NCAA Tournament Day 1 Thread (Merged) | Page 20 | The Boneyard

NCAA Tournament Day 1 Thread (Merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
So now I guess no fouls will be called the rest of the way? Pretty physical there.
 
aceboon said:
UC San Diego just wont go away
Expand ...
Just last Saturday I saw UC San Diego defeat UC Irvine in their championship title game in a small high school sized gym. They looked good, but it's interesting seeing them doing it under the bright light of the big stadium
 
Hurleyman216 said:
I really wish there was some kind of extra incentive for the league with the highest winning percentage in the tournament. I think I’ve mentioned this in the past, but if you have the highest winning percentage you should get to select an at large team from your league the next year. Or, add a financial incentive and make the credits worth more for the best winning % conference.
Expand ...
The Big East's winning percentage is inflated by UConn and being top heavy and the strange bubble situation last year (where St. John's might have warranted inclusion).

If (God why can't there be a different example?) UNC loses tomorrow and Duke wins the title the ACC overall record of 7-3 even though Duke was the only ACC to win an actual tournament game. Should the ACC receive an award for awesomeness?
 
UC San Diego had a shot at the end but missed a three. One of the better games on Thursday.
 
millertime7774 said:
Big East was severely underseeded vs. other top 5, especially ACC.
Expand ...

Nah, SJU is where they should be. Same with UConn, MU, Creighton and X. UConn and X had not great OOC losses and some injuries that hurt their seed. MU faded after a stellar OOC. Creighton had issues adjusting to Pops getting injured. They are all probably better than the seeds they got, but they deserved the seeds they got.
 
caw said:
Nah, SJU is where they should be. Same with UConn, MU, Creighton and X. UConn and X had not great OOC losses and some injuries that hurt their seed. MU faded after a stellar OOC. Creighton had issues adjusting to Pops getting injured. They are all probably better than the seeds they got, but they deserved the seeds they got.
Expand ...
SJU is fine. UConn, Marquette and Creighton were under-seeded. OOC games in the fall are terrible basis for seeding teams in March. It just is. I realize they are trying to be objective, but it doesn't work.
 
HuskyHawk said:
SJU is fine. UConn, Marquette and Creighton were under-seeded. OOC games in the fall are terrible basis for seeding teams in March. It just is. I realize they are trying to be objective, but it doesn't work.
Expand ...
The metrics also overweight the OOC fall games, because that is how the relatvie conference strengths get determined--thus every SEC team gets highly regarded and a lot of Q1 wins from inconference play. It would be better if some nonconference games--against equal teams--were played in January and February,
 
HuskyHawk said:
SJU is fine. UConn, Marquette and Creighton were under-seeded. OOC games in the fall are terrible basis for seeding teams in March. It just is. I realize they are trying to be objective, but it doesn't work.
Expand ...

It wasn't just OOC games though. Marquette, X and UConn dropped games to Nova, and UConn had that SHU loss. Creighton and X lost to Georgetown. Those are the types of games that will compound a bad/mediocre OOC.

Basically, Nova and Georgetown being just lively enough to beat the good teams probably cost the BE a few seed lines amongst the five teams in the tournament. That was further compounded by UConn losing to SHU. If those teams had handled business OOC they could have weathered those losses. The BE needs to do better OOC.
 
HuskyHawk said:
SJU is fine. UConn, Marquette and Creighton were under-seeded. OOC games in the fall are terrible basis for seeding teams in March. It just is. I realize they are trying to be objective, but it doesn't work.
Expand ...
A Quad 4 loss in February is a reasonable basis for seeding in March.
 
BFieldHusky said:
Very interesting first game. Creighton v.s. Ville
Expand ...
Creighton-Louisville an 8/9 game-- huh ????
I STILL don't get it-- a damned good team , Creighton, gets to and loses BET final, but gets a lousy 9... seed??? ...yet the team that beats them in BET final, St Johns, gets a great 2 seed... ???? for beating a "lousy" 9.. ???
Contradictory??
And a very good team, Louisville gets to/loses ACC final, but gets a lousy...8 seed??
and...Duke gets a great 1 seed...for beating a "lousy" 8????
Contradictory??
It wasn't a blowout...but UL down to an 8?
If UL had WON the ACC final, they'd a been.... a...lousy 7??. 6??
A lousy 8 seed, yet they get to play at "home," in nearby Lexington???
Way too good of a game in the FIRST 64 !! WTF??
 
ec33 said:
The Big East's winning percentage is inflated by UConn and being top heavy and the strange bubble situation last year (where St. John's might have warranted inclusion).

If (God why can't there be a different example?) UNC loses tomorrow and Duke wins the title the ACC overall record of 7-3 even though Duke was the only ACC to win an actual tournament game. Should the ACC receive an award for awesomeness?
Expand ...
Thanks for me explaining how winning percentages work. Even more reason for the NCAA to have some incentive built in there because if a league with just 1-2 bids has a team go off and win 3-4 games it may make them the conference with the highest winning percentage. It’ll be a tough title for a league like the SEC to win unless all 13 of their teams win 1-2 games and they have a few go beyond the sweet 16. I get that conference performance is going to vary from year to year, but it would add an interesting wrinkle.

All that being said, this will not happen because the SEC/Big 10/Big 12 run the NCAA and it wouldn’t benefit them, so zero chance it would happen.
 
SoFla Steve said:
I want all BE teams to win. We need the tourney credits. ;)
Expand ...
Me too. And why would I EVER root for a team from a P4 who didn't want us since "we're not good enough for them?" So ram it down their throats Jonnies, Muskateers, BlueJays and Golden Eagles. You are only allowed to lose when you play the UConn Huskies.

Now the little guys like McNeese St (where is that? - forget it, I don't want to know)...I root for them.
 
caw said:
It wasn't just OOC games though. Marquette, X and UConn dropped games to Nova, and UConn had that SHU loss. Creighton and X lost to Georgetown. Those are the types of games that will compound a bad/mediocre OOC.

Basically, Nova and Georgetown being just lively enough to beat the good teams probably cost the BE a few seed lines amongst the five teams in the tournament. That was further compounded by UConn losing to SHU. If those teams had handled business OOC they could have weathered those losses. The BE needs to do better OOC.
Expand ...
Ok, but Nova is pretty decent actually. Look at all the teams in the SEC losing to each other. You didn't say "oh but they lost to Vandy"? Because you think Vandy is good, and the only reason anyone thinks that is because the SEC did so well OOC. Oklahoma went 6-12 in conference. Twelve losses. But you assume those teams are good. As I said the other day, Texas sucks. UGA sucks. Vandy sucks. None of them are really any better than Villanova. It's an illusion created by that incredible OOC run the SEC went on.

From February 1 to March 1 OU went 2-7 in league play. Including a loss to LSU at home. Yet a weird loss to SH on the road is a problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
229
Guests online
2,510
Total visitors
2,739
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
163,959
Messages
4,376,708
Members
10,168
Latest member
CTFan142


.
..
Top Bottom