ncaa tournament thread

[duhu1148]

Arizona has the most favorable path.

I actually like Oregon's road- Louisville has lost 3 of it's last 5 (including to Wake), and Kansas usually blows it before the Final Four.

UCLA however will have to best Kentucky again or an under seeded Wichita State, and then a matchup with UNC or the best #4 seed in Butler.

Just goes to show how important the conference tourney was.

[Scscsc89]

Syracuse is a little bitter

 

http://www.insidesocal.com/usc/2017/03/12/usc-v-syracuse/

[RogueDuck]

I'm sick of the east coast bias.  I hope cal plays cuse in the nit, and humiliates them.

[KUGRDON]

You don't want to be a six seed, a three seed or a member of the pac 12:

 

[All Hail]

11 hours ago, RogueDuck said:

I'm sick of the east coast bias.  I hope cal plays cuse in the nit, and humiliates them.

They would probably kick our ass.  The fact that USC got in over a prestigious basketball school like Syracuse who had 6 top 50 wins to USC's 2 shows that East Coast bias did not come into play.  Also, Arizona's gift of a bracket.  The selection committee is basically begging for a team from the Pac 12 to make the final four with the way they put down the red carpet for Arizona. 

[MrBug708]

Someone's inherent inability to make a final four, Few or Miller, should end this year

[duhu1148]

37 minutes ago, All Hail said:

They would probably kick our ass.  The fact that USC got in over a prestigious basketball school like Syracuse who had 6 top 50 wins to USC's 2 shows that East Coast bias did not come into play.  Also, Arizona's gift of a bracket.  The selection committee is basically begging for a team from the Pac 12 to make the final four with the way they put down the red carpet for Arizona. 

USC was better than Syracuse in every other metric. That is why they got in. WAY Better RPI, WAY better road/neutral site record, better overall record, better non conference SOS. And six of their 9 losses were to top 3 seed teams.

 

[All Hail]

14 minutes ago, duhu1148 said:

USC was better than Syracuse in every other metric. That is why they got in. WAY Better RPI, WAY better road/neutral site record, better overall record, better non conference SOS. And six of their 9 losses were to top 3 seed teams.

 

 

I guess it depends on whether or not you prefer good losses or good wins.  I prefer good wins to almost wins.  Syracuse started out very slow but by the end of the season, they were beating very capable teams.  USC didn't have a single notable win since their victory over UCLA in January.  Syracuse's RPI is horrible and their record away from home is poor but winning ACC road games is no joke.  It's not like USC beat anybody good on the road.   They only played 11 road games and their best win was either Colorado  or TAMU.   Syracuse won @ Clemson and @NC State.  Pretty much the same thing.  Ultimately, I think its about who has proven they can beat other tournament teams and Syracuse has proven that 6 times while USC hasn't proven that since January. 

[All Hail]

38 minutes ago, MrBug708 said:

Someone's inherent inability to make a final four, Few or Miller, should end this year

Now how funny would it be if neither of them make it. 

[duhu1148]

They couldn't even beat 9-23 Boston College on the road. Even 14-17 Nicholls State managed that.

USC won 8 games on road/neutral courts with better RPI than Boston College.

[All Hail]

15 minutes ago, duhu1148 said:

They couldn't even beat 9-23 Boston College on the road. Even 14-17 Nicholls State managed that.

USC won 8 games on road/neutral courts with better RPI than Boston College.

Once again, your examples are from very early in the season.  By the end of the season, Syracuse won 2 out of their last 4 road games against teams with better RPI's than anyone USC beat on the road.   

IMO, none of this makes up for the vast desperaity in quality wins.  Syracuse got them at home but USC lost time-after-time to good teams at home.  They couldn't even beat Cal at home. 

[RogueDuck]

1 hour ago, All Hail said:

Once again, your examples are from very early in the season.  By the end of the season, Syracuse won 2 out of their last 4 road games against teams with better RPI's than anyone USC beat on the road.   

IMO, none of this makes up for the vast desperaity in quality wins.  Syracuse got them at home but USC lost time-after-time to good teams at home.  They couldn't even beat Cal at home. 

The entire season has to be taken into account, or why not just call all preseason games exibitions and not count them?  It's the entire body of work, not just how you play the final 10 games.

[Scscsc89]

I don't know why they're picking on USC -- it was Kansas State that took their spot!

[All Hail]

39 minutes ago, RogueDuck said:

The entire season has to be taken into account, or why not just call all preseason games exibitions and not count them?  It's the entire body of work, not just how you play the final 10 games.

They are taken into account but games towards the end of the season are weighed more heavily than games at the beginning.  This is exactly why Vanderbuilt got into the tournament.  They had 15 losses (a record for any team that got invited), many of them early and to mediocre teams.  However, by the end of the season, they had defeated Florida twice, South Carolina, Alabama, and Georgia.  Even with their 15 losses and only 19 wins, they received a 9-seed.  The entire season matters, but games in December don't matter nearly as much as games in February or March.  Cal being 4-6 in their last 10 games kept them from being in the tournament despite finishing with the same conference record as USC, playing a more difficult schedule than USC, winning more pac 12 tournament games than USC, and beating USC at USC.  

[clpp01]

I would say I don't understand the outcry for leaving Syracuse out of the tournament but everyone knows the one and only reason why this has been the "snub" this season is because of their brand name.  If you give Syracuse's resume to any middle of the road program like Nebraska or ASU or Mississippi or Texas Tech etc... no one would be saying anything about top wins and belonging in the tourney.  Syracuse just wasn't good enough

an OOC SOS floating around 200

a putrid 2-11 neutral site/road record

RPI in the 80s

Bad losses to Uconn, Georgetown, St Johns, Boston College & Georgia Tech.

Had they managed to win just two of those 5 games putting them at 20-12 they would be in the field but losing all 5 that's too many blemishes on a subpar resume to ignore.

 

[All Hail]

How the March Madness TV dollars are spent.

 

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/13/how-the-march-madness-tv-dollars-billions-of-em-are-spent/

[duhu1148]

Syracuse lost 5 of it's last 7 games. And only the win @Clemson rates as the better RPI road victory (NC State is below Colorado and A&M according to CBS), and it's not by much- 67 vs 93 & 99. 

Every other point still stands.

 

Anyway the main thing is I don't think the conference as a whole was particularly over or under seeded. Or any conference for that matter, just varies by team. For example, Wisconsin is under seeded by 2 slots and Minnesota is over seeded by two slots, but both are from the B1G. There are many examples. 

For the PAC, they were mostly right. I would've given USC a 10 or 11 (no play in), and swapped Oregon with Louisville, but Oregon gets the easier path to the Sweet 16 anyway.

[glduck]

well, i came up with a duke/north carolina final, so shoot me in the fucking face. 

MIDWEST: i have kansas coming out of the midwest because they have a cakewalk up to the elite 8, and while i did find the stones to pick oregon to "upset" louisville, decades of harsh fandom preclude me from taking the ducks over rock, chalk, jayhawk in god damn kansas city. i normally don't like taking kansas far in the dance, but there are a handful of schools i like picking in the ncaa tourney even less, and purdue just happens to be one of them. so this whole region will likely go nuclear on me in round two when tom izzo and sparty knocks kansas off and i'm left sitting there holding my dick.

SOUTH: i'm a pussy, so here's me taking another #1 seed. this is more about playing the odds: good gravy what an easy walk to the regional final carolina has, whereas the bottom of the bracket looks like a messy blood bath. i've got wichita state knocking off kentucky, but ucla/cinci won't be a picnic. cinci can get after it defensively. i'm still taking ucla to the elite 8 before carolina knocks them off, but really, there are four different teams that look capable of meeting carolina there. i want no part of it, i'll take the odds.

WEST: yeah i took arizona. it won't be easy -- really looking forward to that florida state showdown in the S16 -- but i just don't see gonzaga making it to the regional final (i've got west virginia taking them out) and what little pac-12 pride i have is enough to boost the wildcats to the F4. 

EAST: ugh, duke. they trailed by double digits in all four ACC tourney games so i know this is a stupid pick but i love me some jayson tatum and after a loooooong dry spell you just can't argue that duke doesn't bring it in the tourney these days. plus they play garbage until 'nova in the E8. smart money should probably be on 'nova there but i'm not a well man.

so that's duke vs arizona and carolina vs kansas. arizona blows it, carolina beats kansas kinda/sorta easily, then we all wind up forced to play out a jay bilas wet dream. 

note: i'm dumb and often wrong.

 

 

 

[ExplorerSunDevil]

To me, Oregon can still make a run to the Elite Eight, despite being down a great player.

Louisville, Creighton, Oklahoma State and Michigan are good teams, but are all very beatable this year.

[All Hail]

My completely disorganized, almost assuredly incorrect thoughts on the tournament.

 

Mid West - Surprise team: Michigan is my surprise team of the tournament and I have them going to the elite 8.  These guys are playing out of their minds good the last 4 weeks of the season.   John Beilein is an excellent basketball coach who has proven success in the tournament with both West Virginia and Michigan.  Michigan's 5 starters are all very capable scorers, can all hit the 3, and most of them have excellent mid-range jumpers too.  Walton is the kind of distributor you need in March and their defense, while not great, is above average.  They struggle against big teams but they don't play a single that could punish them inside until the final four.  

Okie State will be easy, Lousiville is a poor jump shooting team and their on-ball pressure won't phase Michigan's group of slashers.  Oregon will probably be next and this is the game that they probably win with Boucher but I don't think they do without him.   This leaves Kansas, a team who lost to TCU in the 1st round of their tournament.  A team who won the Big Ten but probably played in more close games than any team in the country.  Consistently playing close games is a recipe for defeat in March and Kansas might not even make it to the Elite 8.   I take that back, they are in the same region as perennial tournament chokers, Iowa State and Purdue so if they get by Michigan State, they will instantly be transported to the Elite 8. 

South: Who did UNC piss off in the scheduling committee.  This side of the bracket is mind field if there ever was one.  Both Seton Hall and Arkansas are playing well right now but Seton Hall's defense has been very very good recently.  They lost by 1 to Villanova in the Big East tournament and should have won that game.  They have the best rebounder in the country.   Then  you have Butler as a 4 seed.  They have already beaten Villanova twice and are basically built to frustrate the ever living shit out of a more talented team.  They are dangerous.  Middle Tennessee is easily the most underseeded team in the tournament.  They are the best 12 seed by far.  They are already favored by vegas to beat their 5 seeded opponent in Minnesota.  They return everyone from a team that knocked off a 2 seed last year and not just any 2-seed but the "I always exceed tournament expectations" Michigan State Spartans.   In the bottom half, UCLA is easily the most dangerous 3 seed in the tournament and is one of the few teams who can beat anyone.  Kentucky is Kentucky and just to make matters worse, Wichita State won their last 6 or so games by 20 or more points.  They are on fire.  This is the bracket from hell. 

 

West:  Pretty much the opposite of the south.  I think Florida State can't score consistently enough to be a threat.  They have no distributor.  West Virginia is a gimmick of a team that can beat solid teams but never can they upset great ones.  I actually like Gonzaga more than most people but the fact is, they have the least amount of talent out of any #1 seed and have a history of disappointment tournament runs.  This leaves ND, who I think along with Gonzaga, is the most dangerous team in this bracket.  They almost won the ACC tournament, they have been to two straight elite 8's and have come very close to taking out #1 seeds both times.  I wouldn't want them in my bracket.  

East: Pretty much the West except without ND.  I think Florida has already peaked, Baylor has been playing mediocre for about six straight weeks now, and UVA can't score.  I think there's a decent chance Virginia goes down in the 1st round.  They aren't very good this year and haven't been playing well.  This entire side of the bracket is full of teams who are limping into the tournament.  I mean holy crap, South Carolina as a 7.  Look at their last 4 weeks.   Wisconsin, SMU, Florida, Baylor, Virginia and South Carolina all suck offensively.  There is no bracket I am more confident in a 1 meeting a 2 than this one.