SMU a 6? | Page 5 | The Boneyard

SMU a 6?

mauconnfan said:
Cinci got real screwed - winner of K State/Wake Forest isn't an 11 seed - AAC got it in the...

Big East can't lose enough for me, highly overrated.
Expand ...
I don't understand this thinking from some of our fans. Where does the Big East hate come from? Marinatto was a freaking idiot but the schools did nothing wrong, I still root for the league and northeast basketball.
 
whaler11 said:
I'll let you know. Both are just 5x5 roto.

My college league that started in 1994 died in 2013. The better of my current leagues has 6 of the owners from that league. It's 10 teams AL only. Picking an auction date has been worse than a dentist trip.
Expand ...

Haha. That's how our home league has been this season. Seems like apathy and busy schedules have led to it.

Truth be told, I'm hopefully going to be going back to school part time, so my days of pouring over fangraphs for hours on end may take a minor hiatus as well. Just can't see myself going cold turkey though.
 
quacktalker said:
SMU got hosed in their seed number but they have a totally winnable path to the Sweet Sixteen. Providence and USC are both pretty bad for bubble teams, and Baylor is easily the worst 3 seed. Plus the games aren't too far away in Tulsa.
Expand ...

And the league needs them to make a run. They won't respect this league until we start doing some damage. It was a screw job, but a 6 seed is a good spot to make a run from.
 
The AAC needs UConn as the basketball flagship, and at least 5 other teams - SMU, Cinci, Temple, Memphis and at least 1 of Houston/Tulsa/UCF to start the season decimating opponents in the OOC schedule.

Doesn't make the league necessarily any more desirable, but it makes it noticed.
 
A10 fan said:
SMU has a chance to prove itself. If they get to the Sweet 16 vs Duke, you know it will be the national game. Beat them with the nation watching, and it will establish SMU as a real power, and do wonders for the league.
Expand ...
Yup.
 
SMU deserved better than what they got. And Xavier has no business in the tournament imo, but if you want o know why the fake BE has the rankings consider a strong Nova and the OOC of teams like Creighton and Butler. They got it done early while the AAC floundered.
 
BUConn10 said:
I felt bad after the terrible game we were forced to endure last night thanks to Hess, but I can't believe how much worse I feel now on Selection Sunday.

SMU getting a 6 seed after having an amazing season, basically sweeping the conference titles and honors, not losing in months (consistency usually gets rewarded huge, unless your Duke) and they get slapped in the face with a 6.

If this future UConn team's front court has you worried about what is coming ahead, I ask you to shift your attention to the mess that is how this conference gets perceived and treated by real people who hold much of this program's fate in their hands. Every day we fall farther from the limelight and relevance, better play is coming ahead they say, but it seems with each passing season our potential as a team is being heavily capped by factors outside of our control.

Seeing SMU as a 6 and Northwestern as an 8 absolutely terrifies me for the future of this program.
Expand ...

This is exactly the issue.

The only hope this program has in the long run is if the fanbase keeps it relevant long enough to survive whatever happens next.

This is why people need to drag themselves to Rentschler, XL and Gampel. Because unless you are a Neilsen household nobody gives a damn what you are watching on TV.

But if your team stinks and you have a huge loud crowd... that can't be ignored.

Disappearing when the team is down just confirms their assumptions - and it makes your fanbase fungible because everyone is a draw when they win.
 
Eamon Brennan at ESPN ranked all the field of 68. SMU came in at 19. (Cinci 20). So both are under-seeded. Emphasis added.

In the first season of the post-Larry Brown era (which went exactly as expected, for better and for worse), here's what you need to know about SMU: (1) Semi Ojeleye, a former blue-chip Duke recruit, is 6-foot-7, shoots 43 percent from 3, and is one of the most efficient volume scorers in college hoops; (2) Shake Milton is really good at basketball, but also his name is Shake Milton, so the previous phrase is redundant; (3) Tim Jankovich's Mustangs shoot the lights out, rebound their own misses, don't send opponents to the free throw line, and do pretty much everything else you can do while on a basketball court either well or very well. Relative to seed, no team this side of Wichita State will scare its bracket neighbors so comprehensively.​
 
SMU legitimately should have been a four seed this year but personally, I would rather be a six seed than a five or a four.
 
It's probably going to kill my bracket but I'm going far with SMU and will pick them over Duke should they get there, and if there is any justice in the world they will do us proud.
 
SMU went 2-3 vs Top 50...and is the highest ranking team in RPI (at #13) that has fewer wins than losses in the Top 50.

The question seems to be...Is SMU's 17-1 conference record being discounted? And if too much?

Other Six seeds:

Maryland....4-3 Top 50

Creighton....6-5 Top 50

Cincinnati....3-4 Top 50

SMU's RPI was higher than other 6 seeds.
 
I have them in the final4 in one of my brackets. Watching them a bunch this year they just seem to hit every big shot and get every loose ball. Everyone on their team is so good in every facet of the game. Scary thing for them is being one injury away from disaster.
 
I have them going down to Baylor. I couldn't bring myself to pick a team that was 4 points away from blowing a game to ECU over a team that was at one point ranked #1 in the country.
 
I would love to have seen SMU against Nova. They're a bigger more physical version of what Nova does. That said, i'll take all of the action for taking usc over Smu. Crazy train pick.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
SMU legitimately should have been a four seed this year but personally, I would rather be a six seed than a five or a four.
Expand ...

Most years sure. This year there's hardly any difference between the 1 and 2 seeds. Zona will surely be a betting favorite against Gonzaga, Duke will likely be favored over Nova, and UNC won't lay more than like 1.5 to Kentucky. Louisville is the only 2 seed that didn't really have a legit case to be a #1.
 
NielsisGood said:
Most years sure. This year there's hardly any difference between the 1 and 2 seeds. Zona will surely be a betting favorite against Gonzaga, Duke will likely be favored over Nova, and UNC won't lay more than like 1.5 to Kentucky. Louisville is the only 2 seed that didn't really have a legit case to be a #1.
Expand ...

Gonzaga would be favored by 4 or 5 points in that matchup. The public would pounce on Arizona and the bookies would be happy to assume the risk.
 
NielsisGood said:
Absolutely not.
Expand ...

Point spreads track to KenPom pretty closely. Gonzaga was a 6 point favorite over St. Mary's, who is ranked better in KP than Arizona (but Arizona might get pretty close to St. Mary's rank if they reached E8 + Trier's influence not wholly accounted in rating would drive spread down ). Like I said from your reaction, public would take Arizona and Vegas would be fine with it.

You're underestimating Gonzaga's dominance this year. They've been blowing everyone out and are 22-7-1 against the spread this year (10-1-1 away from home), so they won't adjust the line too far down. Gonzaga also did beat Arizona on neutral court by 7 and were ahead for 3/4 of the game by double digits, of course without Trier for Arizona.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
20
Guests online
1,138
Total visitors
1,158
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,069
Messages
4,381,004
Members
10,177
Latest member
silver fox


.
..
Top Bottom