Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Censored by Laurie said:

I'm so tired of watching a 15 seed like Robert Morris get blown out by a 2 seed like Alabama

Yeah... Good for Robert Morris. Unfortunately, the officials were never going to let them win. The moment RM took a 66-65 lead it became clear the fix was always in. 

But I'd rather see 1-3 seeds be consistently pushed than be consistently given a playing bye, which is the mean. Act like it's not, though. 

  • Eye Roll 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Yeah... Good for Robert Morris. Unfortunately, the officials were never going to let them win. The moment RM took a 66-65 lead it became clear the fix was always in. 

But I'd rather see 1-3 seeds be consistently pushed than be consistently given a playing bye, which is the mean. Act like it's not, though. 

Look…I get the concept that you’re going for, but what I refuse to get behind is the end-result being cutting low-major conferences like the SWAC, MEAC or NEC from getting their fair shot…if for no other reason it wasn’t so long ago that was UNTs place in the world. 

Plus, these 16, 15, 14 seed upsets/scares are some of the best storylines of the tournament 

In the end, play 35 games of high level winning basketball and you deserve a presumptive cake walk in the first round. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Eye Roll 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, CMJ said:

There are more close calls (and upsets) of 1-3 seeds than people give credit for.  Nearly every year we get one.

Not to keep beating the dead horse... but to your point... if we nearly get one upset each year then we nearly waste 11 to 12 tournament spots every year. 

Posted
Just now, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Not to keep beating the dead horse... but to your point... if we nearly get one upset each year then we nearly waste 11 to 12 tournament spots every year. 

Aren’t you supposed to win if you’re a 1-3 seed?

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, NT93 said:

Aren’t you supposed to win if you’re a 1-3 seed?

Exactly.

 

 

It's kinda like a tennis tournament...the high seeded players tend to win a couple of rounds before they get challenged.

 

And also, we may only get about one upset of a 1-3 seed a year -- but that doesn't mean we don't get another scare or two.  This year has been relatively light on upsets so far though.

 

 

 

Also, I should hasten to add...blowouts happen in the tournament even with two fairly evenly matched teams.  Utah State was a trendy "upset" pick (a 10 over a 7 isn't really that much of an upset normally).  UCLA threw them down an elevator shaft last night.

Edited by CMJ
  • Upvote 1
Posted

Want to complicate this even further, factor in things that have less to do with metrics and skill, and more to do with chance, luck, and/or chaos.  That one team gets uncharacteristically hot, or another just has cosmically bad shooting day, completely uncharacteristic of how they've previously played or their seeding.

Whether these things help an underdog get the win, or a favored team get an exceptionally large blowout win, are part of the stories that make this tournament so unpredictable and endearing.

Posted
On 3/20/2025 at 4:00 PM, golfingomez said:

Now Georgia getting throttled by the Zags

I heard one of the media mouths say that Gonzaga sits at 9 straight S16s, with an opportunity to reach 10 straight.

So, trivia: No team since the expansion (1985) has ever made 10 straight S16s.  But two other programs have made it 9 straight, tied with the current Zags.  Who are they?

@CMJ can you name them without Googling?

Posted
2 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I heard one of the media mouths say that Gonzaga sits at 9 straight S16s, with an opportunity to reach 10 straight.

So, trivia: No team since the expansion (1985) has ever made 10 straight S16s.  But two other programs have made it 9 straight, tied with the current Zags.  Who are they?

@CMJ can you name them without Googling?

best guess is Kansas and UCONN. I feel like Duke and Kentucky have had big upsets to disrupt a streak like that

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, greenminer said:

nope on both.  HINT: they are obv bluebloods, so you're on the right track.

and it's not Duke or UK? UNC and UCLA? I feel like both those runs would've come in the 90s/00s. maybe Villanova? this is a good one. Arizona also leaps to mind

Edited by Censored by Laurie
Posted
11 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I heard one of the media mouths say that Gonzaga sits at 9 straight S16s, with an opportunity to reach 10 straight.

So, trivia: No team since the expansion (1985) has ever made 10 straight S16s.  But two other programs have made it 9 straight, tied with the current Zags.  Who are they?

@CMJ can you name them without Googling?

I believe Duke and UNC.

Posted
3 minutes ago, greenminer said:

correct! Blue Devils and Tar Heels

@Censored by Laurie sorry, I was responding to KU and UCONN.

all good. it was fun trivia. I know Duke's had some pretty high profile upsets through the years, but I'm guessing their run was in the middle of their early 90s run

Posted (edited)

If you don't want low rated 16 seeds in the tournament then you don't love March Madness. Also, if you remove these low-major conference auto-bids, you're just shifting who the lowest rated conferences in the tournament are. Then the move will be to remove auto-bids from your Sun Belt and WAC type conferences.  As you keep shedding "dead weight" conferences, all that will be left is the high-majors. See college football to get an idea of how terrible that is.

Edited by GMG_Dallas
Spelling. I'm sure there's more. I'm tired.
  • Thanks 1
Posted
44 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

I tried reason. Dudes just gonna double down on his bad take

It's like quadruple at this point... 

And I'm not sure I'd call it a bad take... once the 1st round is over we should look at point differential for 14-16 seed games. Then look at it over the past decade. I use those seeds because those slots are generally used for low major teams or mid major teams with poor metrics. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

If you don't want low rated 16 seeds in the tournament then you don't love March Madness. Also, if you remove these law-major conference auto-bids, you're just shifting who the lowest rated conferences in the tournament are. Then the move will be to remove auto-bids from your Sun Belt and WAC type conferences.  As you keep shedding "dead weight" conferences, all that will be left is the high-majors. See college football to get an idea of how terrible that is.

Hence why I prefaced this entire topic on not wanting to step out on that slippery slope...

Posted

digging through Wiki on those 90s teams...man, that is peak "let's remember some dudes"

Rumeal Robinson
Alaa Abdelnaby
Anderson Hunt
Jimmy King
Dugan Fife
Serge Zwikker
Scotty Thurman
Tyus Edney

that's an elite 8 of my childhood

  • Upvote 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.