Everyone except Virginia, Kentucky and Gonzaga, all other 348 D-1 teams have at least 2 losses. They still have 4 "tough" games, but three at home (St. Mary's, Memphis, BYU) and one on the road (St. Mary's).
Don't Look Now...
- Thread starter KA4Prez
- Start date
If Gonzaga loses again, it will be Feb 21 at St. Mary's. About zero % chance they lose to any of those teams on their home floor.
Even at 1 or 2 losses and ranked as high as number 2 or 3 at season's end will not guarantee them a 1 seed though. Look at Louisville last year. They were ranked #5 and got a 4 seed.
Even at 1 or 2 losses and ranked as high as number 2 or 3 at season's end will not guarantee them a 1 seed though. Look at Louisville last year. They were ranked #5 and got a 4 seed.
While true, if UCLA plays a bit better, the Zags will have 6, possibly 7 top 50 wins. They have 4 already (5 if UCLA cracks the top 50, currently 54th).
Louisville had 6 last year, including zero in the non-conference. 3 were over the same team, Connecticut, who wasn't even in the top 30 heading into the NCAA Tournament.
I think these 3 are #1 seed at this point and have a good shot at staying there.Duke,KU,Wis and probably one other team will slug it out for the 4th spot.There will be interesting games between now and Feb1,we should be able to enjoy everybody trying to avoid us as long as they can.
And it shouldn't.
I made this argument about Wichita last year, and I'll continue to make it any time a school like Gonzaga puts itself in 1 seed discussions. Undefeated should pretty much be the standard for any team like that to be a 1 seed. If they don't want that to be the case, then they need to aggressively pursue the highest level non-conference opponents they can find. If that means playing road games with no return game, so be it. Gonzaga's non-conference schedule was OK, but nothing great. The fact that their only loss was at Arizona helps, but they really have no high-quality wins. Wichita's OOC schedule (last year and this year) was kind of weak.
Teams like Gonzaga and Wichita KNOW that they're going to dominate their conferences in ways that no ACC, Big 12, Big 10, or even SEC team can know. They're playing on a different field than the power conferences, and if they want to be compared to those teams, they need to make a statement in November and December.
^ Not sure there are very many similarities between Wichita St. and Gonzaga.
Gonzaga gets a few big games a year in the OOC. For awhile they were playing Memphis--when Memphis was good--and in fact that game is still on this year. They played Georgia, they played a then-ranked St. John's, they played a supposed-to-be-good SMU, they played at Arizona. They've played a bunch of exempt events over the years.
I don't see the comparison between what they've done for the past decade and Wichita St. Wichita St. is more along the lines of a Butler or a Xavier--a program that has a very good coach and that has caught a little lightning.
Gonzaga certainly isn't an elite program, but they play an OOC schedule that mid-majors envy.
Gonzaga gets a few big games a year in the OOC. For awhile they were playing Memphis--when Memphis was good--and in fact that game is still on this year. They played Georgia, they played a then-ranked St. John's, they played a supposed-to-be-good SMU, they played at Arizona. They've played a bunch of exempt events over the years.
I don't see the comparison between what they've done for the past decade and Wichita St. Wichita St. is more along the lines of a Butler or a Xavier--a program that has a very good coach and that has caught a little lightning.
Gonzaga certainly isn't an elite program, but they play an OOC schedule that mid-majors envy.
Are Memphis, St. John's, Georgia, and SMU going to be top 5 seeds in the NCAA Tourney? Are they even going to be IN the tourney?
We're talking about giving Gonzaga a 1 seed. A 1 seed means you're favored to make the FF. If a school like Gonzaga wants that, shouldn't they at least have played a few games against teams likely to be playing past the first weekend of the tourney? I mean, aren't those the teams they're going to need to beat to make the FF, and the teams they'd be seeded ahead of? As it stands, they've played one game like that, and though it was a noble effort, they lost. The rest of their schedule is window-dressing.
I'm not saying they shouldn't have a high seed. That's fine, and they pretty much earn it. But they should not have a 1, unless they're undefeated. Even then, I think it's somewhat of a stretch.
Well, they're 4-1 against the top 50 of the RPI.
Wisconsin is 3-1. Villianova is 4-2. Arizona is 3-0. Duke is 5-1. Virginia is 5-0. Kentucky is on another level at 9-0.
I just don't think there's a whole lot out there this year when you start trying to parse these top teams behind obviously Kentucky, Virginia, and Duke. Gonzaga certainly lacks elite wins and they're not going to get one, but if they run it out at 33-1 I can't see them not getting a 1.
It's one thing to say Gonzaga hasn't done enough. But then you look around and there aren't a lot of teams who've done more. The one thing I can see happening is if Arizona runs through the Pac-12 and wins that conference tournament, and if they're sitting there with 3 or 4 losses with a win over Gonzaga, then I think a case can be made that they deserve the 1 over Gonzaga because of the head-to-head win.
This post was edited on 1/20 9:52 AM by Joneslab
Gonzaga has 12 wins over teams rated outside the top 100 of the BPI. And that number will rise more by the end of the season than teams in power conferences. In comparison:
Arizona has 7
Duke has 9
Virginia has 8
Wisconsin has 8
Kansas has 6
Villanova has 9
UK has 7
That's the difference their conference makes. Those games against top 100 teams are often games even quality teams can lose. Gonzaga doesn't have to play all that many of them. That's why they should need to go above and beyond to really earn a 1 seed.
Arizona has 7
Duke has 9
Virginia has 8
Wisconsin has 8
Kansas has 6
Villanova has 9
UK has 7
That's the difference their conference makes. Those games against top 100 teams are often games even quality teams can lose. Gonzaga doesn't have to play all that many of them. That's why they should need to go above and beyond to really earn a 1 seed.
Everyone will be picking Gonzaga for the Final 4 in their brackets like they always do. I won't.
I'll likely pick them to go out in the second round or Sweet 16. I think an 8 seed type team like an Iowa or Michigan State could take them out if they are a #1. Or a 4/5 seed like Oklahoma, West Virginia, or Louisville could take them out in the Sweet 16.
I'll likely pick them to go out in the second round or Sweet 16. I think an 8 seed type team like an Iowa or Michigan State could take them out if they are a #1. Or a 4/5 seed like Oklahoma, West Virginia, or Louisville could take them out in the Sweet 16.
Gonzaga looks similar to me to Wisconsin last year. A lot of guys who can shoot and spread you out, a stretch big man who can play away from the basket, a 40%+ three-point shooting team.
I think teams like that--read: teams who are soft and don't like physical play--always run the risk of dropping the NCAA Tournament Special: games played in the 50s against rugged, chip-on-their-shoulders teams from the east. There's a reason UCONN has had such NCAA Tournament success.
But I do think this Gonzaga team is arguably the best Mark Fox has had and while I wouldn't put them in my Final Four, I didn't buy Wisconsin last year either. Those teams are highly dangerous if the match-ups fall the right way and if they can work through the gauntlet not having to play ugly.
I think teams like that--read: teams who are soft and don't like physical play--always run the risk of dropping the NCAA Tournament Special: games played in the 50s against rugged, chip-on-their-shoulders teams from the east. There's a reason UCONN has had such NCAA Tournament success.
But I do think this Gonzaga team is arguably the best Mark Fox has had and while I wouldn't put them in my Final Four, I didn't buy Wisconsin last year either. Those teams are highly dangerous if the match-ups fall the right way and if they can work through the gauntlet not having to play ugly.
Still not buying into Gonzaga being all that great. Their schedule just doesn't match up with the big boys on the block and their conference won't help them get ready very well for the tournament where they will face much better competition and coaching. And, I know you meant Mark Few.
Thanks.
I hope Mark Fox isn't reading. He's on my All-Coaches Serial Killer Team.*
* Bo Ryan, Frank Martin, Tom Crean, Fran McCaffrey, Mark Fox.
Gonzaga (and Villanova) will be a 1 seed if they run the table. They will probably also be a one seed if they lose only one more game (unless Arizona wins out or the ACC has two teams that look about equal by season's end).
Things to consider:
1) Assuming the ACC has a clear best team, it's hard to put the second best ACC team as a one seed as well.
2) The winners of the Big 10, Big 12, and PAC will probably have at least 4 losses (and more likely 5) by the time conference tourney time is over.
So who gets the one seeds over Zaga and Nova (assuming each has one or two losses)? A 4 or 5 loss Wisconsin or Arizona team... An ACC team (like Duke) that has 4 or 5 losses and finishes 3 games behind UVA in conference play?
It's hard to imagine the committee making that decision.
I don't think Nova or Zaga are as good as Duke or Wisconsin or Arizona, but by the end of the year, the difference in losses will probably be enough to give the teams in weak conferences the edge.
Of course, that would definitely change if Duke or Zona or Wisconsin wins out. It probably changes if Duke or Zona or Wisconsin only lose one more game (including conference tourney). But I don't think they are that good (relative to their conference opposition) to make that scenario likely.
Things to consider:
1) Assuming the ACC has a clear best team, it's hard to put the second best ACC team as a one seed as well.
2) The winners of the Big 10, Big 12, and PAC will probably have at least 4 losses (and more likely 5) by the time conference tourney time is over.
So who gets the one seeds over Zaga and Nova (assuming each has one or two losses)? A 4 or 5 loss Wisconsin or Arizona team... An ACC team (like Duke) that has 4 or 5 losses and finishes 3 games behind UVA in conference play?
It's hard to imagine the committee making that decision.
I don't think Nova or Zaga are as good as Duke or Wisconsin or Arizona, but by the end of the year, the difference in losses will probably be enough to give the teams in weak conferences the edge.
Of course, that would definitely change if Duke or Zona or Wisconsin wins out. It probably changes if Duke or Zona or Wisconsin only lose one more game (including conference tourney). But I don't think they are that good (relative to their conference opposition) to make that scenario likely.
^ Villanova got throttled last night by Georgetown.
Will be very hard for them to get a 1 seed IMO.
Will be very hard for them to get a 1 seed IMO.
After that shellacking last night, I don't believe Villanova will be in the discussion. Maybe if they run the table and win their conference tourney, but I highly doubt that will happen. They still have games at Providence, Butler, and Xavier. They'll drop at least 2 of those IMO. To me, they are more of a 3 or 4 seed type of team.
I so hope you're right. I've watched Gonzaga a little just to see if maybe Wiltjer had decided that he really wanted to play professional basketball - you know, use the interior moves his father spent a decade teaching him and committing to practicing and playing hard. I didn't see any change. It still appeared that he would not contest a put back by muggsy bogues for fear of contact. So, if Gonzaga depends on Wiltjer to rebound, play defense or even have voluntary contact with another human being on the basketball floor, then this would be the easiest 2 seed for UK maybe in the history of the tournament.
Still a lot of games to be played. IMO I don't think SOS and RPI will matter if the losses between team A and team B are that far apart.
I get that no one thinks Villanova or Gonzaga are elite teams, I can't disagree. But both have VERY favorable schedules left. I think combined they have like 4 ranked teams left on their slate. Unless they collapse, sustain an injury, or some team in their conference steps up... these two schools will probably only lose once or twice more... maybe not at all.
Duke on the other hand (and UVA to a lesser extent) have pretty tough schedules left. I honestly think Duke will see another 3 to 4 losses before the tournament. If that happens, does a 5 loss Duke team still get the nod over a 2 loss Gonzaga or a 3 loss Villanova? Not too sure.
The question is then... how many losses can teams like Duke and UVA (with tough SOS) sustain and still get that #1 seed? Regardless, I don't care what the outcome is. I'd RATHER have the better teams as #1 seeds in opposite regions. It's just fun to debate.
I get that no one thinks Villanova or Gonzaga are elite teams, I can't disagree. But both have VERY favorable schedules left. I think combined they have like 4 ranked teams left on their slate. Unless they collapse, sustain an injury, or some team in their conference steps up... these two schools will probably only lose once or twice more... maybe not at all.
Duke on the other hand (and UVA to a lesser extent) have pretty tough schedules left. I honestly think Duke will see another 3 to 4 losses before the tournament. If that happens, does a 5 loss Duke team still get the nod over a 2 loss Gonzaga or a 3 loss Villanova? Not too sure.
The question is then... how many losses can teams like Duke and UVA (with tough SOS) sustain and still get that #1 seed? Regardless, I don't care what the outcome is. I'd RATHER have the better teams as #1 seeds in opposite regions. It's just fun to debate.
I believe Gonzaga will finish out the season without any more losses and get A number one seed in the tournament. Then they will become the first team to be beaten by A 16 seed.
I would say that Gonzaga will not get past the elite 8. They are NOT as good as their ranking. Its a shame teams can walk into a top ranking and play a weak schedule and not be tested much at all.
Similar threads
