 |  |
 |
|
| Wednesday, January 23 Bracket Banter |
||||||||||
|
Boy, it's great to be popular ...
UK Blues Do I think OSU is a bad team? No. Do I think UK, Alabama, Florida and Georgia are more deserving than OSU? Yes. If anybody gets a No. 2 seed from the Big Ten, then give it to Illinois. UK as a No. 5 seed? I can see a No. 3 seed or maybe even a No. 4, but last I checked the 'Cats were only one game back in the SEC East and were 13-4 with the same record as Arizona, a No. 2 seed in your book and No. 2 in the RPI. Kentucky was No. 7.
Bart Giles I knew this was coming. It's perfectly fine for Kentucky fans to trash their own team, but God forbid someone with a shred of objectivity doesn't genuflect at the altar of the Bluegrass. For the record, I have historically projected UK with a higher seed than most, consistently complimenting the Wildcats on their back-breaking schedules and near-annual lead in quality wins. But this year, at least so far, those big scalps simply aren't there. The list of teams with multiple RPI Top 50 wins to date includes: Ohio State also has three RPI Top 50 wins (Indiana, North Carolina State, Iowa), and is unbeaten in one of the "Super Six" conferences that dominate the NCAA bracket. UK was 2-2 in its own "Super Six" conference at the time of these projections and had but one Top 50 victory. I'm not saying Ohio State will be better in March than any of the SEC teams you mention. But I am saying the Buckeyes had a better NCAA profile when these latest projections were done (Jan. 21). Kentucky a No. 5 seed? What are you smoking? I enjoy looking at your projected brackets each week, but now I must prepare myself for laughter when I go to your site. Have you ever considered being a stand-up comedian? Kentucky is not what they were in the '90s without a big-time presence in the middle, but they are ranked in the Top 10 last time I checked. They are ranked 7th in the RPI. Their schedule rank is 7th according to USA Today, and they play Alabama and Florida the next two games. That will only raise their schedule strength even higher. It remains to be seen whether they can win both of these games. I believe they will beat 'Bama and lose to the Gators. Still should not make them a No. 5 seed!
Daniel Egbers If a name other than "Kentucky" was attached to UK's current profile, no one would argue with this projection. When that profile improves, I'll be the first to restore the Wildcats to their accustomed perch. P.S.: I do stand-up comedy in the offseason, usually by reading fans' emails aloud on the stage. I guess Alabama-Kentucky isn't a "Games of the Week" kind of matchup, huh?? Next time, check the match ups before throwing out duds for your Games of the Week. I mean Hawaii-Tulsa, Kent-Bowling Green? Give me a break! At the very least 'Bama-Kentucky is a better match than those two. Oh yeah, 'Bama is also deserving of a 3 seed if you think Georgia is. Do a little back-checking, you'll see what I am talking about. Keeping in mind that Florida is overrated, of course.
Jon E. Gifford "Games of the Week" aren't chosen as much on marquee value as on their import to the NCAA Tournament selection process. Alabama and Kentucky are dancing no matter what happens this week. You can't say the same about the teams in most of the other match ups we spotlight each week.
The Other Side of the Coin I attended Pitt basketball camps as a kid during the heady Charles Smith, Jerome Lane, Demetrius Gore days. OK, so nobody remembers Gore -- but he was my favorite. In those days Pitt was a name, a Big East champ. Then they got bounced in the NCAAs (1988, I believe) by Will Purdue and the cursed Vanderbilt Commodores. And they haven't really been heard from since. Regardless, they're a strong T-E-A-M (in the classic sense) this year. And watch that bracket, because they could end up playing some games at the Civic Arena in Pittsburgh. This site is hosted by Duquesne University, so Pitt is eligible to play there. The venue is literally only a 5-10 minute walk from campus and would be a monumentally imposing place for a visiting squad to face the Panthers.
Chad Giron I agree with everything you say, Chad, except the part about Pitt playing NCAA games at Mellon Arena. For the Panthers to stay that close to home, they'd probably have to be seeded no worse than a No. 3. Possible, but not probable. At least not yet.
Westward, Ho! I know Wyoming played poorly in non-conference, but they're the best home team in the league and they probably have the most talent. When Wyoming wins the conference and Utah wins the conference tournament, will two teams from the MWC receive selections to the big dance?
Matthew Weimer Wyoming has been in my bracket twice in three weeks, so I'm not sure where this "foregone conclusion" stuff is coming from. As for the Mountain West, it certainly deserves at least two NCAA bids. If Selection Sunday were today, BYU, New Mexico and Wyoming would be battling for that second spot behind Utah -- and in that order. Joe, I am a HUGE Mountain West Conference fan. And while I appreciate your Bracketology column and the respect you've shown us here in the Rocky Mountains (unlike a certain anxious, east coast-dwelling, bald basketball analyst we all know), I have to read and ponder why there's no Wyoming? OK, so their RPI is suffering a bit and Utah may be a better team at the moment, but here's a team without a loss in the conference, with one of the most feared frontcourts in the country (Josh Davis, Uche Nsonwu-Amadi and Ronnell Mingo) and who are invincible at their 7,200-foot elevation at home. So my real question is: How did a "stable seeded" Wyoming (12-4) not only fall from your prospective MWC champs, earning an automatic bid, to all the way out (and not even in your "Last Four Out") of the tournament without even losing a game? An explanation is definitely in order.
Clint Dickinson Several explanations are in order, actually:
1) Who ever said the Cowboys were "stable" in their seed? Wyoming was included in the Jan. 7 and Jan. 14 brackets because they were leading the MWC standings. That was not the case this week. The Cowboys have no shot -- NONE -- at an at-large bid with this kind of profile. Sorry. (And don't ever forget, bald people have feelings, too!).
Eastern Secrets When are teams like BC, ND, G'town, Seton Hall, Pitt, Syracuse and Miami going to follow the lead of their brethren (like UConn) and start scheduling some tougher non-conference games. Of the teams mentioned, BC played eight teams with an RPI lower than 150 (plus one non-Division I opponent). Other numbers include Syracuse (6+1), Pitt (8+1), Miami (9+1), G'town (7+1), Seton Hall (6+1) and ND (7+1). Compare them to the A-10: UMass played four games below 150; UD had four; St. Bonaventure had five; XU played four; GW played five; St. Joe's and Duquesne three each. There are no non-DI opponents on A-10 schedules. Temple? No need to even go there. Come Selection Sunday, this will undoubtedly hurt Big East "bubble" teams like BC, ND, G'town and maybe Pitt if they slip a little. Just wanted your thoughts on that issue/topic.
Brent Kaniecki Brent, you have exposed the Big East's dirty little secret. Its members obviously feel they can build a successful at-large profile this way and, until the Selection Committee sends them a different message, I see no reason that it will change (or that something like an A-10/Big East challenge would occur). Let's remember that six conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC) dominate the at-large pool. And let's see how they rank as conferences with regard to non-league schedule strength: (The Atlantic 10 is No. 2, by the way.) Even more alarming is the data on individual schools. Of the 68 teams in the "Super Six" leagues, here are the 10 worst with regard to non-conference SOS:
The Big East comprises roughly 20 percent of the "Super Six" pool, but has 40 percent of its most embarrassing non-conference schedules. I would absolutely punish any and all "bubble" teams in this group.
Here and There For the sake of argument, let's say Dayton loses at Xavier and St. Joe's, wins the rest of their regular-season games, and loses to Xavier or St. Joe's again in the A-10 championship game. Can a 23-7 Dayton team with no bad losses, but no marquee wins, get an at-large bid?
Blaine Brown I doubt your scenario would do the trick for Dayton.The Flyers are currently 0-3 vs. the RPI Top 50, and your "hypothetical" would put them at 0-6 in that category. Dayton is also 2-3 away from home so far this year, and you're piling on three more road/neutral losses. Add to that their standing as no better than the third-best Atlantic 10 team (as you script it), and a successful at-large profile simply isn't there. Eventually, you have to beat good teams to play good teams. It's great to be able to follow my favorite team (and alma mater)-Marquette on "Bracketology." One question with regard to Strength of Schedule: Does SOS take into account games played all season or just those played to date. It surprises me that MU is No. 177 when we still have Cincinnati coming up twice. We have also played three of your projected tournament teams in Wake Forest, Indiana and Gonzaga, and have gone 2-1 against them (I don't count a win against Loyola-Chicago, a projected tourney team through a conference championship). Granted we have played a few "cupcakes" in Morris Brown and Chicago State, but so do most programs. I don't count Tennessee, Dayton, Charlotte, Louisville and Wisconsin as easy, either, regardless of record. Please fill me in and let me know where you think Marquette is headed. Thanks.
Scott Smith To answer the easy question first: SOS is measured only through games played "to date." So Marquette's number will certainly get a bump or two thanks to the remaining games with Cincinnati. Ironically, I was struck by Marquette's low SOS when building the bracket this week. Then I saw the damage: Chicago State (No. 311), Texas Southern (No. 289), Sam Houston (No. 201), Arkansas-Pine Bluff (No. 316) and Morris Brown (No. 307). It takes a whole lot of beef to counterbalance that much broth. Do you know if Dallas is locked in to having a No. 1 seed? The reason I ask is that I have tickets to the games in Dallas and also happen to be an Oklahoma Sooner fan. That said, I would love to see the team play in the Big Dance. The Sooners are playing well enough right now to grab a No. 1 seed, but the line between a No. 1 seed or a 2/3 seed is minimal.
Thane Bredy None of the eight sub-regional sites are "locked" into particular seeds playing there. It will all depend on which teams are chosen for the 1-4 seed positions; the committee will make the most logical geographic assignments relative to that. You are almost as likely, for instance, to see Oklahoma in Dallas as a 2/3 as you are as a No. 1. Joe Lunardi is the resident Bracketologist for ESPN, ESPN.com and ESPN Radio. He is also editor and publisher of www.bracketology.net. Write to Joe at jlunardi@home.com. |
|
|||||||||
