Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tennessee and that’s it.Tennessee will
Auburn will
Florida might.
Alabama will not.
South Carolina will not.
We will be fortunate to get a 3.
Hahaha! "So bad". Ok Lutardi, tell us about NC State...how bad are they? Easily worse than A&M, yet you'll have the Pukies right there at the 3 or 4, moron.Lunardi said todsy A&M is so bad we have to drop a entire seed line to a 4
How much you wanna bet? Name your price2 or so. And I doubt anyone but Auburn makes it out of the first weekend. And Auburn won't make the Elite 8.
Logically, we should be the last 3. Eye test we will be a mid 4.Still not confident, but we will be no worse than a 4, possibly the last 3.
I mean, even before they played us it was a quad one game last night, top 50 on a neutral court.Lunardi said todsy A&M is so bad we have to drop a entire seed line to a 4
Did he say the same thing about NC state and dukes loss to them?Lunardi said todsy A&M is so bad we have to drop a entire seed line to a 4
UK should be a three seed, along with Auburn. Only team higher would be UT based on winning the regular season title.Tennessee will
Auburn will
Florida might.
Alabama will not.
South Carolina will not.
We will be fortunate to get a 3.
It was a figurative bet. I think that's the way it plays out, but I don't gamble.How much you wanna bet? Name your price
“So bad”, even before the game they were predicted “in” (was barely In)Lunardi said todsy A&M is so bad we have to drop a entire seed line to a 4
“So bad”, even before the game they were predicted “in” (was barely In)
This week:
Duke lost to NC St (Out)
KU got crushed by Cincy (Out)
Creighton lost to Providence (Out)
UT lost to Miss St (was barely In)
But yeah, we do drop 3 to 4 if Illinois and Auburn win tomorrow. I think there are 4 teams with a chance at the last two 3-seeds: UK, Duke, Illinois, Auburn.
Interesting that in games vs top half of Q1, these 4 are:
UK: 6-2
Duke: 2-3 (both wins barely in top half)
Illinois: 1-4 (1 win at Wisc)
Auburn: 1-6
Yes we have 1 loss worse than those 3 (at Home to 118), but they all have bad losses too (i.e. Duke has 2 Road losses to teams 115-127), We (UK) simply have a better resume than those 3.
lol, those should be one of the most important criteria!Assuming they are even taking those into account.
Ahead of us definitely are: Purdue, UConn, Houston, UNC, UT, Arizona, Creighton, Marquette, Baylor, Iowa St (4 of these 10 also lost this week to a team “not in” or “on the bubble”).I am going to go out on a limb here and say if it's among those four teams, UK gets a 3 seed still.
The committee loves the who did you beat. The resume. 6-2 in Q1 games when the other teams aren't remotely close is going to be awfully hard to ignore.
What stats are you looking at? Net rankings haven't been updated since 3/15, but as of that day they had Quad 1 games as:The committee loves the who did you beat. The resume. 6-2 in Q1 games when the other teams aren't remotely close is going to be awfully hard to ignore.
What stats are you looking at? Net rankings haven't been updated since 3/15, but as of that day they had Quad 1 games as:
UT: 8-7
TAMU: 7-6
UK: 6-7
UF: 5-7
Auburn: 1-7
Those have changed slightly since 3/15.
I said the “top half” of Quad 1.What stats are you looking at? Net rankings haven't been updated since 3/15, but as of that day they had Quad 1 games as:
UT: 8-7
TAMU: 7-6
UK: 6-7
UF: 5-7
Auburn: 1-7
Those have changed slightly since 3/15.
Ok, I stand corrected. There is a problem with cherrypicking those stats, however. It would also indicate that UK struggles against the bottom half of Quad 1. I guess it just depends on what the committee values more.I said the “top half” of Quad 1.
Quad 1 is 1-30 Home, 1-50 Neutral, 1-75 Road.
Those 40-75 teams are not the best of the best. A win over Purdue worth way more than a win over Northwestern.
So the top half is: 1-15 Home, 1-25 Neutral, 1-37 Road
As I just replied to the other poster, there are some issues with using that method, but I do understand what he was trying to say. It's not a bad argument, but it's also not perfect.I was going off the stats that was above my post. He was looking at records vs the top half of Q1 and comparing the potential three seeds.
Considering our SECT performance we clearly do not deserve a 3 or 4 seed.Tennessee will
Auburn will
Florida might.
Alabama will not.
South Carolina will not.
We will be fortunate to get a 3.