Most teams that have consistently received high seeds have the same type of results. Go look at Duke:'97: #2 seed out in Round of 32, '98: #1 seed out in Elite Eight, '00, '02, '05, '06 : #1 seed Sweet Sixteen, '07: #6 seed out in Round of 64, the list goes on. Coach K, widely considered the best coach in the sport and Duke, widely considered the most accomplished team in the last 25 years have FAILED to play up to their seed more than any other team in the nation.
Kansas up 1 at haltime at Texas Tech
- Thread starter cyclonefan1983
- Start date
If that counts as overachieving (which is barely the case), then so would last year when ISU beat a team in the tournament that was 3 seeds better in Notre Dame.
Oh good, now we've got 2 KU trolls. I request closing this thread, banning the 2 KsUck losers and going on about our business. Thanx!
And it is also common for them to be over-rated. They are good nobody is denying that, but because there is another consistently over-rated team doesn't make it any less of a correlation.
At some level, doesn't it bother you that both ISU and KU have more wins against tournament quality teams more wins against the top 25, probably even more top 10 wins, (didn't check) and basically the same record against a considerably tougher schedule. Yet there Duke stands at #5. Duke is one of the few teams that gets more protection than KU. You should be able to see that they are over-rated. If anyone has a gripe with them it should be KU. KU has a vastly better resume, and duke is being rewarded for efficiency against lesser competition.
Last edited:
You do realize that it is easy to perform "vastly better" than your seed when you are always seeded in the 6-12 range, right? It is physically impossible for a #1 seed to perform better than their seed. They either make the Final Four or have "underachieved". Perhaps you haven't been following college basketball long but it is very challenging to survive the first four games of the tourney, no matter who you are. Otherwise there would be more than one year in the history of seedings where all four #1 seeds made the Final Four. A year in which Kansas won the national title I might point out...Picking off one upset game here or there is not a big deal. It happens lots of times every year.
Seriously, you have not added one shred of value to any conversation being had here. They should ban you for trolling our conversation.
I have nothing to add to a conversation between you and yourself. I'll keep trolling you as long as you are here.
So KU is essentially never in a position to overachieve in the Tournament, then right?
Is a 10 seed winning over a 7 seed overachieving?
How the hell does a thread about KU nearly getting embarrassed by Tech get to 25 pages here?
If everyone would just block the KU trolls, they will just be talking to themselves. Just a thought, and suggestion.
If everyone would just block the KU trolls, they will just be talking to themselves. Just a thought, and suggestion.
Actually I would consider that a considerable over achieve. I look at it as rounds and how many rounds they went out early. I'd give that a +2. But that was one year. now compare it with the 5 or 6 below seed. Serious question in the Self era what does this kind of comparison come out to for KU. What does it look like for the last 25 years. I don't think it shows real favorably and supports being over-rated on average for the last 25 years. I'd appreciate actually seeing the real break down from a KU fan.
In contrast. And for comparison. ISU has outperformed 5 out of 16 trips and calling 8/9's a wash they have washed 10 times. While only underperforming once.
and I'd consider 3 of the outperforms considerable outperforms.
Yes it actually was. If I see that right its a 2 seed not a 2 ranking. 2 seed making the Championship means they went two rounds deeper. Solid year and one of the few I've pulled for KU. (after the ISU games)
Last edited:
A 10 seed beating a 7 seed is a "considerable overachieve?" LOL, that's awesome. Maybe some day KU can be a 10 seed and "overachieve."
Who said 10 beating a 7 was a considerable over achieve? I call that on it's own an over achieve, there is an arguement for that team relative to the OSU game could still be considered a considerable overachieve, or the the ISU, MSU 1vs2 seed became widely regarded as an over achieve by the media as it put us as the #2 team in the country after the tournament when they had us as a low 2 seed before the tourney.
Last edited:
KU was considered the fourth 1 seed in 2008. They were thus expected to make it to the Final Four but no further. Does the fact that they won the National Championship count as an overachieve?
Maybe one day you will. But I doubt it. If your protected team ever gets that low enough where the NCAA would get you an appropriate 10 you'll still get a 4. Deflect away again. At least 2coaches comes up with some valid arguements once in a while.
