NCAA Brackets

[Clarkmeister]

My current projections:

Chicago Regional
1. Illinois
2. Oklahoma State
3. Syracuse
4. Louisville

Syracuse Regional
1. Boston College
2. Duke
3. Gonzaga
4. Washington

Albuquerque Regional
1. Wake Forest
2. Kentucky
3. Michigan State
4. Pittsburgh

Austin Regional
1. Kansas
2. North Carolina
3. Arizona
4. UConn

[nolanfan34]

The best part of these is that you have teams playing way far away from the closest region to them, just like the selection committee does it!

My biased gripe - the Huskies (UW) are overrated, and are going to lose in the first or 2nd round of the PAC-10 tournament. I think they are headed for a 5 seed, and a nice 12/5 first round upset.

[Clarkmeister]

My biggest problem was what to do with Pitt. I certainly could understand someone who said they should be a 3 seed.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
My current projections:

Syracuse Regional
1. Boston College
2. Duke
3. Gonzaga
4. Washington


[/ QUOTE ]

I really hope you're right on this one. That regional would mean about a 90% chance of Duke going to the Final 4.

[Clarkmeister]

The other problem is that teams from the same conference can't meet until the regional finals IIRC.

[Clarkmeister]

I could easily be wrong, but I think it's very likely that Illinois and the 3 ACC teams will all be in separate regionals. Given that, how many brackets really scare you? I'm guessing not many.

[Uston]

And with an estimated RPI of 51, I could understand someone who said they should be a six seed.

[Clarkmeister]

More to life than RPI.

17-4

1 really bad loss to Bucknell.
3 other losses, all not good, but none terrible to Georgetown, @St. Johns, @W. Virginia.

But...

Decent non-conference wins vs Memphis and So. Carolina
Swept Syracuse 2-0
Won @ UConn
Beat ND

8-3 in a very deep conference.

A lot will be determined for Pitt in the last few games:

@ Villanova
West Virginia
UConn
@ Boston College
@ Notre Dame

They certainly can book a 3 seed if they go 4-1 in that stretch. More likely is 3-2 and a 4 seed IMO.

[wonderwes]

You still have to predict the upsets. Who knows what there will be this year?

I run a $20 bracket pool on poolhost.com with my friends. I was thinking of making it available also to 2+2'ers.

[Clarkmeister]

This is just a selection of top seeds, not a prediction of anything.

Personally, I think it's a very weak year overall in college hoops and there is a good chance that there will be even more upsets than usual.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
I really hope you're right on this one. That regional would mean about a 90% chance of Duke going to the Final 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless it ended with


16. Maryland.


Bitch!

NT

[Uston]

More to life than RPI.

Agreed. If there wasn't an RPI of 51 would be good for a seed in the 9-12 range.

I think I write off Pitt out of spite, seeing as they blew up my bracket in each of the last two NCAA's.

[holeplug]

I think UNC will get a #1 over BC. I wouldn't count out Kentucky if they can steam roll through the SEC tourney ,which they should do, and if Wake does bad in the ACC tourney. As of today though yours looks about right.

[DemonDeac]

this is awful. couldnt be further from the truth. i say this because u have BC at a #1 and Wake not in the syracuse bracket.

just look at espn.com joe lunardi's bracketology. he does a decent job of it

[jstnrgrs]

I think that they should abandon the tournament and instead have several postseason games played on neutral sites including a championship game between the teams ranked #1 and #2. The tournament goes on to long and interferes with accademics. Also it makes to much money.

[jstnrgrs]

seeding doesn't matter much. If your team gets a poorer seed than it deserves, they at least have a chance to prove it on the court.

[thatpfunk]

you're funny

[Toro]

I'd like to see it but I don't think BC will get a one seed.

[patrick dicaprio]

BC will not end up with a 1 seed barring a miracle. and you really think kansas will get the nod over NC??

i am always curious about sleeper teams. this yera it is VERMONT. no respect at all, one of the best scorers in college and a 7 point loss to kansas. only conf loss to BU who is no slouch either.

HOLY CROSS is another. 3 pt loss to BC, and one conf loss. both can win a game in the first round.

Pat

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
this is awful. couldnt be further from the truth. i say this because u have BC at a #1 and Wake not in the syracuse bracket.

just look at espn.com joe lunardi's bracketology. he does a decent job of it

[/ QUOTE ]

BC deserves a #1 if they finish with 2 or fewer losses. That would be very impressive in the touhest top to bottom conference in the country. It will be an absolute travesty if they do not get a #1 seed, and a second team from the ACC with at least twice as many losses gets one.

Wake isn't in the syracuse bracket because I have them as the 3rd #1 seed, and as such, they travel.

[Clarkmeister]

"you really think kansas will get the nod over NC??"

I think they deserve it. Half the losses, no "bad" losses, and a top notch road win at Kentucky.

[wayabvpar]

[ QUOTE ]
The best part of these is that you have teams playing way far away from the closest region to them, just like the selection committee does it!

My biased gripe - the Huskies (UW) are overrated, and are going to lose in the first or 2nd round of the PAC-10 tournament. I think they are headed for a 5 seed, and a nice 12/5 first round upset.

[/ QUOTE ]

Careful- your crimson and grey boxers are showing!

Have you watched them play? Other than last weekend (when they squeaked past UO and got drilled by OSU), they have been playing at an extremely high level. I think they have a good shot to make some noise in the tournament for a couple of reasons-
1) They are atheletic as hell
2) They are DEEP
3) Their swarming defense will be MUCH more effective once they get away from the goddamned PAC-10 officials (unless someone loses an appendage or major organ, there should never be 96 free throws in a game!)
4) They have several guys that want to go pro next year, and need to do something on a national stage to get paid.

I think they are Sweet 16 easily, and could get hot and make the Final Four. Elite 8 is more likely.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
4) They have several guys that want to go pro next year, and need to do something on a national stage to get paid.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be the most relevant part.

I think it'll be one or the other. Either they'll get upset in the first round, or go pretty deep. If they run into a team with a legit center who can rebound I think they could have problems. Of course, not many teams have that....

[DemonDeac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this is awful. couldnt be further from the truth. i say this because u have BC at a #1 and Wake not in the syracuse bracket.

just look at espn.com joe lunardi's bracketology. he does a decent job of it

[/ QUOTE ]

BC deserves a #1 if they finish with 2 or fewer losses. That would be very impressive in the touhest top to bottom conference in the country. It will be an absolute travesty if they do not get a #1 seed, and a second team from the ACC with at least twice as many losses gets one.



[/ QUOTE ]

whats wrong with another ACC getting a #1 seed. just look at strenght of schedule of ACC teams and the lack thereof for BC. theres no contest. BC woulndt be top 4 in the ACC. just wait til next year

[Clarkmeister]

I think having only 1 loss in a very deep conference is more impressive than the multiple losses that NC, Wake and Duke all have in a top heavy conference.

[DemonDeac]

[ QUOTE ]
I think having only 1 loss in a very deep conference is more impressive than the multiple losses that NC, Wake and Duke all have in a top heavy conference.

[/ QUOTE ]

WHAT?!?! thats absurd. you put the top 6 teams from the big east against the top 6 of the ACC and you'll be lucky to pull off two wins. i think you're the only person in America who actually thinks BC deserves a #1 ranking.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think having only 1 loss in a very deep conference is more impressive than the multiple losses that NC, Wake and Duke all have in a top heavy conference.

[/ QUOTE ]

WHAT?!?! thats absurd. you put the top 6 teams from the big east against the top 6 of the ACC and you'll be lucky to pull off two wins. i think you're the only person in America who actually thinks BC deserves a #1 ranking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the Big East is the deeper conference, you should at least go to the 7 teams that figure to have a great shot at getting in the tourney. I would bet a lot of money on the Big East teams in a home-and-home round robin mega tourney.

ACC
Wake Forest (5) 10-2 22-3
North Carolina (4) 9-2 21-3
Duke (7) 8-3 18-3
Maryland (22) 6-6 15-8
Miami (FL) 6-6 15-8
Georgia Tech 5-6 14-8
Virginia Tech 5-6 12-10

Big East
Boston Coll. (6) 10-1 21-1
Syracuse (9) 9-3 22-4
Pittsburgh (17) 8-3 18-4
Connecticut (18) 8-3 16-6
Georgetown 8-4 16-7
Notre Dame 7-5 15-7
Villanova (25) 5-5 15-6

The best part is that two of the teams on the ACC list are the two teams that just joined the ACC from the Big East!

[bugstud]

I like the bottom 4 to trounce the ACC there and the top 3 will keep it close...good point

[patrick dicaprio]

nice avatar by the way. what is it?

Pat

[Dead]

If the Cuse end up with those 3 teams then they're going to either lose to Ok State or Il. I think they are better than Louisville.

I hope not though.

[Clarkmeister]

Well, in the Cuse's defense, they did beat Ok St. once already.

[Dead]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, in the Cuse's defense, they did beat Ok St. once already.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not true. Ok State spanked them in the Coaches vs Cancer tournament by like 15. They've only played once.