Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 223
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Possibly, but a lock? If they lose to Utah or Washington in the first round, I wouldn't be confident about their seed until I saw what everyone else did.

    And I know you stepped back from the "lock" statement, which is why my last post quoted tommy's post and not yours. I don't disagree with you that no matter what, Arizona has a pretty good shot at a #1.

    It doesn't have anything to do with Arizona. I was addressing tommy's apparent separation of RPI and SOS and using that to make a broader observation.
    Gotcha, sounds good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atlanta Duke View Post
    The current USA Today bracket has Duke as a #3 seed in the South with Florida as the #1 and Kansas as the 2 seed

    That works as a worst case scenario for me
    Yeah. I'm still not completely on board the Florida train, but having to face Kansas as soon as the Sweet 16 is probably the worst realistic scenario I could come up with.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Utah
    I would love a Duke-Kansas rematch. Love it.

    I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by Duke95 View Post
    I would love a Duke-Kansas rematch. Love it.

    I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.
    We've been top 10 forever. There're story lines galore. Selection committee doesn't have to try with us. The rest of them, though... (A priori, it'll be someone! Alwaws (or so to speak).

    -jk

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Duke95 View Post
    I think the likelihood that the selection committee puts us in the same bracket as Arizona or Kansas is very high.
    I'd say it's about 50%

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Possibly, but a lock? If they lose to Utah or Washington in the first round, I wouldn't be confident about their seed until I saw what everyone else did.

    And I know you stepped back from the "lock" statement, which is why my last post quoted tommy's post and not yours. I don't disagree with you that no matter what, Arizona has a pretty good shot at a #1.



    It doesn't have anything to do with Arizona. I was addressing tommy's apparent separation of RPI and SOS and using that to make a broader observation.
    Oh, I know, and think I've stated, that SOS is a component of RPI. I should've been more clear in my post -- but I just think that the media, and probably to a lesser extent the committee, probably is either unaware of that fact, or doesn't consider it so much. They seem to speak of the two measures independently, so it makes me feel the "double counting" does occur, to an extent, in the committee room.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    I think Arizona is in better shape this year, but only because there just aren't as many contenders for No. 1 out there. Certainly if they get a win or two in the Pac 12 tourney they are a 1 -- and they may get it anyway, since there just isn't anybody else ... Duke? Kansas? Michigan State? The teams we think are best just keep losing.
    I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Utah
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.
    After watching the MSU-Kentucky game at the beginning of the year, I would have NEVER thought we'd be talking about both of them potentially being out of the Top 25 at this point. Never.

    And I could see the selection committee putting either in Duke's bracket.

  8. #48

    mich state

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.
    Oh, I agree -- absolutely. But Michigan State IS in the conversation (I think for the reasons you cite). Saturday on GameDay, Bilas, Digger and Rose all talked about Michigan State as a potential Final Four team.

    I think they are a tough and talented team. And because of past NCAA success, they are going to be a confident team. I think the real story in this tournament will be the power teams that are seeded very low. Would you like to be a No. 2 seed playing Oklahoma State or Kentucky in the second round (well, the round of 32 ... I know that's technically the third round). I could see Michigan State as a 5 seed. If you were a No. 4 seed, wouldn't you hate to see them in your bracket? Or what if you are a one and draw Oklahoma State as an No. 8 seed?

    As for the RPI/SOS issue -- you guys are right that SOS is a big factor in RPI. But over the past few years a MAJOR issue for the committee (separate from RPI) is non-conference strength of schedule -- the dreaded "who you choose to play". Of course, this only applies to schools from a power conference -- never to the Gonzagas of VCUs of the world.

    So don't treat RPI and SOS as separate factors ... but do consider NCSOS as a different metric.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Duke95 View Post
    After watching the MSU-Kentucky game at the beginning of the year, I would have NEVER thought we'd be talking about both of them potentially being out of the Top 25 at this point. Never.

    And I could see the selection committee putting either in Duke's bracket.
    Why not both?

    SOUTH REGION

    1) Florida
    2) Kansas
    3) Duke
    4) Louisville
    5) Michigan State
    6) Kentucky
    7) New Mexico
    8) VCU

    The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    So don't treat RPI and SOS as separate factors ... but do consider NCSOS as a different metric.
    But if you're measuring NCSOS by the RPI method, it's still susceptible to gaming the system as I outlined in my earlier post. Coach K has been doing this for years -- scheduling the best teams from the worst conferences. Like Vermont, though that almost backfired, or Davidson this season. Playing these teams helps our RPI NCSOS, even though it would seem we had little chance of actually losing to them. In fact, other than Florida Atlantic and Alabama (which we didn't actually choose to schedule), I think every non-conference team we played this season has a winning record. That's why our RPI NCSOS is 20th in the country while Pomeroy thinks it's 87th.

    In other words, the committee may rely on the RPI's NCSOS, but it's still pretty much a bogus measure.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    Why not both?

    SOUTH REGION

    1) Florida
    2) Kansas
    3) Duke
    4) Louisville
    5) Michigan State
    6) Kentucky
    7) New Mexico
    8) VCU

    The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.
    Maybe substitute Hah-vahd or Vermont for New Mexico (if either would fit that seed) and you've got the "ideal" gauntlet that we've discussed upthread or on another thread.
    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    Why not both?

