*** Official Selection Sunday Thread ***

[sj4]

If you assume that the majority of your non-conference games are your Quad 3 and Quad 4 games then they both should just be eliminated from being a factor.

The top 10 teams in the Net rankings were 110-1 against Q3 and Q4 teams. The top 25 teams were 296-8. So that means that nobody really loses those games whether they are Q3 or Q4. So what difference do they make? That's kind of the point that the one commentator was making in that youtube video.

 

[jcf817]

I was incredibly impressed with how good the defense was without being overly physical (read fouling).

Exactly. I couldn't decide if refs were just swallowing their whistles on a lot of plays or if we really were that good without being too physical. It seemed so obviously different from the regular season to me that I wondered if TJ was coaching this in preparation for the NCAA.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

But Illinois would have 4-5 days to prep for it.

I was referring more to the possible match up with Drake, then the next weekend. But even with more days of practice, is hard to simulate what ISU is doing on defense. You can show them and tell them but until they actually play against it, then they understand how hard it makes everything you want to do more difficult.

 

[Daserop]

Two USAToday editors have ISU in the title game...one winning it all. I always loved that pub.

March Madness expert picks: Our bracket predictions for 2024 NCAA men's tournament

Need some help filling out your March Madness bracket? Our experts give their predictions for the Final Four and the NCAA team that will win it all.

www.usatoday.com

Interesting. All the national pundits have us loosing to Washington State or Illinois.

It's so funny watching all these national pundits say ISU being the 8 best team and being disrespected. Then proceed to have them lose in the sweet 16

 

[exCYtable]

"We play favorites. And we don't care if it's heavy handed and obvious." -The Selection Committee

"Let's just play some f***ing basketball." -TJ and the Boys

It's become pretty obvious that the real reason Jamie Pollard was "sick to his stomach" Saturday night was because he knew we were getting absolutely screwed.

 

[twincyties]

Yep. My guess is we were behind Baylor (and maybe Creighton and Duke too) heading to the conference tourney.

And our ceiling was lowest two seed (i.e. no matter what we weren’t going to be able to catch Marquette, Tennessee, or Arizona).

I think this was true even after we beat Baylor Saturday. A loss to Houston would have put us on the theee line. Even a close loss. I think the 28 point victory left them no choice but to move us up.

 

[HoopsTournament]

All Top 4 seeds in the East Regional won their conference Tournaments. Since 1985, that is only the 4th time that has happened.

1995 - There were 8 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the East
#1 - Wake Forest (ACC) - AP #3
#2 - UMass (A10) - AP #7
#3 - Villanova (Big East) - AP #9
#4 - Oklahoma State (Big 8) - AP #14

2002 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Cincinnati (Conf USA) - AP #5
#2 - Oklahoma (Big 12) - AP #3
#3 - Arizona (Pac 10) - AP #7
#4 - Ohio State (Big 10) - AP #14

2006 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Memphis (Conf USA) - AP #4
#2 - UCLA (Pac 10) - AP #7
#3 - Gonzaga (WCC) - AP #5
#4 - Kansas (Big 12) - AP #12

2024 - There are 4 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with ALL 4 in the East
#1 - UConn (Big East) - AP #1
#2 - Iowa State (Big 12) - AP #4
#3 - Illinois (Big 10) - AP #7
#4 - Auburn (SEC) - AP #10

So this is the first time in a 64+ team tournament that only one regional has had all of the Top 4 tournament champions. It was the only time that a regional that has had all top 4 tournament champions were all ranked in the Top 10. And the only time that a regional that had all top 4 tournament champions was from Power 6 conferences.

In terms of AP Ranking, the combined ranking of the East regional is the lowest in tournament history (since 1985 expansion), tied with the 2014 Midwest Regional

#1 - Wichita State - AP #2
#2 - Michigan - AP #7
#3 - Duke - AP #8
#4 - Louisville - AP #5

 

[alarson]

In terms of AP Ranking, the combined ranking of the East regional is the lowest in tournament history (since 1985 expansion), tied with the 2014 Midwest Regional

#1 - Wichita State - AP #2
#2 - Michigan - AP #7
#3 - Duke - AP #8
#4 - Louisville - AP #5

For anyone who saw this and was curious how that played out

 

[cyclones500]

We might want to have a separate @HoopsTournament tournament nuggets thread to augment our "***official tournament thread***" (which I assume someone will launch at some point).

 

[cyclones500]

All Top 4 seeds in the East Regional won their conference Tournaments. Since 1985, that is only the 4th time that has happened.

