Somebody gave Kentucky a #1 vote in the Coaches Poll

[Wander]

Wichita State too. I know it's not a big deal and silly to care too much about this stuff, but what? An 8 seed that didn't win the tournament?

[Bluedog]

Wichita State too. I know it's not a big deal and silly to care too much about this stuff, but what? An 8 seed that didn't win the tournament?

Somebody could also argue that a team losing in the Round of 64 shouldn't be ranked #16....:mad: The after tournament coaches poll is a bit silly, though. They always make the Final Four teams 1-4. The question is: "Is the poll supposed to reflect 1.) how teams performed most recently, 2.) how teams performed throughout the course of the season, or 3.) which team is best right now and would you think has the best chance to win a tournament if played again?" It's basically 1, but it could easily be 3...UConn was one rebound away in the closing seconds from losing in the Round of 64 too.

[Edouble]

Wichita State too. I know it's not a big deal and silly to care too much about this stuff, but what? An 8 seed that didn't win the tournament?

An 8 seed that was national runner up and laid an egg last night. You can look at it one of several ways. They had a great run and one could argue that at the end of the season they were the best team, but they just didn't close the deal.

I would not have much of a problem with that argument.

[Wander]

Somebody could also argue that a team losing in the Round of 64 shouldn't be ranked #16....:mad: The after tournament coaches poll is a bit silly, though. They always make the Final Four teams 1-4. The question is: "Is the poll supposed to reflect 1.) how teams performed most recently, 2.) how teams performed throughout the course of the season, or 3.) which team is best right now and would you think has the best chance to win a tournament if played again?" It's basically 1, but it could easily be 3...UConn was one rebound away in the closing seconds from losing in the Round of 64 too.

OK, but all of this is basically a justification for voting for someone like Florida over UConn. I'm not taking the position that UConn is the best team in the country. But I don't understand how you could vote for a team who has both a worse tournament performance AND a worse seeding. I think this is the most bizarre poll result I've ever seen in any sport. Not a huge deal, just really weird.

[Duvall]

An 8 seed that was national runner up and laid an egg last night. You can look at it one of several ways. They had a great run and one could argue that at the end of the season they were the best team, but they just didn't close the deal.

I would not have much of a problem with that argument.

Look at it this way - how can Kentucky be considered the best team to lose to UConn in the Final Four, let alone the best team in the country?

[Bluedog]

Look at it this way - how can Kentucky be considered the best team to lose to UConn in the Final Four, let alone the best team in the country?

Kenpom's ratings have Louisville as the best team in the country and they lost to Kentucky. How could they possibly be considered best? And AZ as #2, but they didn't make it to the Final Four. The NCAA tournament is cruel....But I agree with everybody's general premise: the rankings probably should reflect the tournament results. But if somebody ranks based on some other perspective, you could see some different results. And head-to-head results in a single game don't necessarily indicate which team is "better" (i.e. would have a better chance to win the tournament if it was played again).

[Atlanta Duke]

Look at it this way - how can Kentucky be considered the best team to lose to UConn in the Final Four, let alone the best team in the country?

I do not believe USA Today discloses the ballots, but it does disclose who votes

Most of the coaches who vote are journeymen, but Jim Boeheim has a vote

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/polls/

I could see Coach Boeheim voting UK #1 just to be ornery

[vick]

Look at it this way - how can Kentucky be considered the best team to lose to UConn in the Final Four, let alone the best team in the country?

Also, it's not as if they were rolling through people--their four previous games had been wins by 2, 5, 3, and 1. Harrison deserves all the credit he gets for making shots at the end, but this was hardly a "great run" by tournament runner-up standards. UConn played better in the tournament even before the championship game.

[CDu]

Also, it's not as if they were rolling through people--their four previous games had been wins by 2, 5, 3, and 1. Harrison deserves all the credit he gets for making shots at the end, but this was hardly a "great run" by tournament runner-up standards. UConn played better in the tournament even before the championship game.

I disagree. Kentucky had a terrific run to the final game. They beat 3 of the 4 Final Four teams from last year in a row. They beat 4 teams that were #1 seeds or were considered in the discussion for a #1 seed. Did they blow those teams out? No. But any team that beats 4 teams seeded in the top-16 (probably top-13) of the field has made a great run.

Conversely, UConn needed overtime to beat St Joe's. They then beat a Villanova team that was overseeded, they beat an Iowa State team that lost their starting center in the round of 64 (by 5), and they beat MSU by 6. Aside from their win over UF by 10, nothing about their run was more impressive to me than what UK did.

Ultimately, both teams had great runs. UConn's great run just lasted one game longer.

[uh_no]

I disagree. Kentucky had a terrific run to the final game. They beat 3 of the 4 Final Four teams from last year in a row. They beat 4 teams that were #1 seeds or were considered in the discussion for a #1 seed. Did they blow those teams out? No. But any team that beats 4 teams seeded in the top-16 (probably top-13) of the field has made a great run.

Conversely, UConn needed overtime to beat St Joe's. They then beat a Villanova team that was overseeded, they beat an Iowa State team that lost their starting center in the round of 64 (by 5), and they beat MSU by 6. Aside from their win over UF by 10, nothing about their run was more impressive to me than what UK did.

Ultimately, both teams had great runs. UConn's great run just lasted one game longer.

sure, when you take out one of the most impressive wins in the tournament, uconn's run looks worse....

you also poo-pooed the win over MSU, whom many considered to have as legit a chance as louisville to win it all

I would rank the wins as such:

uconn over florida
UK over michigan
UK over louisville
Uconn over MSU
UK over wisconsin
Uconn over ISU
UK over WSU
uconn over nova
UK over KSU
Uconn over St Joes

While the exact ordering can be debated, both teams had very good wins...I'm not sure I'd agree with a statement such as "kentucky's run was so far and away more impressive than uconn's that despite losing head to head to uconn, they are clearly the better team"

[vick]

I disagree. Kentucky had a terrific run to the final game. They beat 3 of the 4 Final Four teams from last year in a row. They beat 4 teams that were #1 seeds or were considered in the discussion for a #1 seed. Did they blow those teams out? No. But any team that beats 4 teams seeded in the top-16 (probably top-13) of the field has made a great run.

Conversely, UConn needed overtime to beat St Joe's. They then beat a Villanova team that was overseeded, they beat an Iowa State team that lost their starting center in the round of 64 (by 5), and they beat MSU by 6. Aside from their win over UF by 10, nothing about their run was more impressive to me than what UK did.

Ultimately, both teams had great runs. UConn's great run just lasted one game longer.

It's a judgment call, but ultimately I disagree with you here. First of all, "aside from their win over UF by 10" is, IMO, sort of a silly thing to say, because beating UF by 10 is by a fair margin better than any of UK's wins, and you can't just drop 1/5 of the sample like that (if so, UConn should get to toss out the St. Joe's game to make it fair). Second of all, UConn's win over MSU by 6 is also probably more impressive than any individual one of UK's wins. So, while they may had the least impressive individual game, UConn's best games were better.

Put another way, entering their first tournament games, UConn was #25 and UK was #17 in Pomeroy. Before the final, UK was #9 and UConn #10. To me, that says that UConn was probably playing better basketball over the span of the tournament.

[Des Esseintes]

sure, when you take out one of the most impressive wins in the tournament, uconn's run looks worse....

you also poo-pooed the win over MSU, whom many considered to have as legit a chance as louisville to win it all

I would rank the wins as such:

uconn over florida
UK over michigan
UK over louisville
Uconn over MSU
UK over wisconsin
Uconn over ISU
UK over WSU
uconn over nova
UK over KSU
Uconn over St Joes

While the exact ordering can be debated, both teams had very good wins...I'm not sure I'd agree with a statement such as "kentucky's run was so far and away more impressive than uconn's that despite losing head to head to uconn, they are clearly the better team"
7th-most impressive victory? Uh, no.

[Kedsy]

They beat 4 teams that were #1 seeds or were considered in the discussion for a #1 seed.

Any run to the championship game is a great run, but I think you're overstating things here. Wichita State was a #1 seed, but were probably as "overseeded" as Villanova was. Louisville was no more "in the discussion" for a #1 seed than was Michigan State. Wisconsin wasn't in the discussion, either, after they lost in the Big 12 semifinal. And realistically, Michigan with the #11 RPI wasn't either.

Going by seeds, Kentucky beat #1,#4,#2,#2 while UConn beat #2,#3,#4,#1, pretty close to the same. Going by the RPI (admittedly not a great measure), UK beat #4,#19,#11,#6 while UConn beat #5,#7,#18,#1 -- edge to UConn. Using Pomeroy numbers, UK beat #4,#2,#14,#11 while UConn beat #6,#23,#10,#3 -- an edge for Kentucky but not enough different to say one was significantly more impressive than the other.

[uh_no]

7th-most impressive victory? Uh, no.

seems we disagree over the actual ability of the WSU team. That's fine. I'll take them seriously when they beat someone better than mediocre....which they didn't....all year....

[wavedukefan70s]

Remember quite for sometime spurrier would give duke a number 1 vote in the football polls.im sure others said the same thing.

[uh_no]

Remember quite for sometime spurrier would give duke a number 1 vote in the football polls.im sure others said the same thing.

no, I think he would give them 1 point (a 25th place vote) in the preseason poll....slightly different than #1 in the postseason poll.

[wavedukefan70s]

no, I think he would give them 1 point (a 25th place vote) in the preseason poll....slightly different than #1 in the postseason poll.

Yeah, I went to the off topic board to post on game of thrones.then I realized my mistake.you beat me to it lol.still for a while people were like why.