    SOUTH REGION

    1) Florida
    2) Kansas
    3) Duke
    4) Louisville
    5) Michigan State
    6) Kentucky
    7) New Mexico
    8) VCU

    The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region. The only unlikely part of this scenario right now is putting Kentucky in the same region as Florida.
    If that bracket shows up on my screen next Sunday I will be drinking heavily by 7 pm EDT (while listening to Digger say Duke caught an unfair break by being seeded over Louisville)

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    The Selection Committee has shown in the past that they lack either the brain capacity or the minimal amount of human effort to balance out the strength of each region.
    I always like to remember 2005 when this conversation comes up. North Carolina, the eventual national champion and clearly an elite team, had the defending national champion UConn as its 2 seed, the preseason #1 team Kansas as its 3 seed, and a very talented Florida team as its 4 seed. IIRC people were seriously calling it the most stacked region of all time.

    Then Kansas, Florida, and UConn all lost before the Sweet 16. I guess my point is: Kentucky, Michigan State, and so on really are going to deserve the seeds they're projected to get. They're capable of pulling upsets of course, but if the seeding is done reasonably accurately, the regions are automatically roughly balanced, even if that balance doesn't match up with preseason rankings or talent level. After all, that's the point of seeding.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by devildeac View Post
    Maybe substitute Hah-vahd or Vermont for New Mexico (if either would fit that seed) and you've got the "ideal" gauntlet that we've discussed upthread or on another thread.
    Vermont lost in their tourney, so they are not an option.

  15. #55
    So with Wisconsin losing, that means Duke, UVA, Kansas and Wisconsin all lost this weekend. I think Florida, Arizona, and Wichita State have #1 seeds locked up. Maybe U of A needs to win 1 game in the P12 tourney.

    That leaves 1 1-seed up for grabs. Bracket Matrix has 'Nova as the last one. If Duke wins the ACCT, they'll beat 2 guys ahead of them. Also, Kansas and Michigan are probably in the discussion.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hudson Valley, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by FerryFor50 View Post
    UVA likely misses out on a #1 seed with the loss to Maryland...

    Unless they manage to win the ACC tourny.
    If Duke UVA or 'cuse wins the acct, then they will be in line for a 1 seed.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by NYBri View Post
    If Duke UVA or 'cuse wins the acct, then they will be in line for a 1 seed.
    Ahead of who?

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I can't understand why Michigan State is even in any of these conversations. It's gotta be just based on past history of being involved in these conversations. They are nowhere close to that level this year. I know, injuries, but really, even with the guys back, they've still struggled, including losing today to Ohio State. I'd say at this point Michigan State is more appropriately discussed with others in the 5-6 seed range than in the 1-2 range.
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Oh, I agree -- absolutely. But Michigan State IS in the conversation (I think for the reasons you cite). Saturday on GameDay, Bilas, Digger and Rose all talked about Michigan State as a potential Final Four team.

    I think they are a tough and talented team. And because of past NCAA success, they are going to be a confident team.
    I side with Tommy on the Michigan St issue. I don't think they are THAT good even at full strength. There are few to no dominant teams this year so any 5 seed on up has a legit chance at the Final Four, but I wouldn't rate Mich St in the top half of those 20 or so teams. As to past NCAA success making them a confident team I don't buy that either. Mich St has a first round loss and 2 Sweet 16 losses the last three years. Izzo has a great history of making the FF with very good but not great teams but none of these players do.
    Coach K on Kyle Singler - "What position does he play? ... He plays winner."

    "Duke is never the underdog" - Quinn Cook

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by sporthenry View Post
    So with Wisconsin losing, that means Duke, UVA, Kansas and Wisconsin all lost this weekend. I think Florida, Arizona, and Wichita State have #1 seeds locked up. Maybe U of A needs to win 1 game in the P12 tourney.

    That leaves 1 1-seed up for grabs. Bracket Matrix has 'Nova as the last one. If Duke wins the ACCT, they'll beat 2 guys ahead of them. Also, Kansas and Michigan are probably in the discussion.
    At this point, I'm rooting for Villanova to keep winning and get the last 1 seed to keep them off the 2 seed line. That gives Duke more paths to MSG since 'Nova's geo-preference would also be New York.

    Of course, mostly, I just want Duke to win the ACC. Do that and let the chips fall where they may.

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by tbyers11 View Post
    I side with Tommy on the Michigan St issue. I don't think they are THAT good even at full strength. There are few to no dominant teams this year so any 5 seed on up has a legit chance at the Final Four, but I wouldn't rate Mich St in the top half of those 20 or so teams. As to past NCAA success making them a confident team I don't buy that either. Mich St has a first round loss and 2 Sweet 16 losses the last three years. Izzo has a great history of making the FF with very good but not great teams but none of these players do.
    Maybe not that good... But definitely have the toughness to win the war of attrition that is the NCAA tourny...

Similar Threads

  1. ACC #1 seed
    By dcdevil2009 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 02-27-2011, 09:13 PM
  2. The bid for a No. 1 seed
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 633
    Last Post: 03-14-2010, 06:32 PM
  3. I would take a #2 seed
    By GODUKEGO in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-08-2010, 09:33 PM
  4. Can we still get a #1 seed?
    By Johnny B in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 10:31 PM
  5. NCAA Tourney Seed Predictions
    By DukeWarhead in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 11:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •