If we win out, we'll be NCAA Tournament Champions.
Bracketology 2024
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
Creighton seems to be getting hot at the right moment too. Arizona just lost at home, although it was to a decent team.
Baylor. Houston does not have any other possible projected losses on their schedule. This gives us a chance to share the title. Baylor will still have games on the schedule where they could easily lose. Thus, seeding for Omaha has plenty of time for them to drop below us. But, the grand scheme of things, I don't think this will be a negative either way the dominoes fall.
Keep in mind they are to basketball what Texas A&M is to football. Unlimited potential and talent flows through and always underachieves relative to said talent.
Lunardi's brackets are terrible.
There really isn't a super strong argument for ANY of the 2 seeds to be seeded over us at this point. When you look at the schedules, especially during conference, none of those teams really has our resume. Tennessee's best wins have come against teams that faltered, UNC has lost 3 of their last 5-6, Marquette's early season wins don't look as impressive and they just got PASTED by UConn, while we are above Kansas in the standings.
The loss at Houston shouldn't hurt us at all. If anything it should inspire confidence in us being a legit team. We played in one of the toughest road envrinoments in CBB and performed admirably. That's a lot more than 99% of teams have done in similar games.
I don't see how anything other than bias can keep us off the 2 line. At this point we should be squarely on that line.
There really isn't a super strong argument for ANY of the 2 seeds to be seeded over us at this point. When you look at the schedules, especially during conference, none of those teams really has our resume. Tennessee's best wins have come against teams that faltered, UNC has lost 3 of their last 5-6, Marquette's early season wins don't look as impressive and they just got PASTED by UConn, while we are above Kansas in the standings.
The loss at Houston shouldn't hurt us at all. If anything it should inspire confidence in us being a legit team. We played in one of the toughest road envrinoments in CBB and performed admirably. That's a lot more than 99% of teams have done in similar games.
I don't see how anything other than bias can keep us off the 2 line. At this point we should be squarely on that line.
We need Bama to drop a couple games so we can hop them for the MW region. They are getting a lot of mileage out of being really efficient on offense and tallying Q2 wins. Their resume isn't very impressive Q1 wise.
Stop looking at ESPN and CBS for brackets.. There are 100 better places to look
See here for the best bracket makers: http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html
Here is my favorite bracket to look at: https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
Dan's site updates daily as well: https://bracketville.wordpress.com/
See here for the best bracket makers: http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html
Here is my favorite bracket to look at: https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
Dan's site updates daily as well: https://bracketville.wordpress.com/
I don't disagree. But when you are on ESPN and see his updates it's hard not to look.
I don't get us being a 3 seed right now. In fact, I think it's a tough argument to make.
Isn't putting me on ignore easier than wasting your time replying to a poster who's takes you apparently never like? Makes no sense.
Where have you been? I've missed reading your 1200 word essays.
It's obvious that the tournament committee punished teams with weak noncon schedules in their top 16 reveal on Saturday.. I also feel like the comittee put A LOT more weight in Q2 wins than most had forecasted..
If ISU goes 5-2 before selection Sunday, we are VERY likely to be a a bottom 2 or top 3 seed IMO.. Just can't take any bad losses the rest of the way, so Saturday is very important to get that W
The committee showed last week that they didn't love our resume.... With that being said the Big 12 grind HAS to mean something. Unlike all of the other conferences, there are no nights off. If Iowa State can hold the course and win out I think we will be flirting with the 2 line. Either way just get us out of the damn East region, it's hands down our worst path.
This is from an Athletic article today:
"We caught up with the chairman this week to discuss some pertinent issues (and nominate ourselves for future committee membership … still waiting to hear back on that one).
How about the notion that certain leagues, like the Big 12, have gamed the system by playing soft nonconference schedules and then simply racking up quality wins against one another? Iowa State, for example, played the No. 323 nonconference schedule per the NET, yet had five Quad 1 wins before the reveal. (The Cyclones added another Saturday against Texas Tech before losing to Houston on Monday.) They were awarded an early No. 3 seed by the committee, 12th overall.
“We spend a significant amount of time discussing this exact topic,” McClelland said. “It’s always good for the game to play good nonconference schedules. If teams are going to play a weak nonconference schedule, it makes it critically important for them to do well in their league games. Even in the loss at Houston, it was a hard-fought game, and I think the nation could see, even if they watched just that one game and not the entirety of the season like we do, that Iowa State is a very good team and certainly deserving of the seed we gave them. But if you do play a weak nonconference schedule and then you get into the league and don’t win those games against the best teams and are just kind of floating there at let’s say 9-9 … just because you have a tremendous amount of wins doesn’t necessarily guarantee you a way into the tournament.”
Bracket Watch: The selection committee chairman speaks!
Big 12 gaming the system? Importance of road wins? Those sliding quads? Commitee chair Charles McClelland answers our questions.
theathletic.com
I don't understand how their logic applies to certain teams but not others. A weak non con is one thing but teams shouldn't just get rewarded for losing to "good" teams in the non con. With the portal and NIL I just don't think they can weigh the non con like they traditionally have.
This is from an Athletic article today:
"We caught up with the chairman this week to discuss some pertinent issues (and nominate ourselves for future committee membership … still waiting to hear back on that one).
How about the notion that certain leagues, like the Big 12, have gamed the system by playing soft nonconference schedules and then simply racking up quality wins against one another? Iowa State, for example, played the No. 323 nonconference schedule per the NET, yet had five Quad 1 wins before the reveal. (The Cyclones added another Saturday against Texas Tech before losing to Houston on Monday.) They were awarded an early No. 3 seed by the committee, 12th overall.
“We spend a significant amount of time discussing this exact topic,” McClelland said. “It’s always good for the game to play good nonconference schedules. If teams are going to play a weak nonconference schedule, it makes it critically important for them to do well in their league games. Even in the loss at Houston, it was a hard-fought game, and I think the nation could see, even if they watched just that one game and not the entirety of the season like we do, that Iowa State is a very good team and certainly deserving of the seed we gave them. But if you do play a weak nonconference schedule and then you get into the league and don’t win those games against the best teams and are just kind of floating there at let’s say 9-9 … just because you have a tremendous amount of wins doesn’t necessarily guarantee you a way into the tournament.”
Bracket Watch: The selection committee chairman speaks!
Big 12 gaming the system? Importance of road wins? Those sliding quads? Commitee chair Charles McClelland answers our questions.
I almost made the comment earlier that even in a loss I think we actually gained of respect in a close loss at Houston. That was a huge stage and we were right there. That will help come selection Sunday.
In football, this is what I despise the most about media and committee involvement in the formula for choosing playoff teams. One might have been able to make an argument when the playoff was only four teams that limiting the selection to metrics was unwise, but an expanded playoff loses that argument. Computers and metrics are the fairest way to choose teams for the playoff outside of the auto bids.
TLDR: The proof is in the pudding.This is from an Athletic article today:
"We caught up with the chairman this week to discuss some pertinent issues (and nominate ourselves for future committee membership … still waiting to hear back on that one).
How about the notion that certain leagues, like the Big 12, have gamed the system by playing soft nonconference schedules and then simply racking up quality wins against one another? Iowa State, for example, played the No. 323 nonconference schedule per the NET, yet had five Quad 1 wins before the reveal. (The Cyclones added another Saturday against Texas Tech before losing to Houston on Monday.) They were awarded an early No. 3 seed by the committee, 12th overall.
“We spend a significant amount of time discussing this exact topic,” McClelland said. “It’s always good for the game to play good nonconference schedules. If teams are going to play a weak nonconference schedule, it makes it critically important for them to do well in their league games. Even in the loss at Houston, it was a hard-fought game, and I think the nation could see, even if they watched just that one game and not the entirety of the season like we do, that Iowa State is a very good team and certainly deserving of the seed we gave them. But if you do play a weak nonconference schedule and then you get into the league and don’t win those games against the best teams and are just kind of floating there at let’s say 9-9 … just because you have a tremendous amount of wins doesn’t necessarily guarantee you a way into the tournament.”
Bracket Watch: The selection committee chairman speaks!
Big 12 gaming the system? Importance of road wins? Those sliding quads? Commitee chair Charles McClelland answers our questions.
I do wonder if the initial release the Committee wanted to reward the team with the Teams that scheduled the better games to inspire the teams (like ISU) to schedule better opponents in the future.
Curious if we see some shake up in the top 16 to reflect the recent conference play and be a bit more accurate on the actual bracket as we enter March. Just a thought....
