New Bracketology
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Addict
    Points: 97,473, Level: 97
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 1,577
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,682
    Points
    97,473
    Level
    97
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 329
    Given: 729

    New Bracketology

    Just posted about a half-hour ago. Twister Sisters now at a 7.

    Bracketology - Women's College Basketball Brackets and Predictions - ESPN

    A lot better than an 8, and shouldn't drop back to that if ISU takes care of business and plays at least to seeding in the Big 12 tournament.

    This bracketology, in fact, looks extra-good w/ a 7 seed (provided you survive 7-10) ... I think Miami is the most vulnerable of all those 2's.

    A lot will change before it's official, of course.



  2. #2
    All-Star
    Points: 26,021, Level: 49
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 529
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    BenEClone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Lincoln, Ne
    Posts
    1,853
    Points
    26,021
    Level
    49
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7
    Given: 22

    Re: New Bracketology

    While speculating about seed, my wife and I realized a basic fact - being in the NCAA tournament is an expectation for ISU WBB. There are a lot of schools for which that is not true. We also expect to win at least one game every year (top 32) and if we don't get a sweet sixteen appearance we're disappointed.


    “We’ve got a pretty good football conference, and we’ve got a pretty good conference overall. We’re still walking around with our heads held high and our chest out, about that.” Paul Rhoads

  3. #3
    Addict
    Points: 97,473, Level: 97
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 1,577
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,682
    Points
    97,473
    Level
    97
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 329
    Given: 729

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by BenEClone View Post
    While speculating about seed, my wife and I realized a basic fact - being in the NCAA tournament is an expectation for ISU WBB. There are a lot of schools for which that is not true. We also expect to win at least one game every year (top 32) and if we don't get a sweet sixteen appearance we're disappointed.
    That's my general feeling, too.

    It's nice to be able to have those expectations, and have them be realistic (due to consistency over several years)



  4. #4
    Speechless
    Points: 495,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 31.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    jdoggivjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sterling Heights, MI
    Posts
    33,407
    Points
    495,879
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,345
    Given: 939

    Re: New Bracketology

    If that's the way it falls out, that's a lot better than we potentially deserve (the way the season has played out so far). If this team catches fire down the stretch that bracket is a potential run to the Elite Eight.


    Chuck Lidell: I paint my toenails with pink and black polish. Problem is, I get more paint on my toes and on the carpet than on my nails. Any advice?
    Maria Sharapova: Don't you beat up other guys for a living? I don't know how to answer this.


  5. #5
    Bench Warmer
    Points: 7,830, Level: 26
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 320
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    310
    Points
    7,830
    Level
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 1

    Re: New Bracketology

    This is great news -- really important that we stay off the 8-seed line to give ourselves a chance at some upsets and an Elite Eight. And yes I agree, as fans we have come to expect year after year to be in the tournament and are disappointed when we don't make the Sweet 16. It is a great tradition to be part of! Now we just need to win out the season and maybe pull a spoiler surprise against Baylor in the Big 12 tourney.... Next few weeks will be fun....



  6. #6
    Just Win Baby
    Points: 299,761, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Clones85''s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,339
    Points
    299,761
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 2

    Re: New Bracketology

    Would love to get ahold of the 6 seed



  7. #7
    Pro
    Points: 82,696, Level: 89
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 1,054
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    Your first GroupVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    khaal53's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,545
    Points
    82,696
    Level
    89
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 112
    Given: 1

    Re: New Bracketology

    IMO, with seeding, I think if a team is going to land somewhere between 4-8, #6 is usually the best situation. Avoid the #1 as long as possible and the drop from #2 to #3 is usually substantial in the Women's tourney.




    I'm on Twitter: @khaal53

  8. #8
    Legend
    Points: 213,030, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    MNCyGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    10,902
    Points
    213,030
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 636
    Given: 428

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by BenEClone View Post
    While speculating about seed, my wife and I realized a basic fact - being in the NCAA tournament is an expectation for ISU WBB. There are a lot of schools for which that is not true. We also expect to win at least one game every year (top 32) and if we don't get a sweet sixteen appearance we're disappointed.
    Yea, it is very cool to have a program that established. I actually had a friend use the term "embarassment" in a conversation about the WBB this year. I was a bit taken aback and thought that was a bit too harsh, but it did really drive home how high that bar has been raised.



  9. #9
    Pro
    Points: 42,407, Level: 63
    Level completed: 59%, Points required for next Level: 543
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience PointsYour first Group

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    SW Iowa
    Posts
    2,252
    Points
    42,407
    Level
    63
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 71
    Given: 56

    Re: New Bracketology

    I would be thrilled with a 6 seed.



  10. #10
    Bench Warmer
    Points: 7,830, Level: 26
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 320
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    310
    Points
    7,830
    Level
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 1

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by khaal53 View Post
    IMO, with seeding, I think if a team is going to land somewhere between 4-8, #6 is usually the best situation. Avoid the #1 as long as possible and the drop from #2 to #3 is usually substantial in the Women's tourney.

    Yes, totally agree.... There are usually some upsets of #6 over #3 seeds almost every year in the women's tourney second round, but I don't believe a #1 or #2 seed has ever lost in the first two rounds (or with rare exception, maybe Tennessee two years ago). Anyway, point is, #6 seed would be great and keeps us away from Stanford longer. : )



  11. #11
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 68,226, Level: 81
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 1,524
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Your first GroupVeteran50000 Experience Points
    mred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE WI
    Posts
    4,965
    Points
    68,226
    Level
    81
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 41
    Given: 0

    Re: New Bracketology

    Looking at the past four years, the #1 seed lost in the 2nd rd once and the #2 seed lost in the 2nd rd six times.

    2010:
    #7 Mississippi St over #2 Ohio State
    #7 Gonzaga over #2 Texas A&M

    2009:
    #9 Michigan State over #1 Duke (we beat MSU in the next round)
    #7 Rutgers over #2 Auburn

    2008:
    none

    2007:
    #7 Mississippi over #2 Maryland
    #10 Florida State over #2 Stanford
    #7 Bowling Green over #2 Vanderbilt

    That's 6 losses in 16 games for the 2 seed in the second round. I don't mind those odds.


    Last edited by mred; 02-28-2011 at 01:56 PM.

  12. #12
    All-Star
    Points: 18,286, Level: 41
    Level completed: 27%, Points required for next Level: 664
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Three4Cy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Des Moines
    Posts
    1,915
    Points
    18,286
    Level
    41
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 19
    Given: 30

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCy View Post
    Yes, totally agree.... There are usually some upsets of #6 over #3 seeds almost every year in the women's tourney second round, but I don't believe a #1 or #2 seed has ever lost in the first two rounds (or with rare exception, maybe Tennessee two years ago). Anyway, point is, #6 seed would be great and keeps us away from Stanford longer. : )
    Only time in the history of the men's or women's bball tourney that a # 16 beat a # 1.

    Feaster leads Crimson to historical upset - Women's College Basketball - ESPN



  13. #13
    Bench Warmer
    Points: 7,830, Level: 26
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 320
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    310
    Points
    7,830
    Level
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 1

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by mred View Post
    Looking at the past four years, the #1 seed lost in the 2nd rd once and the #2 seed lost in the 2nd rd six times.

    2010:
    #7 Mississippi St over #2 Ohio State
    #7 Gonzaga over #2 Texas A&M

    2009:
    #9 Michigan State over #1 Duke (we beat MSU in the next round)
    #7 Rutgers over #2 Auburn

    2008:
    none

    2007:
    #7 Mississippi over #2 Maryland
    #10 Florida State over #2 Stanford
    #7 Bowling Green over #2 Vanderbilt

    That's 6 losses in 16 games for the 2 seed in the second round. I don't mind those odds.

    Thanks MRed. You're the best. Do you have the same data for #6 seeds upsetting the #3? I bet there are a lot of those....



  14. #14
    Prospect
    Points: 6,467, Level: 23
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 83
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    59
    Points
    6,467
    Level
    23
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: New Bracketology

    I would pay more attention to this bracket if someone could explain to me why Texas is in with a 6-8 conference and 17-11 overall record and Kansas State is out with a 8-6 conference and 18-9 overall record. Not quite as bad with Texas Tech at 7-7 and 20-8. Texas played a really tough nonconference schedule but got whipped bad by the top teams. The announcers on the ISU-UT Monday game said the same thing, why not KSU? I don't care about KSU any more than I do Texas or Tech. The whole thing just seems strange.



  15. #15
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 68,226, Level: 81
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 1,524
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Your first GroupVeteran50000 Experience Points
    mred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE WI
    Posts
    4,965
    Points
    68,226
    Level
    81
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 41
    Given: 0

    Re: New Bracketology

    Quote Originally Posted by HuskerClone View Post
    I would pay more attention to this bracket if someone could explain to me why Texas is in with a 6-8 conference and 17-11 overall record and Kansas State is out with a 8-6 conference and 18-9 overall record. Not quite as bad with Texas Tech at 7-7 and 20-8. Texas played a really tough nonconference schedule but got whipped bad by the top teams. The announcers on the ISU-UT Monday game said the same thing, why not KSU? I don't care about KSU any more than I do Texas or Tech. The whole thing just seems strange.
    You can't compare conference records between north and south without keeping in mind the unequal conference schedules. The strength of the conference skews heavily to the south.

    There are 5 conference schools with RPIs better than 25, and 4 are in the south. Texas plays those five teams a total of 9 times. KSU plays those five teams a total of 6 times.

    There are 5 conference schools with RPIS worse than 60, and 4 are in the north. Against those teams, KSU -- 9 games, Texas -- 6 games.

    The one remaining conference game they had was against each other, which Texas won @ KSU.

    The conference divisional schedules are one big factor in Texas having a #12 SOS compared to KSU's #65. That SOS is the big reason Texas has an RPI 20 places above KSU (#34 to #54).



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • TV: Cyclones.tv
  • HOOPS: Iowa State vs. Mississippi Valley State
  • December 31, 2014
  • 06:00 PM