Transmogrified Tiger

Top 50 is generally teams that will be in the tournament. Granted, not all teams in the tournament are equal, but showing the ability to win against the teams that will be in the tournament is helpful to determine whether or not they are worth being in there. I agree with what Jay Bilas said, would team A beat team B in a 7 game series? I just think this top 50 thing is just too random because I would rather play 45, 47 and 49 if this is the case and it helps the Missouri Valley type leagues because they don't have to deal with 3-5 top 25 teams twice each. The MVC has the 19, 23, 25, 35, and 40 teams in the RPI top 50. That's an average of 28, a median of 25. The Big East has the 2, 3, 7, 18, 28, 34, 38, and 41 teams. That's an average of 21 and a median of 23. Not a huge difference. But the thing is that the top 50 thing is included in the RPI thus making my point. Syracuses RPI is worse because of playing UConn and Villanova 5 times and going 1-4 while one of these Missouri Valley teams are playing a 19 at the very best. You still can't assume that Syracuse would win if they were playing a team with a lower RPI and you can't assume the MVC teams would lose playing a higher RPI team. Syracuse is an extreme example with their schedule, but they killed their seeding by losing to Seton Hall, Cincy, and Bucknell at home, and to DePaul on the road. All those teams are outside the top 40 RPI.

Top 50 is generally teams that will be in the tournament. Granted, not all teams in the tournament are equal, but showing the ability to win against the teams that will be in the tournament is helpful to determine whether or not they are worth being in there. I agree with what Jay Bilas said, would team A beat team B in a 7 game series? I just think this top 50 thing is just too random because I would rather play 45, 47 and 49 if this is the case and it helps the Missouri Valley type leagues because they don't have to deal with 3-5 top 25 teams twice each. The MVC has the 19, 23, 25, 35, and 40 teams in the RPI top 50. That's an average of 28, a median of 25. The Big East has the 2, 3, 7, 18, 28, 34, 38, and 41 teams. That's an average of 21 and a median of 23. Not a huge difference.

Fielding percentage is a terrible, terrible way of determining defensive aptitude.

I don't think Iowa deserves it over U of I, but it's close enough that I could see it happening, which is why I'm rooting hardcore for MSU here. That and MSU winning the tourney won't make our loss look as bad. If we get lower than a 3, I'm gonna be pretty outraged. There are not 12 teams out there that deserve a spot above us. I don't really disagree, but U of I is 13 in kenpom's RPI today.

MSU is absolutely gassed, small miracle to only be down 2 at this point.

haha, MSU fans calling Trannon "Trannibal Lector". MSU up early on Iowa.

which players? Horton, Gardner, Brown, Dandridge, Grimes, Lawrence, Douglas, and Lyons. Basically the entire team except for Watkins's son and the walk-on Berardini who didn't play a minute this year. Is Dandridge related to Bobby Dandridge that used to play for the Bucks and Bullets? Nope.

Wait, what? Everything I've seen has talked about Walker, Hairston, and Perez all battling for the job. I've seen some stuff that includes Perez, but probably just as many that ignore him as a candidate.

which players? Horton, Gardner, Brown, Dandridge, Grimes, Lawrence, Douglas, and Lyons. Basically the entire team except for Watkins's son and the walk-on Berardini who didn't play a minute this year.

Never coached his own kids though, he's winning right now with what Watkins left him. He may be able to, as he's pulled in some nice classes, but we still don't know for sure.

For your viewing pleasure, today's TV schedule: Underway- UAB v. Memphis(C-USA Championship) CBS 11:00 CST- Vermont v. Albany(America East Championship) ESPN2 12:00 CST- South Carolina v. Kentucky(SEC Semi) No National TV 12:30 CST- Wake Forest v. Duke(ACC semi) ESPN 12:40 CST- Michigan St. v. Iowa(Big 10 semi) CBS 1:00 CST- Texas A&M v. Texas(Big 12 semi) ESPN2 2:15 CST- Florida v. LSU(SEC Semi) No National TV 3:00 CST*- Boston College v. North Carolina(ACC semi) ESPN 3:05 CST*- Indiana v. Ohio State(Big 10 semi) CBS 3:20 CST*- Nebraska v. Kansas(Big 12 semi) ESPN2 5:00 CST- Xavier v. St. Joseph's(A-10 Championship) ESPN 5:15 CST- Cal v. UCLA(Pac-10 Championship) CBS 6:00 CST- Toledo v. Kent State(MAC Championship) ESPN2 6:30 CST- Hampton v. Delaware St.(MEAC Championship) ESPN Classic 7:00 CST- Syracuse v. Pittsburgh(Big East Championship) ESPN 7:30 CST- Arkansas Pine-Bluff v. Southern(SWAC Championship) ESPNU 9:00 CST- Wyoming v. San Diego St.(Mountain West Championship) ESPN 11:00 CST- Long Beach State v. Pacific(Big West Championship) ESPN 11:00 CST- Utah State v. Nevada(WAC Championship) ESPN2 *Starts set time after other semifinal, likely will start later than scheduled time.

