|
|
#1
03-13-2005, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
NCAA Tournament Field
One of my favorite days of the year. With that, here are my final top 16 teams. This is my opinion of where they *should* be seeded, not where they will be seeded. Of note is that 89% of Final Four teams have come from the top 16 teams, almost 75% from the top 8.
Note that Okie St. and Duke are flexible based on their results today. In order: 1 Seeds Illinois North Carolina Wake Forest Oklahoma State 2 Seeds Duke Kentucky Gonzaga Washington 3 Seeds Oklahoma Arizona Kansas UConn 4 Seeds Louisville Boston College Syracuse Villanova Teams most likely to be seeded too high by the NCAA: Louisville (and anyone from CUSA), Kansas, Michigan State. Teams most likely to be seeded too low by the NCAA: Gonzaga, Oklahoma, Pitt. 
|
|
#3
03-13-2005, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA Tournament Field
I haven't wasted a whole weekend watching TV in so long...well, since last March.
The end to the Duke-GT game was awesome and I'll second the idea that GT is the team nobody wants to see in the first round. That being said, I think this little run will elevate their seed to the 6-7 range, when three weeks ago 10-12 was not out of the question. Duke's win today seals a #1 seed. The final #1 seed comes down to Ok. State or Wake Forest but I think OK state needs to win convincingly to knock wake out of the top seed. Kentucky is assured a two with the way they lost just hours before the selections are final.
|
|
#5
03-13-2005, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about GW
[ QUOTE ]
How good are they? I'm an A-10 fan, but didn't really follow the NCAA this year. How do they stand against the rest of the country? [/ QUOTE ] I've seen them on TV a couple of times since moving to the DC Area and I can tell you I'm not impressed. They're simply the best team in a very down year for the A-10. They did beat Michigan State and (then top-10) Maryland early in the season, but were inconsistent at best in the A-10. I think one of the biggest factors for team like G.W. for pulling an upset is quality gaurd play and they don't have the leadership or organizational skills at the point. Thompson, their PG, is a turnover machine. GW does have have a couple of things going for them: (1) They have a couple of shooters and we know how important that is in pulling an upset and (2) they are a solid defensive team, especially on the perimiter. That's my take from the 3ish times I've seen them play on TV.
|
|
#8
03-13-2005, 05:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA Tournament Field
[ QUOTE ]
Someone explain to me why Buffalo is probably going to make the tourney. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think Buffalo gets in. Before the developments on the west coast last night, they were definately in the mix. There just aren't enough at-large bids to go around. When you're from one of the low mid majors, you need better quality wins than home to Miami (OH) and home to Ohio. The MAC is just a bad conference and there's no way the committee lets them in when teams like Iowa, Iowa State, and UAB are there who play in much better conferences with similar records.
|
|
#10
03-13-2005, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA Tournament Field
[ QUOTE ]
Note that Okie St. and Duke are flexible based on their results today. In order: 1 Seeds Illinois North Carolina Wake Forest Oklahoma State 2 Seeds Duke Kentucky Gonzaga Washington 3 Seeds Oklahoma Arizona Kansas UConn 4 Seeds Louisville Boston College Syracuse Villanova Teams most likely to be seeded too high by the NCAA: Louisville (and anyone from CUSA), Kansas, Michigan State. Teams most likely to be seeded too low by the NCAA: Gonzaga, Oklahoma, Pitt. [/ QUOTE ] I like your list. Only changes I make is moving Duke to a #1 and WF to a #2. Also, I'd put Florida in as a 4 and Villanova out of the top 16. Kansas might be struggling now, but they should still get a #2 seed because of their entire year. I'd put Gonzaga as a #3.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
