PDA

View Full Version : And the fourth and last #1 seed goes to?



houstondukie
03-10-2009, 04:43 PM
Everyone seems to think that UNC, Pitt, and UCONN have locked up #1 seeds, and I agree as long as they win at least one game in their respective conference tourneys.

So who gets the last #1 seed?

IMO, it comes down to 6 teams for the last spot:

Louisville
Oklahoma
Duke
Wake Forest
Michigan State
Memphis

All of these teams have to win their conference tournaments to be considered for the #1 seed.

And if Louisville wins the Big East tourney to add to their regular season championship, they will no doubt get the final #1 seed.

So here's my question...

If Louisville does NOT win the Big East tournament, who gets the last #1 seed if Oklahoma, Michigan State, Memphis, and either Duke or Wake Forest EACH WINS THEIR RESPECTIVE CONFERENCE TOURNAMENTS.

hurleyfor3
03-10-2009, 04:54 PM
Not us. I think it's between Memphis and Oklahoma, with OU probably needing to win its tournament *and* Memphis to lose its.

The Ncaa doesn't always go on straight rankings/ rpi/ pomeroy/ whatever dork polls it says it doesn't look at. Geographical balance matters, too.

chrisheery
03-10-2009, 05:01 PM
I think we would need to win the ACC tourney over a fully manned UNC (after beating Wake as well). We would also need Oklahoma to not win the Big 12 tourney. I don't think the C-USA tourney holds much weight. That said, we could fall to a 3 seed if we don't win at least 2 games in the tourney.

crimsonandblue
03-10-2009, 05:03 PM
I don't think Memphis can get there. They've got four top-50 RPI wins. Period.

If OU runs the table, I think they can get there. Particularly if they beat MU and KU to win the tourney (even if it is being held in Oklahoma City). If not, if Michigan State wins the Big 10, I'd give them the nod.

Maybe the committee will disagree, but beating up on conference USA, while not dominating your out of conference quality opponents isn't a recipe for a one seed.

houstondukie
03-10-2009, 05:05 PM
Not us. I think it's between Memphis and Oklahoma, with OU probably needing to win its tournament *and* Memphis to lose its.

The Ncaa doesn't always go on straight rankings/ rpi/ pomeroy/ whatever dork polls it says it doesn't look at. Geographical balance matters, too.

So let's say Duke beats Boston College, Wake Forest, and North Carolina this weekend and wins the ACC championship. You think the NCAA will still give the number 1 seed to Memphis?

(assuming it wins conf. usa tourney, of course)

I don't agree.

If Duke wins the ACC tournament by beating Wake Forest and UNC, I think it needs only Louisville and Oklahoma to lose to grab the final 1 seed.*

* even if Michigan St and Memphis run the table

So here's how I rank them (as if they all win out):

1. Louisville
2. Oklahoma
3. Duke or Wake Forest
4. Michigan St.
5. Memphis - no way the NCAA picks Memphis as the 1 seed if teams 1-4 win their tourneys too. Memphis needs a lot of teams to lose.

CameronBornAndBred
03-10-2009, 05:07 PM
I think it would go to Oklahoma. I hope so, it will be fun to watch Capel go in as a 1.

hurleyfor3
03-10-2009, 05:11 PM
So let's say Duke beats Boston College, Wake Forest, and North Carolina this weekend and wins the ACC championship. You think the NCAA will still give the number 1 seed to Memphis?


We won't beat those three teams. (Which is not the same as saying we won't win the tournament.)

Has the ncaa ever split the 1-seeds two to one conference and two to another? That's just not in character.

houstondukie
03-10-2009, 05:14 PM
We won't beat those three teams. (Which is not the same as saying we won't win the tournament.)

Has the ncaa ever split the 1-seeds two to one conference and two to another? That's just not in character.

Isn't it funny how 6 weeks ago, every expert was saying it was not just possible but probable that the ACC and BIG EAST would split the #1 seeds?

Could still happen, but nobody seems to mention it much anymore.

feldspar
03-10-2009, 05:17 PM
Here's what I think needs to happen for Duke to get a #1 seed (in order):

Oklahoma has to NOT reach the semi-finals of the Big XII tournament

Michigan State has to NOT reach the semi-finals of the Big Televen tournament

Louisville CAN NOT win the Big East tournament

Memphis CAN NOT win their conference tournament

Duke HAS to win the ACC Tournament, preferably beating Wake Forest and UNC in the process

That's a tall order.

Chard
03-13-2009, 09:56 AM
Anyone know what happened to the "predict Duke's NCAA seed" thread? The one where we were discussing what Duke's seed would be based on the results of the ACC tournament. Things just got a bit dicey with some of the projected #1's not winning one game in their tourneys.

blueprofessor
03-13-2009, 10:04 AM
UNC,UCon, Louisville, and Michigan State.Just guessing.:D
Whom do we want...Louisville or MState?:mad:

Best--Blueprof:)

Highlander
03-13-2009, 10:38 AM
Here's what I think needs to happen for Duke to get a #1 seed (in order):

Oklahoma has to NOT reach the semi-finals of the Big XII tournament


One down...

InSpades
03-13-2009, 10:40 AM
Curious as to why people think UConn will get a #1 over Pitt. They basically have the exact same record (Pitt has 1 more non-conference win). Pitt has a higher SoS and most importantly, Pitt swept UConn in the regular season. I think it's still possible that they both get #1s, but more likely 1 of them gets a #1 and one of them gets a #2 and the #1 should go to Pitt.

feldspar
03-13-2009, 10:46 AM
I’m becoming more and more convinced that, if Louisville doesn’t win the Big East tournament and Duke does win the ACC Tournament, Duke is pretty much a lock for a #1 seed.

Why? How bad would it look for the committee to award #1 seeds to three teams who didn’t get the job done in their respective conference tournaments and deny top bids to teams who did?

Imagine, for a moment, that Louisville loses tonight or tomorrow and Duke wins on Sunday. Then imagine the scenarios that everyone is talking about:

1 seeds:

UNC
UConn
Louisville
Michigan State/Memphis

Three teams that didn’t win their conference tournaments as #1 seeds? I don’t think the committee will allow that. Duke will end up taking Louisville or UConn's spot.

I hope this Duke team knows that they are now literally playing with a #1 seed on the line, because I really believe that, at this point, they are.

blueprofessor
03-13-2009, 11:06 AM
Here's what I think needs to happen for Duke to get a #1 seed (in order):

Oklahoma has to NOT reach the semi-finals of the Big XII tournament

Michigan State has to NOT reach the semi-finals of the Big Televen tournament

Louisville CAN NOT win the Big East tournament

Memphis CAN NOT win their conference tournament

Duke HAS to win the ACC Tournament, preferably beating Wake Forest and UNC in the process


Michigan State's not reaching the semis---- 10%
Louisville's not winning the Big Easy-------- 25%
Memphis's not winning conference tourney--20%
Duke's winning ACC tourney----------------30%

Probability that all 4 events occur: .1x.25x.2.x.3=.0015

Compute your own percentages and multiply .

TALL ORDER,indeed! But ,there is a chance.:)
Best regards--Blueprof:D

RoyalBlue08
03-13-2009, 11:15 AM
I’m becoming more and more convinced that, if Louisville doesn’t win the Big East tournament and Duke does win the ACC Tournament, Duke is pretty much a lock for a #1 seed.

Why? How bad would it look for the committee to award #1 seeds to three teams who didn’t get the job done in their respective conference tournaments and deny top bids to teams who did?

Imagine, for a moment, that Louisville loses tonight or tomorrow and Duke wins on Sunday. Then imagine the scenarios that everyone is talking about:

1 seeds:

UNC
UConn
Louisville
Michigan State/Memphis

Three teams that didn’t win their conference tournaments as #1 seeds? I don’t think the committee will allow that. Duke will end up taking Louisville or UConn's spot.

I hope this Duke team knows that they are now literally playing with a #1 seed on the line, because I really believe that, at this point, they are.

I think you got your #1 seeds right except Pitt is a 1 seed over UConn (whom they beat twice). I think UNC and Pitt are still locked in. Memphis will be there unless they slip up in Conf USA and the last one goes to Louisville if they could win their tournament, then Michigan State if they win their tournament...and if neither of those happen that Duke can sneak in with an ACC tourney title.

tbyers11
03-13-2009, 11:22 AM
Anyone know what happened to the "predict Duke's NCAA seed" thread? The one where we were discussing what Duke's seed would be based on the results of the ACC tournament. Things just got a bit dicey with some of the projected #1's not winning one game in their tourneys.

I was looking for that thread yesterday as well and it just disappeared. It wasn't locked and slid to the 2nd page. It was deleted. Strange. :confused:

With Pitt, OK and UConn all losing in the quarters of their tourneys, things have opened for the Devils to possibly get a 1 seed. They still need to win the ACC. But if they beat BC/Wake/UNC to do it, I don't see how the committee can place Mich St or Memphis over them no matter what they do in their tourneys.

Right now I think the Number 1 seeds look like:

Fairly set
UNC (assuming they don't lose to VT and Lawson's toe makes it to next weekend :D)
Pitt (they beat UConn twice and don't have the bad losses that Louisville has)

If all these teams win out, in order they deserve #1
Louisville
Duke
Michigan State (beating Minn/Wisc/Illinois wouldn't raise their profile as much Duke's three potential victories would)
Wake (they are just a slight notch below Duke right now and beating MD/Duke/UNC would boost them greatly as well)

Could still get #1 if some combination of the above 4 teams don't take care of business
UConn
Memphis

No shot at #1
Oklahoma

This assumes that Memphis wins the CUSA tourney. IMO, if any of the 4 teams above UConn and Memphis win out, I think they are easily more deserving of a #1 than Memphis. We have debated back and forth how good they are this year. My opinion is that they are not that good. I would be shocked if they made the FF and think they are likely to lose in the Sweet 16.

However, no matter how good they may be their resume simply is not worthy of a number 1 seed. They might sneak into it via attrition in the other conference tourneys but I feel their resume maxes out at a 2 seed.

mgtr
03-13-2009, 11:29 AM
I remember a few years ago a discussion (probably on TV) that the committee doesn't give much weight to wins on selection Sunday (ie, ACC championship). They pretty well have things set before then, and would be very reluctant to make meaningful changes.

RoyalBlue08
03-13-2009, 12:57 PM
I agree I don't think Memphis deserves a 1 seed, but it is a big difference between what I think is fair and what I think is going to happen unfortunately.

houstondukie
03-13-2009, 03:23 PM
I’m becoming more and more convinced that, if Louisville doesn’t win the Big East tournament and Duke does win the ACC Tournament, Duke is pretty much a lock for a #1 seed.

Why? How bad would it look for the committee to award #1 seeds to three teams who didn’t get the job done in their respective conference tournaments and deny top bids to teams who did?

Imagine, for a moment, that Louisville loses tonight or tomorrow and Duke wins on Sunday. Then imagine the scenarios that everyone is talking about:

1 seeds:

UNC
UConn
Louisville
Michigan State/Memphis

Three teams that didn’t win their conference tournaments as #1 seeds? I don’t think the committee will allow that. Duke will end up taking Louisville or UConn's spot.

I hope this Duke team knows that they are now literally playing with a #1 seed on the line, because I really believe that, at this point, they are.

I agree. Duke is not being discussed AT ALL for a 1 seed.

Neither is Wake Forest. If they beat Duke and UNC to win the ACC championship, that gives them a 4-1 record against Duke/UNC.

houstondukie
03-13-2009, 03:29 PM
Memphis WILL NOT get a #1 seed.

(unless Louisville, Michigan St., Duke and Wake Forest don't win their conference tournaments)

Their best 2 wins are Tennessee and Gonzaga.

The media is hyping them up as potential #1, but I will not be surprised if they get a 3 seed.

The tournament committee is smarter than you think. Remember a few years ago when Gnzaga was #6 in the country and ended up getting something like a 6 seed?!?!

Greg_Newton
03-13-2009, 11:51 PM
Kind of funny how Louisville quietly snuck up on the Big East regular season title, and now it looks like they'll cruise to the tournament championship too. Syracuse has now played 3.875 tough basketball games in the last 3 days, I can't imagine they'll have anything left in the tank tomorrow.

Don't get me wrong, they've earned their number 1 seed if they win the tournament, but talk about the chips falling in your favor...

moonpie23
03-14-2009, 12:40 AM
I think we would need to win the ACC tourney over a fully manned UNC

i totally believe that they will be "fully manned" if we meet on sunday......lawson's toe will be suddenly "better"......

Exiled_Devil
03-14-2009, 01:42 AM
Kind of funny how Louisville quietly snuck up on the Big East regular season title, and now it looks like they'll cruise to the tournament championship too. Syracuse has now played 3.875 tough basketball games in the last 3 days, I can't imagine they'll have anything left in the tank tomorrow.

Don't get me wrong, they've earned their number 1 seed if they win the tournament, but talk about the chips falling in your favor...

The Love for Lville is driving me crazy - they won the Big East due to the schedule inequalities (regular season champions are meaningless without a round robin) and they have a lower RPI and SOS than we do. How are they being considered a 1 seed outside of ESPN's happy little Big East centered world?

Given the numbers, I can see both Ucon and Pitt before Lville, even if they win the conference tournament.

DukeWarhead
03-14-2009, 02:11 AM
Given the victory tonight, and some key losses, I think Duke is locked into a 2seed and will go no higher or no lower regardless of what happens the rest of the weekend.
My thought process is thus:
The fact that Wake, Washington, and Kansas - all contenders for #2 seeds, all lost early guarantees one of the four #2 seeds for Duke at this point. The close win against BC meant Duke will slide no furhter.

I suppose if both Louisville and Memphis lose thier championship games, and Duke sweeps impressively, they could potentially move up, but I don't believe such a scenario will happen. At this point, I see UL and Memphis competing for the last #1 seed and I think Duke will join Oklahoma, MSU, and the loser of the Memphis/Louisville jockeying at a #2 seed.

Kind of nice to know you have nothing to lose as far as seeding goes, but I'm sure that's not enough to satisfy at team that eagerly wants to win a conference tourney title....

Any compelling arguments for Duke losing out on a #2 or getting a #1??? I can't see any....

Greg_Newton
03-14-2009, 02:22 AM
Given the numbers, I can see both Ucon and Pitt before Lville, even if they win the conference tournament.

Yeah, I understand where you're coming from, but it seems unlikely that the committee would do that given Pitt and UConn's early tourney exits IF Louisville does in fact win both the regular season and tourney titles.

How about this one... if UNC falls to FSU (knock on wood) and Louisville wins out, does Louisville go into the tournament ranked #1 and as the number 1 overall seed??? Crazier things have happened...

Bob Green
03-14-2009, 02:42 AM
If we win the ACCT, a #1 Seed is not out of the question as it will mean that UNC, Pitt, UConn, and Oklahoma all lost. A Syracuse win over Louisville would probable be the icing on the cake.

Speaking of Syracuse, watch out for the Orange. Jim Boeheim has his team playing excellent basketball at the right time of the season.

davekay1971
03-14-2009, 08:27 AM
I would love for us to get a 1 seed, but I think it's unlikely at this point. Louisville will probably get it, and, win or lose to Syracuse, they have a reasonable claim. I hope it isn't Memphis, because I don't think they have the resume that we or Louisville do...but, if it is, I hope we're the 2 seed in this bracket. (I was about to type "I hope we're their number 2", but that sounded all wrong). If Louisville wins the BE tourney, they probably are a lock as the regular season and tournament winners of The Greatest Conference Ever. If they lose and we win the ACC tournament, we could get it. Where does Mich St. stand in the picture right now?

Ultimately I don't think our chances of making the final four or winning the NCAA tournament are significantly affected by whether we're a 1 or 2 seed. We're probably going to have to beat a UConn, Oklahoma, Memphis, Louisville, or Pitt to get there no matter what our seed is going in.

ice-9
03-14-2009, 08:34 AM
I actually think it will materially increase our probability of winning. Not only in the first weekend, but particularly the Sweet Sixteen game. The difference between playing a 3rd seed vs. a 4th seed is significant as there is a big drop off in quality between those two lines. However, I agree for the Elite Eight it won't matter much -- we'll be playing an top team at that point.

Buckeye Devil
03-14-2009, 08:47 AM
I don't think that Duke would get a #1 even if they win the ACCT. So if the Spartans win the Big 10 tournament, I think they deserve it seeing as how other potential #1's have fell by the wayside. Izzo is a good coach and they seem to be peaking (but strange things can happen).

CDu
03-14-2009, 09:20 AM
I think Duke and MSU have very similar resumes. Both have four wins against the RPI top-25. Both have 15 wins against the top-100. Neither has a win against a team in the top-5. Neither has a loss to a bad team. And they have similar records overall.

Louisville, despite being atrocious at times offensively, actually has a better resume than either Duke or MSU. They have five wins against the RPI top-25 (three on the road) and 15 top-100 wins. They have a win against a top-5 team (Pitt). And they have no losses to bad teams. If they win today, that'll be their sixth win against a team in the RPI top-25. I think they're probably the third-best team in their conference, but that shouldn't be a reason to keep them from being the fourth #1 seed. If they wind up with the fourth-best profile (and as it stands right now, I'd say they have that), they should get the seed - even if they do seem like they could score 50 points on any given night.

I think it will come down to how the weekend plays out. If Louisville wins against Syracuse, they have a strong shot at the fourth #1. If they lose, then we can steal it if we beat Maryland and then UNC in the final. If UNC loses today and we win out, it'll be an interesting debate. MSU can get it if they win the Big-10 and Louisville and Duke lose.

I don't think either Memphis or Oklahoma should get a #1. Memphis has just one win against an RPI top-25 team (vs two losses, to Xavier and Syracuse) and only three top-50 wins. They don't have any losses to bad teams, but they haven't beaten many good teams. And when the other teams we're discussing also don't have any losses to bad teams, it's hard to argue Memphis over the others. Oklahoma just has too many late-season losses now, and they have one bad loss (@Arkansas).

blueprofessor
03-14-2009, 10:07 AM
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=527295
"Best defensive team in country."
Also, superlatives in Big Easy tourney.:D

Best regards--Blueprofessor:)

pamtar
03-14-2009, 10:09 AM
If L'Ville wins the Big East then they should get it IMO. I just don't see Mich St getting it over a team with the same number of loses who also happens to be the Big East season and tourney champs.

In fact, I don't see Mich St getting in over L'Ville even if L'Ville loses. They lost to MD, by 18. They also got annihilated by UNC basically at home. If we win out our six loss ACC season is way better than their 5 loss Big Televen season.

Sgt. Dingleberry
03-14-2009, 10:57 AM
I don't think that Duke would get a #1 even if they win the ACCT. So if the Spartans win the Big 10 tournament, I think they deserve it seeing as how other potential #1's have fell by the wayside. Izzo is a good coach and they seem to be peaking (but strange things can happen).

I know it was early in the season and it was only one game. But, the fact that MSU lost to UNC by 35, let me repeat, 35 points on a basketball court in the state of Michigan prevents them from getting a #1 seed in my book. Whether or not the tourney committee agrees with me is a different story.

Right now, I think UNC, Pitt, and UConn are pretty safe bets and deserve it. Louisville is in the lead for the fourth spot. The only possible way I would knock them out is if they lose tonight and Duke beats UNC with a full-strength Lawson.

If you look at MSU and Memphis' records against the top two leagues (ACC and Big East) the numbers speak for themselves...

MSU-0-2...Losing by 18 to Maryland on a neutral court and 35 to UNC in Detroit.
Memphis-1-2...Beat Seton Hall by 14 @ Seton Hall, lost to Georgetown by 9 @ Georgetown, lost to Syracuse by 7 @ home.

gumbomoop
03-14-2009, 11:48 AM
I posted my Fri morn mini-bracketology on "Memphis and #1" thread, and I've got revisions. But if Joe Lunardi can change his bubble watch virtually game-by-game, I can surely do so daily, and so can you.

Here's a Sat morn scenario, with some assumptions:

"Ranking" for seeds:
1- UNC - no matter how they do in rest of ACC tourn, no matter how UL does
2- UL - as long as they beat Syracuse
3- Pitt
4- Memphis - as long as they win C-USA, pretty safe bet
5- UConn - I think they still deserve a 1, but will Committee?
6- Mich St - even if win Big Ten tourney, Committee will rightly see them as below the above 5 teams
7 - Duke - win ACC tourney, and we could move up these seed rankings, but only marginally, probably only above Mich St, and not to a #1, even if UL, Mich St, and Memphis all lose in their tourneys
8- Okla -some doubts by now about how solid they are; could Syracuse grab a #2 with win tonight??? [no, that's crazy] Gonzaga? Kansas?

Regional 1-4 seeds:

Boston - Pitt, Mich St, Wake, Purdue/LSU/Tenn????
Memphis - UNC, Okla, Syracuse, Purdue/LSU/Tenn???
Indianapolis - UL, Duke, Kansas, Xavier
Phoenix - Memphis, UConn, Gonzaga, Arizona St

I bet I've forgotten somebody for a #3-4 seed; and I realize dropping UConn to a #2 will garner some scoffs. The problem is, impossible to logically judge how good Memphis is.

Scoff away.

House G
03-14-2009, 12:02 PM
I posted my Fri morn mini-bracketology on "Memphis and #1" thread, and I've got revisions. But if Joe Lunardi can change his bubble watch virtually game-by-game, I can surely do so daily, and so can you.

Here's a Sat morn scenario, with some assumptions:

"Ranking" for seeds:
1- UNC - no matter how they do in rest of ACC tourn, no matter how UL does
2- UL - as long as they beat Syracuse
3- Pitt
4- Memphis - as long as they win C-USA, pretty safe bet
5- UConn - I think they still deserve a 1, but will Committee?
6- Mich St - even if win Big Ten tourney, Committee will rightly see them as below the above 5 teams
7 - Duke - win ACC tourney, and we could move up these seed rankings, but only marginally, probably only above Mich St, and not to a #1, even if UL, Mich St, and Memphis all lose in their tourneys
8- Okla -some doubts by now about how solid they are; could Syracuse grab a #2 with win tonight??? [no, that's crazy] Gonzaga? Kansas?

Regional 1-4 seeds:

Boston - Pitt, Mich St, Wake, Purdue/LSU/Tenn????
Memphis - UNC, Okla, Syracuse, Purdue/LSU/Tenn???
Indianapolis - UL, Duke, Kansas, Xavier
Phoenix - Memphis, UConn, Gonzaga, Arizona St

I bet I've forgotten somebody for a #3-4 seed; and I realize dropping UConn to a #2 will garner some scoffs. The problem is, impossible to logically judge how good Memphis is.

Scoff away.
If Syracuse is a #3 and Duke a #2, I think it will be tempting for the selection committee to place them in the same bracket because Boeheim and K both coached our Olympic team. Whether or not this is feasible is unclear to me.

CDu
03-14-2009, 12:13 PM
If Syracuse is a #3 and Duke a #2, I think it will be tempting for the selection committee to place them in the same bracket because Boeheim and K both coached our Olympic team. Whether or not this is feasible is unclear to me.

