Author Topic: The Official Bracketology Thread  (Read 297096 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39603
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1250 on: March 16, 2014, 09:58:51 PM »
How in the actual rough ridin' did Baylor get a 6?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

After the protected 1-4 seeds, the committee moves teams around because of several factors (avoiding conference matchups, avoiding 2nd round rematches, keeping teams close to home, etc.)

Offline Lefty

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 601
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1251 on: March 16, 2014, 10:01:34 PM »
pg. 11 is where lunardi comes out with an April of last year bracketology. shockingly accurate for a few different reasons. also some great comments from idiot fans of ours on same page.

pg. 1-10 is fantastic banter of Pullen's Senior year journey to a surprise #5 seed vs. Utah St.
elitist since 1994

Offline Powercat Posse

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4585
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1252 on: March 16, 2014, 10:30:38 PM »
How in the actual rough ridin' did Baylor get a 6?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

After the protected 1-4 seeds, the committee moves teams around because of several factors (avoiding conference matchups, avoiding 2nd round rematches, keeping teams close to home, etc.)

Exactly right.  Last year, Villanova was the overall 38th ranked team (meening 2nd best 10 seed).... but they got a 9 seed cause making them a 10 had its conflicts.   So Colorado was the 36th overall ranked team got a 10 seed.   This is just 1 example

Offline Powercat Posse

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4585
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1253 on: March 17, 2014, 12:22:30 AM »
Kentucky was 29th overall seed.  N Mexico was 28th.   Had those 2 been switched.   We could have been playing N Mexico.  And UK could have been a 7 seed with 2 seed KU

KState was the 33rd overall seed.   Colorado was 32.    So we could have been the 8 seed playing Pitt with 1 seed FLA lurking, and CU could have been playing UK in the 8 vs 9 game in St Louis

Pitt definitely easier game than UK, but I am glad we are not in Fla bracket

You can see overall rankings on here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 12:34:46 AM by Powercat Posse »

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1254 on: March 17, 2014, 12:38:20 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks it is odd to have three play in games for the same region? Or have I just never noticed this before.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39603
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1255 on: March 17, 2014, 08:00:10 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks it is odd to have three play in games for the same region? Or have I just never noticed this before.

No, this is unusual. I wonder when the NCAA will address the advantage these bubble teams are that are playing in the first four have. Since the first four has been instituted one of those teams have made the Sweet 16.

Offline GCJayhawker

  • Point Plank'r
  • Combo-Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 845
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1256 on: March 17, 2014, 10:36:18 AM »
Obviously WSU got a very tough region and draw, but the committee did not have some conspiracy to knock them out of the tournament.

There is always a top seed every year who has a ridiculous draw, there is a reason every year people try to find the "region of death".  WSU wanted to be treated like a top dog, well welcome to the party Shocks.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 44236
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1257 on: March 17, 2014, 10:43:48 AM »
Obviously WSU got a very tough region and draw, but the committee did not have some conspiracy to knock them out of the tournament.

There is always a top seed every year who has a ridiculous draw, there is a reason every year people try to find the "region of death".  WSU wanted to be treated like a top dog, well welcome to the party Shocks.

yup, welcome to the party shocks just leave your keys with the DD and grab yourself a red solo cup b/c it's time to play some beer pong right now and then prob do some crazy crap like jump off the roof into the pool.  b/c that is where you're at now shocks, it's time to play the big boy game and none of this school yard crap.  come bring your a game shocks.  of course you are now scared and walking away shocks b/c you don't  have big boy stones gmafb shocks, get out of here with your weak crap.

shocks = ketchup
k-state = shrimp cocktail sauce with tons of horseradish

BRING IT.


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline GCJayhawker

  • Point Plank'r
  • Combo-Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 845
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1258 on: March 17, 2014, 11:15:27 AM »
Obviously WSU got a very tough region and draw, but the committee did not have some conspiracy to knock them out of the tournament.

There is always a top seed every year who has a ridiculous draw, there is a reason every year people try to find the "region of death".  WSU wanted to be treated like a top dog, well welcome to the party Shocks.

yup, welcome to the party shocks just leave your keys with the DD and grab yourself a red solo cup b/c it's time to play some beer pong right now and then prob do some crazy crap like jump off the roof into the pool.  b/c that is where you're at now shocks, it's time to play the big boy game and none of this school yard crap.  come bring your a game shocks.  of course you are now scared and walking away shocks b/c you don't  have big boy stones gmafb shocks, get out of here with your weak crap.

shocks = ketchup
k-state = shrimp cocktail sauce with tons of horseradish

BRING IT.

