Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Bracketology 2024

HFCS said:
I’m probably gonna watch a lot of the tournament with Arizona fans. At least with my friends they tell me that they take over Vegas and almost nobody else comes, definitely not Utah fans at all. My friends go almost every year (az fans that drive the 5 hours from LA) and tell me it’s 80% Arizona fans. There’s also the fact that before they started having it in Vegas their other locations weren’t great and this was an upgrade for them and was a somewhat neutral but central location. Vegas PAC 12 isn’t like KC where it’s KU/ISU/KSU…it’s just Arizona and a small bit of the other pac schools. Part of the reason Arizona wanted to get into a better conference.

I think their fanbase is going to kind of be like a hybrid of ISU and KU, definitely legit fans…but without the over the top arrogance of bragging that they invented basketball.

If we ever did have it Vegas, I have no doubt ISU and KU fans would outnumber Utah there too. It wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world do have it there once in a while. The history of KC needs to be honored though as the main location.
Click to expand...

I honestly think AZ fans are really going to like KC once they get a taste of it. Besides, Southwest flights are generally cheap.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: tzjung, nrg4isu, SportsMan9000 and 3 others
ClonerJams said:
Yes, our non-con was gross. No arguments here. However, it is not our fault that Iowa and DePaul blow.
Click to expand...

If the committee is supposed to look at the entire resume…focusing on non conf is the worst way to NOT do that because it’s stressing specific games that are the furthest away. If they did focus on specific parts, it would be the recent games, not November.

Ward was a huge part of why we dominated the b12 tournament and he didn’t play at that holiday tournament.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: tzjung, isufbcurt, bluestarcyclone and 1 other person
alarson said:
I don't know that we'll get it.

I do believe we deserve it based on the actual criteria.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I want the #1 seed; I think we deserve the #1 seed; but I also don't know what the committee is thinking and I won't be disappointed if we're a #2 tomorrow.

And it's fine for people to project that way. Just don't use bull**** reasoning like "NC has a better resume" when you clearly haven't actually looked at the resume - or at least aren't explaining why you think that.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: SolterraCyclone and bluestarcyclone
HFCS said:
If the committee is supposed to look at the entire resume…focusing on non conf is the worst way to NOT do that because it’s stressing specific games that are the furthest away. If they did focus on specific parts, it would be the recent games, not November.

Ward was a huge part of why we dominated the b12 tournament and he didn’t play at that holiday tournament.
Click to expand...

Yep. We've gotten away from the 'last 10' measurement that they used to consider (and i do see justification for that), but its absolutely asinine to turn around and place double emphasis on a metric that looks only at the early season.

Especially when 2/3 of that metric isn't the actual challenging games that are the supposed reason for wanting to consider it, but instead that 2/3 is just 'how trash were your trash buy games' that everyone schedules early in the season
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: cstrunk and HFCS
jdoggivjc said:
I honestly think AZ fans are really going to like KC once they get a taste of it. Besides, Southwest flights are generally cheap.
Click to expand...

These same guys take a road trip to a new stadium every year for football (TCU next year).

Arizona will definitely be the 3rd or 4th biggest fan presence next year in KC depending on if Tang has torched his program fully yet.
 
  • Funny
  • Like
Reactions: TheCampanile and jdoggivjc
Earlier someone (Marmot?) posted correlations on seeding with different metrics. The avg of KP and SOR was the most correlated. Here is that avg and the ensuing seed- note this does NOT include todays game for the SOR - so it will only get better for ISU and worse for UNC.

I think they have a legit shot at a 1 seed.

1710649668158.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheCampanile and dahliaclone
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: exCYtable, drmwevr08, NEPatriotscy and 1 other person
alarson said:
Yep. We've gotten away from the 'last 10' measurement that they used to consider (and i do see justification for that), but its absolutely asinine to turn around and place double emphasis on a metric that looks only at the early season.

Especially when 2/3 of that metric isn't the actual challenging games that are the supposed reason for wanting to consider it, but instead that 2/3 is just 'how trash were your trash buy games' that everyone schedules early in the season
Click to expand...
I’ve been beating this drum for weeks. Counting Non Con SOS is a load of crap. SOR is the only metric needed. Insert the “Big 12 is gaming the system” idiots.
 
I don't even care that much if we get a 1 or a 2 seed. I don't think our path will be that much easier either way. I just love the fact that there is some intrigue for us going into the selection show.

the-suspense-is-terrible-i-hope-itll-last.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jakester, Jkclone15, LincolnSwinger and 5 others
Why has it become acceptable for the College Football Playoff committe to discuss "eye test" but not college basketball? Iowa States and North Caolinas resumes are extremely similar. Iowa State just absolutely DOMINATED the Big 12 tournament and dismantled #14 Baylor and put a historic beatdown on #1 Houston. UNC meanwhile barely squeaks by a mediocre Pitt and was controlled by NC State.

Eye test...all else equal...who is the better team right now???
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Friendly
Reactions: tzjung, CloneIce, SolterraCyclone and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom