NCAA seeding...

[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.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

May not get by Texas. Very scary team.

Roy just simply has to stay on their asses. Their problem is they are good, and they know it. Too much bullsh*t from them at times. If he keeps them focused, they can play with any team in the country. But, that is a big if....

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

Roy just simply has to stay on their asses. Their problem is they are good, and they know it. Too much bullsh*t from them at times. If he keeps them focused, they can play with any team in the country. But, that is a big if....

Texas has the best player and you know what can happen if he gets hot and the supporting cast fills the roles...

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Texas has the best player and you know what can happen if he gets hot and the supporting cast fills the roles...

ala carmelo Anthony

My final four right now

Oregon, Kansas, Georgetown, A&M

Kansas/Georgetown

Kansas

(Kansas is exactly like NC in regards to what Kev said, they have a year experience, and will take it 1000% seriously after getting bounced last year in the first round)

[Pointg5]

I can't understand how Duke is a 6th seed, they are not deserving, every year they get preferential treatment.

I was dissapointed in Bilas cracking Xavier, as much as I hate to admit it, they are a dangerous team, they weren't helped with the seeding.

I am sticking with Georgetown and would like to see Louisville well.

I can't wait until my beloved Bearcats get back to where they belong, because I don't have much interest in this Tournament without them, and you want to talk about a hose job they got it last year...

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

May not get by Texas. Very scary team.

Yeah, that was another seeding that totally baffled me. Poll every team in the tourney and ask them if they'd rather play Texas or Washington St and see how it turns out. Yet somehow Texas got the 4 seed while Wash St got the 3. It isn't like it was an RPI thing since Texas was 25 and Washington St was 26.

[GPK]

Texas record vs. Top 25 opponents 3-4
UNC record vs. Top 25 opponents 7-0

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

Texas record vs. Top 25 opponents 3-4
UNC record vs. Top 25 opponents 7-0

Throw it out the window in a single elimination tourney. Everybody is 0-0. Texas coach Barnes may be one of the worst in game coaches I have ever seen. He seemingly has no clue what is going on. His teams make a lot of mental mistakes. But they have a really good point guard and the best player outside of the NBA which can be a lethal combination.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Throw it out the window in a single elimination tourney. Everybody is 0-0. Texas coach Barnes may be one of the worst in game coaches I have ever seen. He seemingly has no clue what is going on. His teams make a lot of mental mistakes. But they have a really good point guard and the best player outside of the NBA which can be a lethal combination.

I hear what you are saying Chuck, but some of that has to be taken into consideration. Does it not mean that your team has shown the propensity (look it up Scavs) to get the job done against opponents more closely matched talent wise?

[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.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

Well I don't think it is just politics. In the end Syracuse had a non-conference schedule that was detrimental and in conference only had three quality wins to go with two bad losses. I get a feeling the comittee chair making the statement he did about unbalanced conference schedules was the equivalent of issuing a statement but that Syracuse was excluded based on their full resume, not because of politics.

[pmayjr]

Lots of good points here guys.

Just in case you haven't signed up yet, here's the info for the Derbytrail FREE bracket pool through Yahoo (info on another DT thread)-

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10694

I hope to see you guys in...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Well I don't think it is just politics. In the end Syracuse had a non-conference schedule that was detrimental and in conference only had three quality wins to go with two bad losses. I get a feeling the comittee chair making the statement he did about unbalanced conference schedules was the equivalent of issuing a statement but that Syracuse was excluded based on their full resume, not because of politics.

Then why not just say "Syracuse just did not play a strong enough nonconference schedule with enough success to be included"? All that crap about not playing each team twice is pathetic. Why? Because while you dont play the tough teams twice you also dont play the patsies twice and in some seasons dont play some of the patsies at all. Texas Tech really does not belong either. I know Air Force kind of faded late but they were more qualified that Stanford and TT both of whom they beat.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Then why not just say "Syracuse just did not play a strong enough nonconference schedule with enough success to be included"? All that crap about not playing each team twice is pathetic. Why? Because while you dont play the tough teams twice you also dont play the patsies twice and in some seasons dont play some of the patsies at all. Texas Tech really does not belong either. I know Air Force kind of faded late but they were more qualified that Stanford and TT both of whom they beat.

I hated the interviews with the head of the committee as well this year. He seemed totally clueless or just afraid to say what they were actually thinking. They should get a new spokesman and point out exactly why they excluded any team they get asked about. I bet if they rattled off some numbers about Syracuse like I did people would be a lot less bothered by it than they are by the garbage he was spouting. Stanford, TT, and Arkansas are all a joke. There are ten teams I could argue getting in before them. I don't really get the backlash by a lot of people on Illinois though. They seemed deserving to me.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I hated the interviews with the head of the committee as well this year. He seemed totally clueless or just afraid to say what they were actually thinking. They should get a new spokesman and point out exactly why they excluded any team they get asked about. I bet if they rattled off some numbers about Syracuse like I did people would be a lot less bothered by it than they are by the garbage he was spouting. Stanford, TT, and Arkansas are all a joke. There are ten teams I could argue getting in before them. I don't really get the backlash by a lot of people on Illinois though. They seemed deserving to me.

Sniper, they are brutal, absolutely brutal, they will lose that game by 20. I hope they win because SIU will SMOKE them but they are going to get smoked by VT

[Cannon Shell]

I guess what pisses me off the most is this idea that this is such a "hard" job and the committee must be locked up for 5 days to make all these tough decisions. 90% of the field is settled by last week. An upset in a conference final may upset things a bit but it should not be as complicated as they make it.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I guess what pisses me off the most is this idea that this is such a "hard" job and the committee must be locked up for 5 days to make all these tough decisions. 90% of the field is settled by last week. An upset in a conference final may upset things a bit but it should not be as complicated as they make it.

I saw Lunardi's offer to just pay him instead and save the precious time it supposedly takes them. I'm willing to make the same offer. I don't think my bracket would have been as offensive to so many people as the one they came up with. I got 62 out of 65 which is one of my worst years but I beat Lunardi who had 61 at best. Just wait until next year on ESPN.com when they claim Lunardi had 64 out of 65 last year like they do every year when he really has 62 or 63.