First 2009 March Madness thread

I think part of the problem is the following:

The teams you call the middling majors get in
based on wins that occurred earlier in the season.
Like Notre Dame. Now they might pull out another
major win just because they have a chance to.
The conf. schedule is full of them.
But... they are actually playing very bad basketball
by the time they get into the tourney.

The so called quality mids get in (and this is also
a generalization) because they win their tourney,
or because they have played very well and have
a very good record, but lost in their tourney turning
them into a quality mid. Bottom line is that they are still
playing good basketball. I think it is Butler that has won
a heck of a lot of games on the road against solid teams.
But that does not look nearly as good as winning home
games against very good teams (like UConn or NC). But
winning as many road games as Butler has against very
solid teams is more difficult imo.

Texas is 18-8 and ranked in the top 25. They had some
good wins early but are NOW playing absolutely horrible basketball.
They beat OU by beating up possibly the best college basketball
player in the country recently. So they vault right back up
because they have the chance to play a top team at home
without their best player.

There is no way Butler gets in at 18-8. If the NCAA tourney started
today Texas would be in. But they are first round losers unless
some magic occurs.

And it makes sense that mid majors can be very strong.
You dont necessarily need to have the depth of quality players like you
do in football. And some of these mid major teams have a bunch
of smart players that have played more than 1 year. Almost all of the traditional top programs have lost a quality experiened underclassman to the NBA this year.
And they will every year. Some of these players that stay together
really play very well as a team with less talent. Or with one very
good player with experienced players surrounding him.
A major conf. team can play much more erratically and get in so much easier.

Anyways...
It makes the tourney one of the best team sporting events
in our country. Maybe THE best.

Another pgardn ramble. No fancy bullets like phil.

Answer B.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I think part of the problem is the following:

The teams you call the middling majors get in
based on wins that occurred earlier in the season.
Like Notre Dame. Now they might pull out another
major win just because they have a chance to.
The conf. schedule is full of them.
But... they are actually playing very bad basketball
by the time they get into the tourney.

The so called quality mids get in (and this is also
a generalization) because they win their tourney,
or because they have played very well and have
a very good record, but lost in their tourney turning
them into a quality mid. Bottom line is that they are still
playing good basketball. I think it is Butler that has won
a heck of a lot of games on the road against solid teams.
But that does not look nearly as good as winning home
games against very good teams (like UConn or NC). But
winning as many road games as Butler has against very
solid teams is more difficult imo.

Texas is 18-8 and ranked in the top 25. They had some
good wins early but are NOW playing absolutely horrible basketball.
They beat OU by beating up possibly the best college basketball
player in the country recently. So they vault right back up
because they have the chance to play a top team at home
without their best player.

There is no way Butler gets in at 18-8. If the NCAA tourney started
today Texas would be in. But they are first round losers unless
some magic occurs.

And it makes sense that mid majors can be very strong.
You dont necessarily need to have the depth of quality players like you
do in football. And some of these mid major teams have a bunch
of smart players that have played more than 1 year. Almost all of the traditional top programs have lost a quality experiened underclassman to the NBA this year.
And they will every year. Some of these players that stay together
really play very well as a team with less talent. Or with one very
good player with experienced players surrounding him.
A major conf. team can play much more erratically and get in so much easier.
Anyways...
It makes the tourney one of the best team sporting events
in our country. Maybe THE best.

Another pgardn ramble. No fancy bullets like phil.

Answer B.

A very good ramble, especially the bottom paragraph. Your Texas example is spot on. They had some good wins, and clearly have a lot of talent, should be in the tournament, but have not played well as of late (up until the OU game)... and are highly likely to get beat in the first round as a 10 or 11 seed.

[SniperSB23]

Thanks Phil! Personally I feel like Notre Dame shouldn't even be in the discussion unless they can win at home against Villanova and get to 9-9 in league play. At 8-10 with an RPI of 70 they shouldn't even be strongly considered. I hope Siena gets in, they are playing really good basketball now, took a 40-19 halftime lead on Northern Iowa who leads the MVC. Niagara also blew out the 3rd place MVC team Illinois St so the top of the conference stacks up very well against the MVC. Siena played absolutely terrible in the Old Spice when Kenny Hasbrouck let talks of NBA scouts get in his head but the past few games they have looked better than they have ever looked (including wins over Stanford and Vandy last year). At Kansas they played really poorly and still cut a 30-10 deficit down to 4 with 7 minutes to play before losing by 7. Not many teams can do that at Kansas in a pay to play game where they use Big 12 officials and let Aldrich do whatever he wants underneath.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Thanks Phil! Personally I feel like Notre Dame shouldn't even be in the discussion unless they can win at home against Villanova and get to 9-9 in league play. At 8-10 with an RPI of 70 they shouldn't even be strongly considered. I hope Siena gets in, they are playing really good basketball now, took a 40-19 halftime lead on Northern Iowa who leads the MVC. Niagara also blew out the 3rd place MVC team Illinois St so the top of the conference stacks up very well against the MVC. Siena played absolutely terrible in the Old Spice when Kenny Hasbrouck let talks of NBA scouts get in his head but the past few games they have looked better than they have ever looked (including wins over Stanford and Vandy last year). At Kansas they played really poorly and still cut a 30-10 deficit down to 4 with 7 minutes to play before losing by 7. Not many teams can do that at Kansas in a pay to play game where they use Big 12 officials and let Aldrich do whatever he wants underneath.

Even if Notre Dame beats 'Nova, they should still have to beat UConn to get in. They were life and death to beat Rutgers last night for God's sake.

[2 Dollar Bill]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Even if Notre Dame beats 'Nova, they should still have to beat UConn to get in. They were life and death to beat Rutgers last night for God's sake.

Maybe we should wait till ND man...makes HIS post..

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Even if Notre Dame beats 'Nova, they should still have to beat UConn to get in. They were life and death to beat Rutgers last night for God's sake.

Yeah, I agree. I was just saying they should have to beat Nova to even get consideration. If they got in at 8-10 in league with an RPI in the 70s it would be a joke.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Yeah, I agree. I was just saying they should have to beat Nova to even get consideration. If they got in at 8-10 in league with an RPI in the 70s it would be a joke.

What do you college b-ball fanatics think of Kansas' chances in March/April?

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

What do you college b-ball fanatics think of Kansas' chances in March/April?

I know Scott doesn't like Kansas, but I do. Aldritch is really starting to play well, and if the twins can become more consistent, Kansas isn't impossible for the Final Four. My main problems with them are their lack of experience and how much they rely on Collins. I'm not sure how they'd react if Collins had a 4-for-15 game in the Sweet 16. They also turn the ball over a hell of a lot, so a team with good defensive guards could pose them problems.

One thing's for sure. The play of Collins this year shows just how awesome last season's team was. Sherron was like the fourth or fifth option on last year's team, and now he's got Kansas on the verge of a 2 or 3-seed as the go-to guy.

Originally Posted by declansharbor

What do you college b-ball fanatics think of Kansas' chances in March/April?

Big 12 is weak.
Kansas gets beat.
I personally cannot fathom a final four for them.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I think part of the problem is the following:

The teams you call the middling majors get in
based on wins that occurred earlier in the season.
Like Notre Dame. Now they might pull out another
major win just because they have a chance to.
The conf. schedule is full of them.
But... they are actually playing very bad basketball
by the time they get into the tourney.

The so called quality mids get in (and this is also
a generalization) because they win their tourney,
or because they have played very well and have
a very good record, but lost in their tourney turning
them into a quality mid. Bottom line is that they are still
playing good basketball. I think it is Butler that has won
a heck of a lot of games on the road against solid teams.
But that does not look nearly as good as winning home
games against very good teams (like UConn or NC). But
winning as many road games as Butler has against very
solid teams is more difficult imo.

Texas is 18-8 and ranked in the top 25. They had some
good wins early but are NOW playing absolutely horrible basketball.
They beat OU by beating up possibly the best college basketball
player in the country recently. So they vault right back up
because they have the chance to play a top team at home
without their best player.

There is no way Butler gets in at 18-8. If the NCAA tourney started
today Texas would be in. But they are first round losers unless
some magic occurs.

And it makes sense that mid majors can be very strong.
You dont necessarily need to have the depth of quality players like you
do in football. And some of these mid major teams have a bunch
of smart players that have played more than 1 year. Almost all of the traditional top programs have lost a quality experiened underclassman to the NBA this year.
And they will every year. Some of these players that stay together
really play very well as a team with less talent. Or with one very
good player with experienced players surrounding him.
A major conf. team can play much more erratically and get in so much easier.

Anyways...
It makes the tourney one of the best team sporting events
in our country. Maybe THE best.

Another pgardn ramble. No fancy bullets like phil.

Answer B.

I think that post is your career longest! Tired,huh?

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

I think that post is your career longest! Tired,huh?

I can ramble on saying practically nothing
on any particular subject.