This can be said of any number of combinations. If they put us in UNC's half of the draw, it'd be because the committee wants that rivalry game. If they give us UConn, it's because they want us to have the Calhoun/Coach K rematch. If they give us Oklahoma (which would be the least-interesting from a national standpoint), Duke fans will say it's because they want a Capel/K matchup. If they put us with Louisville, folks would say it's to give Pitino a rematch from the 1992 game. Given how prominent Duke has been for so long, there are just so many connections someone could make post hoc about the committee's selection motivations.

I don't know if the committee actually does anything of the sort, though. There are just too many teams to consider and too many possible connections between teams. I will say though that if the committee really wanted to draw ratings from a potential 1/2 matchup for Duke would be the UConn/Duke matchup, based on the Northwest/Atlantic fanbases for both teams and the famous Final Four battles between Calhoun and K. I don't know that Anything else would really only be extra exciting/interesting from a Duke perspective.

sagegrouse
03-14-2009, 12:13 PM
Not sure there is much difference between being the lowest-rated #1 and the highest rated #2. Because of the S Curve, they will be slotted in the same region, barring conference considerations. I expect it will get a five-minute consideration from the tournament committee.

sagegrouse
'The S Curve slots the overall #1 to play the weakest #2 in the regional final, etc.'

sagegrouse
03-14-2009, 12:21 PM
This can be said of any number of combinations. If they put us in UNC's half of the draw, it'd be because the committee wants that rivalry game. If they give us UConn, it's because they want us to have the Calhoun/Coach K rematch. If they give us Oklahoma (which would be the least-interesting from a national standpoint), Duke fans will say it's because they want a Capel/K matchup. If they put us with Louisville, folks would say it's to give Pitino a rematch from the 1992 game. Given how prominent Duke has been for so long, there are just so many connections someone could make post hoc about the committee's selection motivations.

I don't know if the committee actually does anything of the sort, though. There are just too many teams to consider and too many possible connections between teams. I will say though that if the committee really wanted to draw ratings from a potential 1/2 matchup for Duke would be the UConn/Duke matchup, based on the Northwest/Atlantic fanbases for both teams and the famous Final Four battles between Calhoun and K. I don't know that Anything else would really only be extra exciting/interesting from a Duke perspective.

Just like the rest of us.

I think your second paragraph answers the implicit question in your first. Given the prevalence of upsets at tournament time (look at this week), I don't think the committee wastes a lot of time worrying about TV matchups in the second weekend.

I do believe that the members try to throw CBS some bones with intriguing Thursday-Friday matchups. (Like Maryland-UMBC or Duke-VCU or Arizona State against an ACC team [Herb's revenge] or FSU vs. the Gators.)

sagegrouse

dukemsu
03-14-2009, 12:35 PM
I know it was early in the season and it was only one game. But, the fact that MSU lost to UNC by 35, let me repeat, 35 points on a basketball court in the state of Michigan prevents them from getting a #1 seed in my book. Whether or not the tourney committee agrees with me is a different story.

Right now, I think UNC, Pitt, and UConn are pretty safe bets and deserve it. Louisville is in the lead for the fourth spot. The only possible way I would knock them out is if they lose tonight and Duke beats UNC with a full-strength Lawson.

If you look at MSU and Memphis' records against the top two leagues (ACC and Big East) the numbers speak for themselves...

MSU-0-2...Losing by 18 to Maryland on a neutral court and 35 to UNC in Detroit.
Memphis-1-2...Beat Seton Hall by 14 @ Seton Hall, lost to Georgetown by 9 @ Georgetown, lost to Syracuse by 7 @ home.

Not to go on a Sparty rant, but this is short-sighted analysis. The Big Ten is far superior to CUSA. And if you are talking about bad losses, there is no more hideous loss by any of the #1 seeds that Louisville face-planting against Notre Dame, who will not even make the tourney.

The anti-Big Ten stuff has gotten so over the top I have started an Big 10 Hatred Tsunami thread on a State board. I am not saying State is 1 seed good, I am not sure they are. But their overall body of work is far superior to that of Memphis. Some credit has to be given for winning the Big 10 by four games.

dukemsu

tele
03-14-2009, 12:46 PM
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=527295
"Best defensive team in country."
Also, superlatives in Big Easy tourney.:D

Best regards--Blueprofessor:)

Doesn't Decourcey live just across the river in cincinnati?

Exiled_Devil
03-14-2009, 01:35 PM
I'm regularly annoyed with people referring to the 'regular season champions' of whatever conference (yes, Lville is the key example) Regular season doesn't mean anything with the uneven schedule.

AS I look at updated stats from last night/today (kenpom.com and realtimeRPI), Lville has flipped over us from 7 to 6. For what its worth, both ratings have Uconn, UNC, Pitt and Memphis in the top spot (kenpom has Gonzaga up there, too. Which is weird.)

Looking at just RPI, I would expect something like this:

UNC
Pitt
Uconn
Memphis

OU
Lville
Duke
MSU Spartans

Lville could play up, but I think that Duke, OU and MSU are solid 2's. Lville would bump Memphis if it went up.

That's my thoughts. I also recall that the committee already has the top teams slated right now, and are adjusting as games become final today. The ACC championship game is too late for a dramatic change - but the Big East tonight could have the impact of bumping Lville. OR Syracue...could they get as far up as a 2 or 3?

Exiled_Devil
03-14-2009, 02:01 PM
I'm regularly annoyed with people referring to blah blah blah

WHo am I kidding? I just caught 15 seconds of the Big Ten game and instantly rooted against MSU. I just want to see Duke do as well as possible and upsets everywhere else in March.

CDu
03-14-2009, 02:02 PM
Some credit has to be given for winning the Big 10 by four games.

I agree with you that Michigan State's resume looks better than Memphis's. But I wouldn't give THAT much credit to winning the Big 10 by four games. The reality is that the Big 10 has one very good team (MSU) one good team (Illinois), and a lot of decent/borderline teams. A #2/3 seed SHOULD win that conference by four games. That's not reason in my mind to argue for a #1 seed.

I think MSU has a similar argument to Duke, but probably a bit weaker case overall. I think Duke (right now) has a weaker case than Louisville. And I think that all three have a stronger case than Oklahoma or Memphis.

Right now, I'd rate it as:
Pitt/UNC
UNC/Pitt
UConn
Louisville
Duke
MSU

Everybody else.

Of course, that's based solely on looking at who you've played and who you've beaten. I have no idea whether the committee will stick firmly to that criteria.

vick
03-14-2009, 02:38 PM
I think MSU has a similar argument to Duke, but probably a bit weaker case overall. I think Duke (right now) has a weaker case than Louisville. And I think that all three have a stronger case than Oklahoma or Memphis.


I agree. Look at common opponents:

Maryland - Duke +41 (home), Duke +11 (road), ? (today). MSU -18 (neutral). No matter what happens today, huge advantage Duke

UNC - Duke -14 (home), Duke -8 (road). MSU -35 (semi-home). I would argue advantage Duke, although I understand some people disagree that there is "quality" in losses, which is fine.

Michigan - Duke +15 (neutral), Duke -8 (road). MSU +12 (road). Advantage MSU, and how weird is it that we played them twice but a team in their own conference only played them once?

Purdue - Duke +16 (road). MSU -18 (road), MSU +11 (home). Advantage Duke.

I have a hard time seeing how one could look at those two side-by-side and pick MSU. Of course, all this is depending on Duke and MSU winning out, and MSU is already down at half...

tele
03-14-2009, 03:53 PM
Maybe they should just give out 8 or 9 two seeds. Seth Davis just said UNC should still get the number one seed because Lawson stubbed his toe.

feldspar
03-14-2009, 04:08 PM
If the committee gives out number one seeds to three teams that bowed out relatively early in their respective conference tournaments (UNC, UConn, Pitt) and snubs Duke (if they win the ACC Tournament), then why in the crap should we even have conference tournaments?

Sgt. Dingleberry
03-14-2009, 04:09 PM
Not to go on a Sparty rant, but this is short-sighted analysis. The Big Ten is far superior to CUSA. And if you are talking about bad losses, there is no more hideous loss by any of the #1 seeds that Louisville face-planting against Notre Dame, who will not even make the tourney.

The anti-Big Ten stuff has gotten so over the top I have started an Big 10 Hatred Tsunami thread on a State board. I am not saying State is 1 seed good, I am not sure they are. But their overall body of work is far superior to that of Memphis. Some credit has to be given for winning the Big 10 by four games.

dukemsu

You are right about the Louisville loss to ND, I forgot about that one...

You are also right that MSU has a much better resume than Memphis...

I just think Louisville has been more impressive playing tougher competition in the Big East...

While MSU has shown they are the best team in Big 10, but has had some pretty pathetic showings against non-Big 10 teams...

brevity
03-14-2009, 04:19 PM
If the committee gives out number one seeds to three teams that bowed out relatively early in their respective conference tournaments (UNC, UConn, Pitt) and snubs Duke (if they win the ACC Tournament), then why in the crap should we even have conference tournaments?

The committee is going to be making some kind of unlikable statement with their top seeds, no matter who they choose.

Examples, in overall seeding order.

Memphis, Pitt, UNC, UConn: we'll reward you for dominating a lesser conference.

UNC, Pitt, UConn, Memphis: we're ignoring the past week.

Louisville, Memphis, Duke, UNC: we're ignoring the regular season.

I don't really know what they'll do, now that UNC, Pitt, UConn, Oklahoma, and Michigan State have lost. Only Memphis has gotten the job done; Louisville and Duke still have work to do.

Also, I'm hoping that UNC isn't given the overall top seed; I really don't want to be forced to select them in my all-chalk comparison bracket.

feldspar
03-14-2009, 05:13 PM
The committee is going to be making some kind of unlikable statement with their top seeds, no matter who they choose.

Examples, in overall seeding order.

Memphis, Pitt, UNC, UConn: we'll reward you for dominating a lesser conference.

UNC, Pitt, UConn, Memphis: we're ignoring the past week.

Louisville, Memphis, Duke, UNC: we're ignoring the regular season.

I don't really know what they'll do, now that UNC, Pitt, UConn, Oklahoma, and Michigan State have lost. Only Memphis has gotten the job done; Louisville and Duke still have work to do.

Also, I'm hoping that UNC isn't given the overall top seed; I really don't want to be forced to select them in my all-chalk comparison bracket.

You forgot:

UNC, Pitt, UConn, Louisville: Conference tournaments are only useful for determining automatic bids.

GoingFor#5
03-14-2009, 05:15 PM
I think conference championships should matter more than the regular season. I would not mind a system where you have to win your conference tournament to get a #1 seed. These conference tournaments should not be after-thoughts...the ante should be upped a bit and teams called out for losing early rather than excused.

Duke79UNLV77
03-14-2009, 05:58 PM
their best non-conference wins are over kentucky, ole miss, and minnesota.

they only played u conn, pitt, marquette, and syracuse once each, with the first three of those being at home.

there's a reason we're several spots ahead of them in the rpi.

Hancock 4 Duke
03-14-2009, 06:19 PM
Now we have beaten Maryland in the Semis. If we beat Florida state tomorrow, could we be #1?

dbd4ever
03-14-2009, 06:49 PM
Joe lunardi was just on ESPN News and the other anchor asked him about Duke being a number one seed. Lunardi replied that Duke's hopes of being a number one seed went by the wayside when UNC lost to FSU. He said that Duke needed to play and beat UNC on a neutral floor in order to make it's case for a number one seed. He said that as of now Duke will be a 2 seed and play it's first two rounds in Greensboro along with UNC.

bossesjoe
03-14-2009, 06:51 PM
OU lost, MSU lost, Wake lost, Memphis is in the running but I don't think they should get it without having beaten any top teams, but if Louisville wins out I think they have it clenched.

If Louisville loses to Syracuse and Duke impresses against FSU, then perhaps we have a chance.

dukelifer
03-14-2009, 07:24 PM
Joe lunardi was just on ESPN News and the other anchor asked him about Duke being a number one seed. Lunardi replied that Duke's hopes of being a number one seed went by the wayside when UNC lost to FSU. He said that Duke needed to play and beat UNC on a neutral floor in order to make it's case for a number one seed. He said that as of now Duke will be a 2 seed and play it's first two rounds in Greensboro along with UNC.
The conference tourneys have gone from meaning everything to now meaning nothing. With unbalanced regular seasons schedules, teams can lose their first game in their conference tourneys and still maintain their number 1 seed. So who now finishes the regular season number 1? If Louisville wins- probably they do- but if they lose- then it has to be Memphis. And then they end the year number 1 and still don't get a number 1 seed because of the regular season. Duke is now two in the RPI and can only be a number 2 seed regardless of whether they win the supposed ACC championship. Very, very strange year.

Indoor66
03-14-2009, 07:55 PM
The conference tourneys have gone from meaning everything to now meaning nothing. With unbalanced regular seasons schedules, teams can lose their first game in their conference tourneys and still maintain their number 1 seed. So who now finishes the regular season number 1? If Louisville wins- probably they do- but if they lose- then it has to be Memphis. And then they end the year number 1 and still don't get a number 1 seed because of the regular season. Duke is now two in the RPI and can only be a number 2 seed regardless of whether they win the supposed ACC championship. Very, very strange year.

Actually it makes basketball, as far as selection for tourney seeding, much like the BCS. All opinion.

Sir Stealth
03-14-2009, 08:09 PM
I think that Duke, if (IF) they win the ACC Championship,with their great computer numbers, deserves a number 1 seed. However, I also sure wouldn't mind a scenario in which Memphis got a number 1 and Duke was the number 2 in their bracket. Would feel a lot better than a situation where Duke was a 1 with someone like UCONN, Pitt, or Louisville as their number 2.

superdave
03-14-2009, 10:46 PM
Bilas just said he thought three Big East teams should be #1's. He said Duke should be a #2 "at best." Then he complimented what it takes to run the gauntlet in the ACC, but said the Big East is still better.

I guess I tend to agree about the Big East getting three #1's. Makes more sense than Memphis and Duke is a step below the top 2-3 teams, evidenced by two losses to Unc.

But if we get hit in two weeks.....watch out. I think this is a distinct possbility with our talent and guts.

InSpades
03-14-2009, 11:05 PM
"at best" is ridiculous. "at worst" is a lot more like it. There's no way Duke gets a #3, there is a chance we get a #1. I think at this point UNC and Louisville are locks (assuming they win this game, which they seem to have well in hand).

So 2 #1s between Memphis, Duke, Pitt and UConn. Possible that Memphis gets it, but seems likely that their weak schedule will keep them as a #2. So it comes down to Duke, UConn and Pitt. We have actually have more wins over NCAA teams than either of them. By my count we have 10 already (possibly 11 w/ a win tomorrow) and UConn has 7 (8 if Wisconsin makes it, but they probably won't). Pitt has 8. We also have not lost to a non-NCAA team (while both of them have). Not saying we should get a #1, but we might get one. Depends how much emphasis they put on the conference tournaments.

Exiled_Devil
03-14-2009, 11:31 PM
I guess I tend to agree about the Big East getting three #1's. Makes more sense than Memphis and Duke is a step below the top 2-3 teams, evidenced by two losses to Unc.


UConn lost two games to Pitt. How much does that undermine their case for a 1 seed?

gumbomoop
03-14-2009, 11:42 PM
I think that Duke, if (IF) they win the ACC Championship,with their great computer numbers, deserves a number 1 seed. However, I also sure wouldn't mind a scenario in which Memphis got a number 1 and Duke was the number 2 in their bracket. Would feel a lot better than a situation where Duke was a 1 with someone like UCONN, Pitt, or Louisville as their number 2.

Sir Stealth is [mostly] on the money here. UL just beat Syracuse, so I'm almost certain that, as reg season and Big East tourney champs, they gotta get a 1-seed. I cannot figure out ANY scenario in which, were we to get a 1-seed, we could avoid both Pitt and UConn as a 2-seed in our region. No such scenario. Prove I'm wrong. Please.

Now, I think we're a 2-seed for near-certain, and am delighted, for I can envision a couple of scenarios in which, as a 2-seed, we avoid the 3 teams we want to avoid until Final 4 [UNC, Pitt, UConn]. Namely, as a 2-seed to 1-seed UL or Memphis. Admittedly, I don't fear UL or Memphis in same way as other bruiser teams [UNC, UConn, Pitt], for as good as UL is defensively, they shouldn't overwhelm us down low. It may well be that UL has sort of sneaked up on folks, and they deserve not only a 1-seed, but maybe even the overall 2d best 1-seed after UNC. Still, I want to avoid those Nasty 3, and don't think it's possible if we're a 1-seed. So, stick with 2-seed, and play what we're dealt.

And we know that our brutal end-schedule isn't going to go away. We may get one fairly easy game, but next Sat in G'boro, it's back to hard, hard play every possession. Madness for sure.

BlueintheFace
03-14-2009, 11:59 PM
1) Carolina
2) Pitt
3) Louisville
4) Memphis/UConn

This means that memphis and UConnvicts will get each other and Duke will unfortunately get Louisville or Pitt. I'm not sure who I would prefer... I guess Pitt...

ice-9
03-15-2009, 12:09 AM
Sir Stealth is [mostly] on the money here. UL just beat Syracuse, so I'm almost certain that, as reg season and Big East tourney champs, they gotta get a 1-seed. I cannot figure out ANY scenario in which, were we to get a 1-seed, we could avoid both Pitt and UConn as a 2-seed in our region. No such scenario. Prove I'm wrong. Please.

Now, I think we're a 2-seed for near-certain, and am delighted, for I can envision a couple of scenarios in which, as a 2-seed, we avoid the 3 teams we want to avoid until Final 4 [UNC, Pitt, UConn]. Namely, as a 2-seed to 1-seed UL or Memphis. Admittedly, I don't fear UL or Memphis in same way as other bruiser teams [UNC, UConn, Pitt], for as good as UL is defensively, they shouldn't overwhelm us down low. It may well be that UL has sort of sneaked up on folks, and they deserve not only a 1-seed, but maybe even the overall 2d best 1-seed after UNC. Still, I want to avoid those Nasty 3, and don't think it's possible if we're a 1-seed. So, stick with 2-seed, and play what we're dealt.

And we know that our brutal end-schedule isn't going to go away. We may get one fairly easy game, but next Sat in G'boro, it's back to hard, hard play every possession. Madness for sure.


That's an interesting point...but I think I would still prefer to be the #1 seed and face a significantly weaker team in the Sweet Sixteen, even if that means eventually playing a Pitt/U-Conn vs. a Memphis/Louisville. At that level, we're splitting hairs...these are ALL good teams. However, there is definitely a material difference between defeating a #4 seed vs. a #3 seed.

Finally, keep in mind that there is a VERY good chance that a #3 seed could upset a #2 seed. Can Pitt and U-Conn lose to a #3 seed type team? Definitely. Just look at what happened in the Big East tournament. As a #1 seed, can we get upset by a #4? Sure, but the probability is much smaller.

Bottom line: there's a reason why everyone wants to be a #1 seed. It's not so much who we play in the end, but more in how easy the path is to getting there. We want to be #1 if we can help it.

dbd4ever
03-15-2009, 12:17 AM
Don't know how much it matters but the latest bracketology has the #1 seeds as UNC in the east, Memphis in the west, Louisville in the south, and Pitt in the Midwest. Then Lunardi makes the statement that by losing out on a #1 seed, UConn would get the #2 seed in the east bracket and play in Boston. So at least that way UNC and UConn would have to meet before the Final Four. Maybe a lil silver lining in this possibly dark cloud!

BlueintheFace
03-15-2009, 12:23 AM
Don't know how much it matters but the latest bracketology has the #1 seeds as UNC in the east, Memphis in the west, Louisville in the south, and Pitt in the Midwest. Then Lunardi makes the statement that by losing out on a #1 seed, UConn would get the #2 seed in the east bracket and play in Boston. So at least that way UNC and UConn would have to meet before the Final Four. Maybe a lil silver lining in this possibly dark cloud!

that would be awesome

dbd4ever
03-15-2009, 12:32 AM
And if I am not mistaken, I just looked at the tourney dates and sites. The teams that play in Greensboro, NC, play on Thurs. and Sat. and the Thursday/Saturday games eventually turn into the East and West brackets. So if we are playing in Greensboro and that will either be East or West bracket, UConn is the #2 in the east, that would make us the #2 in the West with Memphis as the #1. Right???

BlueintheFace
03-15-2009, 12:34 AM
Lunardi has us as the second rated overall #2 which would give us Louisville or Memphis (if the committee decides to send #2 seed Uconn to the east with Carolina.)

dbd4ever
03-15-2009, 12:35 AM
Has anyone else noticed that no one is talking about Oklahoma anymore? He has Kansas as the last #2, but no mention of the Sooners.

InSpades
03-15-2009, 12:39 AM
And if I am not mistaken, I just looked at the tourney dates and sites. The teams that play in Greensboro, NC, play on Thurs. and Sat. and the Thursday/Saturday games eventually turn into the East and West brackets. So if we are playing in Greensboro and that will either be East or West bracket, UConn is the #2 in the east, that would make us the #2 in the West with Memphis as the #1. Right???


Playing thursday/saturday during week 1 doesn't mean you will play thursday/saturday during week 2. Duke could play in Greensboro and then go into any region after that.

I don't see how Memphis deserves a #1 seed. They have beaten 2 tournament teams (Gonzaga and Tennessee). They lost to Georgetown, Syracuse and Xavier. They might get it, but they don't deserve it. I think it comes down to Duke or UConn for the 4th #1.

BlueintheFace
03-15-2009, 12:41 AM
And if I am not mistaken, I just looked at the tourney dates and sites. The teams that play in Greensboro, NC, play on Thurs. and Sat. and the Thursday/Saturday games eventually turn into the East and West brackets. So if we are playing in Greensboro and that will either be East or West bracket, UConn is the #2 in the east, that would make us the #2 in the West with Memphis as the #1. Right???

That is what it looks like right now... It sounds very good to me.

RockyMtDevil
03-15-2009, 12:53 AM
What will really stink is if Mich St. is UNc's 2 seed, which is what I predict.

They can go ahead and punch their ticket now.

Wildling
03-15-2009, 01:01 AM
What will really stink is if Mich St. is UNc's 2 seed, which is what I predict.

They can go ahead and punch their ticket now.

Not if Lawson isn't 100%

-bdbd
03-15-2009, 01:19 AM
Please keep in mind that the committee will try to keep conference foes, as much as possible, from having to play one another. So I would highly doubt any of the top 3 Big East teams get paired together in the same region, and even the 4th B.E. team, Syr., probably is in the UNC region. Also, highly unlikely we end up in same region with UNC-ch.

On ESPN just now they seemed to be saying the order of the #1's, at present, was Louisville, UNC, Pitt and then (4a) Memphis or (4b) UCONN. That would mean that Mem. and UCONN -- as the last #1 and first #2 -- get mapped together in the same region, and those 3 B.E. teams are thereby separated from playing each other until Detroit.

