College Basketball 2007-2008

[dew1679666265]

It's pretty ridiculous that Tennessee is not a 1 seed.

 

Even though we didn't make our tournament championship, we won the SEC regular season championship outright (more meaningful) and we had a much better resume than Kansas.

 

Otherwise, I'm happy enough with the Vols' spot. I don't know much about American though...

 

Tennessee rightly got seeded second.

 

Is a two-win difference in the conference tournament enough to nullify a much better regular season? If it is, it shouldn't be.

 

Who do you knock down then?

 

Kansas

 

Kansas finished tied for the Big 12 title and Tennessee won theirs but Kansas showed up and won the Big 12 tournament. That's your difference. And the Big 12 was a better league in the SEC this year. Kansas over Tennessee for a No. 1 is a no doubter.

 

Like you said, Tennessee won the SEC outright. The Vols also had a better RPI than Kansas (2 v 5), Tennessee had 3 wins over teams in the top 12 in the RPI (Memphis - higher ranked than Kansas - Vandy and Xavier) while Kansas had 1 (Texas today) and Tennessee has a SOS of 1 and Kansas' is 50.

 

Far from a no-doubter and, in my opinion, ridiculous.

 

Kansas had a better weekend. Tennessee had a better season.

 

Kansas looks like a better team IMO.

 

But Tennessee has proven to be at least as good - if not better. What has been accomplished on the court should matter more than a subjective "I think this team looked better."

[Exile on Waveland]

It's pretty ridiculous that Tennessee is not a 1 seed.

 

Even though we didn't make our tournament championship, we won the SEC regular season championship outright (more meaningful) and we had a much better resume than Kansas.

 

Otherwise, I'm happy enough with the Vols' spot. I don't know much about American though...

 

Tennessee rightly got seeded second.

 

Is a two-win difference in the conference tournament enough to nullify a much better regular season? If it is, it shouldn't be.

 

Who do you knock down then?

 

Kansas

 

Kansas finished tied for the Big 12 title and Tennessee won theirs but Kansas showed up and won the Big 12 tournament. That's your difference. And the Big 12 was a better league in the SEC this year. Kansas over Tennessee for a No. 1 is a no doubter.

 

Like you said, Tennessee won the SEC outright. The Vols also had a better RPI than Kansas (2 v 5), Tennessee had 3 wins over teams in the top 12 in the RPI (Memphis - higher ranked than Kansas - Vandy and Xavier) while Kansas had 1 (Texas today) and Tennessee has a SOS of 1 and Kansas' is 50.

 

Far from a no-doubter and, in my opinion, ridiculous.

 

Kansas had a better weekend. Tennessee had a better season.

 

Kansas looks like a better team IMO.

 

Yes. If I had to handicap a head-to-head matchup, I'd chose Kansas. But that's completely arbitrary.

[dew1679666265]

It's pretty ridiculous that Tennessee is not a 1 seed.

 

Even though we didn't make our tournament championship, we won the SEC regular season championship outright (more meaningful) and we had a much better resume than Kansas.

 

Otherwise, I'm happy enough with the Vols' spot. I don't know much about American though...

 

Tennessee rightly got seeded second.

 

Is a two-win difference in the conference tournament enough to nullify a much better regular season? If it is, it shouldn't be.

 

Who do you knock down then?

 

Kansas

 

Kansas finished tied for the Big 12 title and Tennessee won theirs but Kansas showed up and won the Big 12 tournament. That's your difference. And the Big 12 was a better league in the SEC this year. Kansas over Tennessee for a No. 1 is a no doubter.

 

Like you said, Tennessee won the SEC outright. The Vols also had a better RPI than Kansas (2 v 5), Tennessee had 3 wins over teams in the top 12 in the RPI (Memphis - higher ranked than Kansas - Vandy and Xavier) while Kansas had 1 (Texas today) and Tennessee has a SOS of 1 and Kansas' is 50.

 

Far from a no-doubter and, in my opinion, ridiculous.

 

Kansas had a better weekend. Tennessee had a better season.

 

Exactly my point. Two games at the end of the year should not completely erase being a better team the entire season.

 

It's silly.

 

The conference tournaments have become way, way too important. Tennessee's overall profile is better than Kansas's.

 

Exactly. The conference tournaments are silly anyway - the fact that they take a team that is at least better - if not significantly so - than another team to a 2 seed instead of a 1 seed is frankly ridiculous.

[Coach C]

Can someone explain to me why Arizona is in?

 

Still waiting....

 

Because they're Arizona and they're a historic program.

 

Unacceptable to me. The NCAA loves to fellate Arizona.

 

ASU beats Arizona twice....with ASU having better conference record and better overall record....and is out?

 

Screw that.

 

Non-conference SOS. According to one site, Arizona had the 4th hardest in the entire country. Arizona State had the 296th hardest nonconference schedule.

 

The committee has consistently told teams that if they want more consideration, they need to go out and play at least a decent schedule in the nonconference. Arizona State didn't, and they're out because of it.

 

Who did Arizona beat in non-con? They played a few good teams but they also lost those games.

 

Then, they lost to ASU both times and had a losing record in the conference. I'm sorry, but if you have a losing record in a conference, you shouldn't be in.

[dew1679666265]

Yes. If I had to handicap a head-to-head matchup, I'd chose Kansas. But that's completely arbitrary.

 

And shouldn't be used to determine seeding between teams when there is very strong evidence that one has accomplished more than another.

[RynoRules]

UNC's bracket is the hardest, IMO. I don't understand how you are the no. 1 seed and are set up against the best 8-9 seeds (Indiana and Arkansas) and the only no. 2 seed with a legit claim to being a no. 1 (Tenn).

 

Dayton got hosed, though I understand their best player is hurt and has been for a while. AZ St. also has a good beef.

 

VA Tech needs to shut up - their out of conference losses are brutal.

[Exile on Waveland]

Yes. If I had to handicap a head-to-head matchup, I'd chose Kansas. But that's completely arbitrary.

 

And shouldn't be used to determine seeding between teams when there is very strong evidence that one has accomplished more than another.

 

That was my point; not sure if I did a good job expressing that. Who cares what I think?

[dew1679666265]

Like you said, Tennessee won the SEC outright. The Vols also had a better RPI than Kansas (2 v 5), Tennessee had 3 wins over teams in the top 12 in the RPI (Memphis - higher ranked than Kansas - Vandy and Xavier) while Kansas had 1 (Texas today) and Tennessee has a SOS of 1 and Kansas' is 50.

 

Far from a no-doubter and, in my opinion, ridiculous.

that is the biggest reason I believe they deserved a #1

 

Yeah, Kansas may play in a tougher conference, but Tennessee's non-con schedule dwarfed any difference between the SEC and Big 12.

[Guest]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

[Exile on Waveland]

VA Tech needs to shut up - their out of conference losses are brutal.

 

Agreed. I don't really know why they're terribly viable, besides 1) 9-7 in the ACC; 2) nearly beating UNC (so?); and 3) their coached ranted that they should be in. Those aren't very convincing reasons.

[dew1679666265]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

[dew1679666265]

Yes. If I had to handicap a head-to-head matchup, I'd chose Kansas. But that's completely arbitrary.

 

And shouldn't be used to determine seeding between teams when there is very strong evidence that one has accomplished more than another.

 

That was my point; not sure if I did a good job expressing that. Who cares what I think?

 

I know and I appreciate the help. I was just expounding on the point and venting. :D

[Andy]

I have picked North Carolina to beat Stanford in the national title game.

[illiniguy]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

[Guest]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

 

If Tennessee wanted No. 1 seed, they should have won the SEC tournament. Their resume was similar to that of Kansas in the regular season but they flamed out in the SEC semis. Kansas won the tournament.

[illiniguy]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

 

If Tennessee wanted No. 1 seed, they should have won the SEC tournament. Their resume was similar to that of Kansas in the regular season but they flamed out in the SEC semis. Kansas won the tournament.

Or they should have not played so many good teams early in the season.

