New Bracketology 2-17-14

[mr.hockey4242]

when did I say they shouldn't get a 2? I simply laughed at the fact that right now they ARE a 2. Also I will stick with my 0 chance, as silly as that may sound to everyone who believes for some reason that "each team has a chance!" Creighton has no chance, because they aren't that good. In that I mean they can't and won't shoot lights out for 6 games in a row because the last 4 will probably all be against teams that are better than the competition they have faced all year and I include 'Nova in that whether you like it or not.

Yeah but your arguments are all completely subjective to you THINKING they are not good.

Fact is it can work the other way too. They play a good defensive team on a day when there shots are falling? That team better pray they can keep up.

Good defense definitely can stop a good offense. But when a team has the ability to make shots from anywhere on the floor, they can also beat good defense.

It all works around full circle. That is why they play the tournament. Any team could get hot.

If we are just going to use your logic I really see 2 teams(florida/Cuse) and maybe MSU if all there guys get healthy and gell that can win 6 in a row.

But in reality there are many, many more capable if they get hot..Creighton included.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

when did I say they shouldn't get a 2? I simply laughed at the fact that right now they ARE a 2. Also I will stick with my 0 chance, as silly as that may sound to everyone who believes for some reason that "each team has a chance!" Creighton has no chance, because they aren't that good. In that I mean they can't and won't shoot lights out for 6 games in a row because the last 4 will probably all be against teams that are better than the competition they have faced all year and I include 'Nova in that whether you like it or not.

How much have you watched Creighton play?

 

[Louie26]

DEFENSE. You just literally jumped right onto my side of the argument. If a team plays great defense they can beat anyone, whether they are a mid major or not. If they play great offense and no defense, IMO they won't have enough to win 6 games. Duke and Creighton can certainly beat ANY team in the country on any night. I just don't buy that they are good enough to get the stops they need in that game where they aren't blowing out a good team, because that will happen at least once if not 4 times on the way to a championship

Butler beat 5 out 6 teams they played, I'm pretty sure NOBODY, including you, had them going that far. That isn't just a one night stand! Coming within inches of beating Duke in the final!!

 

[kramer1]

UC as a #4? Put down the crack pipe.

 

[ericd7633]

UC as a #4? Put down the crack pipe.

I don't really see an issue. Most projections have them as a 3 or 4. With more as a 4 seed.

 

[Runeman]

DEFENSE. You just literally jumped right onto my side of the argument. If a team plays great defense they can beat anyone, whether they are a mid major or not. If they play great offense and no defense, IMO they won't have enough to win 6 games. Duke and Creighton can certainly beat ANY team in the country on any night. I just don't buy that they are good enough to get the stops they need in that game where they aren't blowing out a good team, because that will happen at least once if not 4 times on the way to a championship

Teams that play defense generally do well at the NCAA. Defense travels well; offense can be a real problem as some shooter do not perform well in certain venues.

I like Duke and think they have enough defense to do well. IMO, Creighton is a 1-trick pony and a team with a good defense will deny the ball to McDermet(sp) and they will lose. IMO, Creighton does not make the sweet 16.

 

[rmilia1]

While I think Creightons numbers are inflated the reality of the tourney is the oppositie of what most people think. People tend to think defense is the key to making a long run and its nice to have good defensive efficiency BUT offense is more important. Tourney play opens up more ( scoring averages are almost 7 ppg higher in the tourney over the regular season over the last 15 years ). Games are called closer and teams that can score it generally make deeper runs. Its better to have a combo of both obviously but given the option of a team with limited defensive skills vs a team with limited offensive skills Ill take the team with the better offense every time in tourney play.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Teams that play defense generally do well at the NCAA. Defense travels well; offense can be a real problem as some shooter do not perform well in certain venues.

I like Duke and think they have enough defense to do well. IMO, Creighton is a 1-trick pony and a team with a good defense will deny the ball to McDermet(sp) and they will lose. IMO, Creighton does not make the sweet 16.

While I hope you are correct, because I love seeing the douchebag Creighton fans be miserable when they lose AGAIN in the tournament, McDermott is unbelievable. If you double him, he'll still get decent points, and it opens up the rest of their experienced offense, who will kill you from outside. The guy is really good, and everyone around him is good enough to make teams pay for paying too much attention to McDermott.

I'm gonna go puke now after defending Creighton. Yuck.

 

[Clayton]

Missouri vs Kansas in STL in rd 2? Make it happen

 

[Runeman]

While I think Creightons numbers are inflated the reality of the tourney is the oppositie of what most people think. People tend to think defense is the key to making a long run and its nice to have good defensive efficiency BUT offense is more important. Tourney play opens up more ( scoring averages are almost 7 ppg higher in the tourney over the regular season over the last 15 years ). Games are called closer and teams that can score it generally make deeper runs. Its better to have a combo of both obviously but given the option of a team with limited defensive skills vs a team with limited offensive skills Ill take the team with the better offense every time in tourney play.

Sometimes statistics get in the way of reality. Of course a good team is going to score more points than a bad team and they will score more points on a great defense, but not as many as they would against a team with limited talent. The way the tournament is set up, Nr 1 seed plays NR 16. Usually that's where you see the blowouts and higher scores from both teams because the better team is on the bench at the end of the game. When it gets to the sweet 16, all that is remaining are excellent teams and excellent teams play excellent defense as well as score. Makes sense to me that more points are scored in the NCAA simply because the teams are better. Louisville won last year because their defense was excellent and they did have good scoring....just not great.

 

[kramer1]

I don't really see an issue. Most projections have them as a 3 or 4. With more as a 4 seed.

Well, I guess you're a moron.

After this week when they beat UCF and #11 Louisville they'll most likely be ranked 5th in the country. You have them as a 4 seed.

Do you see why this is stupid now?

 

[dcZONAfan]

How many teams do you think can win it all then? Like 3 or something?

Kind of, ya. Why do you think I was so mad we lost Ashley this year? It's because of the serious lack of contenders this year...

 

[rmilia1]

Kind of, ya. Why do you think I was so mad we lost Ashley this year? It's because of the serious lack of contenders this year...

I think the teams that can REALLY win a title number around 10-12. 3 is way too low IMO especially in a year where there really isnt that dominant team a la 2011 Kentucky. EVERY top 5-10 teams has serious weaknesses that can be exploited by the right team. Once you get to the S16 its going to be ( as always ) all about the matchups.

 

[CoolStoryBro]

I think the teams that can REALLY win a title number around 10-12. 3 is way too low IMO especially in a year where there really isnt that dominant team a la 2011 Kentucky. EVERY top 5-10 teams has serious weaknesses that can be exploited by the right team. Once you get to the S16 its going to be ( as always ) all about the matchups.

Agree, I can see 75-80 percent chance for top 5 and the other 20-25 percent spread from 5-10 (11,12) to win it all.

There truly isn't one extremely dominant team, a lot of good teams and a few great teams.

Is it a down year? I can say it's not the best year, but equally can't say its the worst.

 

[SteelersPride]

pitts sliding out of the tourney

 

[SteelersPride]

how r they still 28 in the polls

 

[Texas Jefe]

Not sure Okie State will make the tournament. They are 4-8 in conference before tonight's game. Texas destroyed them last week, and they looked terrible in the loss. Don't you need to be .500 in conference to make tournament?


Of course, guess they could get hot and win Big12 tournament, but I don't see it..

 

[rmilia1]

Agree, I can see 75-80 percent chance for top 5 and the other 20-25 percent spread from 5-10 (11,12) to win it all.

There truly isn't one extremely dominant team, a lot of good teams and a few great teams.

Is it a down year? I can say it's not the best year, but equally can't say its the worst.

I actually prefer years like this. I dont like years where there is one clear cut favorite to win the title and then that team steamrolls the field and wins it. A perfect mix for me in the Final 4 is 2 1 seeds, 1 2/3 seed and 4/5/6 seed from major conference that gets hot and makes a run. Those are the most exciting years. I love a nice run by a mid major but I dont really want one in the FF ( sorry Butler/VCU/George Mason/Wichita)

 

[rmilia1]

Not sure Okie State will make the tournament. They are 4-8 in conference before tonight's game. Texas destroyed them last week, and they looked terrible in the loss. Don't you need to be .500 in conference to make tournament?


Of course, guess they could get hot and win Big12 tournament, but I don't see it..

Eh, not really. SInce the tourney expanded to 64 ( then 68 teams ) there have been 34 teams make the tourney as at larges with sub .500 conference records. HOWEVER only 1 team has ever made it as an at large being 4 games under .500 in league ( 1998 Florida State ). Basically that means that OK State is going to have to go 4-2 down the stretch to have any real shot IMO and that is highly unlikely unless they find a way to win @ Baylor without Smart tonight.

 

[Texas Jefe]

Eh, not really. SInce the tourney expanded to 64 ( then 68 teams ) there have been 34 teams make the tourney as at larges with sub .500 conference records. HOWEVER only 1 team has ever made it as an at large being 4 games under .500 in league ( 1998 Florida State ). Basically that means that OK State is going to have to go 4-2 down the stretch to have any real shot IMO and that is highly unlikely unless they find a way to win @ Baylor without Smart tonight.

okay, I'm not sure where I got that .500 or better in conference, maybe I'm just getting old. Maybe I was thinking about qualifying for bowl games in football...yikes