SMU a 6 seed?
- Thread starter Original TULSAFAN
- Start date
They are a 6 because they are 2-3 against tournament teams. If using the "eye test", they would be a 4 or 5.
Same thing with WSU. They are 1-3 against tournament teams and the win is against a 16 seed. Using the eye test and modern analytics, they are a 4, 5 or 6 seed. But based on resume, it is a tougher call.
Despite being an 11 seed WSU is favored by 6.5. Pretty decent indicator the committee messed up there.
Wisconsin is a head scratcher for sure too
Wisconsin is a head scratcher for sure too
I thought WSU was the lowest seeded and the worst downgrade by the Committee. And, I wanted them here as an 8 or 9. Maybe the Committee got tired of the obvious KU-WSU second round deja vu. But they gave FSU-Florida Gulf Coast and Kentucky-Northern Kentucky first rounds, which seems forced. But those opponents are not the quality of WSU.
If anything, this should send a message to the Shockers that they must exit the MVC and move to the AAC - the champ Illinois State is in the NIT. I'm disappointed that we won't get Wichita here,
If anything, this should send a message to the Shockers that they must exit the MVC and move to the AAC - the champ Illinois State is in the NIT. I'm disappointed that we won't get Wichita here,
Calipari ripped the committee for the way they seeded the tournament. He said it doesn't hurt the team that is seeded too low, it hurts all the teams above them. He referenced the year Kentucky was an 8 seed and forced a matchup with Wichita State as a 1-seed in the 2nd round. Duke beats UNC 2 out of 3 and wins the ACC and they get a 2-seed where UNC gets left on the 1-line and watching Arizona beat Oregon, I'd take Arizona all the way through. Boggling the way the committee basically said the conference tournaments basically didn't matter at the top.
Agree. I really like SMU's draw. Baylor is a struggling weak #3 imo and SMU gets to play in the nearest regional. Very good setup for them to reach the Sweet 16.
Unless our conference really sucked this year SMU (i hate to admit) was head and shoulders better than everyone in the AAC.
SMU might be size challenged but they look like a team that could really be the darling of the Tourney. A really good balanced team and are going to be a hard out.
I have SMU playing Duke in the sweet sixteen and that is going to be a great game if it happens. If they beat Duke look out!!!!!!!
GO TU!!!!!
SMU might be size challenged but they look like a team that could really be the darling of the Tourney. A really good balanced team and are going to be a hard out.
I have SMU playing Duke in the sweet sixteen and that is going to be a great game if it happens. If they beat Duke look out!!!!!!!
GO TU!!!!!
That's a ridiculous seed. Someone needs to be fired from this process. Charles Barkley was right.
Wichita State provides a tough issue for the committee. Do you go by what they could do going forward or by what they have done? I always side with the kenpom analysis. So, I think WSU is way under seeded. However, if you look at it from the committee perspective, WSU is 0-3 v. tournament teams. They lost by 10 to a 2 seed. They lost by 5 to a 9 seed. They lost by 17 to a 10 seed. They are 2-4 against the kenpom top 50 with both wins against #50 Illinois St. Again, I think WSU is significantly under seeded. But, their resume produces a difficult situation for the committee.
SMU should have received the death penalty, thus making this thread irrelevant.
Perhaps the CBI would have been more their speed.Turns out they were mis-seeded
Similar threads
