Damn we had one showing us as a 4seed and several 5s . Worst was a 10 or 11 I think.

I guess missouri can just play like complete arse for a month and be above us ,just because of the non conference record they have.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TigerLaw40

Member since Aug 2017

2788 posts

Posted on 2/23/21 at 12:19 pm to Alt26

quote:
For example: Lunardi currently has Texas as a 4 and LSU a 7. If you dig deeper you see that Texas and LSU don't have terribly dissimilar resumes. Texas is 23 (NET) LSU is 28. BOTH are 3-6 vs. Q1 opponents and 6-6 vs Q1/Q2 opponents. Neither has a "bad" loss. However, Texas has neutral site OOC wins vs. UNC and Indiana. That is probably the difference in the seeding even though the reality may be 7 seed LSU is as good or better than 4 seed Texas.

That is an interesting analysis and definitely agree with that being a reason why TX is higher than LSU; but that seems ridiculous that Lunardi would have them so much higher. I mean 3 seed lines better based off 2 OOC wins, 1 of which is only a Q2 win right now, is a bit outlandish. I can also understand if they are getting some credit for playing in a strong Big 12; but I'd still say they should be a low 5 at best.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Tigerpride18

Lakewood Colorado

Member since Sep 2017

29338 posts

Posted on 2/23/21 at 12:20 pm to Tigerpride18

If we play a 2 or 3 in the tourney ,I hope its not bama ,i know we are due to beat them eventually, but at a certain point you have to just realize that they are bad matchup for us.

So what 1 seed do yall want to play as an 8 or 9 seed ? I'm sure its gonna be Zags Michigan baylor and someone. I'll take the someone .

ETA looks like its another er big ten school like Illinois or Ohio state. Ohio state looked good but Michigan was better Saturday. I know zilch about Illinois

This post was edited on 2/23/21 at 12:23 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Alt26

Member since Mar 2010

28233 posts

Posted on 2/23/21 at 1:03 pm to TigerLaw40

quote:
That is an interesting analysis and definitely agree with that being a reason why TX is higher than LSU; but that seems ridiculous that Lunardi would have them so much higher. I mean 3 seed lines better based off 2 OOC wins, 1 of which is only a Q2 win right now, is a bit outlandish. I can also understand if they are getting some credit for playing in a strong Big 12; but I'd still say they should be a low 5 at best.

A few years back the committee made a big push to establish that OOC games were just as important as conference games. Part of that push was to, I'm sure, try to make games Nov/Dec more interesting by making them more "impactful" and also force good teams to play each other in non-conf games instead of just racking up easy wins and a gaudy record before conference play.

But this year is different. It's not like teams like LSU wanted to play SEIU, Southeastern, etc. They just had no choice. So is the committee going to penalize teams this year, as they have in years past, for playing a relatively weak OOC schedule? I can't think they would. So I think "good wins" are really going to be more important than ever, with a diversity of "good wins" carrying greater weight. That is "good wins" both in AND out of conf. play.

Page 1 2