The top seeded teams are from power conferences. They have the money to pay for better buy games. Not only do they have the benefit of better conference games but they don't have scheduling issues.
You don't think Cronin would like to schedule more 200+ games? Do you not think he hasn't asked? I am happy we can get the top 25 games home and away...our administration is not paying high dollar buy games.
I just gave you examples. I can go back more years and give you more examples. The committee loves the power conferences...that doesn't mean they hate UC in particular. They want to see blue bloods. It's good for TV etc.
I also think we could do a better job of becoming known as a tourney team and that would help our chances with future seeding but it's hard to do when you get under seeded and face other under seeded teams. We also have to break that trend.
I mean you guys are completely ignoring what i am saying.
For us to be a 1-4 seed with 4 300+ teams on the schedule we will need to severely beat the odds. The 2 teams that were exceptions to the rule were from the ACC.
My case is:
- We didn't game the RPI at all
[*]historically you have a absolutely rare chance of a protected seed with 4+ 300 games- UC's overall SOS will be WORSE than last years dispite the great games on the schedule
- Our conference will be much improved but KP still predicts were the 7th best conference by a pretty safe margin.
- Currently we don't have a ton of top 50 games on our schedule. Hopefully those teams in the 60's can move up. But not all will.
IMO for us to really get respect we need to schedule the top end games like we did this years and next year but sub those 300+ teams with buy games from 150-250. Those are hugely winnable games and they weigh much heavier on SOS. Look at Xavier for example, I hate them, but yea their AD gets and understands gamining the RPI. They dont have 2 games nearly as good as UCLA and Florida and yet, their NON conference SOS will be much better than ours. They understand that those back end teams affect your overall SOS.
wow dude. I AM NOT SAYING ITS A REFLECTION OF THE TALENT ON THE TEAM OR ANYTHING OF THE SORT. I am saying that FACTUALLY us getting a top 4 seed with 4 300+ teams is almost unprecedented.
I'm also saying that that we really need to go 4-1 against our top teams. Other wise if we go 3-2 or god forbid 2-3 then it will mean between 35 and 40% of our non conference wins came against teams Bellarmine would beat.
My only hope is that the selection committee recognizes that we are sharing an arena and that we had a pretty tough time getting high quality buy games. if they give us that benefit we might be fine.
There is no other good reason in the world for us to be playing 4 300+ teams when we are this good. And if this continues next year, someone needs fired because they don't understand basketball scheduling in the slightest
Do you think Xavier or Uconn have ever had these thoughts. they've had success as lower seeds. yes, Xavier has gotten breaks but the committee can't predict those
Arizona was great last year. They were bottom of the barrel? Lot of people’s pick to win it all but ok. You just played yourselfUCLA was ranked 3rd in AP and Coaches poll and got a 3 seed. We were ranked 15th and 18th and got a 6 seed. We were a potential 4 seed playing a potential 1 seed.
Maryland was #25 in AP and unranked in Coaches and got a 6 seed. Arizona was ranked 7th and got a 2 seed. Xavier got the bottom of both barrels.
Im not saying they care or they don't care. I just know in the last 4 years out of 64 combined possible 1-4 seeds just 2 of those teams played 4 300+ teams.
Maybe the committee doesn't care at all. But I do see a trend that top seeded teams don't play this many junk games. Keep in mind, a great portion of those 64 teams i mentioned come from power conferences with deep conference schedules. They could in theory play 300+ games and get away it; Yet they didn't. They chose not to play those kind of games.
I mean you guys are completely ignoring what i am saying.
For us to be a 1-4 seed with 4 300+ teams on the schedule we will need to severely beat the odds. The 2 teams that were exceptions to the rule were from the ACC.
My case is:
- We didn't game the RPI at all
- historically you have a absolutely rare chance of a protected seed with 4+ 300 games
- UC's overall SOS will be WORSE than last years dispite the great games on the schedule
- Our conference will be much improved but KP still predicts were the 7th best conference by a pretty safe margin.
- Currently we don't have a ton of top 50 games on our schedule. Hopefully those teams in the 60's can move up. But not all will.
IMO for us to really get respect we need to schedule the top end games like we did this years and next year but sub those 300+ teams with buy games from 150-250. Those are hugely winnable games and they weigh much heavier on SOS. Look at Xavier for example, I hate them, but yea their AD gets and understands gamining the RPI. They dont have 2 games nearly as good as UCLA and Florida and yet, their NON conference SOS will be much better than ours. They understand that those back end teams affect your overall SOS.
Arizona was great last year. They were bottom of the barrel? Lot of people’s pick to win it all but ok. You just played yourself
We played creighton, Harvard, st. Joe in the 1st rounds and lost to all 3. But the committee has to make sure they set up the tournament to mak it as hard as possible on us. Ok
I’m not denying we play hard teams. We are allowed to beat them. The tournament has hard teams. Some teams beat hard teams when they play them. We do not for whatever reason. We also haven’t beat the lesser teams we have played. Is that a conspiracy ?You cannot deny the difficulty of our games in the tournament. Is it a conspiracy, no probably not. But we've consistently had bad draws and are almost always scheduled to play out west. Last time I believe we actually played in the region was in Nashville and as you prlkbably remember we went to the sweet 16 that year.
Either way.
I’m excited for the season tip.
And so I’m happy we’re playing good teams. And this is one of those things that I hope you guys can come back to this thread and say I was wrong about. I’ll gladly take that L.
I’m not denying we play hard teams. We are allowed to beat them. The tournament has hard teams. Some teams beat hard teams when they play them. We do not for whatever reason. We also haven’t beat the lesser teams we have played. Is that a conspiracy ?
Either way.
I’m excited for the season tip.
And so I’m happy we’re playing good teams. And this is one of those things that I hope you guys can come back to this thread and say I was wrong about. I’ll gladly take that L.
I am pretty sure I literally said it wasn't a conspiracy in my first post. And we have, Florida state was ranked higher than us. Have we don't in consistently, no. And I'm sorry but draws are draws and you can't say ours have no been difficult. And you ignored the fact about us never playing close to home. And believe me that makes a difference.
Well if you look at rankings at the time of seeding it doesn't match up. In other words the committee doesn't see things like the poll voters otherwise we would have been a 4 or 5 seed. Not only did we get a lower seed but we were matched up with UCLA who was also under seeded and we were moved out west to boot.
Ahem!!
I’m not denying we play hard teams. We are allowed to beat them. The tournament has hard teams. Some teams beat hard teams when they play them. We do not for whatever reason. We also haven’t beat the lesser teams we have played. Is that a conspiracy ?
Playing better should be the point. It should be the main point. You said it best, we didn’t have a prayer. Bottom line is it didn’t matter who we played. We lost to good teams and bad teams.Whether there is a conspiracy or not there are a lot of ways to get screwed by the committee. You can get under seeded to start. If you are under seeded you are going to be playing a tougher first round and second round game than if you were seeded correctly. Those teams you do play can also be under seeded making matters worse. You can also get shipped out of your region so fans can't travel.
You can even have all three of these happen like last year. We got a 6 seed and played the 3rd ranked team in the country as a 3 seed in the second round. Shipped out west. The Year prior we played the #1 overall seeded team in the second round.
I really don't think we had much of a prayer of advancing in some of these years (if any) past the sweet 16. I don't expect the committee to make it easier on us. I'm not sure they go out of their way to make it harder. However, it does seem our road has been tougher than it should have been more years than not. In the past 6 years I think we got a decent seed and draw one time.
I agree it's time we play better than our seed but that is not the point IMO.
Also we were ranked in the top 15. You act like it was a top 5 team playing a scrub team from the horizon. It was #3 vs 15Whether there is a conspiracy or not there are a lot of ways to get screwed by the committee. You can get under seeded to start. If you are under seeded you are going to be playing a tougher first round and second round game than if you were seeded correctly. Those teams you do play can also be under seeded making matters worse. You can also get shipped out of your region so fans can't travel.
You can even have all three of these happen like last year. We got a 6 seed and played the 3rd ranked team in the country as a 3 seed in the second round. Shipped out west. The Year prior we played the #1 overall seeded team in the second round.
I really don't think we had much of a prayer of advancing in some of these years (if any) past the sweet 16. I don't expect the committee to make it easier on us. I'm not sure they go out of their way to make it harder. However, it does seem our road has been tougher than it should have been more years than not. In the past 6 years I think we got a decent seed and draw one time.
I agree it's time we play better than our seed but that is not the point IMO.