Author Topic: Updated Bracketology  (Read 8734 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WildcatNkilt

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6930
  • Had the worst birthday ever on Dec. 5th of '98.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2010, 12:46:22 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good.  

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why?  

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine.  

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point.  

This

rough ridin' ELITE 8
Kansas City Blue Barbecue fan.

Offline slimz

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Katpak'r
  • *******
  • Posts: 2128
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2010, 12:52:37 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good.  

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why?  

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine.  

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point.  

No offense, FAN, but comparing Baylor's zone to Syracuse's zone might be a bit of a stretch.  Kind of like saying we should be able to defend Texas Tech's spread offense because we handled Iowa State's spread offense.

But you're right that we shouldn't really worry about who we play past the first couple of rounds.  Any team we play will present problems.  We have the tools to defeat the zone if the players perform.  

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2010, 12:53:34 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good.  

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why?  

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine.  

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point.  

Don't compare Baylor's zone to Cuse's, you know better than that. And I won't be picky at that level either, but on Feb. 22nd, when this is all we have to discuss, I would prefer a top seed not named Syracuse. I think UK (the real one, Ashley Judd's UK) would be a much better matchup for us than Cuse, actually.

Offline CrushNasty

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1001
  • Future Shooter Jones W.C.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #28 on: February 22, 2010, 12:55:52 PM »
On that bracket, if we had to play a 7, 3, 1 (the highest seeds possible) I would want to play Richmond, New Mexico, Purdue  :love:

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #29 on: February 22, 2010, 12:56:17 PM »
Look, I didn't say that Baylor was anything near Syracuse.  And their match-up style 2-3 is not what Drew runs.  

But looking at who we've played, I think its the best comparison b/c Syracuse has long athletic players like Baylor does, just more of them and better ones.  But a 2-3 zone concept combined with long athletes is what we'll see against Syracuse, though the structure of the zone and the movements within it are much different.

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 36688
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #30 on: February 22, 2010, 12:59:07 PM »
Cuse's Zone.... :flush:

My point exactly.  Unless Deni's fracking trick shots are "on," a zone kills us.

Yep.  We only have one way to win this game.  To kill the zone with outside shots until they abandon the zone, or spread it out. 

They keep a tight zone= we lose and the game is damn near unwatchable for both fan bases.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85346
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #31 on: February 22, 2010, 01:03:56 PM »
To kill the zone with outside shots until they abandon the zone

You realize we're talking about Syracuse, right?

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #32 on: February 22, 2010, 01:09:20 PM »
To me its all relative once you get to the Elite 8.  Yeah, Syracuse's defense/scheme may make them tougher, but the biggest thing that makes them good is that they have really good players.  So does UK and KU.  Probably the team with the fewest really good players is Purdue, but they are still very good. 

Offline WildcatNkilt

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6930
  • Had the worst birthday ever on Dec. 5th of '98.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #33 on: February 22, 2010, 01:12:21 PM »
To kill the zone with outside shots until they abandon the zone

You realize we're talking about Syracuse, right?

We could try to go inside and create foul problems.  Since their depth sucks, putting any one of their starters in foul trouble would be huge.  
Kansas City Blue Barbecue fan.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46514
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #34 on: February 22, 2010, 01:16:36 PM »
could I get a mod/someone to rename this thread "Updated Retardology" 

mods?

a zone by anyone will be the least of our problems when it comes to matching up in the tournament.


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 WildCatzPhreak

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 791
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #35 on: February 22, 2010, 01:24:56 PM »
It is kind of funny that for the first year in a very long time we have a multiple three point threats, and everyone is all  :ohno: over zone defense.  God help our opponent in a game when Denis, Jake, and our 3 are all hitting them.

Offline Ira Hayes

  • Created #RayRayForAD
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1985
  • The Marine that went to war.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #36 on: February 22, 2010, 01:32:19 PM »
The important thing to note is that the 3 through 6 seeds are a big jumbled mess.  There is almost no advantage of being a 1 seed vs a 2 seed.

Also, it looks like a pretty solid bet that we will be in OKC for the first round.  That's huge.

Personally, I hope we get a crack at Kentucky.  

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #37 on: February 22, 2010, 01:41:59 PM »
It's not just Cuse's zone, that isn't the only reason they'd be a bad matchup for us. They have huge, long guards and are a good outside shooting team. I think they're better than UK. I'm not even sure UK will make it to the E8. :dunno:

Offline ew2x4

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3918
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #38 on: February 22, 2010, 02:06:28 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good.  

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why?  

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine.  

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point.  

Don't compare Baylor's zone to Cuse's, you know better than that. And I won't be picky at that level either, but on Feb. 22nd, when this is all we have to discuss, I would prefer a top seed not named Syracuse. I think UK (the real one, Ashley Judd's UK) would be a much better matchup for us than Cuse, actually.

Wall vs Clemente could be legendary.

Offline canadian_breeze

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2010, 02:49:16 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good.  

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why?  

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine.  

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point.  

Don't compare Baylor's zone to Cuse's, you know better than that. And I won't be picky at that level either, but on Feb. 22nd, when this is all we have to discuss, I would prefer a top seed not named Syracuse. I think UK (the real one, Ashley Judd's UK) would be a much better matchup for us than Cuse, actually.

Wall vs Clemente could be legendary.
:drool:

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2010, 03:06:14 PM »
K-State fans; we are going to face good teams in the tournament if we make it to the 2nd weekend.  We will probably see someone pretty decent in the 2nd round.  Some match-ups could be better than others, but regardless if we get to the Sweet 16 whoever we play is going to be dang good. 

Even though we haven't really been there, at least try to act like we've been there.

There are good teams out there that are far better matchups for us than freaking Syracuse.

Why? 

We seemed to handle Baylors athletic 2-3 zone just fine. 

I don't know who out of the likely 1 seeds would be a better match-up, I just know if we are playing Syracuse its likely in the Elite 8.  I'm not going to be too picky about who we play at the point. 

Don't compare Baylor's zone to Cuse's, you know better than that. And I won't be picky at that level either, but on Feb. 22nd, when this is all we have to discuss, I would prefer a top seed not named Syracuse. I think UK (the real one, Ashley Judd's UK) would be a much better matchup for us than Cuse, actually.

Wall vs Clemente could be legendary.

As could Cousins v. Colon.

Kidding.

Offline EllToPay

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5174
  • Typical EMAW
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2010, 03:09:46 PM »
Wouldn't mind seeing Kelly on Cousins, as I really think Kelly is pretty underrated as a defender.

Wall would drop 40 on Clemente, although it would be Pullen on Wall.


Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40533
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #43 on: February 22, 2010, 05:33:43 PM »
that bracket sucks because it's loaded with teams that are better than their seeds.


lmao @ you tards that are scared of zones.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Johnny Thunderbone

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 520
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #44 on: February 22, 2010, 05:46:02 PM »
even though I said I don't see Purdue being a 1 seed by tourney time, they still have 11 guys who have played in 20+ games this season (more depth than us).

We have 10 guys that have played 20+ games to their 10.  We have 10 guys playing 10+ minutes a game to their 8.  Sure, they have 16 players, but arguing depth is a moot point here.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46514
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: Updated Bracketology
« Reply #45 on: February 22, 2010, 05:50:29 PM »
that bracket sucks because it's loaded with teams that are better than their seeds.


lmao @ you tards that are scared of zones.
but it's not just any zone, it's the syrazone   :ohno:


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.