Kansas
- Thread starter Louisville Crazie
- Start date
They've benefited a lot from the schedule. They have quite a few losses, but they have the #2 SOS and they're 10-3 in Quad 1 games, including wins on the road against Texas Tech, West Virginia, TCU, and Texas.
And it says last edited 3/5, so yeah I'm confused. It doesn't make any sense. I mean at least put MSU there if it's not us. I thought after the butt whooping they took, we would take that spot after beating UNC. He must be putting them there because of their 5-1 record vs the RPI top 25. But they just got beat by 18 by a team outside of the top 50, and have more losses than us... I just don't see them as a one seed over us or MSU.
In the end it looks like we'll have to get a couple wins this week to get that 1 seed and hope Kansas doesn't win the Big 12 Tourney. But some on this board would rather have the 2 seed in the east. I'm not sure where I want to be without seeing the bracket.
In the end it looks like we'll have to get a couple wins this week to get that 1 seed and hope Kansas doesn't win the Big 12 Tourney. But some on this board would rather have the 2 seed in the east. I'm not sure where I want to be without seeing the bracket.
Kansas has a lot of Q1 and Q2 wins and won their conference outright (true round robin). The Big 12 is a strong conference so, on paper they deserve to be a 1 seed.
However, they are the shakiest 1-seed of the bunch. If they underperform in the big 12 tournament and Duke wins the ACC Tournament, both teams will swap seeds.
To me, the 2 seed is just as good as the 1 seed out West
However, they are the shakiest 1-seed of the bunch. If they underperform in the big 12 tournament and Duke wins the ACC Tournament, both teams will swap seeds.
To me, the 2 seed is just as good as the 1 seed out West
What confused me was Lunardi saying Duke has a 99% chance to get a 1 seed if we beat Carolina and then proceeds to not put us on the 1 line LOL
I'd rather be a 2 seed in the East than a 1 seed in the West, provided the #3 seed isn't Michigan State. Nova and UVA both have the 1 seed locked up. I suppose we could get the #1 seed in the Midwest if Xavier falls early in the Big East Tournament - and we win out.
I got to say Lunardi's West Region looks insanely tough right now: 1. Kansas 2. North Carolina 3. Michigan State 4. Arizona 5. Gonzaga 6. Kentucky... Not sure UNC is deserving of a 2 seed with 9 losses, but if they're in the West with those teams, I'll take my chances. They would have a hard time making it past the Sweet 16. I look at the top 6 seeds here and I basically see 6 teams that merit either 2 seeds or 3 seeds. Gonzaga and Arizona are both capable of FF runs, IMO.
I got to say Lunardi's West Region looks insanely tough right now: 1. Kansas 2. North Carolina 3. Michigan State 4. Arizona 5. Gonzaga 6. Kentucky... Not sure UNC is deserving of a 2 seed with 9 losses, but if they're in the West with those teams, I'll take my chances. They would have a hard time making it past the Sweet 16. I look at the top 6 seeds here and I basically see 6 teams that merit either 2 seeds or 3 seeds. Gonzaga and Arizona are both capable of FF runs, IMO.
I think UNC has a lot of Q1/2 wins.
That bracket is full of NAME programs, but Kentucky isn't a threat and Zona isn't good on defense. Michigan State has a guady record with no great wins. I think they're like 3-4 vs. Q1/2 teams (or something like that).
All true statements. But UNC is also 4-7 against ACC teams with a winning record. Yes, they had nice OOC wins over Michigan, OSU, and Tennessee. But I'm not sure how you can overlook 9 losses. The loss to Wofford should at least cancel out one of those quality wins. They're 8-7 against RPI top 50. So yes, they have quality wins, but they also have quite a few losses against the top-level teams.
Not sure what to make of Kentucky. They've won 4 of their last 5 - and they did beat WVU on the road. But they've been wildly inconsistent. While I don't think they're a contender, I still think they're a formidable opponent as a 6 seed. They're crazy, crazy long. I wouldn't be surprised to see them upset a team or two in the tournament.... Zona doesn't play defense, no argument here. Obviously that makes the margin for error that much smaller, but their offense is very capable of outscoring any team... MSU doesn't have the best resume, but they haven't had that many chances for quality games. The Big 10 was way, way down. At this point I think they're almost a lock as a 3-seed. There's no other 3 seed I would want to avoid more so than Michigan State.
We didn't mention Gonzaga, but I think they are way under-seeded at the 5 line. #8 in KenPom and #6 in the Polls. I've seen them play 6 or 7 times this year, and I think the talent on this year's team isn't that far behind the 2017 Gonzaga team. If they're a 5 seed in Kansas's region, I'm probably taking the Zags to the elite 8... One thing I notice with the Zags, however, is they're really good at blowing HUGE leads. Seen it in about every quality opponent they've played the last two years. Sometimes they end up winning, but they sure like to make a game out of some contests that should have been decided by the early 2nd half.
It has everything to do with their SOS. I don't totally disagree, either. We were kind of in the same boat last year too. If they win their conference tournament then I don't really have an issue with them being a 1-seed. But I don't think they can afford a loss.
Also, put me in the group that would rather be a 2-seed than a 1-seed out west. That never seems to work for us. But I do think if we win the ACCT then we're likely going west....especially if Kansas was to win the B12T and Xavier took a loss in the Big East. I think Kansas would become the one in the Midwest and bump Xavier to the second seed....
Bottom line is you have to play well and beat good teams no matter where you wind up being placed.
Also, put me in the group that would rather be a 2-seed than a 1-seed out west. That never seems to work for us. But I do think if we win the ACCT then we're likely going west....especially if Kansas was to win the B12T and Xavier took a loss in the Big East. I think Kansas would become the one in the Midwest and bump Xavier to the second seed....
Bottom line is you have to play well and beat good teams no matter where you wind up being placed.
Do they not have GPS's in Arizona? Is it just me or do they always seem to stay in the West?
It's not just you. And I agree. It's frustrating. I swear they're the only team in the entire bracket since January that hasn't left a region once. Now that they've pretty much solidified a top four seed for the NCAAT I don't see that changing, either.
I also don't see how Kansas is still considered a one seed. No announcer gives them any credit, this is a weak Bill Self team, and they just got pounded by Oklahoma State. They should be a 2, Holes a 3 seed. Michigan is going to be a handful wherever they get put. Peaking at the right time.
What I don't get is how UNC can lose 2 games in a row and move UP in the RPI??
They do seem to be in there every year. But I think it's a given that the committee will put the top-ranked Pac-12 team in the West.
Top Seeded Pac-12 team
2017: 2- Arizona, West
2016: 1- Oregon, West
2015: 2- Arizona, West
2014: 1- Arizona, West
2013: 6- Arizona, West
6- UCLA, South
1992, 2001, 2010
sidenote: We won the ACC Tournament all 3 years in which Roy won a national title.
It’s beyond ridiculous! UNC loses two games in a row and only drop 3 spots. Unc is the only team in the top 15 with 9 losses. I foresee UNC losing another game before the NCAA brackets are released, could this be the first time a team with 10 losses gets a 2 seed?? The committee seems determined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I don't keep track of how the RPI and the NCAA committee determine their rankings but can I guess they value to 50 wins more than bad losses? So if a team won let's say 5 games vs. top 20 teams but lost 8 games to bad teams, they will get a high ranking? Because that seems to me to be the case with UNC.
I'm okay with them getting a 3 seed, but a 2 seed seems a little generous. 8-7 against the top 50? That's fair, but probably not indicative of a 2-seed. But to answer your question, no team has ever had double-digit losses with a 2 seed. Here are the 2 seeds with the most losses going into the tournament:
2014: Kansas, 24-9
2001: Kentucky, 22-9
I find it ridiculous you get punished for being a 1 seed and they send you across country, but then keep teams seeded 4 and lower in their regions.
I don't want to be the #2 seed in a bracket with Nova as the #1 seed.
Vegas has Nova as most likely to win the tournament (9/2) and us as second most likely (5/1). The rest of the top eight is:
3. UVA at 6/1
4. Michigan State at 8/1
5. Michigan at 9/1
6. Kansas at 10/1
7. UNC at 12/1
8. Purdue at 12/1
Tough question though - would you rather be a #1 seed in the midwest or west, or would you rather be closer to home (East or South) but be a #2 seed and have UVA or Nova as your #1 seed?
Vegas has Nova as most likely to win the tournament (9/2) and us as second most likely (5/1). The rest of the top eight is:
3. UVA at 6/1
4. Michigan State at 8/1
5. Michigan at 9/1
6. Kansas at 10/1
7. UNC at 12/1
8. Purdue at 12/1
Tough question though - would you rather be a #1 seed in the midwest or west, or would you rather be closer to home (East or South) but be a #2 seed and have UVA or Nova as your #1 seed?
But will have a week and a half break...time to cool off.
I agree, but Duke sells. It doesn't matter where Duke will be, the arena will be full. All about the $$.
I’m good with going anywhere, except where Michigan State would be the 3 seed assuming Duke is a 2.
Normally I would be nervous with Duke in the West but pk80 calmed my fears a little bit there.
This is one of the worst Bill Self Kansas teams IMO. Crazy that they are a one seed still with 7 losses and a couple of those were blowouts. We have had zero blowouts and were up by double-digits in every game minus UVA I believe.
If we are a 2, I think it’s dumb if we are in the East with Nova. They are probably gonna end up the #1 or #2 overall 1-seed, and we will be the top 2 seed. Same thing happened in 2013 with Louisville. I don’t like the NcAA’s Emphasis on geography since 2012ish.
If we are the 2 and Xavier is our 1 than we are 7.5 point favorites against them.
If we are a 2, I think it’s dumb if we are in the East with Nova. They are probably gonna end up the #1 or #2 overall 1-seed, and we will be the top 2 seed. Same thing happened in 2013 with Louisville. I don’t like the NcAA’s Emphasis on geography since 2012ish.
If we are the 2 and Xavier is our 1 than we are 7.5 point favorites against them.
Thank you. In that case, I sorta hope we just make it to the Championship Game, haha.
That Brings up a good question. Most all of us have said we would rather be a 2 seed closer to home than a 1 seed in the west. So, if winning the ACCT makes us a 1 seed out west, and losing the final game makes us a two seed close to home, do you actually pull for us to lose in the championship game? I don't think I have it in me to do that???
No typically championship teams either lose in the semis of the conference tournament or they will win the conference tournament. There maybe two or three teams since 2000 (been a little while since I checked this out) to lose in championship game and still win the title.
My option is start kicking the $hit out of these teams like we know they can and ride it all the way to the national championship!
I wouldn't pull for us to lose, but it wouldn't break my heart if that was the final outcome. Then again, no loss actually breaks my heart, haha.
This is true that the eventual national champion is more likely to either win the conference tournament or lose in the semifinals. Since 2000, 50% of NCAA Champs also won the conference tournament, while 33% lost in the semifinals. However, there are still quite a few NCAA Champs that have lost in the conference title game: '16 Villanova, '14 UConn, '12 Kentucky, '96 Kentucky, '93 UNC, '91 Duke.
Just wanted to answer this part real quick. Bracketology is based on if the tournament started right now. The 99% projection is what he thinks will ultimately happen. Lunardi has said a couple of times that he doesn't see any scenario where 2 Big East teams are 1 seeds which means the loser of Nova/Xavier is falling off the 1 line.
Thanks for looking it up dukedevilz! I guess the trend since 2012 is to lose in the conference title on the even years!
So we could possible get the one seed on the East or Midwest. That’s better than the West
Why is everyone so scared of Mich St? It may come back and bite me but god they are overhyped. They have like two good wins on the year. I'd much rather play ST than Michigan. And K owns Izzo.
For me, Izzo is 1-11 against Duke and Duke is on a 7 game win streak against MSU, so I just think they are bound to get a W eventually and don't want the chance of it being in this tournament.
Plus I think they match up well with Duke and they actually have a couple people that could hit the foul line jumper against the zone and have the shooters to hit the open corner 3 as well.
Beating a good team twice in the same year is always difficult. I don't think there is a single team out there that we can't beat, but that's why I like us if we play Virginia again in the ACCT. we are good, and beating a good team twice is hard
Similar threads
