March Madness Thread

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You really don't think Wazzou could take down Kansas? Or that Notre Dame could in Detroit?

[Vanilla Ice]

I got Duke out in the second round to the winner of Zona/WVU. Texas winning it all and Clemson tentatively in the final game. 1,3,5,3,4,2,1,10 in the elite eight

[illiniguy]

You really don't think Wazzou could take down Kansas? Or that Notre Dame could in Detroit?

They could, but UNC has to dodge bullets starting in round 2. KU doesn't. Maybe I should be more angry with the IU seed more than anything. They were like 12 all year long and then get an 8 seed.

[illiniguy]

I got Duke out in the second round to the winner of Zona/WVU. Texas winning it all and Clemson tentatively in the final game. 1,3,5,3,4,2,1,10 in the elite eight

Zona is a nightmare. They either get beat right away or go crazy and get to UCLA. I always hate having to deal with them in the tourny bracket I do.

[Vanilla Ice]

I got Duke out in the second round to the winner of Zona/WVU. Texas winning it all and Clemson tentatively in the final game. 1,3,5,3,4,2,1,10 in the elite eight

Zona is a nightmare. They either get beat right away or go crazy and get to UCLA. I always hate having to deal with them in the tourny bracket I do.

 

Im thinking if I take Zona in the first game it'll be to the elite eight, WVU to the Sweet 16. I just don't have any confidence in Duke right now.

[snoodmonger]

This ought to be an interesting tournament. I miss the days when I could just take Thursday off and watch the games from 12 on drinking beer and eating wings throughout the whole day.

I am off the whole weekend and plan on doing just that.

 

The UNC thing is a joke. Yes they have to beat all of the teams to win, but playing more of them than the other 1 seeds is where I see the problem. They earned the number 1 overall seed, thus they should have the easier road. They will play an IU team that was near the top ten the entire year in round two(yes IU fans you are going to win that game vs Arkansas). But, then Kansas plays Kent State or UNLV. I don't see any Eric Gordon or D.J. White's on those rosters. UNC has a shot to go down in any round. I can't see KU losing before the elite eight and that isn't because KU is better than UNC.

 

 

I think it's funny that you've spent all year talking about how bad IU is, and now all the sudden they're a looming danger to UNC.

 

Of course, you're right now, inasmuch as IU is under-seeded and is a tough 2nd round match-up. But given that you've played both sides of the fence, you had to be right one of those times. Aside from that, I don't see that much difference in our two brackets. I'd rather face ND than Clemson (advantage UNC), but I'd rather face Vandy than Wazzu (advantage KU). As for the two seeds, in a vacuum,Tennessee is better than Georgetown, but they're also a easier matchup for UNC.

[SouthSideRyan]

I missed the tail end of the last thread, but law-f-n l at the Tennessee hand-wringing. SEC fans love hyping up their teams for their brutal conference schedule in football. When it comes to basketball and they have 2 teams that belong in the damn tournament, they still complain. SEC basketball this year is utter garbage.

[SouthSideRyan]

I got Duke out in the second round to the winner of Zona/WVU. Texas winning it all and Clemson tentatively in the final game. 1,3,5,3,4,2,1,10 in the elite eight

 

Final game as in national title game? Clemson isn't very good.

[dew1679666265]

I missed the tail end of the last thread, but law-f-n l at the Tennessee hand-wringing. SEC fans love hyping up their teams for their brutal conference schedule in football. When it comes to basketball and they have 2 teams that belong in the damn tournament, they still complain. SEC basketball this year is utter garbage.

 

I have yet to argue - or see anyone else argue for that matter - that Tennessee should be a 1 seed because of the strength of the SEC. Despite the SEC being down this year, Tennessee still managed the #1 strength of schedule in the nation - and did just as well (or better) than Kansas throughout the regular season.

 

The Vols then got knocked out of a 1 seed and down to the lowest 2 seed because Arkansas' Shawn Hill (I think that's his name - the big 7 footer) hit a shot at the end of the tournament game to give the Razorbacks a 1 point win. So basically, the committee said a 1 point loss in the conference tournament meant more than 30-ish games in the regular season.

 

That's my beef. It has nothing to do with actual or perceived strength of the SEC in football or basketball.

[SouthSideRyan]

Well my Pomeroy bias is clearly showing again when it comes to Tennessee's seeding(He's got em #14) Tennessee's win against Memphis did a lot of convincing to me that Tennessee was a legit top 10 team. Interesting that it is the Memphis win that convinced me though, as their situations are closer than one would expect when the season started. Memphis enters the tourney without really having many tests over the past 3 months due to the horrendous play in C-USA(to the point where even close wins were viewed as detriments. The SEC isn't so bad that Tennessee should be docked for winning close games, but losing to an Arkansas team I didn't have in the tourney(and probably still wouldn't if I was around for the final picks) was a dagger.

[SouthSideRyan]

I agonized over Davidson vs. Georgetown, deciding the winner of that would go to the Final 4. I took Georgetown, and then changed my mind by the time I got to the next round and had them lose to Wisky who I had lose to Kansas. Then I went back and changed my mind and put Davidson over G-Town and put Wisky over KU cause I didn't want 3 #1s in the Final 4. Bottom line, I've overthought, one of my 8 scenarios I didn't put down will come true and I'll claim I knew it was going to be happen, and sulk the rest of this thread.

 

Seriously though, Davidson is very good.

[dew1679666265]

Well my Pomeroy bias is clearly showing again when it comes to Tennessee's seeding(He's got em #14) Tennessee's win against Memphis did a lot of convincing to me that Tennessee was a legit top 10 team. Interesting that it is the Memphis win that convinced me though, as their situations are closer than one would expect when the season started. Memphis enters the tourney without really having many tests over the past 3 months due to the horrendous play in C-USA(to the point where even close wins were viewed as detriments. The SEC isn't so bad that Tennessee should be docked for winning close games, but losing to an Arkansas team I didn't have in the tourney(and probably still wouldn't if I was around for the final picks) was a dagger.

 

Arkansas is definitely a tournament team - the only ones left on the bubble before the SEC tourney were Kentucky and Ole Miss. The Razorbacks have an RPI of 32 with a strength of schedule of 25. They've had some bad losses (UGA for instance) but also some good wins - I thought they were placed just about right in the tourney.

 

Memphis' one loss came to #2 ranked (at the time) Tennessee. Otherwise, they beat USC (neutral site), Georgetown, Arizona and Gonzaga since Dec. 1. How exactly were they not tested?

 

Tennessee beat Western Kentucky, Xavier (on the road), Gonzaga (on the road), Ohio State, Memphis (on the road) and Kentucky since Dec. 1. All those teams are either in the tourney or just missed it (OSU). How exactly were they not tested?

[snoodmonger]

Funny line from Basketball Prospectus about Indiana getting shafted:

 

Indiana. The committee's toughest task may well be deciding what to do with a team that's changing rapidly before your eyes, whether for good or ill. In the case of the Hoosiers, granted, the recent change is for the worse: losses at Penn State and to Minnesota on a neutral floor. Still, an eight-seed? Arkansas as a first-round opponent? The overall one-seed, North Carolina, in the second round? Good grief. What more can possibly befall D.J. White in his career at Indiana? White provides that rarest of cases where the NBA actually promises to give a player a newfound sense of structure and stability.

[SouthSideRyan]

Well my Pomeroy bias is clearly showing again when it comes to Tennessee's seeding(He's got em #14) Tennessee's win against Memphis did a lot of convincing to me that Tennessee was a legit top 10 team. Interesting that it is the Memphis win that convinced me though, as their situations are closer than one would expect when the season started. Memphis enters the tourney without really having many tests over the past 3 months due to the horrendous play in C-USA(to the point where even close wins were viewed as detriments. The SEC isn't so bad that Tennessee should be docked for winning close games, but losing to an Arkansas team I didn't have in the tourney(and probably still wouldn't if I was around for the final picks) was a dagger.

 

Arkansas is definitely a tournament team - the only ones left on the bubble before the SEC tourney were Kentucky and Ole Miss. The Razorbacks have an RPI of 32 with a strength of schedule of 25. They've had some bad losses (UGA for instance) but also some good wins - I thought they were placed just about right in the tourney.

 

Memphis' one loss came to #2 ranked (at the time) Tennessee. Otherwise, they beat USC (neutral site), Georgetown, Arizona and Gonzaga since Dec. 1. How exactly were they not tested?

 

Tennessee beat Western Kentucky, Xavier (on the road), Gonzaga (on the road), Ohio State, Memphis (on the road) and Kentucky since Dec. 1. All those teams are either in the tourney or just missed it (OSU). How exactly were they not tested?

 

I used past 3 months to refer to March, February, January, essentially meaning the start of conference play, but I definitely was not clear.

 

Arkansas has more losses to non-tourney teams as they do wins against tourney teams. And other than Tennessee none of those teams were particularly good. Thinking back, I guess I would have them in after the Tennessee win, but before that what are they hanging their hat on? A Baylor team that nobody thinks belongs? They beat Miss. St. by 20, but they've beaten even less good teams than Arkansas. The 2 wins over Vandy are respectable, but there really isn't a lot of heft for Arkansas.

[SouthSideRyan]

And since I keep talking about teams that don't belong, I'll put myself out there and put together my 34 in a couple minutes, so I can ripped to shreds.

[SouthSideRyan]

Texas

Kansas St.

A&M

OK

WSU

Stanford

AZ

USC

ASU

Oregon

Duke

Clemson

MSU

IU

Purdue

Louisville

Marquette

Georgetown

Notre Dame

UConn

West Virginia

Tennessee

Vanderbilt

Xavier

St. Joe's

BYU

Gonzaga

St. Mary's

*South Alabama

Mississippi St.

Villanova

Baylor

Miami

Arkansas*

 

I'm shocked at pretty much every team from USA down.

Edited March 18, 2008 by SouthSideRyan

[dew1679666265]

Well my Pomeroy bias is clearly showing again when it comes to Tennessee's seeding(He's got em #14) Tennessee's win against Memphis did a lot of convincing to me that Tennessee was a legit top 10 team. Interesting that it is the Memphis win that convinced me though, as their situations are closer than one would expect when the season started. Memphis enters the tourney without really having many tests over the past 3 months due to the horrendous play in C-USA(to the point where even close wins were viewed as detriments. The SEC isn't so bad that Tennessee should be docked for winning close games, but losing to an Arkansas team I didn't have in the tourney(and probably still wouldn't if I was around for the final picks) was a dagger.

 

Arkansas is definitely a tournament team - the only ones left on the bubble before the SEC tourney were Kentucky and Ole Miss. The Razorbacks have an RPI of 32 with a strength of schedule of 25. They've had some bad losses (UGA for instance) but also some good wins - I thought they were placed just about right in the tourney.

 

Memphis' one loss came to #2 ranked (at the time) Tennessee. Otherwise, they beat USC (neutral site), Georgetown, Arizona and Gonzaga since Dec. 1. How exactly were they not tested?

 

Tennessee beat Western Kentucky, Xavier (on the road), Gonzaga (on the road), Ohio State, Memphis (on the road) and Kentucky since Dec. 1. All those teams are either in the tourney or just missed it (OSU). How exactly were they not tested?

 

I used past 3 months to refer to March, February, January, essentially meaning the start of conference play, but I definitely was not clear.

 

Arkansas has more losses to non-tourney teams as they do wins against tourney teams. And other than Tennessee none of those teams were particularly good. Thinking back, I guess I would have them in after the Tennessee win, but before that what are they hanging their hat on? A Baylor team that nobody thinks belongs? They beat Miss. St. by 20, but they've beaten even less good teams than Arkansas. The 2 wins over Vandy are respectable, but there really isn't a lot of heft for Arkansas.

 

Not a lot of great wins, but before the Tennessee game they should have been squarely on the bubble - which does contradict my earlier statement that they weren't on the bubble before the SEC tourney, so I retract that.

 

But, they probably should have squeaked in before the UT win and were definitely in after beating the Vols.

 

And I did misunderstand your 3 month comment - Memphis has beaten Gonzaga and Siena (both tourney teams but Siena isn't a marquee win by any stretch). The Georgetown and Arizona wins were the 22nd and 29th of December.

 

Tennessee still has wins over Vandy, Ohio State, Kentucky, Miss St, Arkansas and Memphis since December. Xavier and Gonzaga came the 22nd and 29th of December.

 

Still some solid wins and certainly enough for Tennessee to be tested entering the tourney.

[Guest]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

Oh, and Luc and Kevin better be ok really quickly.

[MPrior]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

Oh, and Luc and Kevin better be ok really quickly.

 

No worries, man. Your bracket is cush. Drake or UConn could obviously put up a fight, but they're not as scary as most other 4/5 seeds.

[Guest]

They're still good teams and Luc is far too important for this team (I'm assuming Love will play since he played 30 mins against Stanford).

[abuck1220]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

 

i mean, maybe they got screwed, but they'd lose in the first or second round anyway. that's why i really don't feel too bad for bubble teams that don't get in.

[CuseCubFan69]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

 

i mean, maybe they got screwed, but they'd lose in the first or second round anyway. that's why i really don't feel too bad for bubble teams that don't get in.

 

That brings up a good point, has a 11, 12 or 13 seed at large team ever made the Final Four?

[Derwood]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

 

i mean, maybe they got screwed, but they'd lose in the first or second round anyway. that's why i really don't feel too bad for bubble teams that don't get in.

 

which is why two bubble teams should have to play the tuesday play-in game to get in as the 12 seed or something

[CuseCubFan69]

The coverage ASU was getting in the local Phoenix news was ridiculous - main news story on every local news station and the lead story of their newspaper. They didn't belong compared to Arizona and Oregon though they did have a case compared to a few of the teams that did get in (Baylor). Sucks that that over-the-back call against USC came back to haunt them.

 

 

i mean, maybe they got screwed, but they'd lose in the first or second round anyway. that's why i really don't feel too bad for bubble teams that don't get in.

 

which is why two bubble teams should have to play the tuesday play-in game to get in as the 12 seed or something

 

Yeah, they just said that on Mike and Mike.

 

What do you guys think about Bobby Knights idea of having 128 teams? It is just one more game.

[Exile on Waveland]

They're still good teams and Luc is far too important for this team (I'm assuming Love will play since he played 30 mins against Stanford).

 

I'm unsure if I'm going to pick UConn or Drake in the Sweet 16; however, if it's UConn they present significant match-up problems for UCLA. I still UCLA would win -- I'm taking them to win the title -- but UConn's size could be a headache for Love, et al.