I think UNI over Kansas was the biggest upset, KU was the overall #1 seed and supposed to win it all
The BIGGEST 1st round upsets in NCAA Tournament
- Thread starter CMCM
- Start date
Although ISU would remain on bad side of this list until at least another 2 loses to a 15, you know what would exorcise the demons for me? Pull the 8 vs. 1 shocker.
Not assuming a win over UConn, but if we got to UK and could do it — it'd go a long way toward erasing bad memory, no matter how often '01 is brought up each season.
Not assuming a win over UConn, but if we got to UK and could do it — it'd go a long way toward erasing bad memory, no matter how often '01 is brought up each season.
Every year, I just wish a 16 seed would beat a 1. It's almost happened a few times...mostly in the late 80s (Georgetown vs. Princeton) and early 90s...I think Albany gave UConn a scare for 30 minutes a handful of years ago too before UConn woke up and won.
If a 16 beats a 1 though, I will literally shed a tear. Not joking.
If a 16 beats a 1 though, I will literally shed a tear. Not joking.
I think UNC-Asheville has the best chance, followed by Miss Valley State, but UNC Asheville has a way better one. They didn't lose to UConn by much, barely lost to NC State, barely lost at Tennessee, beat Utah (who sucks this year badly). Lost by 15 to UNC as well.
LIU-Brooklyn hasn't played anybody particularily good except maybe Iona though. They played well at Penn State but still lost by almost double digits.Played Old Dominion tough-ish, and beat Vermont but otherwise..?
UNCA could be an interesting game though if they play well.
I would love the moment, assuming ISU is not directly involved.
That would be just the luck.I still expect it to happen. It might take another 30 years, but it's bound to occur. (Assuming the structure remains at 64-team format — go to 96, and the "16" becomes a "24" -- another topic entirely).
For a 16-1 to happen, the following would have to be involved to some extent.
1. 16 seed should be a program with some frequent appearances in recent tournaments, with upsets in the 12-13 range; experienced coach, fairly senior-laden team.
2. 1 seed may need to be program with little traditional success, perhaps a younger roster, good enough for top 4 national seeding but had a near-stumble during the year, reached the high ranks with talent but can be somewhat erratic.
3. 1 seed is a borderline 2 seed; 16 seed is a borderline 15 seed.
Same type of formula probably applies to any 14 or 15 seed that gets over the hump.
Side note: I find it interesting that, although it requires an opening-round/play-in win, Western Kentucky could meet Kentucky in 1-16 game. It's a surprising geographical placement, I think, even though Hilltoppers had losing record and got auto-bid, so it shouldn't be any kind of true factor.
Its the gift that keeps on giving. Mike Greenberg was just talking on Mike & Mike about how that was the first year they had really made a big deal about the bracket picks on their show, and he had picked ISU to win the National Championship that year.
11 years later and it continues to be the biggest upset in history, and we get to keep seeing that stupid Hampton coach's feet up in the air while being lifted up by one of his players every single year.
11 years later and it continues to be the biggest upset in history, and we get to keep seeing that stupid Hampton coach's feet up in the air while being lifted up by one of his players every single year.
On the surface that game appears to be a huge upset but as I recall it wasn't completely from out of nowhere. Getting beaten by Baylor (a pretty sucky Baylor at that) in the 1st round of the Big 12 tournament just a week prior did a pretty good job of sewing some seeds of doubt on that team.
I would love the moment, assuming ISU is not directly involved.
I still expect it to happen. It might take another 30 years, but it's bound to occur. (Assuming the structure remains at 64-team format — go to 96, and the "16" becomes a "24" -- another topic entirely).
For a 16-1 to happen, the following would have to be involved to some extent.
1. 16 seed should be a program with some frequent appearances in recent tournaments, with upsets in the 12-13 range; experienced coach, fairly senior-laden team.
2. 1 seed may need to be program with little traditional success, perhaps a younger roster, good enough for top 4 national seeding but had a near-stumble during the year, reached the high ranks with talent but can be somewhat erratic.
3. 1 seed is a borderline 2 seed; 16 seed is a borderline 15 seed.
Same type of formula probably applies to any 14 or 15 seed that gets over the hump.
Side note: I find it interesting that, although it requires an opening-round/play-in win, Western Kentucky could meet Kentucky in 1-16 game. It's a surprising geographical placement, I think, even though Hilltoppers had losing record and got auto-bid, so it shouldn't be any kind of true factor.
Some people say it'll never happen, but I'm with you. I think it will happen sometime. I really hope it's sooner than later. Honestly, every year there's more and more parity in college basketball for whatever reason (students not making test scores, having to xfer, whatever).
I don't even think they have to be an experienced tournament team and what not. Really, if you watch games from "good teams" early in the year especially, you'll notice a team like UConn almost every year will only beat some random team (I think this year it was UNC-Asheville) by maybe 10 points. Here's why:
Teams get completely trigger happy from 3 point land, especially against "no name" teams. In the games I mention above, look at the box scores. The reason why the power team almost loses is because they can't make a 3 point basket and that's all they're shooting. However, they win because of their rebounding. They always have a huge rebounding margin on the "no name."
SO IMO the recipe is kind of the following.
1) 16 seed has a big guy, who has big size. When Albany was beating UConn 5 or so years ago for 30 minutes, they had a big 7'2" 280 pound German center who UConn had trouble doing things against, and he was scoring... and grabbing offensive boards. Assuming that guy can rebound and provide points....
2) Play good defense and make the 1 seed settle for mid range or further jumpers.
3) With above, the 1 seed should have an off night.
4) 16 seed should have some guys that can make 3 pointers, but some that can get inside and score.
Really, IMO it's not out of the question. All you have to do is have a big guy and some guys who can rebound the ball, a few who can shoot it well from 3 point, and play good enough defense for the 1 seed to settle for long jumpers and hope they have a terrible shooting night. I mean, really rebounding is key here. It really bails out the power teams who can't shoot on any given night. If you take away the rebounding on one of those nights and the 16 can score, then it's a recipe for a monumental upset.
Last edited:
Didn't see Iowa #3 getting picked off in there. Must have thought they weren't as good as their seed.
A continuous troll that has been banned on multiple accounts. Throughout the the 2010 season insisted that Mike McCarthy of the Packers deserved to be fired, claiming the majority of Packers fans agree with him (they don't). Became militant in his beliefs AFTER the Packers won the Super Bowl. Other stupid opinions as well. Had a knack of creating the most idiotic polls. Essentially, one of the biggest laughingstocks CF has had the "pleasure" of knowing.
H
Hugs4ISU
Guest
We also got thoroughly manhandled at Texas the week before that game, IIRC.
Only a few close calls.
2006, Tennessee escaped Winthrop by 1
2008, Duke escaped Belmont by 2
A few others were single digits fairly late.
In '07, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi was mauling Wisconsin the first half, up something like 20 points. Lost by 13. I thought that one was gonna stick.
