A
S curve the thing and screw the emphasis on geography. If they had done this, last season would have seen something like this:
1. UK - Gonzaga
2. Duke - Villanova
3. Wisconsin - Virginia
4. Arizona - Notre Dame
1. UK - Gonzaga
2. Duke - Villanova
3. Wisconsin - Virginia
4. Arizona - Notre Dame
Lord that would have been sweet to have Gonzaga/Arizona to get to the title game.
Totally agree, just go with the S-curve and quit trying to be politically correct.
The thing I don't get is this. They justify the geography thing as a reason to keep teams close to home, allow fans to attend games, cut down on travel expenses, etc.
However, the biggest thing that is driving these down is NOT geography, but the lucrative TV contract that allows fans to sit at home, watch 4 games at once and watch all of them in tremendous broadcast quality. The same TV contract that gives networks, host schools, participants and conferences greater revenue than ever before.
Geography should matter in the first weekend and beyond that, let the chips fall where they may.
However, the biggest thing that is driving these down is NOT geography, but the lucrative TV contract that allows fans to sit at home, watch 4 games at once and watch all of them in tremendous broadcast quality. The same TV contract that gives networks, host schools, participants and conferences greater revenue than ever before.
Geography should matter in the first weekend and beyond that, let the chips fall where they may.
I'm up for whatever benefits Duke every year.
There's no way Villanova would have been dropped to a 2 seed no matter how they did it. The revisionist history/Monday Morning QB nonsense on here with that has been good reading, but still does not change how things looked on selection Sunday. There was no way a 3 loss team in Arizona that lost to 3 cupcakes was getting the last 1 over a 2 loss Villanova team.
Said every person in a position of authority at the NCAA...
Duke has the number one overall seed wrapped up under any format , our brackets have sucked more often than not because the powers that be just don't like Cal . But if they want to do the song and dance of equality then pretend on .
That jumped out to me as well.
But I think you would even agree that Villanova should have been the weakest #1, with Arizona as the strongest #2. That still would have given UK a better path to the final.
You might be over-emphasizing a weakened Big East. Maybe we should consider letting the odds-makers decide the fate of the 2 seeds. Do you honestly think Vegas would have picked Nova over Arizona in a national final if given the choice? Would you have picked Nova over Arizona if forced to place your bank account on the game? Maybe you would, and I'm not going to mock that position, but don't act like the idea of Arizona as a 1 seed is so unfathomable when the potential of obtaining the 4th #1 seed was open to at least four teams leading up to conference tournaments. Arizona was in the discussion almost the whole way, and had Michigan State dispatched Wisconsin the Big 10 tourney, Arizona might very well have replaced the Badgers. Even Cal said they deserved a 1 seed. They had the talent and they proved they belonged in the NCAA tournament against Wisconsin while meanwhile NC State was serving up Nova in an outcome that didn't surprise anyone nationally.
Did Villanova handle their business in conference slightly better than Arizona? Yes, by a whopping total of one less loss to be exact. That doesn't make them a quantifiable runaway for a better seed, regardless of their total wins against Big East whose better teams ( Nova and perhaps G'Town being the exceptions) were more suited for 7 and 8 seeds in the tournament. In fact, Arizona had the better BPI and a slightly worse strength of schedule (Nova was 76th and Arizona was 81st).
But I'm not hell bent on my position here; I'm just making a point for the sake of discussion that the equity was not set up properly. Part of my whole initial emphasis had less to do with nitpicking these two teams, however, and more of an emphasis on what is fair for the better teams. Stacking UK, ND, Arizona and Wisconsin on the same side of the tournament was ridiculous as it essentially placed the #1, #3, #4, and #6 teams on the same side while placing the #2, #5, #7, and #8 teams on the other. At the very least, the committee should have placed Nova and Arizona together to ensure equity (two top contending teams for the coveted 4th #1 seed). That wasn't the case.
Last edited:
Right here is the most important thing mentioned. Someone needs to find out who was it that received a favorable draw. They don't change rules like this until after it happened and pissed the others off.
"The committee also adjusted procedures to prevent a committee member from being present during discussion or participating in a vote involving a team in which an immediate family member is employed by the school's athletic department, or is an athlete on the basketball team."
"The committee also adjusted procedures to prevent a committee member from being present during discussion or participating in a vote involving a team in which an immediate family member is employed by the school's athletic department, or is an athlete on the basketball team."
Exactly.
No cakewalk for Duke. It would have been Duke and Wisconsin beating each other up on Saturday, then Duke having to play tired on Monday against UK instead being rested and playing a fatigued Wisconsin team.
Nova was in no way, shape, or form the #2 overall seed.
Duke and Wisconsin should have been 2 and 3. Nova, at best, should have been 4.
Nova should have been sent West or been a 2 seed.
On Selection Sunday it should have looked like this, at the very least:
Midwest- UK/KU
East- Duke/Zaga
South- UW/UVA
West- Nova/Zona
Based on how they played in the tourney, the Final Four would have been UK vs. Zona in the first game. Duke vs. UW in the second.
I would have done this:
Midwest- UK/UVA
East- Duke/Nova
South- UW/KU
West- Zona/Zaga
Heavy on geography. Take the best teams and put them where they fit geographically as you slide down the rankings. As the best 1, UK goes to Cleveland. Duke then gets to stay in the East. UW goes to Houston, then Zona stays out West. Nova would stay in the East as the best 2 seed. UVA goes to Cleveland and Zaga stays out West. KU as the lowest 2 seed goes to Houston, which just so happens to be their closest region.
So UK probably gets a weaker Elite Eight opponent (ND wouldn't be in UVA's bracket). Duke probably still faces a weak team like MSU, but it would be one game earlier. UW probably gets ND (that would have been interesting). Zona and Zaga battle for the West.
Zona replaces MSU in the Final Four and faces UK while Duke plays UW.
I'm so tired of sour grapes about seeding...how about we just take care of business and beat the team at hand. We haven't failed in NCAAT due to bad seeding, we have failed due to bad play.
We should have beat Wisc, period...Duke did (twice).
We nearly lost to Notre Dame, and no one can tell me our bracket was tough getting to the FF. We played a 16 seed, UC, WVU and ND...that's a cakewalk. Then we laid an egg vs. a team out for blood.
We should have beat Wisc, period...Duke did (twice).
We nearly lost to Notre Dame, and no one can tell me our bracket was tough getting to the FF. We played a 16 seed, UC, WVU and ND...that's a cakewalk. Then we laid an egg vs. a team out for blood.
BS. Notre Dame was #5 in the postseason poll. They beat Duke 2/3x. That is not a cakewalk. You're talking out of your behind.
Secondly, I don't have a problem with our region. Never did. I do still and did at the time the brackets came out have a problem having Wisconsin/Arizona on the same side of our bracket.
Well, low and behold, look at what happened- Duke benefited and UK/Wisconsin/Arizona got screwed.
Last edited:
To me it has little to do with UK. To me it was about Zona and UW getting the shaft. Both should have been 1 seeds. Both should have been in the Final Four.
I think UW deserved to win it all. I hate that they had to play three emotional rematches to win a title, while Duke got to play a seriously outclassed Michigan St. team that lucked into the FF.
Just my opinion, though.
I just enjoy discussing these things. I hope no one is getting emotionally distressed over opinions on an opinion based selection and seeding process. You do realize that even in today's computer driven society, something like tourney selection and seeding is still largely based on opinion and the opinions of a bunch of guys with monetary interests involved?
I am no conspiracy theorist, but this tourney is driven by dollars and the powers that be understand the importance of ratings and try to set up a tourney that brings in the best ratings. Sometimes, fairness (which is subjective) is thrown out the window.
I disagree with their system, but in the end it's just food for thought.
Disagree that ND was,a,cupcake. Honestly if they would have beaten us they would have given Wisconsin a run for their money.
You think ND was a cupcake?
How many times did they beat Duke? <I understand that ND win in Cameron was close. They only busted Puke by 30 in Cameron - WRONG!!> My apologies. I knew they won twice, forgot they played three times. Duke had the big win in Cameron. I glanced at the scores and just assumed it was one of the ND wins. Still, ND busted their arse twice. Guess that gives us some idea about the home cooking at Cameron.
I frankly consider ND better than Wisconsin in terms of their performance against us.
Last edited:
Meh, I kinda agree that you just take care of business and this is a non-issue. Same with Wisconsin and Arizona during the regular season.
We had to play a good team in the final four, boo hoo. Duke got lucky but I disagree that the brackets were terrible from the outset.
We had to play a good team in the final four, boo hoo. Duke got lucky but I disagree that the brackets were terrible from the outset.
Of course you are going to play good teams in the regional finals, but our path to get there wasn't stacked.
How can you consider ND better than Wisc based on performance against us...one lost, the other didn't, and you are more impressed by the loser?
Based on our entire path to get to FF, yes it was a cakewalk...pre-season means nothing at the end of season, we were pre-season #1 and went to NIT and spent a good portion of season outside top 25. Then the next year we lose 10 games on a "40-0" pre-season hype.
I said the entire path was a cakewalk, at least for a historically great team that UK had this year. Was ND good? Yeah, of course they were good. But not great/elite.
You all sound like Nick Saban or UL fans, we lost because of everything but our actual performance, poor us.
No, it wasn't a cakewalk. Playing ND ALONE prevented our bracket from being considered a cakewalk.
No, I sound like a person who knows a lot about college basketball. YoU'RE dismissing a Notre Dame team that was ONCE AGAIN ranked #5 IN THE POSTSEASON POLL. Yes, as in AFTER THE TOURNAMENT, the coaches considered them to be the 5th best team in college basketball.
We lost because we played a really good team who matched up well against us and they beat us in a barnburner. That has little to do with the discussion here.
DID UK/WISCONSIN get a bad deal being put on the same side of the bracket? YES. Did Duke get lucky on their draw overall? YES. Was this pointed out before the tournament even began? YES. Did Duke get lucky drawing Michigan State? Yes. Did Duke get lucky playing a Wisconsin team they matched up well against as opposed to a UK team they wouldn't have? YES.
Last edited:
Having to play 1 game against a good team doesn't mean UK didn't have a cakewalk to the Final Four. It could not have been set up any better. Play 3 teams who have no chance of beating them, followed by 1 game against a good team. Sounds like the path most 1 seeds gets.
How did Duke "draw" Michigan State? If I remember correctly, MSU had to win 4 games to get there. As for their draw overall, it was equivalent to UKs. Three games against teams with no chance, and 1 against a legit team. It's foolish to complain about who they played in the Final Four when all teams had to win to get there. They weren't automatically put in the Final Four.
A "cakewalk" implies an easy path. I'm not mad about UK's bracket, but it wasn't a cakewalk. UK had to beat a really good team in Notre Dame.
I don't give a ish how Duke got Michigan State- they got'em. They also avoided the other 3 prime contenders until the national championship game. Only having to be ONE of Wisky/UK/Arizona was a good break.
I don't give a ish how Duke got Michigan State- they got'em. They also avoided the other 3 prime contenders until the national championship game. Only having to be ONE of Wisky/UK/Arizona was a good break.
^^^This.
ND was UK 2011. A good team that also got really hot at just the right time. People want to undervalue them due to the #3 seed, but they were basically UK's 2, since KU was done without Alexander.
Remember who was on the How-To-Beat-UK SI covers??? All season long, most people felt UK, UW, AZ & Dook were the cream* of the crop. ND came in strong at the end. 4 of those 5 were put on one side of the bracket, and somehow a certain team got the leftovers** in their bracket.
(*Virginia was up there, but the injury bug got them)
(**fool's gold Zags, injury-hampered Virginia, 'Nova from a watered-down BE)
Duke's path to the title was much easier than ours and waaaay easier than UW's.
Duke played one team from a power conference in their region. And that was Utah (a Mountain West team up until just a few years ago). Then they lucked up with Michigan St. in the Final Four, by far the weakest of the four teams.
Even if Duke played Nova in the FF, they still have an easier path than UK and UW. Nova was by far the weakest 1.
UW got the shaft big time, IMHO. Sent out West and playing three power conference teams (Oregon, UNC-perennial power, and Zona- revenge game). Then facing the number one overall seed in the FF. That was an awful draw.
The selection committee wanted a UK/Duke final. That was the plan, IMHO. That was the game that every other fan wanted (if their team couldn't be in the title game). It was going to be a ratings bonanza. UK going for history and the great Coach K standing in the way.
That's my story. I don't think it was a "let's hand Duke the title" conspiracy, I think they were all about the money and ratings. They didn't care who won, they just wanted a great title game.
Duke played one team from a power conference in their region. And that was Utah (a Mountain West team up until just a few years ago). Then they lucked up with Michigan St. in the Final Four, by far the weakest of the four teams.
Even if Duke played Nova in the FF, they still have an easier path than UK and UW. Nova was by far the weakest 1.
UW got the shaft big time, IMHO. Sent out West and playing three power conference teams (Oregon, UNC-perennial power, and Zona- revenge game). Then facing the number one overall seed in the FF. That was an awful draw.
The selection committee wanted a UK/Duke final. That was the plan, IMHO. That was the game that every other fan wanted (if their team couldn't be in the title game). It was going to be a ratings bonanza. UK going for history and the great Coach K standing in the way.
That's my story. I don't think it was a "let's hand Duke the title" conspiracy, I think they were all about the money and ratings. They didn't care who won, they just wanted a great title game.
Not that much of a change really. Besides we ended up not getting Wisconsin as our 2 anyway. Just as well, better to lose to them in the Final 4 than the regional. I personally was very pleased with KU who of course didn't even get to the regional final. While UK's path was pretty tough Wisconsin definitely got the tougher one. All year long the 4 teams talked about as title contenders were UK, Duke, Arizona, and Wisconsin. The latter had to play all of the former beating 2 of the 3. I still wouldn't believe they beat UK if I hadn't seen it.
Never watched much basketball, huh?
And, yes, it is all about how teams match up, how they play that day, what their strengths are, what their weaknesses are. How they play at home versus away. Who's hot, who's not.
If you have even watched a single season of SEC basketball, you should know this.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'm assuming you know all this. I'm guessing you feel the need to defend Duke's cake walk into the final where they beat a thoroughly exhausted Wisconsin. Yes, I would have taken their path to the finals over ours any day, particularly in light of the upsets that removed the little competition they should have had.
I agree wholeheartedly that they need to S curve the whole thing.....if you follow how the NCAA handles both the baseball and softball postseason's they also use an even more heavily influenced geography based systems with regions and super regionals funneling into the College World Series and that system works really well because there are quality baseball teams consistently all over the country (except for the midwest). Having gone back through the annuals of college basketball history and personally charted where all the final four team's have come from it is readily apparent that the West Coast does not consistently produce enough quality teams to maintain a fair geographic based system for the entire country. With the pod system you can even get West Coast team's friendly early round locations so stop being greedy NCAA and S-Curve this thing!
Your a damn fool to think ND is a cake walk. They won the ACC tourney and beat Duke twice. What more do you expect of them?
Notre Dame lost a whopping 5 games. They beat Duke twice, they beat UNC twice, and they won at UL. They were a very, very good team that started the year underrated. Your dismissal of them is plainly idiotic.
And any time you have to play a team that is one of the 5-6 best in the country just to make a FF, it means you did not have a cakewalk. Even if you played three 16 seeds in a row to get to the Elite 8, that Elite 8 game isn't somehow diminished in toughness because of what preceded it.
Here is ND's schedule. They had 1 bad loss and that was at Duke the rest if their losses was toss up games.
https://notredame.rivals.com/bschedule.asp?Team=NOTREDAME
We had several toss up games as well but we only lost one of them and they came at the worst time. ND also had 4 guys in the lineup who will be getting paid to play.
https://notredame.rivals.com/bschedule.asp?Team=NOTREDAME
https://notredame.rivals.com/bschedule.asp?Team=NOTREDAME
We had several toss up games as well but we only lost one of them and they came at the worst time. ND also had 4 guys in the lineup who will be getting paid to play.
https://notredame.rivals.com/bschedule.asp?Team=NOTREDAME
Similar threads
