Trend Continues?

[Cycsk]

Yeah, another reason geography hurts ISU so often is the density of good teams in the Midwest compared to the density of host sites. St Louis and Milwaukee were the Midwest areas, and KU, Wichita, Wisconsin, Michigan took those sites, leaving SA the next closest.

Then the regions were Indianapolis, Memphis, New York, Anaheim. We got stuck with New York, Duke got stuck with Indianapolis, Syracuse got stuck with Memphis and Creighton was thrown out west to Anaheim. Ideally they would put Duke in Memphis, Syracuse in NYC, and Iowa State in Indianapolis. (ISU was the western most team in the East Region, and the farthest from NYC. As a 3 seed)

It would be nice if Hoiberg talked publicly about this during the off-seaston. Not whining, but just stating the facts. Maybe during the Summer Tailgate Tour, as he thanks the fans for coming to KC for the Big 12s, he can say a few things like this. Perhaps it will help put some pressure on the NCAA to give us more favorable placement. Our fanbase certainly will turn up and buy tickets. The story of the amazing turnout for the Big 12s (10,000 fans buying tickets from scalpers on less than one day's notice) has to be told nationally!

 

[HFCS]

Since 2000, here are the number of times being defeated by an eventual National Champion. If UConn wins, Villanova will have 5 and Iowa State 4. If Kentucky wins, Wisconsin will have 4.

Team	Years
Villanova	4
Butler	3
Iowa State	3
Kansas	3
UCLA	3
Wisconsin	3

How many of those are simply a team didn't win the title game? Butler is at least twice. I love ISU and think we're on the way up, but that's pretty elite company and suggests horrible luck.

 

[ChiefCy]

I don't care where they play the trend I do not want to see continue is losing a top player and wondering what if. Last year Ohio State, what if Babb had not been hurt and George this year.

 

[HFCS]

Yeah, another reason geography hurts ISU so often is the density of good teams in the Midwest compared to the density of host sites. St Louis and Milwaukee were the Midwest areas, and KU, Wichita, Wisconsin, Michigan took those sites, leaving SA the next closest.

Then the regions were Indianapolis, Memphis, New York, Anaheim. We got stuck with New York, Duke got stuck with Indianapolis, Syracuse got stuck with Memphis and Creighton was thrown out west to Anaheim. Ideally they would put Duke in Memphis, Syracuse in NYC, and Iowa State in Indianapolis. (ISU was the western most team in the East Region, and the farthest from NYC. As a 3 seed)

The regionals in the midwest are generally deep Big Ten geography more often than not. We need Minn/KC/STL to be a regional more often with less ohio/michigan/indiana/wisc sites.

To be honest I'd almost rather have us in a Texas regional than a typical midwest regional. We'd out-fan-support any team near Texas (where they generally don't like college basketball) as opposed to something like Auburn Hills again.

 

[cyclones500]

Since 2000, here are the number of times being defeated by an eventual National Champion. If UConn wins, Villanova will have 5 and Iowa State 4. If Kentucky wins, Wisconsin will have 4.

Team	Years
Villanova	4
Butler	3
Iowa State	3
Kansas	3
UCLA	3
Wisconsin	3

Thanks for the stats. I had a feeling you'd come through with reliable details. :smile:

 

[Cyclonic1]

Well I decided yesterday to pull for UCONN for the obvious reason. And I am also quite pleased that there are no little 10 teams left in the tourney. That three teams got as far as they did upset me a bit but am over it now.

 

[HoopsTournament]

Geographic proximity is part of the rules used by the Selection Committee. If anything, we should be asking why we didn't get placed in St.Louis for the 2nd and 3rd rounds and in the Midwest Region. Of course, then we would be complaining about getting dumped into the "stacked" region. I do think we should have taken the place of KU. It seems that the committee gave KU favorable ranking because of the prospect of Imbid coming back.

First and second round (I refuse to call them 2nd and 3rd round) sites have nothing to do with the region. Kansas played in St. Louis, but was in the South while Wichita State played there and was in the Midwest. The sites are assigned based on the teams after the bracket is set. They are not pre-set based on the bracket.

 

[HoopsTournament]

How many of those are simply a team didn't win the title game? Butler is at least twice. I love ISU and think we're on the way up, but that's pretty elite company and suggests horrible luck.

Great Point. Kansas lost two title games and UCLA lost 1 title game and a final four. Here are the most times losing to eventual champion before final four since 2000:

Team	Years
Iowa State	3
Villanova	3
Baylor	2
Oklahoma	2
Oregon	2
Purdue	2
Wisconsin	2

Most Times losing to eventual champion

 

[HoopsTournament]

I would guess most of those teams have had more opportunities of actually being in the tournament as well.

That is true. ISU has had the highest percentage.

 

[cyclones500]

First and second round (I refuse to call them 2nd and 3rd round) sites have nothing to do with the region. Kansas played in St. Louis, but was in the South while Wichita State played there and was in the Midwest. The sites are assigned based on the teams after the bracket is set. They are not pre-set based on the bracket.

Excellent clarification.

 

[Cyclonic1]

It wasn't just UConn that got favorable placement as a low seed (Buffalo/New York City), Kentucky got it too (St.Louis/Indianapolis).

Wish ISU got this kind of love in tournament placement (or oversight, anyway).

We will start getting that love and even some good Kansas type calls as we continue to win.

 

[Cyowan008]

Well after tonight with this trend people are going to want to play us in the tourney

 

[CySmurf]

That means we need to be a one or two seed in Midwest next year. Is that Omaha?

That doesn't guarantee anything...we shoot 6-15 in freethrows anywhere, we'll get beat. Got to go out and execute!...But it would help to have our fan base be the alpha-male for a change.