Author Topic: Teams we need to cheer against (Read 7661 times)

CHONGS · « **Reply #25 on:** March 10, 2012, 02:35:29 PM »

I cheer against teams/players/coaches I dislike.

Dr Rick Daris · « **Reply #26 on:** March 10, 2012, 03:04:51 PM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 10, 2012, 02:15:03 PM

Quote from: rick daris on March 10, 2012, 02:08:16 PM
Quote from: MakeItRain on March 10, 2012, 01:45:58 PM
Quote from: ksu_FAN on March 10, 2012, 01:37:01 PM
I understand the process. I look at all of that, but honestly I don't care that much about the process to discuss every scenario and every point. I choose to narrow my focus to the 2/3 seeds above us and below us, but I know there are other games around the country that factor in as well.

I know you understand. You agree that cheering for or against Memphis like it has a direct correlation to our seed it really simple though, right?

obviously it's simple but it's something that can actually be discussed by people. things like how many teams the committee may or may not want in a certain town or having to move a team up or down so conference teams don't meet up is pretty much beyond hypothetical because it involves conversations which we aren't and won't be privy to. that memphis game or whatever is on tv. seems like i understand the people who want to talk about it. i'll personally pass, but i get it.

I get people who think free throw percentage is a relevant stat, doesn't make the argument less absurd.

of course it does. one is something that people talk about because the other important information on the subject is not available and one is something that people talk about despite an insane amount of readily available subject important information. but you already knew all of that.

Powercat Posse · « **Reply #27 on:** March 10, 2012, 03:06:14 PM »

There are always a couple of real surprises each time the bracket comes out on Selection Sunday. Last year, everyone was surprised Utah St got dissed down to a 12 seed when they were 29-3. I know i thought they would be a 9 and most thought they were in that 8-10 range. The other was VCU being the 3rd team from the Colonial (14-7 in that conf)

Sometimes a team could be bumped either up or down a seed. This may have happened to us in 2008. I thought we were gonna be a 9 that year. The committee may have had us at a 10........ but i dont think that saw us being a 9 and bumped us to an 11 for location purposes.

The consensus right now is we are an 8 seed. Now being a 9 is no different except for who your matchup is and perhaps what region you may be. I still think there is that 10% shot we get a 7. I would be stunned if we got a 10. I think all the 7/8 seeds are fairly close, resume wise. I feel the 10 seeds are clearly not as good as the 8 seeds. Just my perspective anyway

MakeItRain · « **Reply #28 on:** March 10, 2012, 03:56:39 PM »

Quote from: Powercat Posse on March 10, 2012, 03:06:14 PM

There are always a couple of real surprises each time the bracket comes out on Selection Sunday. Last year, everyone was surprised Utah St got dissed down to a 12 seed when they were 29-3. I know i thought they would be a 9 and most thought they were in that 8-10 range. The other was VCU being the 3rd team from the Colonial (14-7 in that conf)

Sometimes a team could be bumped either up or down a seed. This may have happened to us in 2008. I thought we were gonna be a 9 that year. The committee may have had us at a 10........ but i dont think that saw us being a 9 and bumped us to an 11 for location purposes.

The consensus right now is we are an 8 seed. Now being a 9 is no different except for who your matchup is and perhaps what region you may be. I still think there is that 10% shot we get a 7. I would be stunned if we got a 10. I think all the 7/8 seeds are fairly close, resume wise. I feel the 10 seeds are clearly not as good as the 8 seeds. Just my perspective anyway

Of course we were bumped for Omaha. The next closet team geographically was Wisconsin, judging by the seed of the ar-large teams we would have been one of the last four in, and by your own admission we were a 9, no where close to the last 4 in.

sys · « **Reply #29 on:** March 10, 2012, 04:38:58 PM »

Quote from: Chingon on March 10, 2012, 02:35:29 PM

I cheer against teams/players/coaches I dislike.

that's a great philosophy, chingon.

sys · « **Reply #30 on:** March 10, 2012, 04:42:10 PM »

agree with mir on how pointless seed talk is, agree with _fan that it isn't annoying. i could maybe get into it, even with the knowledge that seeding is incredibly inexact, if i didn't know that the committee will move unprotected seed teams two or maybe even three seeds up or down to get a geographically better matchup.

kso_FAN · « **Reply #31 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:25:44 PM »

catzacker · « **Reply #32 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:28:09 PM »

if KU and MU are 2 seeds,doesn't that pretty much put us on the 8/9 line? I mean, it has to lower the odds that we could "slide" to a 7.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #33 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:31:16 PM »

Quote from: catzacker on March 10, 2012, 07:28:09 PM

if KU and MU are 2 seeds,doesn't that pretty much put us on the 8/9 line? I mean, it has to lower the odds that we could "slide" to a 7.

The odds of KU being a 2 seed are slim, the odds of KU or Mizzou not reaching a 1 are virtually nonexistent.

catzacker · « **Reply #34 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:36:54 PM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on March 10, 2012, 07:31:16 PM

Quote from: catzacker on March 10, 2012, 07:28:09 PM
if KU and MU are 2 seeds,doesn't that pretty much put us on the 8/9 line? I mean, it has to lower the odds that we could "slide" to a 7.

The odds of KU being a 2 seed are slim, the odds of KU or Mizzou not reaching a 1 are virtually nonexistent.

you don't like Mich St as the last 4 seed?

MakeItRain · « **Reply #35 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:47:35 PM »

The last 1 seed, no. I see no argument for MSU and against KU. I think the #1 seeds were locked coming into the conference tournaments. KU losing to Baylor on the third try doesn't negatively effect their overall profile.

Also I'll be interested to see where SDSU ends up, they are without a doubt the most overrated team in the country, the MWC are going to get too many teams in because of the highly flawed RPI.

kso_FAN · « **Reply #36 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:56:31 PM »

I wouldn't be surprised if the committee didn't already have a Big 12 slot at 1 and 2. Missouri winning the tournament may or may not have flipped them. But the 2 seed may get a better location.

CHONGS · « **Reply #37 on:** March 10, 2012, 07:59:24 PM »

B12 will not get two #1s IHMO.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #38 on:** March 10, 2012, 08:00:41 PM »

Quote from: ksu_FAN on March 10, 2012, 07:56:31 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if the committee didn't already have a Big 12 slot at 1 and 2. Missouri winning the tournament may or may not have flipped them. But the 2 seed may get a better location.

If they hold true to the S-curve both will end up in the St. Louis regional.

catzacker · « **Reply #39 on:** March 10, 2012, 08:16:39 PM »

no matter our seed, I just want billy raftery to call one of our games. that's all I ask.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #40 on:** March 10, 2012, 08:18:16 PM »

I spent all winter holding out hope that Turner Broadcasting would hire Gus to help with the tournament.

Powercat Posse · « **Reply #41 on:** March 11, 2012, 03:02:37 AM »

for what its worth.......... i think

EAST -- 1 Cuse 2 Ohio St 3. Baylor 4. Fla St
South -- 1 UNC 2 Mizzou 3. Mich 4. L'ville
MWest -- 1 UK 2 Duke 3. Marq 4. Wisc
West -- 1 KU 2 Mich St 3. Gtown 4. Indiana

Just dont think they are screw overall #1 seed UK and give Mizzou 2 seed in St Louis. KU and Mich St in the West, Sparty could get 1 seed with chickens 2.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #42 on:** March 11, 2012, 09:47:09 AM »

Is that your s curve? Here's mine.
1 UK
1 Cuse
1 UNC
1 KU
2 MSU
2 Duke
2 Mizzou
2 OSU

As I've said before I could see either KU or Mizzou moved up the s curve to put them both in St. Louis. I think Syracuse gets Boston, UK will go to Atlanta and UNC out to Phoenix.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #43 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:02:01 AM »

Mizzou has to be a 2 though, no? Unless the SEC is pushing them for a 1, they aren't going to have a whole lot of friends in that room

kstater · « **Reply #44 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:10:50 AM »

MU and KU can't both be in the same region. Unless you think one of them would be picked after Baylor and ISU.

Pete · « **Reply #45 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:18:07 AM »

Quote from: kstater on March 11, 2012, 10:10:50 AM

MU and KU can't both be in the same region. Unless you think one of them would be picked after Baylor and ISU.

That's by rule, right?

ChiComCat · « **Reply #46 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:19:01 AM »

I thought the only rule was you couldn't potentially play a team from your conference until the sweet 16

kstater · « **Reply #47 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:19:46 AM »

Quote from: Pete on March 11, 2012, 10:18:07 AM

Quote from: kstater on March 11, 2012, 10:10:50 AM
MU and KU can't both be in the same region. Unless you think one of them would be picked after Baylor and ISU.

That's by rule, right?

Yes, first 3 teams from a conference must be in different regionals.

Pete · « **Reply #48 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:28:09 AM »

Quote from: kstater on March 11, 2012, 10:19:46 AM

Quote from: Pete on March 11, 2012, 10:18:07 AM
Quote from: kstater on March 11, 2012, 10:10:50 AM
MU and KU can't both be in the same region. Unless you think one of them would be picked after Baylor and ISU.

That's by rule, right?
Yes, first 3 teams from a conference must be in different regionals.

OK, lots of people have KU and Mizzou ranked some combination of 4 and 5 on their curves. If that is how the committee saw it, do they eff them both and make them both 2's, or do they just eff one of them?

I think they will both be 2's, and neither will be in STL, because UK will be the number 1 overall in STL and get Duke as their 2.

kstater · « **Reply #49 on:** March 11, 2012, 10:31:11 AM »

In order of chances happening:

KU 1, MU 2
KU 2, MU 2
KU 2, MU 1
KU 1, MU 1

I think they'll put more weight on playing in St. Louis rather than who their potential opponent is. If Kentucky ends up in St. Louis, I doubt they'll move KU or MU out of there.