[dew1679666265]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

 

Yeah, UNC got thoroughly screwed. There are basically two 1 seeds and a near-two seed (Louisville) in their region. Easily the toughest of the four.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Tennessee was 16-4 v. the RPI top 100, Kansas was 15-3. Maybe Tennessee should've beaten a team that was a double digit seed(before that win bumped them up to their current 9 seed) on a neutral court.

[dew1679666265]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

 

If Tennessee wanted No. 1 seed, they should have won the SEC tournament. Their resume was similar to that of Kansas in the regular season but they flamed out in the SEC semis. Kansas won the tournament.

 

Tennessee's regular season resume is actually much better. And the fact that two wins by Kansas canceled out a much better regular season by Tennessee is ridiculous.

[illiniguy]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

 

Yeah, UNC got thoroughly screwed. There are basically two 1 seeds and a near-two seed (Louisville) in their region. Easily the toughest of the four.

Yeah, but in KU's I only see Georgetown and KU.

[Exile on Waveland]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

 

Yeah, UNC got thoroughly screwed. There are basically two 1 seeds and a near-two seed (Louisville) in their region. Easily the toughest of the four.

 

UNC fans are also upset at IU being the #8. Now, as an IU fan, I think the Hoosiers will lose to Arkansas. Still, IU should've been higher and having to (potentially) face two Wooden Award candidates in the second round isn't much of a reward for the #1 overall team.

[dew1679666265]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

 

If Tennessee wanted No. 1 seed, they should have won the SEC tournament. Their resume was similar to that of Kansas in the regular season but they flamed out in the SEC semis. Kansas won the tournament.

Or they should have not played so many good teams early in the season.

 

Tennessee played - and beat - good teams throughout the season. I find it interesting that the committee supposedly awards teams for scheduling tough non-conference games and then gives the nod to a team that was worse in the regular season and scheduled crap non conference.

 

USC is the only top 30 team RPI-wise that Kansas played non-conference.

[Exile on Waveland]

The SEC was also a much weaker conference than the Big 12 was and that certainly has to be taken into consideration.

 

Taken into consideration...but like I said, Tennessee played a brutal non-con schedule and ended up with a significantly better strength of schedule (#1 for UT vs #50 for Kansas).

 

That should outweigh a slight difference inside the conferences.

 

If Tennessee wanted No. 1 seed, they should have won the SEC tournament. Their resume was similar to that of Kansas in the regular season but they flamed out in the SEC semis. Kansas won the tournament.

 

Tennessee's regular season resume is actually much better. And the fact that two wins by Kansas canceled out a much better regular season by Tennessee is ridiculous.

 

I'm on your side here. However, I might take Butler over Tennessee. If Butler doesn't turn the ball over against the press, they can dictate tempo and turn the game into a grinder. It's this type of game that could cause Tennessee to take ill-advised quick 3's while Butler grinds away. And away. And away.

[illiniguy]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

 

Yeah, UNC got thoroughly screwed. There are basically two 1 seeds and a near-two seed (Louisville) in their region. Easily the toughest of the four.

 

UNC fans are also upset at IU being the #8. Now, as an IU fan, I think the Hoosiers will lose to Arkansas. Still, IU should've been higher and having to (potentially) face two Wooden Award candidates in the second round isn't much of a reward for the #1 overall team.

UNC is going to run you off the court.

[Exile on Waveland]

Can someone explain to me how KU was the lowest 1 seed, yet has a much easier region than UNC? Tennessee could have been a 1, so they should be in with Kansas not UNC. The committee missed the boat on that one.

 

Yeah, UNC got thoroughly screwed. There are basically two 1 seeds and a near-two seed (Louisville) in their region. Easily the toughest of the four.

 

UNC fans are also upset at IU being the #8. Now, as an IU fan, I think the Hoosiers will lose to Arkansas. Still, IU should've been higher and having to (potentially) face two Wooden Award candidates in the second round isn't much of a reward for the #1 overall team.

UNC is going to run you off the court.

 

I doubt that matchup occurs; like I said, I think Arkansas beats IU. If IU does win, UNC will crush them, I agree.