Why in 2003 did you guys get shipped out to Minnesota?

[Big_C_KU]

Just bored and watching past games today and was watching the Marquette-UK game. Why were you guys shipped out to Minnesota even though you were the #1 overall seed? That seemed pretty crappy to me. Even worse it ended up making you guys play basically a road game against Marquette. That would piss me off just like it pisses me off in 2007, we were actually the #1 overall seed and got shipped out west with UCLA and they were definitely the top #2 seed overall. The NCAA is a damn lie when they put the crap out there that they don't seed for ratings, tickets, or matchups.

 

[BigRedMachineBigBlueNation]

Because the NCAA is bunk. **** 'em

 

[dezyDeco]

Even worse it ended up making you guys play basically a road game against Marquette. .

Don't forget the game before that one... vs. Wisconsin.

Back-to-back Sweet 16 and E8 games with a guaranteed hostile crowd... isn't that what the top overall #1 seed is supposed to get?

 

[hoodro]

2003 is one of those "what could have been" years for me. Playing Marquette in Minny, Bogans sprained ankle, Dwyane Wade going off. Seems like all the breaks went against them.

 

[mj2k10]

Because it was one of those years where the South and Midwest Regionals were in Timbuktu (at least as far as UK is concerned). It was NYC, San Antonio, Minneapolis, and Anaheim. No good choice for UK.

The Selection Committee has twice refused to send UK to Texas in years where UK had no natural region as a 1 seed, and both times ended up being screw jobs (2010 was the other). Just another in a long line of examples of how the Selection Committee has often tended to show a lack of common sense. Given a choice between going to Texas, or playing in Minneapolis against Wisconsin and Marquette, well, DUHHH, which choice do you think is better for the #1 seed? And in 2010, given the choice between going to Syracuse and playing a Big East team, or going to Texas, which seems like the better choice?

 

[Pope John Wall II]

Because the scariest aspect of conspiracy theories is the percentage of them that have a factual basis.

 

[8XCHAMP]

Tubby needed to look for a house...

 

[UK90]

Out of curiosity, op, where do you think we should've been sent? The other regional sites were San Antonio, Albany, and Anaheim, California, so it's not like there were any closer options available. The NCAA properly placed us in the two nearest possible sites for us--Nashville for the early rounds, and Minneapolis for the regionals.

Man, the lengths folks reach to try to concoct conspiracy theories around here....

 

[deep3]

Why be a prick?

The guy just came looking for a conversation, try being a decent person, shit.

 

[crestcat]

Why be a prick?

The guy just came looking for a conversation, try being a decent person, shit.

Well, because with some it is just their nature and they can't help themselves

 

[UKWildcats#8]

Out of curiosity, op, where do you think we should've been sent? The other regional sites were San Antonio, Albany, and Anaheim, California, so it's not like there were any closer options available. The NCAA properly placed us in the two nearest possible sites for us--Nashville for the early rounds, and Minneapolis for the regionals.

Man, the lengths folks reach to try to concoct conspiracy theories around here....

This is 100% accurate. It really is pretty simple when you think about it. UK would have got Wisconsin in Cleveland this year as well if they had not jumped to that last 1 seed. People would have went insane over that.

 

[dezyDeco]

Out of curiosity, op, where do you think we should've been sent? The other regional sites were San Antonio, Albany, and Anaheim, California, so it's not like there were any closer options available. The NCAA properly placed us in the two nearest possible sites for us--Nashville for the early rounds, and Minneapolis for the regionals.

Man, the lengths folks reach to try to concoct conspiracy theories around here....

I come at it from the other direction. While it's true that the geography of that particular year did not play into an advantage for UK, the NCAA could've compensated by sending Marquette and/or Wisconsin to another region.

You could make an argument that #3 Marquette "earned" the chance to end up in the Minn. region, perhaps... but no one in the Selection room noticed that they were setting up a possible double-whammy by also putting Wisconsin in that position? I'm sure there've been some other 5 seeds (throughout the history of the NCAA's "pod" process) that have had far less convenient travel plans.

What's the point of being the "Overall #1 Seed"... the NCAA should just stop using the term.

 

[UK90]

I come at it from the other direction. While it's true that the geography of that particular year did not play into an advantage for UK, the NCAA could've compensated by sending Marquette and/or Wisconsin to another region.

You could make an argument that #3 Marquette "earned" the chance to end up in the Minn. region, perhaps... but no one in the Selection room noticed that they were setting up a possible double-whammy by also putting Wisconsin in that position? I'm sure there've been some other 5 seeds (throughout the history of the NCAA's "pod" process) that have had far less convenient travel plans.
.

I'm sorry, but I find this reasoning to be silly. Might I remind you that Marquette and Wisconsin are not located in the state of Minnesota--so now we think it's even unfair to seat anyone just from the same geographic region as the site with us? Just how much of a cakewalk do you think we're entitled to? And were you really threatened by that 5 seed Wisconsin team?

Truth is, the NCAA did everything it reasonably could to give us the easiest path in 2003. The other high seeds in our region were friggin Dayton, Pitt and Marquette, which I recall being roundly called the weakest group of 2/3/4 seeds in any of the regions at the time. And, in addition to giving us the easiest group of high seeds, they also sent us to the two closest possible geographic sites in Nashville and Minneapolis--what more could you expect?

Now unfortunately it didn't work out after Bogans got injured and things went awry against Marquette, but that sure as hell wasn't the committee's fault.

 

[dezyDeco]

Now unfortunately it didn't work out after Bogans got injured and things went awry against Marquette, but that sure as hell wasn't the committee's fault.

FTR---I wasn't worried about anything... until Bogans got hurt.

Regardless, the gist of my post was that in this case a #3 and a #5 received a greater reward from the NCAA, at the expense of the Overall #1 Seed. Short of the FF venue, if UK is placed in a position that negates the Big Blue Mist effect, especially after they've spent the season earning the top spot... I'll continue to be less than thrilled about it.

 

[Big_C_KU]

Sorry guys didn't look that in-depth into it. Makes sense from what some of you guys say about why Kentucky went to Minnesota. I guess what I would have been pissed about more if I was a Kentucky fan was Marquette and Wisconsin as 3-4 in the region. At least one of them should have been sent to another region.

 

[dezyDeco]

Sorry guys didn't look that in-depth into it. Makes sense from what some of you guys say about why Kentucky went to Minnesota. I guess what I would have been pissed about more if I was a Kentucky fan was Marquette and Wisconsin as 3-4 in the region. At least one of them should have been sent to another region.

That's my take on it.

I haven't paid as much attention to KU's placement... have you guys had a similar situation in recent history? You mentioned the overall #1 in 2007---if so, seems nutty that you ended up out West.

 

[Big_C_KU]

That's my take on it.

I haven't paid as much attention to KU's placement... have you guys had a similar situation in recent history? You mentioned the overall #1 in 2007---if so, seems nutty that you ended up out West.

No it wasn't similar. I was wrong. We weren't the #1 overall seed in 2007. The seedings actually were correct looking at it. Just sucked we had to play UCLA in California.

 

[dezyDeco]

No it wasn't similar. I was wrong. We weren't the #1 overall seed in 2007. The seedings actually were correct looking at it. Just sucked we had to play UCLA in California.

Yeah, right after I posted my question to you, I was thinking--- it had to be Florida with the top seed in 2007. Still, I thought you may've just had your years mixed up, and that KU got the shaft in seeding on another occasion.

Kudos on your fact-checking follow-up, though. Sometimes our fanaticism can fog our memory... happens to the best of us.

 

[Big_C_KU]

Yeah, right after I posted my question to you, I was thinking--- it had to be Florida with the top seed in 2007. Still, I thought you may've just had your years mixed up, and that KU got the shaft in seeding on another occasion.

Kudos on your fact-checking follow-up, though. Sometimes our fanaticism can fog our memory... happens to the best of us.

I think what threw me off was back then the selection show just introduced by region instead of introducing the #1 overall seed first like they do now.

 

[lakercat]

They were not "3-4 in the region." The 4 seed was Dayton, not Wisconsin.

I'll try to say this without sounding overly rude since someone chastised me for being mean earlier, but dude, you might try doing some quick google fact checking before starting threads like this in the future. Between not realizing Minneapolis was our closest regional site in 03, to falsely claiming Kansas was the top overall seed in 07, to misstating other teams seeds, seems like you've been botching the factual details throughout this thread.

So Marquette was the three and Wisconsin was the five. I'm glad you spent the time to look it up so you can be "Mr. Facts". So he was off by one seed line, BFD. Your facts add nothing to this conversation; we all know what his point was. Some of us have lives; therefore, we aren't going to spend time researching just to please our "Fact Nazis"; seriously, no one gives an F. It's easy to be "Mr. Facts" behind a computer screen, isn't it (and yes, I would say anything I wrote in this post to you directly)? As for your statement about Marquette and Wisky not being in Minnesota, what if Kentucky played in Kansas City, and drew a lower seeded Kansas team? I guess since the venue isn't in Kansas, it doesn't matter, right? What about playing a lower seeded Georgetown team in Baltimore? I don't know how far Madison and Milwaukee are from Minneapolis; I don't really GAF, because the point is, it gave those teams an advantage over a higher seeded Kentucky team. I don't have all the facts, nor do I GAF about them; I remember thinking that Kentucky was playing a de facto road game. Let's not forget that Oklahoma got screwed even worse by playing a third seeded Syracuse in Albany. I intentionally made gramtical errors in this thread so I can be corrected by our grammar/fact nazis.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

So Marquette was the three and Wisconsin was the five. I'm glad you spent the time to look it up so you can be "Mr. Facts". So he was off by one seed line, BFD. Your facts add nothing to this conversation; we all know what his point was. Some of us have lives; therefore, we aren't going to spend time researching just to please our "Fact Nazis"; seriously, no one gives an F. It's easy to be "Mr. Facts" behind a computer screen, isn't it (and yes, I would say anything I wrote in this post to you directly)? As for your statement about Marquette and Wisky not being in Minnesota, what if Kentucky played in Kansas City, and drew a lower seeded Kansas team? I guess since the venue isn't in Kansas, it doesn't matter, right? What about playing a lower seeded Georgetown team in Baltimore? I don't know how far Madison and Milwaukee are from Minneapolis; I don't really GAF, because the point is, it gave those teams an advantage over a higher seeded Kentucky team. I don't have all the facts, nor do I GAF about them; I remember thinking that Kentucky was playing a de facto road game. Let's not forget that Oklahoma got screwed even worse by playing a third seeded Syracuse in Albany. I intentionally made gramtical errors in this thread so I can be corrected by our grammar/fact nazis.

And UK had to play ND in Cleveland last year when ND was closer to Cleveland. Unfortunately these things happen far too often when you have the stupid geographical considerations for teams that are not a 1 seed. I think it should be strictly based on S-Curve.

 

[BlueSince92]

Healthy Bogans---would have beaten anyone anywhere.

Gimpy Bogans getting beat play after play after play in an air cast---would have lost to any tourney team anywhere.

Sucks but that's what it was,

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

Out of curiosity, op, where do you think we should've been sent? The other regional sites were San Antonio, Albany, and Anaheim, California, so it's not like there were any closer options available. The NCAA properly placed us in the two nearest possible sites for us--Nashville for the early rounds, and Minneapolis for the regionals.

Man, the lengths folks reach to try to concoct conspiracy theories around here....

Well If you don't see the problem with that then you need to see a brain surgeon for some needed work.

 

[brianpoe]

Well, because with some it is just their nature and they can't help themselves

 

[KWilt43atbuzz]

Truely sad thing is if Bogans doesnt go down vurses the vermin UK goes tothe FF anyway.

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

Truely sad thing is if Bogans doesnt go down vurses the vermin UK goes tothe FF anyway.

... and UK 90 continues to insult anyone thinking differently. Plus if we had played Marq. in Texas we sure as hell would not have had the same crowd.

 

[EvilMD]

When you look at Bogans' ankle injury, it's amazing that Terrence Jones kept playing in the final against Kansas. Jones rolled his completely over, but immediately got up and walked it off.

 

[jrpross]

2003 is one of those "what could have been" years for me. Playing Marquette in Minny, Bogans sprained ankle, Dwyane Wade going off. Seems like all the breaks went against them.

Same here. It's a shame cuz Tubby gets a bad rap, and yeah, the last few years he pretty much gave up. But I wonder if people would go a little easier on the guy if things had gone the way they should have that year and they had won the championship. That team had arguably more talent than the team that won at all in 98.

 

[EvilMD]

Same here. It's a shame cuz Tubby gets a bad rap, and yeah, the last few years he pretty much gave up. But I wonder if people would go a little easier on the guy if things had gone the way they should have that year and they had won the championship. That team had arguably more talent than the team that won at all in 98.

He might still be our coach if that had happened.

 

[jrpross]

He might still be our coach if that had happened.

Eek. Good point. I had no problem with Tubby but I'm much happier knowing Cal is at the helm.

 

[bthaunert]

The bigger screw job that year was putting Syracuse in the Albany Region as the 3 seed. Poor Oklahoma had to play them in the Regional Finals.

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

The bigger screw job that year was putting Syracuse in the Albany Region as the 3 seed. Poor Oklahoma had to play them in the Regional Finals.

Typical NCAA playing favorites.

 

[EvilMD]

There's no such thing as a fair bracket. They don't know how the games are going to play out. Example...UK had to play Alabama and LSU a fourth time in 1986. Fans look back at that now and say "How unfair!" Well, LSU was an 11 seed that year. They beat the six, the three, and the two (Georgia Tech) just to get to UK.

You can complain about unfair seedings, such as Duke/UK in 2010. But when second seeded Pittsburgh loses by one point to third seeded Marquette in 2003, it's not the committee's fault that we had to play Marquette in Minnesota. Pittsburgh was really good that year. The sites are picked before anyone knows what the teams might be ranked at the end of that year.

 

[CalCat57]

Out of curiosity, op, where do you think we should've been sent? The other regional sites were San Antonio, Albany, and Anaheim, California, so it's not like there were any closer options available. The NCAA properly placed us in the two nearest possible sites for us--Nashville for the early rounds, and Minneapolis for the regionals.

Man, the lengths folks reach to try to concoct conspiracy theories around here....

100 percent correct.

 

[KyFaninNC]

Just bored and watching past games today and was watching the Marquette-UK game. Why were you guys shipped out to Minnesota even though you were the #1 overall seed? That seemed pretty crappy to me. Even worse it ended up making you guys play basically a road game against Marquette. That would piss me off just like it pisses me off in 2007, we were actually the #1 overall seed and got shipped out west with UCLA and they were definitely the top #2 seed overall. The NCAA is a damn lie when they put the crap out there that they don't seed for ratings, tickets, or matchups.

Meanwhile, Duke and UNC seldom have to leave the state of North Carolina. In 2009 UNC played all it's games in the state untill the final four.

 

[lakercat]

There's no such thing as a fair bracket. They don't know how the games are going to play out. Example...UK had to play Alabama and LSU a fourth time in 1986. Fans look back at that now and say "How unfair!" Well, LSU was an 11 seed that year. They beat the six, the three, and the two (Georgia Tech) just to get to UK.

You can complain about unfair seedings, such as Duke/UK in 2010. But when second seeded Pittsburgh loses by one point to third seeded Marquette in 2003, it's not the committee's fault that we had to play Marquette in Minnesota. Pittsburgh was really good that year. The sites are picked before anyone knows what the teams might be ranked at the end of that year.

LSU got to play their first two games at home, too. I remember watching an ESPN classic game with Purdue and LSU, and Gene Keady was pissed because he got screwed, and had to play on the road against an 11-seed. Back then, you could play at home. Also, I'm sure Davidson didn't get true HCA against Kentucky, but they played in the First Round in Charlotte. Syracuse got to play at home, and they lost in the second round.

 

[JustBlue]

The selection committee had their heads up their asses that year. So much in fact, that if BYU had advanced to the sweet sixteen, they were going to pull Wisconsin out of the Midwest and place BYU in their place. They placed BYU in a Friday/Sunday region when they do not play on Sundays. Terrible job that year.

JB

 

[dezyDeco]

There's no such thing as a fair bracket. They don't know how the games are going to play out. Example...UK had to play Alabama and LSU a fourth time in 1986. Fans look back at that now and say "How unfair!" Well, LSU was an 11 seed that year. They beat the six, the three, and the two (Georgia Tech) just to get to UK.
You can complain about unfair seedings, such as Duke/UK in 2010. But when second seeded Pittsburgh loses by one point to third seeded Marquette in 2003, it's not the committee's fault that we had to play Marquette in Minnesota. Pittsburgh was really good that year. The sites are picked before anyone knows what the teams might be ranked at the end of that year.

If you don't mind the question, since you're making a distinction... what's your point of view on Duke/UK 2010?

 

[UK90]

If you don't mind the question, since you're making a distinction... what's your point of view on Duke/UK 2010?

I've honestly never understood all the whining our fans do over the 2010 seeding. I mean, my goodness, we got to the Elite 8 that year without ever having to play anyone higher than a 9 seed. Our first three opponents were 16 seed ETSU, 9 seed Wake Forest, and 12 seed Cornell--that's like the easiest cakewalk to the Elite 8 anyone's ever had in the history of the tournament--so where do we get off constantly complaining about Duke's path that year?

Truth is West Virginia was the first nationally elite team we played all season long that year (we had an absurdly easy schedule in 2010), and the week after WVU drilled us Duke had to play the same WVU team and easily blew them out by more than 20 points, so where exactly is this supposed unfairness?

Don't know why it's so hard for some of our fans to simply admit we got fairly beat without always concocting these petty excuses trying to deflect blame onto the NCAA or some other dark forces out to get us...

 

[king of cali]

I've honestly never understood all the whining our fans do over the 2010 seeding. I mean, my goodness, we got to the Elite 8 that year without ever having to play anyone higher than a 9 seed. Our first three opponents were 16 seed ETSU, 9 seed Wake Forest, and 12 seed Cornell--that's like the easiest cakewalk to the Elite 8 anyone's ever had in the history of the tournament--so where do we get off constantly complaining about Duke's path that year?

That's a pretty fair assessment. Kansas was the overall #1 seed and went to St. Louis. It could be argued that UK should have went to Texas, but imagine the whining on this board and talk of things being unfair if they would have had to play Baylor in Texas. It's enough of that going on with having to have played WVU in Syracuse.