UL isn't a top fiver but they are a top ten team. Thier playing good basketball as of late.

Looking at that bracket, who really thinks that X would get past Arizona in the second round or UL in the Sweet 16? I think a 4 is about as high of a seed as X needs.

 

And that's just assuming they could handle their business against Robert Morris (the illegitimate brother of Randolph).

 

I mean, just think about the four 2 seeds- Kansas, UCLA, Duke and...Xavier? You can make the argument on paper, but in real life and logical standpoint, no way they belong.

 

Why wouldn't someone think Xavier couldn't get past say an Arizona in the second round. Do you remember how they had the National Runner-ups last year in OSU beat until a guy made a great 3 point shot at the buzzer for OSU? Also this year they had the #1 team in the country beat in UT, and blew that game as well. So they definitely shown they can play with ANYBODY. Then as GT pointed out they also have the resume, and the wins against top 100 and top 50 teams.

 

Also yeah seeing Xavier listed with those teams looks weird but thats only because their not a normal power like those schools. But just because they aren't a normal power like those schools, does that mean they don't belong to have a 2 seed even if they have earned it? By the way I not sure if they would beat UCLA or Kansas ( I do think they can play with them though) but I definitely think they can beat Duke. So yes there is nothing wrong at all with Xavier being the 2 seed at this time.

UL isn't a top fiver but they are a top ten team. Thier playing good basketball as of late.

 

:thumb:

Xavier is worthy of a two seed.

Xavier is worthy of a two seed.

 

No, they're not.

I mean, just think about the four 2 seeds- Kansas, UCLA, Duke and...Xavier? You can make the argument on paper, but in real life and logical standpoint, no way they belong.

 

Why just because they are "Xavier." Your argument is Xavier should not be a 2 seed because they are not a well known team around the country. With that logic UK should be a 4 seed this year. Xavier has proven over the last decade or so that they can compete with the big name schools in the tournament. As GT pointed out, Xavier's resume is worthy of a 2 seed. It seems as if your in the minority here.

I agree that it's hard to get past that name on the front of the jersey when seeding a team. Xavier is deserving of whatever solid seed they get. The problem is, the A-10 is a beast this season, if they don't get through the conference tourney unscathed, they'll likely be a 5, IMO.

As far as why Duke didn't drop more with their two straight losses....they paid for one of them last week in the polls, then this week, they paid for the other. I still think they're overrated, likely aroudn 13-15 right now, IMO.

How does UK get blown out by 41 and a week and a half later start getting votes?

 

I don't care how good Vandy is, they are 14th.No team that is remotely close to the Top 25 should get beat by 41 to anyone.

 

UK is by no means a top 25 team, but how many teams in the big conferences has won 8 out of their last 9 games? And UK has beaten the #1 team in the nation.

At this point in the year I believe UK is 1 of the top 30 teams in the nation. Their earlier record will keep them out of that area, but since Jan. 1st, not too many teams have really been better.

If Xavier wins out, they are a 2 seed. The A-10 has made a little bit of noise this year and their non-conference wins are solid. When they defend, they can play with anyone. Remember what they did to Kansas State and Michael Beasley? How about Tennessee? They are very good.

I agree that it's hard to get past that name on the front of the jersey when seeding a team. Xavier is deserving of whatever solid seed they get. The problem is, the A-10 is a beast this season, if they don't get through the conference tourney unscathed, they'll likely be a 5, IMO.

 

If Xavier does not run the table they will not be a 2 seed, however they will not fall to a 5 just because of 1 loss in the A-10 tournament, IMO. You somewhat contradict yourself here, saying the A-10 is a best, but then punishing a team 3 seeding spots because they lose 1 out of their last 15 games or so. Personally, I dont think X will win the A-10 tournament. But, I still think they will be a 3 seed.

^ Penlizing them 3 spots is based on Lunardi's Bracketology...That said, I think they are, at best, a 3 right now. So if they were to go out early in the A-10 tourney, a 5 would sound reasonable. I also feel, that if they get a 5, with how the brackets work out, it might be a great spot for them.

^ Penlizing them 3 spots is based on Lunardi's Bracketology...That said, I think they are, at best, a 3 right now. So if they were to go out early in the A-10 tourney, a 5 would sound reasonable. I also feel, that if they get a 5, with how the brackets work out, it might be a great spot for them.

 

:thumb:

Why just because they are "Xavier." Your argument is Xavier should not be a 2 seed because they are not a well known team around the country. With that logic UK should be a 4 seed this year. Xavier has proven over the last decade or so that they can compete with the big name schools in the tournament. As GT pointed out, Xavier's resume is worthy of a 2 seed. It seems as if your in the minority here.

 

If X wasn't a local team, people would be screaming bloody murder if they got a 2 seed.

 

You'll never convince me that a mid-major deserves higher than a 3 seed. Ever.

If Xavier wins out, they are a 2 seed. The A-10 has made a little bit of noise this year and their non-conference wins are solid. When they defend, they can play with anyone. Remember what they did to Kansas State and Michael Beasley? How about Tennessee? They are very good.

 

IU. That's about it.