Nothing but speculation really. A couple weeks ago there was a rumor (that had some real steam) that it was a done deal but that fizzled out. The consensus is that IU would have to make him their top and only real candidate and offer him the job without any interview process. In that case I think he would take it, but I just don't think IU is sold on him enough to handle it that way. . This may or may not make you happy, but I was at a meeting with some guys from Indianapolis last week and they seem to believe Randy Wittman will be the next Indiana coach. The Randy Wittman bandwagon is gaining steam. I still think it's 50-50 on Alford being the next coach. If not him I suspect Wittman, Crean, Majerus, Dakich, and Keith Smart will be considered heavily. Man, it's amazing to me that people still throw out Majerus' name. Some crazy Mizzou alumni friends of mine want him to be their head coach. I would have to have him go through at minimum 50 physicals before I would even interview him let alone hire him. There's also a faction that want Larry Drew as head coach, despite him never being a head coach ever, and never coaching at the college level. If it would work, getting both would be ideal. Majerus, while hampered by his health, could bring the program back as quick as any, and when he no longer can take it physically, Drew will have enough experience to take over. I doubt you see anything like that though.

So, in your estimation (and I'm playing what if) if Syracuse wins the Big East tourney, what seed did they play themselves into by improving their resume? If they were an 8-9 by beating UConn, how high do you raise them for winning two more games? Or do you? It's a relatively subjective process to begin with and, to me, these four days just makes it even more subjective. I at least like how committees in the past put a lot of emphasis on how you did in the last ten games leading up to the conference tourneys, because as you and I have said before, many teams don't have much to play for and are playing teams on life support. To be honest, I don't know where I'd put Syracuse right now, I haven't looked that deeply into who belongs where, aside from the top, which isn't that difficult. I didn't have them in the tourney before their trip to New York, and only after the UConn win did I consider them in. Beating Georgetown and Pitt is pretty impressive, but to the logic I'm ascribing to, no moreso than if they had done so in the regular season and then lost in the conference tourney. That is, aside from the "most recent performance" part.

cubsgonewild, put some img tags on your sig to get that pic to show up. You can copy/paste what's below in that space to get it to work. http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:jglHwg0lYZGmfM:giftshop.lsusports.net/assets/storeimages/productimages/PAAAAADGEJAKKCBB_L.jpg

I wasn't paying very close attention, but I don't think it was that bad, from the replay and sideline report I saw.

So, if Illinois had lost Sunday and been considered a 3 seed before tonight and won, would you think they deserve a 2 seed? What if the loss happened in the January game? I agree with not ignoring regular season results, but the game still happened. If Illinois was regarded as a #3 seed then fine. I just hate for teams to lose a seed because of a loss in the conference tourney. Should Illinois be punished for losing tonight? No. If they had split the regular season with MSU than I could better understand, but if you drop them because of tonight then, to me, you're saying tonight's game meant more than the two regular season wins, one of which happened in E. Lansing. And you probably will never agree with me, but this is one of the reasons why I don't like conference tourneys. If Ohio State loses tomorrow did they lose a possible #1 seed or have they already been inked as a #2 before the tourney? Does Syracuse deserve to be rewarded for playing mediocre basketball for three months, while playing championship ball for three days? At least I can respect how the ACC handles it because their regular season champion is whoever wins the conference tournament. So you want the conference tourneys to be ignored? They're still games that happen. I understand not overemphasizing them, but in Illinois' case they were in competition with several teams for a 2 seed(Nova, UConn, Duke, Memphis, Texas, OSU are all in front of U of I), so I don't see a huge deal with U of I getting a 3 seed if UNC and UCLA win their conference tourneys, the difference wasn't that great between them(plus Tennessee also lost in their conference quarters, and has a better RPI and SOS than U of I). I don't know if you're being argumentative or I'm not making myself clear, so I'll assume I'm not making myself clear. My issue is not whether Illinois deserves a #2 or not. If the committee felt before today's game that they were a #3 seed that's fine with me. I just don't understand how one game pretty much wipes out a regular season performance. And, I'm not just talking about Illinois. Is it right that UConn may have lost the overall #1 seed with their first round loss, even though they along with Duke and Villanova were pretty much the top three teams for most of the season? Was Ohio State already a #1 or #2 seed no matter what they did in the conference tourney or did they have to prove themselves again by getting deep into the conference tourney? I don't know it may be a generational thing. I still fondly remember when the Big Ten and Pac-10 didn't play conference tourneys and the conference champion got the automatic bid. I just wish teams like Missouri State and Creighton didn't have to suffer because of barely bubble teams playing like champions for three days. Yeah, their games, but it's more of giving teams who don't deserve a second chance a second chance. Thank goodness Bucknell won today or some other deserving team would get the shaft. This is how I look at it. Illinois before today was in all likelihood a number 2 seed. I wouldn't say they were a lock, but I digress. They lost today. Without putting any extra emphasis that it was the tourney, that hurts their resume, probably just as much as if they had lost on Sunday. Tennessee is now in basically the same boat as Illinois, since both are done, and both had solid claims to a 2 seed prior to the tourneys(IMO, they were the other two #2 seeds with the other 6 teams I mentioned). Now that UT and U of I are finished, other teams have a chance to catch them. UNC beating BC and then Duke to win the ACC tournament improves their resume pretty significantly, wouldn't you agree? Looking at their total resume after that, one could conclude that they are more deserving of a 2 seed than Illinois(the heels already have a better RPI and SOS, this would give them a better record v. the RPI top 50 as well as road/neutral record, plus the same total number of losses). Now U of I is battling the Vols for that last 2 seed. If the committee decides UT's SOS and RPI advantage outweigh U of I's record v. the top 50 and in road/neutral games, then U of I is out of luck. It's not punishing them for losing to Michigan State, it's rewarding UNC for taking advantage of the opportunity to improve their overall resume.

So, if Illinois had lost Sunday and been considered a 3 seed before tonight and won, would you think they deserve a 2 seed? What if the loss happened in the January game? I agree with not ignoring regular season results, but the game still happened. If Illinois was regarded as a #3 seed then fine. I just hate for teams to lose a seed because of a loss in the conference tourney. Should Illinois be punished for losing tonight? No. If they had split the regular season with MSU than I could better understand, but if you drop them because of tonight then, to me, you're saying tonight's game meant more than the two regular season wins, one of which happened in E. Lansing. And you probably will never agree with me, but this is one of the reasons why I don't like conference tourneys. If Ohio State loses tomorrow did they lose a possible #1 seed or have they already been inked as a #2 before the tourney? Does Syracuse deserve to be rewarded for playing mediocre basketball for three months, while playing championship ball for three days? At least I can respect how the ACC handles it because their regular season champion is whoever wins the conference tournament. So you want the conference tourneys to be ignored? They're still games that happen. I understand not overemphasizing them, but in Illinois' case they were in competition with several teams for a 2 seed(Nova, UConn, Duke, Memphis, Texas, OSU are all in front of U of I), so I don't see a huge deal with U of I getting a 3 seed if UNC and UCLA win their conference tourneys, the difference wasn't that great between them(plus Tennessee also lost in their conference quarters, and has a better RPI and SOS than U of I).

So, if Illinois had lost Sunday and been considered a 3 seed before tonight and won, would you think they deserve a 2 seed? What if the loss happened in the January game? I agree with not ignoring regular season results, but the game still happened.

Gamecast just made up something about Warren Carter making a layup, then took back their mistake. Carter isn't even on the court...

Wow, what a gutsy play by Brown. I've got bonus coverage, but it's lagging behind.

Whoops, get right on that.

It's within 10 points, has been the entire game. I can't remember the last time either ESPN game had that going for it. Please score some points MSU...

BC is winning by TWENTY TWO. Change the game you schmucks.

Some people like to add SB's to SLG, and subtract CS from OBP, but that gives a stolen base the same value as a single, half a double, and a third of a triple, which isn't the case considering what those hits do to advance runners.

I think a win Saturday and IU is no worse than a 7 seed. Win Sunday and make that a 6. I like our chances against the Buckeyes. I think whoever wins the Killingsworth-Dials match-up wins the game. GO IU! I am not a Mike Davis fan, and I'm glad we will have a new coach next season, but I'm pleasently surprised with the way the team has played since he resigned. Haven't they said that the Championship game doesn't impact the seeding? Not sure. I can't see how it wouldn't though. I know the game an hour or two before the selection show, but you would thing they would have multiple brackets ready. Every game should impact the seedings, including the last one. IIRC, they've said that it's too close to the release of the brackets, and the only way that it matters is if there is a team in the final that wouldn't be in the tourney otherwise(say if Penn State made the final this year). Not 100% sure though.