 :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

Online michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 50459
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1259 on: March 17, 2014, 11:28:47 AM »
Kentucky was 29th overall seed.  N Mexico was 28th.   Had those 2 been switched.   We could have been playing N Mexico.  And UK could have been a 7 seed with 2 seed KU

KState was the 33rd overall seed.   Colorado was 32.    So we could have been the 8 seed playing Pitt with 1 seed FLA lurking, and CU could have been playing UK in the 8 vs 9 game in St Louis

Pitt definitely easier game than UK, but I am glad we are not in Fla bracket

You can see overall rankings on here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament

are those rankings official?

Offline Powercat Posse

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4585
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1260 on: March 17, 2014, 11:47:33 AM »
Louisville and Kentucky are good/dangerous teams in the top half of the MW bracket.   That said even though I had each of those 2 teams a line higher on seeding..... Lville was ranked 13th overall (I had them 11) and UK was 29th overall ( I had them 25).  Bottom line, if you want to make the Final 4, you better expect to beat good teams to get there. 

The only top 4 seed that I really don't think can make the Final 4 is SD St.  They play great defense but they have a hard time scoring the ball and N Mexico was close to beating them 3 times (SD ST had to rally to win at home by 3.  NMex won other 2 games).   Extremely balanced field and if the over/under was 1.5 on the number of 1 seeds that make the Final 4..... I would take the under.   


You can see overall rankings on here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament

are those rankings official?


Michigan Cat... I cant say 100 percent that those overall rankings are official.  Last year, the Monday after selection Sunday I found an article than listed all 68 teams by ranking... and when i checked Wikipedia that same day, they also had the teams with overall rank (and both had the same ranks).  I could not find any article yet this year on overall rankings..... so hopefully this one I posted is correct. 

Offline Powercat Posse

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4585
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1261 on: March 17, 2014, 11:55:21 AM »
OK, yep those rankings were official.

Wacky posted an article by CBS on overall ranks in another thread but here it is too

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24487953/official-ncaa-1-68-seeding-order

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16370
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1262 on: April 09, 2014, 12:56:12 PM »

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1263 on: April 09, 2014, 12:57:19 PM »

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1264 on: April 09, 2014, 12:58:54 PM »
Also, I don't get how he has OSU in the tourney and not us.

 :shakesfist:

Offline EllRobersonisInnocent

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 7690
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1265 on: April 09, 2014, 01:01:06 PM »
NIT!

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1266 on: April 09, 2014, 01:13:12 PM »
#BID

Offline OK_Cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15404
  • Hey
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1267 on: April 09, 2014, 01:15:10 PM »
This is our future with professor dumbstick as coach, friends.

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3410
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1268 on: April 09, 2014, 01:16:56 PM »
the eff, lunardi?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Man he is completely off his rocker, he has Tulsa ahead of Cincinnati.  :lol: :lol: :lol:

I assume he doesn't use computer projections, computers should loves us for what little we lose.

Offline wazucat

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 411
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1269 on: April 09, 2014, 02:20:57 PM »
 :nono: gonna be tough replacing Sprads production apparently.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 16133
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1270 on: April 09, 2014, 02:23:05 PM »
Just turn that Frito into a Dorito, chaps...

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3410
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1271 on: April 09, 2014, 02:54:10 PM »
In 2010 we were in the "First Four Out", So... Haha  :Woot:

Offline Mr Bread

  • We Gave You Bruce
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 7746
  • I've distressing news.
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1272 on: April 09, 2014, 03:00:37 PM »
the eff, lunardi?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Man he is completely off his rocker, he has Tulsa ahead of Cincinnati.  :lol: :lol: :lol:

I assume he doesn't use computer projections, computers should loves us for what little we lose.

He's rough ridin' high if he thinks Minnesota is getting in.
My prescience is fully engorged.  It throbs with righteous accuracy.  I am sated.

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16370
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: The Official Bracketology Thread
« Reply #1273 on: April 09, 2014, 03:03:13 PM »
:nono: gonna be tough replacing Sprads production apparently.

there was an article recently, can't remember exactly which, that said it was going to be tough to replace spradling, with no mention of southwell