1995 - There were 8 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the East
#1 - Wake Forest (ACC) - AP #3
#2 - UMass (A10) - AP #7
#3 - Villanova (Big East) - AP #9
#4 - Oklahoma State (Big 8) - AP #14

2002 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Cincinnati (Conf USA) - AP #5
#2 - Oklahoma (Big 12) - AP #3
#3 - Arizona (Pac 10) - AP #7
#4 - Ohio State (Big 10) - AP #14

2006 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Memphis (Conf USA) - AP #4
#2 - UCLA (Pac 10) - AP #7
#3 - Gonzaga (WCC) - AP #5
#4 - Kansas (Big 12) - AP #12

2024 - There are 4 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with ALL 4 in the East
#1 - UConn (Big East) - AP #1
#2 - Iowa State (Big 12) - AP #4
#3 - Illinois (Big 10) - AP #7
#4 - Auburn (SEC) - AP #10

So this is the first time in a 64+ team tournament that only one regional has had all of the Top 4 tournament champions. It was the only time that a regional that has had all top 4 tournament champions were all ranked in the Top 10. And the only time that a regional that had all top 4 tournament champions was from Power 6 conferences.

In terms of AP Ranking, the combined ranking of the East regional is the lowest in tournament history (since 1985 expansion), tied with the 2014 Midwest Regional

#1 - Wichita State - AP #2
#2 - Michigan - AP #7
#3 - Duke - AP #8
#4 - Louisville - AP #5

Inspired by @alarson post, regarding 2014 ... here are results of the 1995, 2002 and 2006 regions.

All Top 4 seeds in the East Regional won their conference Tournaments. Since 1985, that is only the 4th time that has happened.

1995 - There were 8 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the East
#1 - Wake Forest (ACC) - AP #3
#2 - UMass (A10) - AP #7
#3 - Villanova (Big East) - AP #9
#4 - Oklahoma State (Big 8) - AP #14

2002 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Cincinnati (Conf USA) - AP #5
#2 - Oklahoma (Big 12) - AP #3
#3 - Arizona (Pac 10) - AP #7
#4 - Ohio State (Big 10) - AP #14

2006 - There were 7 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with 4 in the West
#1 - Memphis (Conf USA) - AP #4
#2 - UCLA (Pac 10) - AP #7
#3 - Gonzaga (WCC) - AP #5
#4 - Kansas (Big 12) - AP #12

2024 - There are 4 total tournament champions that received a Top 4 seed, with ALL 4 in the East
#1 - UConn (Big East) - AP #1
#2 - Iowa State (Big 12) - AP #4
#3 - Illinois (Big 10) - AP #7
#4 - Auburn (SEC) - AP #10

So this is the first time in a 64+ team tournament that only one regional has had all of the Top 4 tournament champions. It was the only time that a regional that has had all top 4 tournament champions were all ranked in the Top 10. And the only time that a regional that had all top 4 tournament champions was from Power 6 conferences.

In terms of AP Ranking, the combined ranking of the East regional is the lowest in tournament history (since 1985 expansion), tied with the 2014 Midwest Regional

#1 - Wichita State - AP #2
#2 - Michigan - AP #7
#3 - Duke - AP #8
#4 - Louisville - AP #5

Inspired by @alarson post, regarding 2014 ... here are results of the 1995, 2002 and 2006 regions.

1995
View attachment 125851
2002
View attachment 125853
2006
View attachment 125854

 

[farm85]

BYU Basketball: 'No Sunday' Rule Impacted NCAA Tourney Seed

BYU basketball was the highest-rated 5-seed in the 2024 NCAA Tournament. Yet, they received a 6-seed. Why? Their "No Sunday" rule.

kslsports.com

 

[farm85]

 

[ClubCy]

The Izzo March stuff is mostly based on what he did many years ago.

He’s been to a final four and a Sweet 16 in the past 4 tournaments (5 seasons Covid). Sometime you say things that are just…..not true.

 

[ClubCy]

As far as I know distance to neutral site games is a non-factor. UNC (and Duke and NCState) all played their tournament in NC - the same ******* state! No one is saying "UNC played in their own state and LOST so it's like losing a home game to a ****** team (NCState)."

If the committee is so adamant that "You can control your OOC SOS" why can't they say, "Your fans suck and don't support your team at a neutral site. That's not our problem, bit***s."

If it WAS a factor it just proves that the MBB committee is just like the Football committee. They do whatever the **** they want then pick some weird reason to justify it.

The ACC tournament was in DC.

 

[HoopsTournament]

For all the experts picking UConn, they make this mistake every year.

NCAA Tournament Results for AP #1 | College Poll Archive

www.collegepollarchive.com

 

[cycloneG]

 

[NYCBFan]

First post here. I've always been a closet Iowa State fan since the Hoiberg days. I have no affiliation to the university, born and raised in New York, but just something about the team and the great fanbase that drew me in and I've been a fan ever since. Found your little community (actually, really big community) so figured I would drop a line after the Cyclones got absolutely shafted which leads me to my thoughts on how the committee absolutely dropped the ball...

A couple of things really stood out to me.

