Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

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

NENick said:
It was interesting that he was asked about continuity and the importance of having 4-year guys, like Campbell. He mentioned Anderson and Hudson from last year, but Hudson was a transfer from Loyola. This year's team has a several transfers contributing (Bond, Weisbrod, Smith, Schweiger).

I think the important thing for Jake and UNI is that he may have found the secret for a mid-major: find quality players a step below P5 level, who drop down. Pav would've been great for UNI. Rock as well.
Click to expand...

I’ve always wondered how things would have been different if UNI had gotten Doug McDermott like they were supposed to.
 
Cyburbbalz said:
They can both be 2 seeds in st. Louis
Click to expand...
I understand that

But I look at what they did to Tennessee and Bama last year

Tennessee got Lexington and Bama did not. They got to Cleveland

Wisconsin as a 3 got shipped to Denver last year did not get to play Milwaukee. ISU and Kentucky did. I believe ISU had highest metrics of the 3's, they certainly were higher than Wisconsin.

Point being if you are the lowest 2 or 3 for that matter there is a higher probability of not getting close to home IF there is another 2 rated higher that wants same location.

Of the possible 2's UConn will get Buffalo or Philly, not sure where they would send MSU, St Louis? Illinois and ISU both want St Louis.
Houston would get OKC

Now there are other factors like number of teams by conference etc #1 seed. That factored in last year with all those SEC teams.


My point is as a 3 ISU will have higher probability of playing in St Louis as a 3 vs a 2 if they are the lowest of the 2's.

Does not mean they can't play in St Louis as a 2. They certainly could.

But this is why if they are a 3 at the moment I am okay with it. Especially with Florida being a 1.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cyburbbalz
isufbcurt said:
No he's not funny, just a idiot.
Click to expand...

chris, reading this:

giphy.gif
 
  • Haha
  • Dumb
Reactions: IlliniCy and throwittoblythe
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...
Well said. It is absolutely insane why Auburn is remotely in consideration. ANY metrics that give credence to a case that "they belong" in the field are fishy AF.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: BigCyFan, Letterkenny and Acer88
ISU_Guy said:
I will say that for the most part Iowa never is out of games. They are dangerous down by 10
Click to expand...
Other than pace of play, there is almost nothing different about them compared to a Fran coached variation. They are perhaps slightly less douchey. Guard a little better. But there are systemic things holding over if you look closely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom