ESPN/USA rankings week of 2/23

[jv001]

1. Pittsburgh
2. U-Conn
3. Oklahoma
4. Memphis
5. unc
6. Louisville
7. Duke
8. Missouri
9. Michigan State
10.Marquette

#13. Clemson
#14. Wake Forest
#15. Florida State

I still believe Clemson & Wake are better than #13 & #14 in the country.
Go Duke!

[Ders24]

I haven't seen Missouri at all yet. Are they legit?

[Cdog923]

I haven't seen Missouri at all yet. Are they legit?

They are very good. Play very good defense, which translates into good offensive possesions. They could win the Big XII, especially if Griffin's concussion has any lingering effects.

[jv001]

I haven't seen Missouri at all yet. Are they legit?

Pretty good but I think the Big 12 is weaker than years past. Go Duke!

[should_be_working]

wow, i don't think memphis has any business being in the top 10, let alone the top 5

[jv001]

wow, i don't think memphis has any business being in the top 10, let alone the top 5

Now they are in a real bad conference. They've won something like 54 in a row in the conference. I believe that figure is correct. Go Duke!

[Bluedog]

I haven't seen Missouri at all yet. Are they legit?

My personal opinion? Not a top ten team. Definitely a top 15-20 team. Quality wins: TX, Kansas, and Cal. Losses: Xavier, IL, Nebraska, Kansas State.

But I don't think MSU is top ten quality either. I hope we have Big XII/Big Ten teams in our region....except for Oklahoma. Lots of good teams in the Big Ten, in my opinion, but no great ones.

[geraldsneighbor]

wow, i don't think memphis has any business being in the top 10, let alone the top 5

Memphis is not better then UNC. If you play zone on them, they are done. I'd hope they would win as many games as they do in that conference because its brutal. It might be a one-bid league.

[crimsonandblue]

I haven't seen Missouri at all yet. Are they legit?

Depends on what you mean by legit. They're a legitimately solid Big XII team (which isn't saying much). In any other year, they'd maybe deserve top 20 consideration. This year, they might actually deserve to be in the 15 range.

Mizzou has KState at home and Kansas on the road this week. They also have OU at home. It'll be a big surprise to win two of those three. So, I doubt they'll win the Big XII. Hell, I'll eat my hat if they win the Big XII. It's not happening.

[Bluedog]

#13. Clemson
#14. Wake Forest
#15. Florida State


FSU is ranked 25, NOT 15.

[JDev]

If they were to meet, I would take Wake over Memphis and any of the teams 6-10, besides Duke.

[Clipsfan]

wow, i don't think memphis has any business being in the top 10, let alone the top 5

Surprisingly, they are #1 according to Pomeroy. Duke is 5th

[Matches]

Pretty harsh that Wake dropped six spots for losing on the road to a top-10 team in a game that was competitive until near the end.

[jv001]

FSU is ranked 25, NOT 15.

You are correct. My bad, hit the wrong key. FSU is #25. Go Duke!

[throatybeard]

I don't know how real or unreal Mizzou is, but Mike Anderson sure has cleaned Quin's mess up in short order:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/E797039BAA71B985862575600014DA0E?OpenDocument=

[should_be_working]

Surprisingly, they are #1 according to Pomeroy. Duke is 5th

That's interesting. I guess we'll see just how good they are when they start playing better competition in the NCAA tournament. I just think if they get a 2 or 3 seed they are being rewarded for playing in a weak conference.

[roywhite]

That's interesting. I guess we'll see just how good they are when they start playing better competition in the NCAA tournament. I just think if they get a 2 or 3 seed they are being rewarded for playing in a weak conference.

On Memphis, maybe so. But there's also the theory that they aren't wearing themselves out butting heads against good teams night after night like ACC and Big East teams are doing.

Calipari has done a good coaching job. He had a lineup change of his own involving PG play by giving that responsbility to Tyreke Evans; it's worked out well.

[Wander]

How many NCAA tournaments do you have to watch before you realize conference affiliation has basically zero effect on how far a team goes in the tournament?

I'm not guaranteeing that Memphis will make the Elite 8, but if they do get upset, it won't have anything to do with playing in C-USA.

[should_be_working]

On Memphis, maybe so. But there's also the theory that they aren't wearing themselves out butting heads against good teams night after night like ACC and Big East teams are doing.

Calipari has done a good coaching job. He had a lineup change of his own involving PG play by giving that responsbility to Tyreke Evans; it's worked out well.

I suppose having the best of both worlds would be ideal - the experience and toughness of playing high level competition all season long matched though with the freshness of blowing people out on a nightly basis, but obviously that's near impossible. There's no question Calipari has done a nice coaching job, considering what he lost, but rewarding them a 2 seed, or even crazier a 1 seed, just doesn't seem right for a team that hasn't had ACC or Big East type quality competition. Just doesn't seem fair/right, but of course i'm bias coming from the ACC.

EDIT: I'm not saying a team from a weaker conference can't go far in the tournament, obviously they can (as previous tournaments has taught us), I just don't see the evidence for, in this case, Memphis getting a coveted 1 or 2 seed, maybe even a 3, based on the games they've won and lost.

[rasputin]

How many NCAA tournaments do you have to watch before you realize conference affiliation has basically zero effect on how far a team goes in the tournament?

I'm not guaranteeing that Memphis will make the Elite 8, but if they do get upset, it won't have anything to do with playing in C-USA.

People made the same argument last year, that Memphis would flame out in the tourney because of their weak conference. Then they made the Final Four. They did play a very strong out-of-conference Tennessee team down the stretch last year.

[Memphis Devil]

Memphis' ranking, IMO, is based more on what they have done over the last 4 years than what they have done this year. If UTEP or Tulsa had the exact same record as Memphis they wouldn't even sniff the top 10 let alone top 5.

Of course this phenomenon is nothing new, it happens all the time.

[crimsonandblue]

I don't know how real or unreal Mizzou is, but Mike Anderson sure has cleaned Quin's mess up in short order:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/E797039BAA71B985862575600014DA0E?OpenDocument=

Agreed. Anderson has done a good job. I hope he sticks at Mizzou and doesn't bolt for one of the multitude of SEC jobs he could probably land.

I will say that Leo Lyons was just suspended about a month ago for silly, piddly stuff (http://www.examiner.com/x-1431-Missouri-Tigers-Examiner~y2009m1d13-Mizzous-Lyons-arrested-Daniel-reveals-thumb-injury), including arrest for an outstanding warrant related to a traffic violation, so it's not all candy and roses. But that's a breath of fresh air compared to the stuff that's gone on in the recent past. Just a little funny to see a guy protesting how thrilled he is not to have to report arrests when an arrest occurred a month ago.

[Wander]

There's no question Calipari has done a nice coaching job, considering what he lost, but rewarding them a 2 seed, or even crazier a 1 seed, just doesn't seem right for a team that hasn't had ACC or Big East type quality competition.

Here's a question I like to pose to the few fans of the BCS garbage in college football:

If you took the New England Patriots and put them in a non-BCS conference, would they get a chance to win the national championship? If the answer is no, then the postseason system is a complete failure.

Same thing is true, to a lesser extent, in basketball. If you put the Celtics in C-USA and they didn't get a top seed in the NCAAs, then the selection process sucks.

[should_be_working]

Here's a question I like to pose to the few fans of the BCS garbage in college football:

If you took the New England Patriots and put them in a non-BCS conference, would they get a chance to win the national championship? If the answer is no, then the postseason system is a complete failure.

Same thing is true, to a lesser extent, in basketball. If you put the Celtics in C-USA and they didn't get a top seed in the NCAAs, then the selection process sucks.

This is a good point, but at the same time, don't the patriots and celtics prove their dominance time and time again by competing against and beating the highest level of competition? Memphis could be the best team in the NCAA, but because once conference play begins and they play a lower level of competition, its hard to judge how good they really are. To me, they haven't proven that they deserve a number 1 seed, but that is not their fault, its just their situation. And this of course is just my opinion. Put them in the big east this year, and something tells me they wouldn't have as good of a record, but yes, they would still be the same team with the same talent, but perhaps not competing for a 1 seed

[Memphis Devil]

To me, they haven't proven that they deserve a number 1 seed, but that is not their fault, its just their situation. And this of course is just my opinion. Put them in the big east this year, and something tells me they wouldn't have as good of a record, but yes, they would still be the same team with the same talent, but perhaps not competing for a 1 seed

Actually, it is their fault. One of the biggest differences between this Memphis team and last years (other than the obvious missing NBA players), is that they have not won the big out of conference games. Memphis has played what I consider to be 5 tough out of conference match ups (Gonzaga, Tennessee, Georgetown, Syracuse, & Xavier) and gone 2 - 3 in the process only beating, IMO, the weaker of the 5 (Tennessee & Gonzaga). Granted all of this occured before they moved Tyreke Evans to the PG.

Having said all of that, I think that there is absolutely no way Memphis sports the same record if playing in one of the BCS Conferences. And, as I mentioned earlier, their inflated ranking has more to do with what they have done over the last 4 seasons and what they could do this year than what they have actually accomplished.

Memphis in no way deserves consideration for a 1 seed in the tourney. Well, perhaps they deserve consideration but not seriously.

[tbyers11]

Memphis' ranking, IMO, is based more on what they have done over the last 4 years than what they have done this year. If UTEP or Tulsa had the exact same record as Memphis they wouldn't even sniff the top 10 let alone top 5.

Of course this phenomenon is nothing new, it happens all the time.

I agree with you here. As others have said, Memphis should not be kept from a one seed this year just because they play in a a weak conference. They should be kept from a one seed because they simply don't have the resume to back it up.

In non-conference games against possible NCAA at-large teams this year Memphis is 3-3. Losses to GTown, Syracuse and Xavier. Wins against Gonzaga, Tennessee and Cincinnati. None of those opponents are cream of the crop either. Xavier and Gonzaga are probably the only teams with realistic chances at a top 4 seed.

Conference USA only has two teams (besides Memphis) with an RPI below 70 (UAB and Tulsa) and only two more teams below 100 (UTEP and Houston). This is a weak conference. Memphis deserves credit for winning the conference games that they should win, but UAB is probably the only other CUSA team with a shot at an at-large bid. Memphis beat them at home and play at UAB this Thursday. If they beat UAB, Memphis is 5-3 in games against possible tourney teams. In my book that makes they about a 3 right now. If they win out probably a 2. I don't think they should be awarded a one seed solely for piling up the wins in February while Big East and ACC teams pick up a few losses by attrition.

Last year's team was 7-1 against a more impressive slate of non-con tourney teams with wins (Siena, GTown, Gonzaga, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Arizona, USC) and the loss to Tennessee. Also, from my extremely subjective view, this Memphis team is just not as good as last year's. I've watched them play 4 or 5 times this year (Gtown, Syracuse, UCF, Gonzaga, UTEP) and they aren't as good as last year's team. They are a very good defensive team and moving Tyreke Evans to the point has helped the offense but I am not sure that they can score enough (without CDR and Rose) to win the big ones. Especially if a team zones them and forces them to settle for 3's.

[juise]

Regarding Memphis...

It's funny that we should be talking about their schedule. Their pre-conference challenges were very similar to Duke's. I would say they have played 4 legitimate none-conference games. (I'm not going to count Seton Hall or UMass. I suppose that could be argued.

Xavier (then unranked, neutral site) - lost by 5
Georgetown (then ranked #19, at GU) - lost by 9 in OT
Syracuse (then ranked #11, at Memphis) - lost by 7
Tennessee (then unranked, at UT) - won by 2
Gonzaga (then #18, at Gonzaga) - won by 18


While I am not super-impressed by the caliber of their opponents, I am impressed by their willingness to play road games.

I think that their OOC schedule is pretty similar to Duke's in term's of caliber of opponent.

Both played Xavier in a neutral location (though our game was a little less neutral).
Home against 'Cuse is like our home game against the Hoyas.
At Tennessee is sorta like Duke at Michigan.
At Gonzaga is like Duke at Purdue.

I don't think we a game that compares to at Georgetown, but you get the point. In those four games, Duke went 3-1 and Memphis went 2-2. But that is really where Memphis' challenges end. Duke has played 4 top 10 teams since conference began (going 1-3, sadly).

I haven't really reached any conclusions. I just enjoyed the exercise. :D


(Edit: I started writing this and then got distracted by work, so I did not see Memphis Devil's post.)

[pfrduke]

Regarding Memphis...

It's funny that we should be talking about their schedule. Their pre-conference challenges were very similar to Duke's. I would say they have played 4 legitimate none-conference games. (I'm not going to count Seton Hall or UMass. I suppose that could be argued.

Xavier (then unranked, neutral site) - lost by 5
Georgetown (then ranked #19, at GU) - lost by 9 in OT
Syracuse (then ranked #11, at Memphis) - lost by 7
Tennessee (then unranked, at UT) - won by 2
Gonzaga (then #18, at Gonzaga) - won by 18


While I am not super-impressed by the caliber of their opponents, I am impressed by their willingness to play road games.

I think that their OOC schedule is pretty similar to Duke's in term's of caliber of opponent.

Both played Xavier in a neutral location (though our game was a little less neutral).
Home against 'Cuse is like our home game against the Hoyas.
At Tennessee is sorta like Duke at Michigan.
At Gonzaga is like Duke at Purdue.

I don't think we a game that compares to at Georgetown, but you get the point. In those four games, Duke went 3-1 and Memphis went 2-2. But that is really where Memphis' challenges end. Duke has played 4 top 10 teams since conference began (going 1-3, sadly).

I haven't really reached any conclusions. I just enjoyed the exercise. :D


(Edit: I started writing this and then got distracted by work, so I did not see Memphis Devil's post.)

The Gonzaga game was played in Spokane, but not at the Zags home arena. Certainly Gonzaga still had home court advantage, but less of a "true" road game for Memphis (kind of like Duke at the United Center against Illinois in years past).

[houstondukie]

Regarding Memphis...

It's funny that we should be talking about their schedule. Their pre-conference challenges were very similar to Duke's. I would say they have played 4 legitimate none-conference games. (I'm not going to count Seton Hall or UMass. I suppose that could be argued.

Xavier (then unranked, neutral site) - lost by 5
Georgetown (then ranked #19, at GU) - lost by 9 in OT
Syracuse (then ranked #11, at Memphis) - lost by 7
Tennessee (then unranked, at UT) - won by 2
Gonzaga (then #18, at Gonzaga) - won by 18


While I am not super-impressed by the caliber of their opponents, I am impressed by their willingness to play road games.

I think that their OOC schedule is pretty similar to Duke's in term's of caliber of opponent.

Both played Xavier in a neutral location (though our game was a little less neutral).
Home against 'Cuse is like our home game against the Hoyas.
At Tennessee is sorta like Duke at Michigan.
At Gonzaga is like Duke at Purdue.

I don't think we a game that compares to at Georgetown, but you get the point. In those four games, Duke went 3-1 and Memphis went 2-2. But that is really where Memphis' challenges end. Duke has played 4 top 10 teams since conference began (going 1-3, sadly).

I haven't really reached any conclusions. I just enjoyed the exercise. :D


(Edit: I started writing this and then got distracted by work, so I did not see Memphis Devil's post.)


Um, in case you haven't noticed, we played and beat Georgetown at home this year (makes your point stronger too).

vs Georgetown (Duke-W, Memphis-L)
vs. Xavier (Duke-W, Memphis-L)

[Cell-R]

Um, in case you haven't noticed, we played and beat Georgetown at home this year (makes your point stronger too).

vs Georgetown (Duke-W, Memphis-L)
vs. Xavier (Duke-W, Memphis-L)

I think he already compared vs. Georgetown to Memphis's game AT Syracuse. The reason he did that is because it was away, we played Georgetown at home.

[juise]

I think he already compared vs. Georgetown to Memphis's game AT Syracuse. The reason he did that is because it was away, we played Georgetown at home.

Yahtzee.

At the beginning of my post I said that our OOC schedule looks like Memphis' (with Xavier and G-town as common opponents). However, I didn't think it was fair to compare the two since ours was in Cameron.

[Wander]

Having said all of that, I think that there is absolutely no way Memphis sports the same record if playing in one of the BCS Conferences.

No one is disputing this. C-USA is not as good as any of the BCS leagues, even the mid-major-like SEC. The point is that doesn't matter. I'm not claiming that they would go undefeated in the Big East or ACC. What I am claiming is that they would be right up there as contenders for the title in either of those conferences.

No one is saying they don't have weaknesses, either. Yes, they have massive trouble against a good zone. But UNC has an incredibly obvious huge weakness as well (they can't stop opposing scoring combo guards from dropping 30 on them), and no one is claiming they can't be a 1 seed.

One last point: this seeding doesn't take place in a vacuum. Memphis is not as good as last year. But the field is weaker overall. If Oklahoma loses a couple more games and Texas wins the Big 12 tourney and everything else plays out as expected, who else would you elevate to a 1 seed? Louisville who lost to Western Kentucky? Us, who lost to Clemson by a million? Michigan State, who lost to UNC by a billion? Wake, who is 5th in the ACC? Do you think Clemson or Missouri is more deserving of a 1 seed than Memphis? Some of the teams I listed are comparable, but who is clearly better to the point where it's not even a discussion?

[Memphis Devil]

One last point: this seeding doesn't take place in a vacuum. Memphis is not as good as last year. But the field is weaker overall. If Oklahoma loses a couple more games and Texas wins the Big 12 tourney and everything else plays out as expected, who else would you elevate to a 1 seed? Louisville who lost to Western Kentucky? Us, who lost to Clemson by a million? Michigan State, who lost to UNC by a billion? Wake, who is 5th in the ACC? Do you think Clemson or Missouri is more deserving of a 1 seed than Memphis? Some of the teams I listed are comparable, but who is clearly better to the point where it's not even a discussion?

The one thing that all of the teams that you have listed have in common is a resume with quality wins in it. Memphis quite frankly does not, and yes, I do believe that should keep them from attaining a one seed. There is nothing Memphis has done all season long that would make me think they are 1 seed worthy. For example, if Davidson had the same record as Memphis, do you think anyone would be talking about them as a 1 seed? I do understand that Memphis has built a program of top conference talent playing in a sub-par conference, but if you don't win games against quality teams, how can you lay claim to one of the top four spots in the tourney?

[jv001]

Put Memphis in the ACC and they don't go through one year unbeaten. They would have some quality wins, but would have some bad losses as well. Just like Duke, unc, Wake, Clemson and the other top teams in the ACC. Memphis has a cake walk through the regular season. I don't know who's fault it is, but it is what it is. Go Duke!

[JDev]

Put Memphis in the ACC and they don't go through one year unbeaten. They would have some quality wins, but would have some bad losses as well. Just like Duke, unc, Wake, Clemson and the other top teams in the ACC. Memphis has a cake walk through the regular season. I don't know who's fault it is, but it is what it is. Go Duke!

This is true. In the ACC they are just another good team. However, last year they showed that if you are good, you are good. The difference is they aren't near as good this year, certainly not top five.

[SupaDave]

I'd just like to point out that Tyreke Evans is a major talent. It seems that some of you under estimating the kid and Cal's coaching. Let's not forget that coaching plays a part in this at this time of year as well.

Tyreke might be ready to break out and he's a big kid - could be pretty hard to stop in a tourney situation.

I think it's best not to concentrate on your opponent's opponent because that will never give you a fair evaluation of what it's like to really play THEM. (We trashed Maryland, UNC thrashed us, Maryland takes it to UNC - make sense?)

It's overlooking teams like Memphis that get you into trouble. Missouri as well. Certain teams just come to play - I think George Mason has proven that.

[throatybeard]

Agreed. Anderson has done a good job. I hope he sticks at Mizzou and doesn't bolt for one of the multitude of SEC jobs he could probably land.

I will say that Leo Lyons was just suspended about a month ago for silly, piddly stuff (http://www.examiner.com/x-1431-Missouri-Tigers-Examiner~y2009m1d13-Mizzous-Lyons-arrested-Daniel-reveals-thumb-injury), including arrest for an outstanding warrant related to a traffic violation, so it's not all candy and roses. But that's a breath of fresh air compared to the stuff that's gone on in the recent past. Just a little funny to see a guy protesting how thrilled he is not to have to report arrests when an arrest occurred a month ago.

I guess you could argue that historically, Mizzou to the SEC isn't a move up in BB except for Kentucky. Florida? Arkansas?

Well anyway, right on time, there's a story on Mike Anderson/Mizzou in this week's (March 2) Sports Illustrated. They actually go kind of easy on Quin.