Not only Iowa State as a 2 seed but as the lowest 2 seed is totally bogus. They put so much stock into a non-conference schedule that happened 4-5 months ago and ignored that this team (which was already a 2 seed on most brackets coming into Championship week) decimated Baylor and Houston while North Carolina who plays in a joke of a conference and lost to an average NC State team in the tournament gets a 1 seed. I know the whole body of work should be taken into account but when two teams are fairly closely bunched and one team has a MUCH better conference champ week than the other and it doesn't make a difference, that's a problem.
If I was on the committee, how well a team is playing now should factor higher than how a team played in November and nobody can convince me that there are 4 better teams than Iowa State now nevermind 7.

UConn gets the top overall seed and deservedly so since they are the best team in the country yet they get saddled with the toughest bracket with Big 12 Champ Iowa State as the 2, Big 10 Champ Illinois as the 3, SEC Champ Auburn (who got hosed as a 4) and the runner up last season San Diego St. as a 5. Make that make sense.

North Carolina, Kentucky and Michigan St. were all seeded too high. Notice a pattern with those 3 teams? All bluebloods. No bias there, right?
Virginia getting in at all with 2 Quad 1 wins while a bunch of Mountain West teams with clearly better resumes barely getting in and New Mexico getting an 11 as Conference Champ in one of the tougher conferences in the league is just more bias towards the big schools.
There's always beefs every year but this year seemed especially egregious.

Anyway, glad to be here, I legit think that this is the first Iowa State team that can make a Final 4 run for the first time since 2000 so looking forward to going on the journey with you guys/gals.

 

[Dirt Boy 2]

Interesting. All the national pundits have us loosing to Washington State or Illinois.

It's so funny watching all these national pundits say ISU being the 8 best team and being disrespected. Then proceed to have them lose in the sweet 16

I think we could beat the ever-living-**** out of Illinois, a la UCLA in 2000

 

[bosco]

First post here. I've always been a closet Iowa State fan since the Hoiberg days. I have no affiliation to the university, born and raised in New York, but just something about the team and the great fanbase that drew me in and I've been a fan ever since. Found your little community (actually, really big community) so figured I would drop a line after the Cyclones got absolutely shafted which leads me to my thoughts on how the committee absolutely dropped the ball...

A couple of things really stood out to me.

Not only Iowa State as a 2 seed but as the lowest 2 seed is totally bogus. They put so much stock into a non-conference schedule that happened 4-5 months ago and ignored that this team (which was already a 2 seed on most brackets coming into Championship week) decimated Baylor and Houston while North Carolina who plays in a joke of a conference and lost to an average NC State team in the tournament gets a 1 seed. I know the whole body of work should be taken into account but when two teams are fairly closely bunched and one team has a MUCH better conference champ week than the other and it doesn't make a difference, that's a problem.
If I was on the committee, how well a team is playing now should factor higher than how a team played in November and nobody can convince me that there are 4 better teams than Iowa State now nevermind 7.

UConn gets the top overall seed and deservedly so since they are the best team in the country yet they get saddled with the toughest bracket with Big 12 Champ Iowa State as the 2, Big 10 Champ Illinois as the 3, SEC Champ Auburn (who got hosed as a 4) and the runner up last season San Diego St. as a 5. Make that make sense.

North Carolina, Kentucky and Michigan St. were all seeded too high. Notice a pattern with those 3 teams? All bluebloods. No bias there, right?
Virginia getting in at all with 2 Quad 1 wins while a bunch of Mountain West teams with clearly better resumes barely getting in and New Mexico getting an 11 as Conference Champ in one of the tougher conferences in the league is just more bias towards the big schools.
There's always beefs every year but this year seemed especially egregious.

Anyway, glad to be here, I legit think that this is the first Iowa State team that can make a Final 4 run for the first time since 2000 so looking forward to going on the journey with you guys/gals.

It doesn't matter what metric they use. This was for putting UNC as a one because of the brand. If you switch the resumes with ISU and give UNC our Conference Tourney performance the committee would absolutely put them at the 1.

They would site the historical performance in getting the Championship to support their seeding.

 

[RealisticCy]

As far as I know distance to neutral site games is a non-factor. UNC (and Duke and NCState) all played their tournament in NC - the same ******* state! No one is saying "UNC played in their own state and LOST so it's like losing a home game to a ****** team (NCState)."

If the committee is so adamant that "You can control your OOC SOS" why can't they say, "Your fans suck and don't support your team at a neutral site. That's not our problem, bit***s."

If it WAS a factor it just proves that the MBB committee is just like the Football committee. They do whatever the **** they want then pick some weird reason to justify it.

The ACC tournament was in DC.

Facts carry no weight with toddlers, Karens, and Iowa State fans.

We earn a 2 seed and play what will essentially be two home games, and fans immediately start ******** about who we might have to play 3 games down the line.