March 10, 201214 yr Facts are facts. The best #1 seed plays the worst #2 seed. I'm arguing that the best #1 seed is easily Kentucky. The worst #2 seed is easily not Missouri. Why would they end up in the same bracket in a favorable region for Missouri? I mean how is that a pity party? Again, that is not how it works. It should, but it does not.
March 10, 201214 yr Yes, it was the South region. I just looked it up and Syracuse was in the West region. Baylor in Houston is a very tough draw. That is the sort of matchup, however, that should be given to the 4th number one seed if it has to be given to anyone, though, right? It's different saying "Oh, wow the three seed in my bracket is from the same region" as it is saying "The two seed from my bracket is from this region." Is it not? I mean that's the point at least I was trying to make -- that the number one overall seed should be rewarded by being given the most favorable tournament bracket. That just hasn't happened recently, and it would be a ridiculous break to give UK the Midwest bracket with Missouri in it. I can't understand the logic of any 1 seed playing a de facto road game in the regional final. The only team with the fans to overcome that obstacle though is UK. There is no doubt in my mind that if they get screwed and have to play Mizzou or Kansas in St. Louis that it will be renamed St. Blouis by Sweet 16 week. UK fans will be ready to flood St. Louis and ticketmaster. No doubt in my mind.
March 10, 201214 yr As I have said before, I have always wanted to see how the committee ranks teams 1-68. Based upon that teams can move either up or down a line.
March 10, 201214 yr I can't understand the logic of any 1 seed playing a de facto road game in the regional final. The only team with the fans to overcome that obstacle though is UK. There is no doubt in my mind that if they get screwed and have to play Mizzou or Kansas in St. Louis that it will be renamed St. Blouis by Sweet 16 week. UK fans will be ready to flood St. Louis and ticketmaster. No doubt in my mind. True. I agree with that.
March 10, 201214 yr Again, that is not how it works. It should, but it does not. News to me. I see, and it's a misconception on my part, then.
March 10, 201214 yr As I have said before, I have always wanted to see how the committee ranks teams 1-68. Based upon that teams can move either up or down a line. You get your wish this year as they are releasing the seeds 1-68...
March 10, 201214 yr Facts are facts. The best #1 seed plays the worst #2 seed. I'm arguing that the best #1 seed is easily Kentucky. The worst #2 seed is easily not Missouri. Why would they end up in the same bracket in a favorable region for Missouri? I mean how is that a pity party? You are worked up over something that has not, and likely will not happen. Facts are facts after all...
March 10, 201214 yr You get your wish this year as they are releasing the seeds 1-68... So if UK reaches a reginoal final they would play the #8 seed if their region's # 2 seed also reached the final?
March 10, 201214 yr So if UK reaches a reginoal final they would play the #8 seed if their region's # 2 seed also reached the final? In theory, yes, but that is not how it always works out. There is a lot more to seeding than just doing the S Curve 1-68...
March 10, 201214 yr In theory, yes, but that is not how it always works out. There is a lot more to seeding than just doing the S Curve 1-68... Th S curve isnt used any longer according to an article I read. Geography plays a huge role for the top 16.
March 10, 201214 yr Th S curve isnt used any longer according to an article I read. Geography plays a huge role for the top 16. Right. Just using the term for the sake of the discussion...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.