***Official 2013 Bracketology Thread***

[ajk4st8]

This team just needs one more REALLY good win to cement itself in the Big 12. Lose at home to KU and OSU and it is going to be tough.

[fsanford]

Being an 11 seed is WAY too close to the bubble for my liking. You can say being an 11 seed is an easier road to the sweet 16 but you can also say it's a harder road just to make it to the second round.

I think this year especially the difference between seeds 3-12 is negligible at best.
No dominant team at all.

[State43]

So funny seeing OU as such a higher seed then us. We only beat them by 20ish...

[Cyclonestate78]

I think this year especially the difference between seeds 3-12 is negligible at best.
No dominant team at all.

It all depends on how the seeding shakes out. If teams like Arizona, K-State, Kansas, Butler, Louisville, or even a team like Ohio State can go on a big run to finish the season they could steal a #2 seed then you are looking at some very strong teams getting bumped down to the #3 line potentially.

[jdoggivjc]

Would rather be a 6 seed than an 11 seed. No sweating about making the tourney if we're a 6.

[Cyclonestate78]

Would rather be a 6 seed than an 11 seed. No sweating about making the tourney if we're a 6.

What do you think ISU would need to do to grab a #6 seed at this point with 8 regular season games remaining? Would they need to go 7-1 and win 1 game in the Big XII Tourney (24-9) or maybe go 6-2 and win 2 Big XII Tourney games (24-10)?

In the previous 3 NCAA Tournaments the #6 seeds were:

2012- UNLV 26-8, Murray State 30-1, Cincinnati 24-10, and San Diego State 26-7
2011- Xavier 24-7, Cincinnati 25-8, Georgetown 21-10, and St. Johns 21-11
2010- Marquette 22-11, Xavier 24-8, Tennessee 25-8, and Notre Dame 23-11

Seems like the #6 seeds were reserved for a middle of the pack team from the major conference regarded as the best conference or a highly regarded mid-major team. Tennessee in 2010 is the only team that didn't fit into one of those categories.

[CyJack13]

So previously you said Gonzaga beating these teams was no big deal as they are just mid-level Big XII teams but now when you need to make a point... all of the sudden they are impressive teams Gonzaga played? In fact... of the 11 teams you listed as "impressive" games Gonzaga had on their schedule 9 of them were not ranked when they played the Zags.

As for the tourney... years underperformed in red, years played to seed in black, years overperformed in blue

2012 #7 seed (beat #10 West Virginia, lost to #2 Ohio State... tie game with 3:39 to go)
2011 #11 seed (upset #6 St. Johns, lost to #3 BYU)
2010 #8 seed (beat #9 Florida State, lost to #1 Syracuse)
2009 #4 seed (beat #13 Akron, beat #12 Western Kentucky, lost to #1 North Carolina)
2008 #7 seed (lost to #10 Davidson... who went on to beat #2 G-Town, #3 Wisconsin, lost to #1 KU by 2)
2007 #10 seed (lost to #7 Indiana)
2006 #3 seed (beat #14 Xavier, beat #6 Indiana, lost to #2 UCLA... 1 point lead with 11 seconds to go)
2005 #3 seed (beat #14 Winthrop, lost to #6 Texas Tech... Zags missed 3 with 4 seconds to go, lost by 2)
2004 #2 seed (beat #15 VALPO, lost to #10 Nevada)
2003 #9 seed (beat #8 Cincinnati, lost to #1 Arizona by 1 in 2OT, Zags missed 2 shots in last 4 seconds)

From what I have seen the Zags have played to their seed or overperformed to their seed in 8 of the last 10 years.

Good Lord, how many times do you need to keep changing your argument? Beating the B12 teams Gonzaga has beat this year is not something worthy of a number one ranking compared to the rest of their resume. They don't have any really good wins like Indiana, Miami and other schools have.

However, getting that many big conference opponents to come play at their court is impressive. How many big name teams has ISU gotten to play at Hilton out of conference? Your original argument was good programs don't want to play Gonzaga. That is completely false as I have shown you.

As for the tournament, you're missing 2008 as underperforming, especially if you're going to count beating an 8 seed as a 9 seed as out performing their seed. But either way the facts show that Gonzaga has been average at best over the last decade in the tournament.

[Cydkar]

So funny seeing OU as such a higher seed then us. We only beat them by 20ish...

They beat Baylor on the road and KU at home which may be better than any win we have. Baylor is hard to quantify but it was on the road. We beat OU at home which we were supposed to do.

[Mumbai1986]

If Noel is out the balance of the year, UK might be on the hot seat to make the tourney.

Torn ACL, Season is over. Interesting what happens to Kentucky now.

[Cyclonestate78]

Good Lord, how many times do you need to keep changing your argument? Beating the B12 teams Gonzaga has beat this year is not something worthy of a number one ranking compared to the rest of their resume. They don't have any really good wins like Indiana, Miami and other schools have.

However, getting that many big conference opponents to come play at their court is impressive. How many big name teams has ISU gotten to play at Hilton out of conference? Your original argument was good programs don't want to play Gonzaga. That is completely false as I have shown you.

As for the tournament, you're missing 2008 as underperforming, especially if you're going to count beating an 8 seed as a 9 seed as out performing their seed. But either way the facts show that Gonzaga has been average at best over the last decade in the tournament.

We are debating the Zags on multiple fronts here... so your "changing the argument" claim is BS.

2008 was far from an underperforming year in the Tourney for the Zags. A 7 seed losing to a 10 seed isn't uncommon and not all 10 seeds are created equal. Davidson by name might not mean much to you but that Davidson team was one of the hottest teams in the country going into the tournament. Davidson lost to #1 UNC by 4 and #7 Duke by 6 early in the season. They played some quality teams and played them tough. They were also riding a 22 game winning streak going into the NCAA Tournament that year (last loss prior to the NCAA Tourney was a 66-65 loss at NC State). It isn't like the Zags blew a game they easily should have won... Just ask #2 Georgetown (74-70 loser), #3 Wisconsin (73-56 loser), and #1 Kansas (59-57 winner) after surviving Davidson's chance to win the game on the last possession with 21 seconds to go.

In regards to 2003... the Zags didn't just beat an 8 seed as a 9 seed. They also took the #1 seed Arizona to double OT and should have won the game. By the way... how many times has a #9 seed advanced to the Sweet 16 in the history of the NCAA Tournament? If you guessed only 4 times you are correct. So I would say that a #9 seed taking a #1 seed to double OT and missing 2 shots to win the game in the final seconds qualifies as a #9 seed that performed pretty damn well. Geez... what does a #9 seed have to do to impress you? Final Four?

[cyclones500]

7-1 could do it. That's 23-8 (13-5) regular season.

Instead of comparing past years, let's take Lundardi's current bracket as a baseline.

6's are Notre Dame, Creighton, Oklahoma State and Minnesota.

If Iowa State lost only at OU, the resume would be in ballpark of those teams' current body of work (probably better than Creighton's) ... let's suppose all of them (or teams nearby) hold that slot. They'll most likely have a least a few other good wins and no drag-down losses.

I won't attempt a guess at Big 12 tournament, because I'm not sure where ISU would finish (that would effect how soon they could face an opponent that would move the needle at all).

[VeloClone]

2008 was far from an underperforming year in the Tourney for the Zags. A 7 seed losing to a 10 seed isn't uncommon and not all 10 seeds are created equal.

To be fair, you seemed to set the rules when you defined what your colors meant.

As for the tourney... years underperformed in red, years played to seed in black, years overperformed in blue

Since "played to seed" is black it implies that red (underperforming) or blue (overperforming) are based on the playing to seed measuring stick. If that is the case in addition to 2008 that was already pointed out should be red, 2012 should go from blue to black since they technically only played to seed.

But then again, I really don't care about the Zags unless they end up affecting ISU making the field or ISU ends up playing them.

[Cyclonestate78]

7-1 could do it. That's 23-8 (13-5) regular season.

Instead of comparing past years, let's take Lundardi's current bracket as a baseline.

6's are Notre Dame, Creighton, Oklahoma State and Minnesota.

If Iowa State lost only at OU, the resume would be in ballpark of those teams' current body of work (probably better than Creighton's) ... let's suppose all of them (or teams nearby) hold that slot. They'll most likely have a least a few other good wins and no drag-down losses.

I won't attempt a guess at Big 12 tournament, because I'm not sure where ISU would finish (that would effect how soon they could face an opponent that would move the needle at all).

Minnesota has a fairly difficult remaining schedule with #20 Wisconsin, @Iowa, @#13 Ohio State, #1 Indiana, Penn State, @Nebraska, and @ Purdue. 4 road games and 2 of their 3 remaining home games are against top 20 teams. There is a real possibility they could go 2-5 or 3-4 down the stretch.

Creighton has lost 4 of their last 7 and has @UNI, @Evansville, Southern Illinois, @St. Marys, @Bradley, and Wichita State. Not the most difficult remaining schedule but UNI, St. Marys, and Wichita State could beat them if Creighton continues to play inconsistent.

Notre Dumb has Depaul, @Providence, @#16 Pitt, Cincinnati, @#18 Marquette, St. Johns, and @#12 Louisville. Cincy won't be an easy game and 3 ranked teams on the road could be trouble down the stretch.

Okie Light has @Tech, Oklahoma, #14 Kansas, @West Virginia, @TCU, Texas, @Iowa State, and #10 K-State. 3 of their 4 toughest remaining games are at home but that doesn't guarantee wins. If (and it is a big if) they fail to beat OU and Kansas they might be heading into their final 2 games needing wins and ISU and K-State won't be easy games to win.

[bawbie]

I think 7 (6-2 + 1 in KC) more wins would get us a 7 seed. 8 more wins could get us a 6 seed. Just my wild *** guess.

[CyJack13]

To be fair, you seemed to set the rules when you defined what your colors meant.



Since "played to seed" is black it implies that red (underperforming) or blue (overperforming) are based on the playing to seed measuring stick. If that is the case in addition to 2008 that was already pointed out should be red, 2012 should go from blue to black since they technically only played to seed.

But then again, I really don't care about the Zags unless they end up affecting ISU making the field or ISU ends up playing them.

Yeah it's obvious he's just going to bend his own rules to fit his argument, so I'm not going to bother with it anymore. If he's giving them credit for losing to a good team, then I guess 2009 should count as underperforming since they only beat a 13 and 12 seed, but this is going to turn into a pointless ******* contest so I'm done with it.