In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1301
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Updated 3/8.............so Saturday's games not reflected.
KU will not be a #1 after the blowout in Waco
Baylor was #4 last 4 out so do they move into the last 4 in or do they need a win in the Big 12 Tournament
One note that I thought was interesting..............Texas without Myck lost very close games to UCLA and KU (games Texas had nice leads late in both games) The Bruins and Jayhawks were conference champions in power conferences. I think this points to a wide open screwball tournament where anything can happen.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by austinr 13 months ago
"Leadership is wisdom, courage and great carelessness of self"
KU doesn't deserve a number 1 seed strictly on the basis of finding a way to lose at TCU. An elite team doesn't lose that game, even in the new world of college hoops parity.
KU can be had this year. I could see a first round loss in the Big 12 Tournament and NCAA Tournament this year for KU..........but if they play like they did in Lawerence vs Texas they could win it all. They have trouble scoring at times...........KSU has probably been the most consistent team in the Big 12 this year.
UCLA a better team than when Texas played them.
That is a completely arbitrary decision. #1 seeds should be determined by total body of work. If KU was 30-1 with the loss to TCU being the only loss, would you feel the same way?
Baylor is not in yet. It has a home win over a 2 seed playing for nothing (except to protect a 1 seed), a home win over a 3-5 seed, and a road win over a bubble team. It has 3 losses to teams nowhere near the field, 2 of them at home (NW, CofC), and two home losses to bubble teams. A win over OSU and it becomes a decent bet. Two straight wins to reach the conference finals and it can finally start to feel comfortable.
Ken Pom's ratings have OU #50 and BU #42......................BU improved their position with the blow out of KU/OU by not showing up and then quitting is in a very precarious situation I would think if they lose game one in The Big 12 Tournament.
I know the committee says they don't count teams in a conference but its hard to believe The Big 12 gets more than 5
Other Big 12 Teams
Baylor's rpi is still around 60.
RPI + Kenpom has been an amazingly accurate predictor over the years.
While waiting for RPI to update Monday, I can offer a good approximation from realtimerpi
Lunardi's latest still has Baylor as #4 in the last 4 out. The KU blow-out didn't help
Mark Packard on College Sports Radio made a comment a while ago that I am not sure is believable.............he said the NCAA Selection Committee covers the names of the teams while selecting and only looks at the resumes. Any thoughts about that?
Still say this will be a year when nothing is predictable..............Liberty getting into the Tourney with 20 losses is a start.......
Its not like they haven't lost in the first round before.
I don't think they've ever been lower than a #4 or #5 seed under Self, but I might be wrong. They've lost a couple of times in the first round, and once or twice in the 2nd round.
Am I the only one who wishes someone would tie Joe Lunardi up sometime in February, and lock him in a basement where he has no access to a computer until maybe right about this time in March.
The week of conference tournaments is about the earliest time I want to hear what Joe Lunardi thinks. Until then he's nothing more than a weatherman who issues a long range forcast and then keeps changing it every other day. Then, when he gets to the prescribed date he's pretty damn accurate.
He is an interesting character there is no doubt.
I do however have to give him props......................I think in the last 4 years he missed on one team in the tournament. He sometime misses on the seeds but almost never on the team in the NCAA Tournament..............
They might do some blind resume stuff when there's an argument going on, but I've never heard that they cover the school names all the time. If they did that, you could never assess impact of an injury or suspension.
“Kansas may wind up number one in these polls, but that would be so unfair to Texas...” -- Len Elmore, 2/13/11
That's what I thought.............in addition the members of the committee shadow certain teams. I know the AD at UTSA when she was on the committee shadowed Texas during the 2010-2011 season. I am convinced until this day she had an agenda and that was the reason Texas received a 4 seed in a very difficult bracket. I remember the basketball people across the country said the Horns got screwed..............(she, while a women's basketball coach in aggieland, never could beat Jodi so she had an agenda...............IMHO)
Lunardi is actually kind of a cool guy, but I admit that I can't stand his smug expressions when he pontificates on the tournament field. He is the color man for St. Joe's radio and was a long time associate (or assistant, I'm not sure) vice president of marketing for St. Joe's. Bracketology was just a sideline that kind of took over. He now teaches a course on the subject.
He's far from the best at it, btw. Of the 10 bracketologists charted for the last 7 years, he came in 7th. I guess his popularity is a testament to his talent at marketing and the large audience of ESPN.
These guys came out on top, but you have to wait until Wednesday for an update. (Last week they didn't even have Baylor in their next four out.)
This post was edited by bierce 13 months ago
The first round losses were early in Self's tenure at KU in a 3/14 loss to Bucknell in 2005 and a 4/13 loss to Bradley in 2006. Since then, it has been Elite Eight, Champions, Sweet Sixteen, Round of 32 loss as a 1 seed to N. Iowa, Elite Eight, Runners-up. Quite the 6 year run he's working on.
I keep clicking on this thread looking for porn ratings.
I put the blame for that on the Ohio State AD, who was the committee chair. The Big Ten teams seemed to get kisses, and the B12 did get screwed.
But you have to think if the Big 12 was being screwed by seeding, then at least one team would have stepped up and played above seed, but no team did.
Texas (4) lost the 4/5 game.
Missouri (11) lost by 15 to a 6 seed that lost by double digits in the second round.
KU (1) lost regional finals to an 11 seed (a play in team, no less), which then lost its next game.
A&M (7) lost in the first round to a 10 seed.
K-State (5) lost in the second round to the four seed, which then lost its next game.
Not a good showing by the conference in 2011.
That's not proof that the seeding process was right. Look at what the B12 schools got and the records they had, compared to the B10 schools.
Its really just my own personal beef, I guess. I'm fine with what he wants to tell us right about now, and I realize he's fairly accurate.
But I simply don't care what his bracketology says in mid February because so much of it is going to be completely inaccurate by mid March.
But in mid-February, it gives you an idea of what your team needs to do.
I think there is less squawking over the field these days because of the openness of the NCAA regarding its process and the willingness of people to apply it. People no longer look at a 20-win team (21, 22, whatever, pick your number) and wonder why it didn't get in. They now have a sense that it goes deeper than the raw record and what matters.
But you also can pick out inequities here and there.
It's not proof the seeding process was right, but it has a tendency to make more probable than not the fact that the conference as a whole didn't deserve any better.
+1. I agree with you
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports