*** Official Selection Sunday Thread ***
- Thread starter CycloneRulzzz
- Start date
We are looking at this all wrong Look at UCONN as the Georges revenge game.
S. Dakota St. best win is #149 Towson at home. They have ZERO Q1 or Q2 wins. They got blown out by K State in Manhattan, lost two close games to UCF and George Mason in Florida November tourney. Those three were their only games against top 100 teams.
bracketologists.com
South Dakota State Jackrabbits Nitty Gritty at Bracketologists
I just can’t get over the stupidity of the non-con stuff. In years passed Gonzaga would beat Michigan State on an aircraft carrier or something and then play no one for 2 1/2 months and get a one seed. But we play top 75 NET teams every night for 3 months straight and get dinged for not beating Va Tech 4 Months ago.
At the end of the day you beat the teams in front of you, so whatever. But it’s just so dumb.
At the end of the day you beat the teams in front of you, so whatever. But it’s just so dumb.
The paper had ISU winning against Baylor as their story today on the frontpage so that is what I based it on and from watching the way KCCI covers ISU. They should go all out on ISU but they won't.
worked for them, they got a 1 seed from a quarterfinal loser, same wit tar heels. sorry, two of them can't be coincidence. recent play has to mean something.
That doesn't change that Indiana St's resume is not as good as the last 4 in. They got screwed because Oregon, NC state, temple, etc. all won. Ask those teams if the conference tournament matters.
If you even play BYU, and again at neutral site with your talent and coaching staff your fine.
No one with their efficiency profile has even made the tournament before (since barttorvik started tracking in 2008). They bad.S. Dakota St. best win is #149 Towson at home. They have ZERO Q1 or Q2 wins. They got blown out by K State in Manhattan, lost two close games to UCF and George Mason in Florida November tourney. Those three were their only games against top 100 teams.
South Dakota State Jackrabbits Nitty Gritty at Bracketologists
BYU can’t string 3 good games together. Not worried about them if we do end up playing them.
Not even slightly worried about themS. Dakota St. best win is #149 Towson at home. They have ZERO Q1 or Q2 wins. They got blown out by K State in Manhattan, lost two close games to UCF and George Mason in Florida November tourney. Those three were their only games against top 100 teams.
South Dakota State Jackrabbits Nitty Gritty at Bracketologists
Serious question, why would a team suit up their starters for a conference tournament if you are solidly in after seeing this. This is why CFB has players opt out for bowls. Nothing good can come from it and they mean nothing.
Pretty egregious seeding job by the committee, as many on here have already stated.
At some point though we need to take some responsibility for not scheduling in accordance with the past precedent and the committee not looking kindly upon poor OOC scheduling. It's what (unfairly) cost us a one seed back in 2000 (when we should have been the 2nd overall 1 seed) and it's undoubtedly cost us here.
What I don't understand though is the lack of breaking down those "highly rated" OOCs. The system unfairly rewards Q2-Q3 OOC home games but hammers the lower Q3-Q4 schedules. Why does UNC get credit for a tougher schedule when they really didn't perform that well against it? Or Tennessee who simply whooped on the Big 10 pretenders. I'm all for using that to "split hairs" when everything is equal but it really wasn't during the conference season. ISU performed well enough on the road, at home, and during the tournament to be between the last #1 seed and the 2nd #2. I really don't see a strong argument against that case.
The Big 10 was the biggest benefactor in the flawed OOC SOS ranking system that allowed MSU to get in (shouldn't even been considered) and for Wisconsin to be a #5 seed. For all the talk of the Big 12 and ISU "rigging the system" nobody rigged it more than Wisconsin. They simply stayed away from the 200+ ranked opponents, played some tough games, and got a high seed from it. Going forward Pollard and Otz have no excuse for such a schedule. It's obvious the committee sucks at it's job and isn't very good at using the tools correctly as guides. You either adjust the schedule or be stuck lamenting and complaining at the seeds.
I just can't figure out what's worse, our seeding job or what the committeed did to Uconn. The east is far and away the toughest bracket in the tourney. Meanwhile UNC, the last #1 seed gets the easiest. Go figure./
At some point though we need to take some responsibility for not scheduling in accordance with the past precedent and the committee not looking kindly upon poor OOC scheduling. It's what (unfairly) cost us a one seed back in 2000 (when we should have been the 2nd overall 1 seed) and it's undoubtedly cost us here.
What I don't understand though is the lack of breaking down those "highly rated" OOCs. The system unfairly rewards Q2-Q3 OOC home games but hammers the lower Q3-Q4 schedules. Why does UNC get credit for a tougher schedule when they really didn't perform that well against it? Or Tennessee who simply whooped on the Big 10 pretenders. I'm all for using that to "split hairs" when everything is equal but it really wasn't during the conference season. ISU performed well enough on the road, at home, and during the tournament to be between the last #1 seed and the 2nd #2. I really don't see a strong argument against that case.
The Big 10 was the biggest benefactor in the flawed OOC SOS ranking system that allowed MSU to get in (shouldn't even been considered) and for Wisconsin to be a #5 seed. For all the talk of the Big 12 and ISU "rigging the system" nobody rigged it more than Wisconsin. They simply stayed away from the 200+ ranked opponents, played some tough games, and got a high seed from it. Going forward Pollard and Otz have no excuse for such a schedule. It's obvious the committee sucks at it's job and isn't very good at using the tools correctly as guides. You either adjust the schedule or be stuck lamenting and complaining at the seeds.
I just can't figure out what's worse, our seeding job or what the committeed did to Uconn. The east is far and away the toughest bracket in the tourney. Meanwhile UNC, the last #1 seed gets the easiest. Go figure./
Well for us, we'd do it because it is a hell of a lot of fun. So I don't regret it. And frankly, I bet we'd have been a 4 without our run.
