Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

***2026-27 Mens College Basketball Thread***

FerShizzle said:
i will be shocked if ISU and Nebraska aren't 2 and 3 and in #1 overall seed Duke's region.
Click to expand...
That is what I have thought all along. (Once the 1 was lost)

And despite what some might think, guys who pay the contracts are not above "suggesting"things for extra story lines
 
cycloneworld said:
If Auburn gets in at 16-15 overall and 7-11 in the league, we might as well pack up shop and tell the mid-majors they have no chance at anything ever again.
Click to expand...
What I don't understand is how the Big XII is so highly regarded, but teams like Cincinnati, West Virginia, UCF and BYU (which are all 9-9 in the Big XII) will have to sweat it out. The Big XII should have 10 teams considered to be locks IMO, but the dregs of the B1G and the SEC are being chosen over them. SEC (11), B1G (9), Big XII (8), ACC (8). If the Big XII is as good as the pundits say, show us the At-Large Love!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Letterkenny
AlaCyclone said:
What I don't understand is how the Big XII is so highly regarded, but teams like Cincinnati, West Virginia, UCF and BYU (which are all 9-9 in the Big XII) will have to sweat it out. The Big XII should have 10 teams considered to be locks IMO, but the dregs of the B1G and the SEC are being chosen over them. SEC (11), B1G) 9, Big XII (8), ACC (8). If the Big XII is as good as the pundits say, show us the At-Large Love!
Click to expand...
IMO, its the difference between being able to do buy games against the SWAC vs buy games against the MAC. the big 10 has significantly more money to spend on buy games.

and everyone made a big stink about big 12 metric manipulation a couple seasons ago and so they altered the metrics to significantly devalue the 300+ ranked teams.

IMO.

and these teams should be pulling down the metrics of the league and they just aren't. i don't trust the NET in regards to the big 10, ACC, and SEC. they seem fishy AF.
1772991099703.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cloned4Life, BigCyFan and Letterkenny
FerShizzle said:
IMO, its the difference between being able to do buy games against the SWAC vs buy games against the MAC. the big 10 has significantly more money to spend on buy games.

and everyone made a big stink about big 12 metric manipulation a couple seasons ago and so they altered the metrics to significantly devalue the 300+ ranked teams.

IMO.

and these teams should be pulling down the metrics of the league and they just aren't. i don't trust the NET in regards to the big 10, ACC, and SEC. they seem fishy AF.
View attachment 168617
Click to expand...
The NET is totally BOGUS. Not even a question about that.
 
FerShizzle said:
i will be shocked if ISU and Nebraska aren't 2 and 3 and in #1 overall seed Duke's region.
Click to expand...
Maybe. If the committee uses a true S curve, the overall #1 seed SHOULD have the last 2 seed in their region. That would also mean that the overall 8 seed/last 2 seed would be against the overall 9 seed/top 3 seed. While Iowa State could be in that, Nebraska won't be. It would be Illinois or Michigan State.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kevdiv48
UNI is going to be a problem for whomever they draw. assuming they will be 13 or 14 seed and hopefully not ISUs problem.

they are ready for the moment and surging at the right time.
 
FerShizzle said:
UNI is going to be a problem for whomever they draw. assuming they will be 13 or 14 seed and hopefully not ISUs problem.

they are ready for the moment and surging at the right time.
Click to expand...
If they are hitting 3s like this, they could do it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom