can have a bad day and when you compound that with a bad match up it mught turn out like it did. The team that should not have been a # 1 seed was TA&M although going by their record it was not a really bad choice. The officials gave them two games in a row but nothing could help them against Arizona.
 
jaydee602 said:
If UCONN beats Baylor to advance to the final four, they play the winner of Arizona/ Indiana. A much easier path to the finals than the other side of the bracket with Louisville, South Carolina, Maryland, & Stanford fighting it out.
Expand ...
So it appears the anticipated difficult bracket did not play itself out with Uconn never having to face A&M nor Tenn, or Kentucky- the teams that were supposed to have made this the toughest bracket. Of course they still have to face Baylor.
 
.-.
If Uconn happens to lose Monday night.... I expect a Baylor should have never been a #2 seed Thread to pop up at around 9:05pm EST.

That's a big hunk of cheese I posted earlier... enough for a few more people to get a slice. :cool:
 
The selection committee thoroughly examines each team's whole season & their seedings reflected that. By the start of the tournament, Baylor & Maryland were two of the best teams in the country. But their whole body of work wasn't enough for the committee to have them leapfrog over Texas AM & NC State.
 
Last edited:
jaydee602 said:
The selection committee thoroughly examines each team's whole season & their seedings reflected that. By the start of the tournament, Baylor & Maryland were two of the best teams in the country. But their whole body of work wasn't enough for the committee to have them leapfrog over Texas AM & NC State.
Expand ...
I definitely see your point. You can’t just go off potential and neither squad mentioned had the quantitative backing on paper, even if they passed the eye test.

At the end of the day, this kind of parity is good for the game.
 
Sched234 said:
I made a (now deleted, thanks admins!) post to the contrary, but I definitely see your point. You can’t just go off potential and neither squad mentioned had the quantitative backing on paper, even if they passed the eye test.

At the end of the day, this kind of parity is good for the game.
Expand ...
I actually agreed with your premise that NCState & Texas A&M should have been seeded lower than Baylor & Maryland. But the selection committee's formula is credible.
 
.-.
NC State and Texas A&M were boosted by the "strength" of their leagues compared to Baylor and Maryland. I think the Big 10 proved it was a better league than the committee gave them credit for and the SEC and ACC were not a step above the Big 10 as the committee and some media members implied. Totally understand the committee has a system, but I don't think it was right this year with where they placed teams #3 - 7. I think they got Stanford and UConn right (and Louisville as the 8th best team), but didn't take the "eye test" into account when looking at the rest of the 1 and 2 seeds.
 
CTGirl15 said:
NC State and Texas A&M were boosted by the "strength" of their leagues compared to Baylor and Maryland. I think the Big 10 proved it was a better league than the committee gave them credit for and the SEC and ACC were not a step above the Big 10 as the committee and some media members implied. Totally understand the committee has a system, but I don't think it was right this year with where they placed teams #3 - 7. I think they got Stanford and UConn right (and Louisville as the 8th best team), but didn't take the "eye test" into account when looking at the rest of the 1 and 2 seeds.
Expand ...
There was much more than the eye test. The Sabermetricians rated Baylor and Maryland very highly. They should have been number one seeds, but SC, AM and State all benefited from more national exposure.
 
CTGirl15 said:
NC State and Texas A&M were boosted by the "strength" of their leagues compared to Baylor and Maryland. I think the Big 10 proved it was a better league than the committee gave them credit for and the SEC and ACC were not a step above the Big 10 as the committee and some media members implied. Totally understand the committee has a system, but I don't think it was right this year with where they placed teams #3 - 7. I think they got Stanford and UConn right (and Louisville as the 8th best team), but didn't take the "eye test" into account when looking at the rest of the 1 and 2 seeds.
Expand ...
Good analysis! Well stated.
 
NC St had a good resume and was playing well. Then they lost their second leading rebounder and third leading scorer to an injury in round 1 of the NCAA tournament (patella tendon) and they lost to a decent Arizona team tonight by three points after being out rebounded on the offensive glass 8-3. Cut them some slack. Injuries suck, we know that from experience.
People were worried that Uconn might struggle losing their #5 starter, 5th in assists and 7th in scoring. I think NC St probably missed their starter more than we did.

TA&M - no argument, they played the 3 games like crap. But ... their resume looked pretty decent in a year where conference strength was very hard to analyze - the committee and most everyone else missed the boat on how much the teams in the Big10 below MD had improved from a year ago - but it wasn't very obvious from their resumes either. Iowa with five questionable losses and no signature wins doesn't exactly scream S16.
 
Massey had the Big 10 as the second most powerful conference before today’s games. Big 12 third, SEC fourth, ACC fifth. Maryland, IU, Michigan and Iowa were all in the Top 14. Seeding Michigan sixth was a travesty; Iowa should have been a four and IU a three.
 
BostonBay said:
Poor showing. Baylor or even Maryland was more deserving.
Expand ...

ESPN talked them into that seeding. It’s almost criminal how much Mowins, Antonelli, Peck, and Lyle talked the committee into those brackets.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,510
Messages
4,579,611
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom