Some new Bracketology
- Thread starter Weatherdemon
- Start date
IMO TU cannot afford to lose to RPI killers UH, ECU, and Tulane. Thankfully 2 of those 3 are home games.
Win at Memphis or UCONN, and win at home vs Temple, and SMU or Cincy, and IMO TU is in the dance.
It's not how many games TU loses down the stretch,, but who they lose to.
TX
Win at Memphis or UCONN, and win at home vs Temple, and SMU or Cincy, and IMO TU is in the dance.
It's not how many games TU loses down the stretch,, but who they lose to.
TX
Sorry I.I......we can't let that happen. Kentucky is for real and our Head of Sales was raised in Kentucky and he hasn't shut up since the pre-season rankings come out. Hell, pre-season, he was going to give me the field against Kentucky to win it all..............I was coaxing him early in the season but I avoid his office now.
I think we can play our way out of the 8/9 game in the next few weeks. Or we can play our into the 10-11 seed. I don't really want the 8/9 game.
Well, I'll tell ya, I'll take it if we get a team as good as the one that followed that one in 1999.
I was there. It was nice to get to the next round. The game against Duke may have made our Elite Eight season possible the next year. If we can win a first round game as an 8-9 , I would be thrilled to play any # 1 seed......and a couple of them might need to be worried about TU. But three point shooting and free throw shooting has to be there.
It might be interesting to see us up against a team like Gonzaga. Our bigs are more physical than theirs, and our guard play might be a good matchup... Plus, we would be seeing EMac again whom a couple of our players are still acquainted with.
We would matchup well against Gonzaga IMO. Pangos is a good player but our athleticism on the wings will give them trouble. They have some really big guys in the middle but again they are not really fleet of foot or athletic. Duke- Okafor is a matchup nightmare for us. Virginia- IDK enough about them. They're good and they play some good D. Kentucky is an NBA team and deep. This would be the equivalent of the '99 Duke team.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
USF made a lot of contested shots yesterday. The shot defense wasn't great, but it was no where near as bad as some are portraying here. To their credit, that was a team that came in without one guy shooting over 35 percent from deep. FWIW, I think we can play with Gonzaga. Don't see them as much more talented than UCLA last year.
Gonzaga doesn't have a 6'9" PG. Pangos is a good player but someone Shaq could handle on defense. Few is a great coach and his team's are smart. They don't beat themselves with dumb mistakes. But they are not the same athletically as Kentucky, UVA, or Duke.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Play-In games are ok with me but I don't get the seeding of them. You are not good enough to make it in the tournament so we will make you play an extra game to see. If you win all of a sudden you are better than 19 other teams in the field with your 12 seed. If you lose then somehow you are worse than those other 19 teams that you were just about to be better than. Play-In games should be 16 seed only.
Because of the addition of D1 teams and thus new conferences and autobids and the NCAA not wanting to reduce the number of at-large bids so New Jersey Tech can get an autobid from the Teamsters Conference, they have maintained the same and thus 68...you have to get to 64 for the main bracket. 2 teams in the 16 seed category (essentially conferences 30 and 31 play in for the right to get walloped by Kentucky and the remaining are usually #11s and #12s playing for the last spots in the main bracket. They didn't want to punish teams that won their conference championship so its all At-Large teams to fill out the remainder of the play in brackets. I would tend to agree since the expansion to 68 was to appease the P5 and their greedy, money grubbing presidents.
In other words, the 11 and 12 play-in games are the last 4 "at large" entries into the bracket, prior to this expansion those 4 teams would have been 12 or 13 seeds. The committee has long preferred the 13 and 14 seed line be reserved for mid-major auto bids. (i.e. - TU 2014)
The #16 play-in game was necessary due to the creation of the MWC. The committee did not want to take away an at large bid to accomodate the MWC's auto-bid, so the play-in game was created for the 2 lowest seeded small mid-major auto bids.
The second #16 play-in game was added along with the #11 and #12 play-in games for the 2011 tournament to further balance out the expansion of the tournament and increase the pool of at large bids.
TX
This post was edited on 2/3 9:37 AM by texcane1982
Similar threads
