UL ranked #5 but a 4seed?????

[jericho]

The selection committee is full of Oscar Mayer Bologna. I would love to hear what they say when they do this seeding. All should be open to public. I wonder if the NSA recorded them?

Edited March 18, 2014 by Randy Parker
Rule 8

[Hellbird]

The committee LOVES conference tournaments. After SMU lost to Houston on Thursday night, NC State got that upset over Syracuse the next night. It was only 24 hours and the Mustangs and Wolfpack likely switched places.

So what did Pitt do to deserve it? Getting to a Semi final in any conference tournament shouldn't mean squat. Semi Finals is pretty easy to get to anymore. Just one win usually gets you there.

 

Pitt beat a bad UNC team and that gets them in? That is stupid.

 

Pitt and NC State got the ACC bias. ACC had 2 AD's on the committee which is a joke in the first place.

[75center]

Given how we'll they've been playing and the fact that they're defending champs, I was thinking Louisville would get more respect than they were shown.

[Getslow]

So what did Pitt do to deserve it? Getting to a Semi final in any conference tournament shouldn't mean squat. Semi Finals is pretty easy to get to anymore. Just one win usually gets you there.

 

Pitt beat a bad UNC team and that gets them in? That is stupid.

 

Pitt and NC State got the ACC bias. ACC had 2 AD's on the committee which is a joke in the first place.

 

It is what it is; the committee says they take the whole season into consideration and not just late-season performance, but it's abundantly clear they place huge stock in conference tournament performances.

[LOOGY]

I remember a few years ago when they interviewed the NCAA committee chair, he said a 20 point win counts the same as a 1 point win. Loses are the same, except if your KU, you can lose 9 games and be fine...

[4chs]

Wichita State didn't get the shaft... They should have been the last of the #1 seeds (if a 1 seed at all), and even though technically they weren't, that's what their bracket should have looked like, IMO.

 

Agree, Wichita St. shouldn't be a #1 seed by the committee's criteria. Put them in one of the better conferences and how many games do they lose and where do they end up being seeded?

 

There best win could be against Tennessee, who has to play in the play-in game.

[LOOGY]

It is what it is; the committee says they take the whole season into consideration and not just late-season performance, but it's abundantly clear they place huge stock in conference tournament performances.

 

For teams who get in I agree, but for overall seeding I dont. Its fairly obvious to me the seeds were all set before any tournament started.

[Randy Parker]

They are beating KSU, no doubt about that in my mind. WSU on the other hand...

 

They're not beating Wichita IMO.

[Wireman]

They're not beating Wichita IMO.

 

I think Kentucky beats Kansas State and Wichita State.

[Bluegrasscard]

I posted earlier that the slipping from a 3 (or a 2) to a 4 was bad since it pairs you up with the #1 in the region semi. But with the way the Midwest is loaded its not so much the #1 that could be the issue with being the 4 seed. Its the #8.

 

Would rather not see UK again to be honest. That would be a very dangerous game for Louisville. But it's March...you have to play each as they come.

[Getslow]

I posted earlier that the slipping from a 3 (or a 2) to a 4 was bad since it pairs you up with the #1 in the region semi. But with the way the Midwest is loaded its not so much the #1 that could be the issue with being the 4 seed. Its the #8.

 

Would rather not see UK again to be honest. That would be a very dangerous game for Louisville. But it's March...you have to play each as they come.

 

I agree. Kentucky in the Sweet 16 is an uncomfortable proposition. Seeing Wichita again isn't exactly a thrilling notion either after last year.

 

That said, Pitino has never lost a Sweet 16 game and seems to often times win them going away. He does well with a few days to prep.

[Imhisdad]

So what did Pitt do to deserve it? Getting to a Semi final in any conference tournament shouldn't mean squat. Semi Finals is pretty easy to get to anymore. Just one win usually gets you there.

 

Pitt beat a bad UNC team and that gets them in? That is stupid.

 

Pitt and NC State got the ACC bias. ACC had 2 AD's on the committee which is a joke in the first place.

 

Man, you are all about the conspiricies. That same bad UNC team that beat UK? Tell me what UK did to deserve a bid, other than a run vs two non tourney teams in the conference tourney? Are we rewarding losses? Then they have some good ones in close losses to Duke, UNC, Uva, and UC, all quality losses. UK won one game, vs louisville esrly in year. They played in a conference that got 2.5 teams in, Tennessee being the half in the money grab that is Dayton. People talk about Wichita States schedule. The actually blew out Tennessee, and beat BYI, St. louis, and Tulsa. Thats not too b

[Hellbird]

Man, you are all about the conspiricies. That same bad UNC team that beat UK? Tell me what UK did to deserve a bid, other than a run vs two non tourney teams in the conference tourney? Are we rewarding losses? Them Pitt lost vlose games to Duke, UNC, Uva, and UC, all quality losses. UK won one game, vs louisville esrly in year. They played in a conference that got 2.5 teams in, Tennessee being the half in the money grab that is Dayton. People talk about Wichita States schedule. The actually blew out Tennessee, and beat BYI, St. louis, and Tulsa. Thats not too bad.

I've said for awhile that it has nothing to do with UK. I am not complaining about UK's seed, shoot I'm happy they even got in. Show me in the post where I even mentioned UK! I didn't yet you come in here running your trap as if you even have a clue what we are talking about.

 

Now that maybe you have realized what an idiotic comment you made about UK when replying to me when I wasn't even talking about UK, you go on and talk about Pitt and the teams they lost to. What good does that do for Pitt? They lost!!!!! IF they won then you could talk, but seeing how they lost you can't. Are you going to talk about the "quality losses" Uk has against Mich St. or UNC etc? Seriously? They lost.

 

So please try and respond to the post itself, not made up crap you claim I've said.

 

Here, I will make this as simple as possible for you to try and follow and keep up. UK is in the tournament yet they didn't even finish in the top 25. Pitt and NC State also didn't finish in the top 25 in either the AP or Coaches poll yet SMU did finish in the top 25 in both polls yet they aren't in but Pitt and NC State are in and you can include UK in that also to make you happy since you totally missed the point of my last posts. Do you get it yet?

[UKMustangFan]

Pitt didn't have a great resume, but what team that got left out deserved to be in over Pitt? They blew out Stanford (a tournament team) on a neutral court, and beat a top 25 UNC team (also on a neutral court). With how weak the bubble was this year, that's good enough.

[Hellbird]

Pitt didn't have a great resume, but what team that got left out deserved to be in over Pitt? They blew out Stanford (a tournament team) on a neutral court, and beat a top 25 UNC team (also on a neutral court). With how weak the bubble was this year, that's good enough.

I have more of a problem with NC State than any team. SMU got snubbed and I have yet to see any reason that makes sense. The committee represenative on yesterdays selection show said it was because of the RPI SoS, yet they let teams ranked below SMU in the RPI in. So you can't pick and choose if they are using that as their reasoning and not use the same criteria for every team.

 

If that is the case then Witchita State shold not be a #1 seed according to the committee. Their were other teams according to the RPI ranked much higher than them.

 

It was very inconsistent and having more ACC members on the committee than other conferences makes it really stink as a snow job.