I think, realistically, it is very hard to see Duke getting a #1 seed. Our best shots coming into this week were to see conference tournament losses by (assuming UNC and Pitt were likely #1 locks regardless) : Louisville, and/or Memphis, and/or UCONN, and/or OK, and/or KA. Well, OK, KA and UCONN all complied -- though UCONN still played incredibly well in their 6 OT loss to Syracuse Thursday night. And apparently Louisville and Mem didn't get the memo at all. For the committee, it'll be just too tempting to pair UCONN and Mem as the 4th and 5th best overall teams. UCONN, who probably entered the week as the #3 overall team just played too well Thursday (6OT!) to drop all the way from overall #3, to #6 or 7. Like has been said here, IF we are a #2 seed, then maybe our preference is to get paired against (in order) Memphis, then Louisville (I think we match up decently), then UCONN and then Pitt. The last two just have great inside games that we simply don't (can't?) match. Obviously our best strategy is just to keep on winning (that is the ONLY way we get to a #4 or #5 overall). We'll all know by 6:30 PM Sunday...

"2009 ACC Champs" would look real nice in that trophy case just off Cameron!

Go Duke!!!

-BDBD :D

gumbomoop
03-15-2009, 01:27 AM
Don't know how much it matters but the latest bracketology has the #1 seeds as UNC in the east, Memphis in the west, Louisville in the south, and Pitt in the Midwest. Then Lunardi makes the statement that by losing out on a #1 seed, UConn would get the #2 seed in the east bracket and play in Boston. So at least that way UNC and UConn would have to meet before the Final Four. Maybe a lil silver lining in this possibly dark cloud!

Well, Lunardi knows almost all, but I won't believe that UNC and UConn are in same bracket until I see it tonight at 6:15ish. I absolutely do not believe it. Does UConn get some kind of Boston-preference? I'd guess UNC will get Kansas as 2 in its region.

It has to be true that, IF UConn falls to a 2, as I do believe has happened, they'll be bracketed with the 4th ranked 1-seed, which has to be Memphis.

I'll be shocked if we're not 2-seed to either UL's or Pitt's 1-seed. Dark clouds, indeed, both of 'em, but who knows whether any of the 1's and 2's will actually meet in Elite 8. Lots of bad stuff can happen.

For example, I now believe that Oklahoma may have fallen to a 3, and would bet that either to please CBS or just because the Committee has in the past set up "family" tilts, that Okla will be the 3 to our 2 in some region. No conspiracy here, just a logical "story line." Maybe some of you think Okla can be had [well of course they can.....], but facing Griffin and Capel is a dark, dark cloud.

Madness.

ice-9
03-15-2009, 03:31 AM
I don't know which Bracketology you guys are referring to that has U-Conn has a 2 seed, but according to http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology they're still a 1 seed.

I'm not sure I like this bracket at all. Duke is a 2 seed with Louisville, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Tennessee. Yikes! The prospect of defeating Tennessee, Oklahoma then Louisville just to get to the Final Four seems rather daunting. The only saving grace of this bracket is that WVa has a chance of upsetting Oklahoma and Louisville would have to get through BC and Purdue/UCLA to get to the Elite Eight...but still. WVa is vastly underrated and Oklahoma was formerly ranked #1 in the country!!

dukegirlinsc
03-15-2009, 09:18 AM
I'm not a fan of the selection committee "not considering conference tourney results" into their equations. To me, it's almost like a mock NCAA tourney. Winning 3-4 games in 3-4 days, in my opinion, is a sign of a dang good basketball team, regardless. They must be doing something right? Even if it's about getting hot at the right time.

Ugh. I could get heated over this for days. :mad:

GoingFor#5
03-15-2009, 09:19 AM
Bilas just said he thought three Big East teams should be #1's. He said Duke should be a #2 "at best." Then he complimented what it takes to run the gauntlet in the ACC, but said the Big East is still better.

I guess I tend to agree about the Big East getting three #1's. Makes more sense than Memphis and Duke is a step below the top 2-3 teams, evidenced by two losses to Unc.

But if we get hit in two weeks.....watch out. I think this is a distinct possbility with our talent and guts.

I wish Bilas would just not discuss Duke rather than go out of his way to prove he's not biased.

dukegirlinsc
03-15-2009, 09:45 AM
I wish Bilas would just not discuss Duke rather than go out of his way to prove he's not biased.

AMEN TO THIS.

Last night during the Big East title game, the other dude (can't remember his name, lol) simply said "How about Duke and FSU tomorrow?" and Bilas replies "Duke doesn't deserve anything better than a 2 seed". (Or something along those lines.) He gets on my last nerve these days. I'm glad someone else thinks he goes out of his way to make sure he doesn't show any favoritism.

dukelifer
03-15-2009, 09:47 AM
Bilas just said he thought three Big East teams should be #1's. He said Duke should be a #2 "at best." Then he complimented what it takes to run the gauntlet in the ACC, but said the Big East is still better.

I guess I tend to agree about the Big East getting three #1's. Makes more sense than Memphis and Duke is a step below the top 2-3 teams, evidenced by two losses to Unc.

But if we get hit in two weeks.....watch out. I think this is a distinct possbility with our talent and guts.

The Big East is very tough at the top of their league- they are very physical and play tough D. In the NCAA- this is key. I have not seen much of Louisville until last night- but they are impressive athletes. Everyone on their team looks like they are 25 years old. Duke will need to be hot to make it far- but Scheyer has gotten out of his slump and Singler is looking strong. So Duke needs G to get in a groove again. Duke has shown an ability to win close games of late- that is what you need to do to advance.

moonpie23
03-15-2009, 09:49 AM
i found it chilling last night to watch Lunardi dressed up as a "judge" and having the hosts make cases for teams to get in and teams to be out...


we all know lunardi really picks the field.....so....why do they make up that crap about some "committee " sitting in a room trying to seed the tourny..

Indoor66
03-15-2009, 10:15 AM
i found it chilling last night to watch Lunardi dressed up as a "judge" and having the hosts make cases for teams to get in and teams to be out...


we all know lunardi really picks the field.....so....why do they make up that crap about some "committee " sitting in a room trying to seed the tourny..

Showbiz, only Showbiz.

Papa John
03-15-2009, 10:21 AM
Color me still unimpressed by the Greatest Conference Ever... Yes, they are a solid conference, but so are we... And, head-to-head, the ACC was the best conference in the country this season, besting all comers top to bottom... Personally, I don't cower in fear at the thought of playing Louisville or UConn or Pitt... I think UNC is the class of the tourney if Lawson is healthy, and they are the only team that I would dread having to play...

superdave
03-15-2009, 10:29 AM
I was looking at RPI as a predictor the other day - unfortunately the RPI rankings I found were post-NCAA tournament. But 2006-2008, 10/12 FF teams were top 5 RPI while UCLA was 6th one year and George Mason was 23rd.

So I do take some comfort in our lofty RPI status and our SOS in spite of the fact that we will be a #2 most likely.

The one thing Duke CAN control is playing lock-down D, getting a little extra scoring off the bench and playing its best basketball in two weeks. Let the seeding committee take care of itself. We can beat any of these teams.

CDu
03-15-2009, 10:33 AM
I'm not sure why people are getting worked up over the idea that Bilas would say Duke hasn't earned a #1 seed. I think he's right. I think we have the 5th or 6th best case in terms of a #1 seed, which makes us a #2 seed.

We were behind at least five teams going in (one of which was Louisville). We needed to win the ACC tourney and have the Big East's Big Three not win the Big East to have a chance at stealing that spot. Louisville was ahead of us going in, and they handled their business (beating two more top-20 RPI teams in the process) to get the title. They're a #1.

We aren't going to pass UNC, who beat us twice and won the ACC regular season. We aren't going to pass Pitt, who has simply a more impressive resume of big wins. We aren't going to pass UConn, which has more big wins and more big road wins than us. That makes us a #2 seed. Overvaluing wins over BC and Maryland simply because they're in the ACC tournament doesn't change that.

I do think it's silly that Memphis can get a #1 seed. I'd give the #1 seeds to the three Big East schools and UNC. I'd say we should be the top #2 seed. I suspect that won't happen, but that's the way I'd do it. But in any case, I'd say based on the number of quality wins (and where they happened) that we're definitely a #2 seed. And I'm not sure why people are so offended that Bilas would say such a thing.

House G
03-15-2009, 10:54 AM
I was looking at RPI as a predictor the other day - unfortunately the RPI rankings I found were post-NCAA tournament. But 2006-2008, 10/12 FF teams were top 5 RPI while UCLA was 6th one year and George Mason was 23rd.

So I do take some comfort in our lofty RPI status and our SOS in spite of the fact that we will be a #2 most likely.

The one thing Duke CAN control is playing lock-down D, getting a little extra scoring off the bench and playing its best basketball in two weeks. Let the seeding committee take care of itself. We can beat any of these teams.
I agree. Many of us tend to agonize over the brackets and fear that we will have to play "so and so"--I believe this is human nature. Unlike some of our more recent teams, I believe this year's team has the potential to beat anyone. Although there have always been reservations on both sides about a Duke-UNC matchup in the Final Four, I am ready for a rematch. We would play the role of the underdog and they would have the added pressure of playing as the team that is "supposed to win the National Championship". (I know, be careful what you ask for).

moonpie23
03-15-2009, 10:58 AM
if you look at any of the pods, there are plenty of teams to be worried about playing.....that said, duke will have to take what is given and do their best..

i think coach K and the staff are experienced enough to prepare the team.

duketaylor
03-15-2009, 11:35 AM
I see Memphis getting a #1 seed; their last loss was Dec 20th and have wins at Gonzaga and at Tennessee this year. unc, Pitt and Louisville get the 3 remaining, IMO. UCONN gets the fifth seed and Duke the 6th. I'd prefer to not be in Pitt's bracket.
I'd seed them:
1) unc
2) Pitt
3) Louisville
4) Memphis
5) uconn
6) Duke
7) MSU
8) OU

diveonthefloor
03-15-2009, 11:42 AM
How in the devil can Duke be a 6th overall seed when it will likely finish the season with either the #1 or #2 RPI rating?

blueprofessor
03-15-2009, 11:46 AM
I see Memphis getting a #1 seed; their last loss was Dec 20th and have wins at Gonzaga and at Tennessee this year. unc, Pitt and Louisville get the 3 remaining, IMO. UCONN gets the fifth seed and Duke the 6th. I'd prefer to not be in Pitt's bracket.
I'd seed them:
1) unc
2) Pitt
3) Louisville
4) Memphis
5) uconn
6) Duke
7) MSU
8) OU

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/sports/ncaabasketball/15conference.html?_r=1

The author points out that most teams who have won the NC did not win their conference tourney and discusses other interesting matters.:)

I do not like memphis (state:)) as a #1 seed, but I think you are right in how the committee may rank the top seeds. Memphis has been receiving a ton of love from the media about their winning streak and the conference's being better than critics have opined. Memphis is a good team, but so is Duke.So is UCon.The latter two have proved their worth in tough conferences.

Best--Blueprof:)

BlueintheFace
03-15-2009, 11:47 AM
Here is the latest bracketology. We would get Pitt, but be in the East (Boston Regional)

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology

...d oesn't look too bad to me.

SushiChef
03-15-2009, 11:50 AM
I see Memphis getting a #1 seed; their last loss was Dec 20th and have wins at Gonzaga and at Tennessee this year. unc, Pitt and Louisville get the 3 remaining, IMO. UCONN gets the fifth seed and Duke the 6th. I'd prefer to not be in Pitt's bracket.
I'd seed them:
1) unc
2) Pitt
3) Louisville
4) Memphis
5) uconn
6) Duke
7) MSU
8) OU

I'm so tired of hearing this statistic that Memphis hasn't lost since Dec. 20th. It's such an irrelevant stat. The reason they haven't lost since then is because that is the beginning of their conference usa schedule. Of course they aren't going to loose in Conf. USA.

InSpades
03-15-2009, 12:04 PM
I don't mind Bilas saying Duke deserves a #2 seed, but phrasing it "at best" a #2 seed is a bit much. I still think we have a shot at a #1 seed. Memphis has beaten 2 NCAA tournament teams. No other team is getting a top 5 seed while saying that I'd bet. UConn vs. us is close, we need them to count the ACC championship heavily to get the nod. Probably unlikely.

That being said... I'll take the latest Bracketology bracket in a heartbeat. Mizzoo is probably a tough 3 for us due to their pressing, but it could be far worse. Pitt is a #1 I'd like to see, I think we match up decently against them. Much rather play them than UConn.

CDu
03-15-2009, 12:25 PM
How in the devil can Duke be a 6th overall seed when it will likely finish the season with either the #1 or #2 RPI rating?

Because RPI is highly overrated as a tool for differentiating between top teams. RPI is a VERY rough measure of the combination of wins and strength of schedule. It gives you a loose guide as to where a team stands, but it should not be looked as as the measuring stick for determining seeds. The fact that we will have the #1 or #2 RPI just means that we're definitely a top-10 team (which we already knew). Where exactly we fall in the seeding depends more on whom we beat. That's why we'll be a #2 seed - our schedule and performance simply puts us as the #5 or #6 team in the country.

CDu
03-15-2009, 12:29 PM
I don't mind Bilas saying Duke deserves a #2 seed, but phrasing it "at best" a #2 seed is a bit much. I still think we have a shot at a #1 seed. Memphis has beaten 2 NCAA tournament teams. No other team is getting a top 5 seed while saying that I'd bet. UConn vs. us is close, we need them to count the ACC championship heavily to get the nod. Probably unlikely.

That being said... I'll take the latest Bracketology bracket in a heartbeat. Mizzoo is probably a tough 3 for us due to their pressing, but it could be far worse. Pitt is a #1 I'd like to see, I think we match up decently against them. Much rather play them than UConn.

Yeah, saying "at best" is the wrong choice of words. But it given that we know the resumes of the teams ahead of us (their seasons are complete now) and we know that a win over FSU won't make our resume better than those, "at best" is probably accurate. What has been left out is the "at worst" part. There's nobody behind us that can bump us down to a #3 either.

I don't have a problem with being a #2 seed. The important thing will be avoiding the toughest #3 seed. Otherwise, it's all about matchups. If we catch a borderline #3/#4 seed as our #3 seed, that's basically as good as being the worst #1 seed.

Highlander
03-15-2009, 12:56 PM
Before declaring UNC a #1 seed? A few years ago, Kenyon Martin went down late with a broken leg, and Cincinnati went from a lock #1 to a #3 or #4 IIRC. UNC without Ty Lawson is a different team, and if he's out for the tournament, UNC is still very good, but maybe not a #1 seed good.

Wishful thinking I know, but a guy can dream...

ice-9
03-15-2009, 01:02 PM
Check out Parrish's article: http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6271764/14055505

The stats he presented make a case for Duke being a one seed.

Memphis simply doesn't look like it belongs and re-emphasizes the point: Who have they beaten? When they played a team that's any good, what was their record? Of the six teams presented, they have got to have the worst credentials. I hope the NCAA selection committee see this.

The stats also make it look as if Duke is more deserving than UNC...but of course we were swept by UNC.

Pitt and U-Conn may have a better percentage versus NCAA tourney teams than Duke does, but they have a bad loss, haven't played as many NCAA tourney-level games, and Duke has more wins (if we beat FSU we'll have 11).

I don't think it's so cut and dried that Duke is a 2 seed. Yes, we'll probably end up as a 2 seed, but if we win the ACC tourney I think we should receive serious consideration for a 1 seed.