NCAA seeding...

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

How do they justify teams that dont win 20 games getting in? I mean out of 30 or more games, 20 should be the benchmark regardless of SOS.

I think Stanford was the only one to get an at large bid with less than 20 wins. While I adamantly am against Stanford getting in they did only play 30 games while a lot of other teams played 33 or 34 so it isn't really that fair to say that their 18-12 isn't allowed but 20-14 would be fine.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I think Stanford was the only one to get an at large bid with less than 20 wins. While I adamantly am against Stanford getting in they did only play 30 games while a lot of other teams played 33 or 34 so it isn't really that fair to say that their 18-12 isn't allowed but 20-14 would be fine.

There is nothing stopping them from playing the max # of games. Too hard for the smaller schools to get in when mediocre power conference teams get in with 18 wins. If you cant win 66% of your games in a given year you should be in the NIT.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

There is nothing stopping them from playing the max # of games. Too hard for the smaller schools to get in when mediocre power conference teams get in with 18 wins. If you cant win 66% of your games in a given year you should be in the NIT.

Agree, with schools being able to make their own schedules, they can schedule whoever they want. SIU can GET NO GAMES, none at all. Listen to this. THE ONLY reason we got to play Indiana this year was because Indiana Football needed a game filler, they asked SIU Football (Division 2) to play them, SIU told them, "You want that game, then we get a 2 game contract with your basketball team, at Indiana/at SIU".....they agreed.

[SniperSB23]

Nevada - Creighton may be one of the toughest games in the tourney. I had Nevada as a 4 and Creighton as a 6 yet they are playing in a 7-10 game.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Nevada - Creighton may be one of the toughest games in the tourney. I had Nevada as a 4 and Creighton as a 6 yet they are playing in a 7-10 game.

I will be attending that game

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I will be attending that game

That should be a pretty awesome game. The winner of that is a major threat to Memphis. You got a little shafted in the rest of the games there though. Arizona-Purdue isn't the most exciting 8-9 game and I can't see either giving Florida a game. Jackson St should be in the play in game and North Texas should be a 16 seed. At least hopefully Florida and Memphis will be entertaining in their shallackings.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

That should be a pretty awesome game. The winner of that is a major threat to Memphis. You got a little shafted in the rest of the games there though. Arizona-Purdue isn't the most exciting 8-9 game and I can't see either giving Florida a game. Jackson St should be in the play in game and North Texas should be a 16 seed. At least hopefully Florida and Memphis will be entertaining in their shallackings.

U of AZ grad. Hoping for a miracle.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

There is nothing stopping them from playing the max # of games. Too hard for the smaller schools to get in when mediocre power conference teams get in with 18 wins. If you cant win 66% of your games in a given year you should be in the NIT.

Not to beat a dead horse but Stanford lost 4 out of its last 5 (all goodteams except ASU-who sucks) and was 4-7 in its last 11 games! Lost 1 st round in its conf tourney. Disgrace. They'll probably go to the elite 8

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Not to beat a dead horse but Stanford lost 4 out of its last 5 (all goodteams except ASU-who sucks) and was 4-7 in its last 11 games! Lost 1 st round in its conf tourney. Disgrace. They'll probably go to the elite 8

Believe me, I agree 100% on you with Stanford.

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10751

I just don't think a 20 game minimum is a good idea since you could easily have a 19-11 team be a lot better than a 20-14 team some year. There actually are rules preventing teams from playing so many games. You are only allowed 2 exempt tournaments every 4 years or something like that where the games only count as 2 towards your total even if you play 4. So getting more than 30 games isn't something every team is allowed. It would also create a situation where you had a 10 team league and the 6th and 7th place team both have 19 wins overall. The 7th place team gets to play the 10th place team in the opening round and gets their 20th win before losing to the 2 seed. The 6 seed loses opening round to the 3 seed. Now you are saying the 7 seed has become eligible by finishing lower in the leauge than the 6 seed. Getting a bye in your tournament would become a detriment.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Believe me, I agree 100% on you with Stanford.

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10751

I just don't think a 20 game minimum is a good idea since you could easily have a 19-11 team be a lot better than a 20-14 team some year. There actually are rules preventing teams from playing so many games. You are only allowed 2 exempt tournaments every 4 years or something like that where the games only count as 2 towards your total even if you play 4. So getting more than 30 games isn't something every team is allowed. It would also create a situation where you had a 10 team league and the 6th and 7th place team both have 19 wins overall. The 7th place team gets to play the 10th place team in the opening round and gets their 20th win before losing to the 2 seed. The 6 seed loses opening round to the 3 seed. Now you are saying the 7 seed has become eligible by finishing lower in the leauge than the 6 seed. Getting a bye in your tournament would become a detriment.

I just read where the chair of the committee said that Syracuse was hurt by the unbalanced league schedule. What are they suppoed to do about that? I am far from a Syracuse fan but to hold the way a conference is set up against a team is stupid. I know that its a hard job and its impossible to make everyone happy but I think that more of the criteria should be required. You should have to have a winning conference record, SOS must be under 100 for power conferences, higher for midmajors, win at least 20 games or 66% of your games. If you do all these things then you are eligible to play in the tourney. If not then you better win the conference tourney. Having mid majors makes the tourney special, not the Stanfords or Illinois of the world.

[GPK]

Im loving UNC's bracket right now...should be fairly smooth sailing to the Elite 8. If they meet G'Town, I will have great cause for concern.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

Im loving UNC's bracket right now...should be fairly smooth sailing to the Elite 8. If they meet G'Town, I will have great cause for concern.

May not get by Texas. Very scary team.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I just read where the chair of the committee said that Syracuse was hurt by the unbalanced league schedule. What are they suppoed to do about that? I am far from a Syracuse fan but to hold the way a conference is set up against a team is stupid. I know that its a hard job and its impossible to make everyone happy but I think that more of the criteria should be required. You should have to have a winning conference record, SOS must be under 100 for power conferences, higher for midmajors, win at least 20 games or 66% of your games. If you do all these things then you are eligible to play in the tourney. If not then you better win the conference tourney. Having mid majors makes the tourney special, not the Stanfords or Illinois of the world.

The superconferences are hurting the sport a lot. No conference should have so many teams that you can't play each team twice and if you do you should absolutely be split into divisions. I think the committee is sending their disapproval on this trend to big conferences. The end result though is that Syracuse has year after year scheduled one of the more pathetic non-conference schedules. They knew it was going to burn them one of these times and it finally did. They are going to have to adjust in the future or risk not making the tourney. They played 6 games non-conference against teams in the top 140 in the RPI. Niagara is in the play-in game and they are in the top 140. In those six games they went 3-3. They beat Penn, Hofstra, and Holy Cross. They lost to Wichita St, Oklahoma St, and Drexel. Of their 14 non-conference games they had 12 at home and one in NYC against Oklahoma St. If they want to improve their tournament resume they have to go on the road more than once in the non-conference schedule. It can only help their recruiting base to play a few games on the road. So while I would have put Syracuse in for sure, I can't feel sorry for them when their only road game non-conference was two hours away at RPI #247 Canisius.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

The superconferences are hurting the sport a lot. No conference should have so many teams that you can't play each team twice and if you do you should absolutely be split into divisions. I think the committee is sending their disapproval on this trend to big conferences. The end result though is that Syracuse has year after year scheduled one of the more pathetic non-conference schedules. They knew it was going to burn them one of these times and it finally did. They are going to have to adjust in the future or risk not making the tourney. They played 6 games non-conference against teams in the top 140 in the RPI. Niagara is in the play-in game and they are in the top 140. In those six games they went 3-3. They beat Penn, Hofstra, and Holy Cross. They lost to Wichita St, Oklahoma St, and Drexel. Of their 14 non-conference games they had 12 at home and one in NYC against Oklahoma St. If they want to improve their tournament resume they have to go on the road more than once in the non-conference schedule. It can only help their recruiting base to play a few games on the road. So while I would have put Syracuse in for sure, I can't feel sorry for them when their only road game non-conference was two hours away at RPI #247 Canisius.

I agree that Boehiem shoots himself in the foot with his nonconfernece schedule but he cant control what the Big East does. If the committee does not like the super conferences then issue a statement but it is not fair to hold politics against college kids and the fans.