Author Topic: Being a 1 seed, Ku compared to UNC Duke and UK (Read 5433 times)

Powercat Posse · « **on:** March 28, 2011, 04:51:18 PM »

In the past 20 years, Duke has been a 1 seed 11 times. KU has been it 9 times, UNC 8 times and UK 7 times.

Here is what each of those schools has done in the region they were put with that one seed (so basicly this is not counting any of the Final Four games.

No 16 seed has ever beat a 1 seed so we all know that none of the 4 schools lost an opening round game being a 1 seed.... so the records reflect games in the round of 32, sweet 16, and elite 8 =

1) North Carolina is 20-2. 6 of the 8 times they were a 1 they made the FF. Only lost in the Elite 8 once and the round of 32 in 1994

2) Duke is 22-6. Duke made FF 5 of the 11 times they got a 1 seed. The Blue Devils have been bounced 5 times in the Sweet 16 by a 4 or 5 seed.

3) Kentucky is 15-4. Made the FF 3 of the 7 times they got 1 seed. Lost in Elite 8 three and got upset by UAB in 2004.

4) KU is 12- 7. Made FF only 2 of 9 times when getting a 1 seed. Lost in round of 32 three times and Sweet 16 twice.

* UNC only bad loss is to an 8 seed Boston College
* Duke has never lost to a team seeded lower than 5
* Kentucky had one bad loss to 9 seeded UAB. Other three loses were to 2/3 seeds

* KU has lost to an 8, a 9, a 9 and a 11

*** If you add in the FF and NC games =
UNC has 26 wins with the 1 seed ( 8 yrs)
Duke has 29 wins (11 yrs)
Kentucky has 18 wins (7 yrs).... fixed this as i had it wrong earlier
KU has 14 wins (9 yrs)

OK_Cat · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2011, 04:54:40 PM »

seems like you put a lot of time into making something that nobody gives a crap about

Andy · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2011, 04:57:05 PM »

interesting stuff. thanks.

kscottbailey · « **Reply #3 on:** March 28, 2011, 05:04:18 PM »

Quote from: OK_Cat on March 28, 2011, 04:54:40 PM

seems like you put a lot of time into making something that nobody gives a cac about

Seems like you put a bit of time into making something that proves you're a douche.

goldenticket · « **Reply #4 on:** March 28, 2011, 05:05:48 PM »

Quote from: Andy on March 28, 2011, 04:57:05 PM

interesting stuff. thanks.

yeah i kinda wanted to know this stuff after their lost on sunday, thanks

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2011, 06:30:16 PM »

Clearly the Big XII isn't a difficult enough league to prep them for the tourney. They should check out the ACC, a bunch of schools that have been good at basketball at some point in time, plus UNC and Duke, plus sucking at football is a requirement.

fr@ck me · « **Reply #6 on:** March 28, 2011, 06:39:39 PM »

Thanks, I sent this to douche bag ku fans that try to justify the loss.

asava · « **Reply #7 on:** March 28, 2011, 06:40:29 PM »

one of these is not like the other things, one of these things is not like the others.

nicname · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2011, 06:49:27 PM »

I find it pretty ridiculous to try to belittle something that is clearly better than us.

fatty fat fat · « **Reply #9 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:00:06 PM »

Quote from: nicname on March 28, 2011, 06:49:27 PM

I find it pretty ridiculous to try to belittle something that is clearly better than us.

then stop being a ksu fan.

EllToPay · « **Reply #10 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:04:03 PM »

nicname · « **Reply #11 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:14:48 PM »

Quote from: fatty fat fat on March 28, 2011, 07:00:06 PM

Quote from: nicname on March 28, 2011, 06:49:27 PM
I find it pretty ridiculous to try to belittle something that is clearly better than us.

then stop being a ksu fan.

nah, ksu needs people like me to fend off the idiot guild

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #12 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:49:34 PM »

Quote from: nicname on March 28, 2011, 06:49:27 PM

I find it pretty ridiculous to try to belittle something that is clearly better than us.

Do ya?

fatty fat fat · « **Reply #13 on:** March 28, 2011, 08:21:55 PM »

Quote from: nicname on March 28, 2011, 07:14:48 PM

Quote from: fatty fat fat on March 28, 2011, 07:00:06 PM
Quote from: nicname on March 28, 2011, 06:49:27 PM
I find it pretty ridiculous to try to belittle something that is clearly better than us.

then stop being a ksu fan.

nah, ksu needs people like me to fend off the idiot guild

ksu doesn't need you. we need more people that work to synthesize emaw w/o toxic by-products.

felix rex · « **Reply #14 on:** March 28, 2011, 08:27:04 PM »

I enjoyed this little nugget of bb info that you unearthed.

Bookcat · « **Reply #15 on:** March 28, 2011, 09:48:32 PM »

KU underachieves and chokes. Their fanbase denies it. The truth hurts. etc etc

Sayers · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2011, 12:22:51 PM »

I do not consider Duke a traditional power. They emerged in the mid 80's. They had a couple moments in 64 and 78 but not a traditional power. The others are big schools who have been doing it well before 64 teams.

8manpick · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2011, 12:35:44 PM »

Quote from: Sayers on March 29, 2011, 12:22:51 PM

I do not consider Duke a traditional power. They emerged in the mid 80's. They had a couple moments in 64 and 78 but not a traditional power. The others are big schools who have been doing it well before 64 teams.

25 years of being consistently one of the best isn't enough to be a traditional power? Seriously? GTFO.

Andy · « **Reply #18 on:** March 29, 2011, 02:25:23 PM »

its worth a discussion about a schools eliteness if its all been with one coach.

TrueBlueHawk · « **Reply #19 on:** March 29, 2011, 02:33:39 PM »

Quote from: Bookcat on March 28, 2011, 09:48:32 PM

KU underachieves and chokes. Their fanbase denies it. The truth hurts. etc etc

There is nothing to deny. Self is 1-3 in the Elite Eight @ Kansas. It sucks because we have had teams that should have been in the Final Four that just had an epic collapse in the tournament. I realize this stuff happens and maybe it will all even out, but my fear is that the team will start to buy in to the whole "perrenial chokers" tag and tense up every year a mid-major doesn't back down after getting popped in the face (not from a Morrii elbow, but rather on the scoreboard).

asava · « **Reply #20 on:** March 29, 2011, 02:39:25 PM »

Quote from: Andy on March 29, 2011, 02:25:23 PM

its worth a discussion about a schools eliteness if its all been with one coach.

makes a whole lotta sense. it would be very similar to saying that Michigan State is up there because of its last 15 years.

bakerman · « **Reply #21 on:** March 29, 2011, 02:47:14 PM »

UCLA could probably be considered too, right?

8manpick · « **Reply #22 on:** March 29, 2011, 03:07:49 PM »

Quote from: Andy on March 29, 2011, 02:25:23 PM

its worth a discussion about a schools eliteness if its all been with one coach.

Duke has been a national power for as long as most recruits and their parents have been paying attention to basketball. Also, Coach K's coaching tree is established enough that when he retires, they will not be without a top tier coach. Really don't foresee any scenario where Duke becomes an also-ran in basketball. The only counter-example I see is Indiana's demise after Knight, although it includes a NCAA title game appearance, and NCAA appearances in 5 out of 7 years. Their fall was caused by a perfect storm of internal issues, poor hires and NCAA violations. Would be shocking for that to happen to Duke.

mcmwcat · « **Reply #23 on:** March 29, 2011, 03:13:59 PM »

Quote from: Sayers on March 29, 2011, 12:22:51 PM

I do not consider Duke a traditional power.

this is called the ostrich form of fighting/bbsing

Powercat Posse · « **Reply #24 on:** March 29, 2011, 04:39:46 PM »

KU is just flat awful and embarrassing as a 1 seed. No way to get around it.

In that same 20 year period, they have been right on average with playing to their seeding when not a 1.

1) As a 2,3,4 seed =
*** Have played to their seed 4 times
*** Have exceeded expectations 3 times (2 seed made FF, 2 seed made title, 4 seed made elite8)
*** have fallen short of seed expectations 2 times (both 1st rd losses)

2) As a 6 and a 8 seed they played to their seed.

*** So all in all, they were 2 rounds shorts in 05/06. They went 2 rds farther in 03. One rd farther in 93, 04. So basicly exactly even on playing to their seeding (when not a 1 seed)