All the media guys have really got on the bandwagon of GW of late. A lot of them are talking about them as a team to go a few rounds in the tourney.

Wow KU could win that bracket...

 

If your a top 12 seed in any bracket this year, you have a chance. That's how bad the NCAA is this year.

SIU all the way.

All the media guys have really got on the bandwagon of GW of late.  A lot of them are talking about them as a team to go a few rounds in the tourney.

 

Yeah, but there are 3 dozen teams that could a few rounds in the tourney this year because of the mediocrity.

I really don't buy Illinois as a #2 seed as of now

What 8 teams do you have above them for the 1/2 seeds, out of curiosity?

We've found the GM for our all-gangsta team

Come on, Its Iowa...don't you associate that with the hood?

Lunardi always gets almost every team right in his bracketology, but is clueless as to the seeds.  He's a guy to pay attention to if your team is on the bubble, but one to ignore in terms of what he predicts your teams seed will be.

 

You've definitely got a point there, he seems to put a lot of teams in wierd places. Besides my rant on the Illini, I have 3 major issues with the way he seeds them...

 

1) He seems to overrate mid-majors. Gonzaga and St. Joes are the only non-power conference teams I can remember seeing above the 7-10 range, which seems to be where a lot of the tougher ones end up. The committee doesn't seem to give the teams a high seed unless there is a considerable amount of hype around a team, even if they deserve it. I find it highly unlikely that UNI gets a #5 seed (I know the MVC is tough, it's just that mid-majors usually seem to get the shaft, even Gonzaga before last year). GW might suffer this fate too, although the A-10 seems to get a little more respect and their #6 seed makes some sense.

 

2) He likes putting major conference teams in the sub-10 seed area like Cincinnati, Arkansas, Alabama, and Iowa State. That almost never happens when the real brackets come out. Usually those bubble teams end up in the 8-9 or 7-10 game.

 

3) He seems to over-value how weak you dog opponents are. I know he mentioned it with UConn and WV this year, stating that it might hurt their seed. Is there really any difference between facing a sub-150 team and a sub-200 team if you're one of the powerhouse teams? I don't see it. Looking at their tougher games makes a world more sense to me. What's funny is that he still puts Memphis as a #1 seed even though like 3/4 of Conference USA is under a 200 RPI.

Yeah give GW some props for their top 250 schedule (240).

 

They have zero wins against the RPI top 25. Sounds like a top team to me.

What 8 teams do you have above them for the 1/2 seeds, out of curiosity?

 

Maybe I exaggerated a bit. As of right this second, they would be likely be a #2 seed. However, I expect them to end up as a #3. I definitely like what Duke, UConn, Memphis, and Texas have done thus far a bit more than what the Illini have done. They're in roughly the same range as Gonzaga, Villanova, Florida, and Pitt right now. I realize that Gonzaga, has a much weaker conference and Florida doesn't really play anyone, but you can make arguments that other teams besides those guys are in a somewhat similar place record-wise with a tougher schedule. West Virginia and NC State are examples, and roughly half of the Big Ten has a good chance to put together a similar or stronger resume.

 

If Illinois comes out of that stretch later in the year with 5 or fewer total losses and makes it to the Big Ten tourney final, then that's another story. But as of right now they haven't done a whole lot to impress me.

1) He seems to overrate mid-majors. Gonzaga and St. Joes are the only non-power conference teams I can remember seeing above the 7-10 range, which seems to be where a lot of the tougher ones end up. The committee doesn't seem to give the teams a high seed unless there is a considerable amount of hype around a team, even if they deserve it. I find it highly unlikely that UNI gets a #5 seed (I know the MVC is tough, it's just that mid-majors usually seem to get the shaft, even Gonzaga before last year). GW might suffer this fate too, although the A-10 seems to get a little more respect and their #6 seed makes some sense.

 

 

Creighton was a 6 a few years back, siu was a 7 last year. UNI will be atleast a 5 imo considering the previous teams I mentioned who are in the same conference and when you realize that the mvc isn't a normal mid major this year, I believe the big 12 past it up now but still above the pac 10 in rpi. UNI's rpi is 14 as of right now, they'll be a top seed.

Let me clarify.  Based on the current state of the NCAA, I can see putting Gonzaga at #5 and GW at #10, and they are both nice teams.  But ANY other year, neither of these teams sniff the top 10.  GW in their one true test this year was BLOWN AWAY by NC State, and Gonzaga, although good, isn't a top 10 team either (they play NO defense).

 

EDIT: As I look, I give GW some props, as they won a close one at home vs. Maryland and another at Temple, 2 nice wins.  But I just can't buy them as a top 10 team, maybe it's just the fact it's freaking GW.

 

Gonzaga has been in the top 10 regularly a couple of times in the past 5 years or so. Yes they lack defense but they're very explosive and have one of the best offenses in the country. I never said anything about George Washington, maybe any other year it'd be like that, but Gonzaga is here to stay.

Creighton was a 6 a few years back, siu was a 7 last year.  UNI will be atleast a 5 imo considering the previous teams I mentioned who are in the same conference and when you realize that the mvc isn't a normal mid major this year, I believe the big 12 past it up now but still above the pac 10 in rpi.  UNI's rpi is 14 as of right now, they'll be a top seed.

 

Forgot about Creighton. Let me rephrase it a bit: when was the last time that a mid-major with more than 3 losses got a 6 seed or better (yes, I'm assuming that UNI loses at least one more)? I'm pretty sure that all of the higher-seeded mid-majors that we mentioned finished with ridiculous records and finished with 1 or fewer loses in conference. Again, I know the MVC is much stronger than your typical mid-major, I just don't think they'll get quite that much credit, since mid-majors have gotten the screw-job in the past. I get the feeling about the best they'll get is a #6 seed against another fairly good mid-major like Western Kentucky or San Diego State. I'm pretty sure that he had Old Dominion and Nevada floating around in the same type of spot last year, and things didn't end so well for them.

Edited January 30, 200620 yr by ZoomSlowik

Forgot about Creighton. Let me rephrase it a bit: when was the last time that a mid-major with more than 3 losses got a 6 seed or better (yes, I'm assuming that UNI loses at least one more)? I'm pretty sure that all of the higher-seeded mid-majors that we mentioned finished with ridiculous records and finished with 1 or fewer loses in conference. Again, I know the MVC is much stronger than your typical mid-major, I just don't think they'll get quite that much credit, since mid-majors have gotten the screw-job in the past. I get the feeling about the best they'll get is a #6 seed against another fairly good mid-major like Western Kentucky or San Diego State.

UNI should definitely lose another game or two in conference considering they play at creighton tomorrow and come to carbondale the last game of the season. I understand what you're saying zoom about how mid majors have got the shaft before, the difference is imo that uni is a top 15 rpi team right now. The mid majors have been shafted before because their rpi sucks and they had no good wins. UNI has wins against Iowa, and at LSU not to mention the conference wins at Wichita State and against SIU. That's 4 wins against the rpi 25 right there, they got a pretty damn good resume despite the mid major status.

UNI should definitely lose another game or two in conference considering they play at creighton tomorrow and come to carbondale the last game of the season.  I understand what you're saying zoom about how mid majors have got the shaft before, the difference is imo that uni is a top 15 rpi team right now.  The mid majors have been shafted before because their rpi sucks and they had no good wins.  UNI has wins against Iowa, and at LSU not to mention the conference wins at Wichita State and against SIU.  That's 4 wins against the rpi 25 right there, they got a pretty damn good resume despite the mid major status.

 

Maybe so, but this isn't the first time that a mid-major has had a solid resume. I think they're going to need at least one more solid win and a decent showing in the tourney (two solid wins if they tank in the tourney). Beating Bucknell in the bracket busters would go a long way.

 

Maybe the UNI situation was a bad example, but my point was that Lunardi seems to think that a lot of these smaller conference teams are going to get good seeds when in reality a seed higher than 7 is pretty rare. I also get the feeling that one of the MVC teams will get the shaft, but that's another story.

 

On a similar topic, does anyone know what Nate Funk's status is for Creighton? He hasn't played in a while, and I have a hard time getting college basketball injury info outside of the original press release.

Edited January 30, 200620 yr by ZoomSlowik

3 of the top 10 teams in the nation don't have wins against a top 25 RPI team. Including Florida, Villanova, and George Washington, with Boston College at #14 knocking on the door. GW played the schedule they were dealt, and have played it very well with 3 wins over RPI 26-50 teams. Granted, #10 is too high in my opinion, I would put them closer to 15-20 range for most of the season. They play at Xavier on February 2nd, that will be a good barometer.

Gonzaga has been in the top 10 regularly a couple of times in the past 5 years or so. Yes they lack defense but they're very explosive and have one of the best offenses in the country. I never said anything about George Washington, maybe any other year it'd be like that, but Gonzaga is here to stay.

 

They are in the top 10 because the media and coaches love affair for them that goes back to when they first busted out onto the scene as a "mid major" in the late 90's. Gonzaga's play in the tournament, however, has shown their true colors.

The Kansas transfer Downs is going back to the NW. He's transferring to Gonzaga.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2309832

On a similar topic, does anyone know what Nate Funk's status is for Creighton? He hasn't played in a while, and I have a hard time getting college basketball injury info outside of the original press release.

He's out for the season.

Texas Tech has an impressive resume...for the NIT

 

11-10

RPI: 136

0-3 vs. RPI top 50

2-7 vs. RPI top 100

Yeah give GW some props for their top 250 schedule (240).

 

They have zero wins against the RPI top 25. Sounds like a top team to me.

Speaking of GW, here's a good article about a possible GW-Georgetown showdown on CBS Sportsline. http://www.sportsline.com/spin/story/9195138/1

 

I'd kill for a GW-G'Town match-up this year. G'Town's got those four losses, but our conference is a FAR cry from the A-10.

 

Look for G'Town to roll again DePaul tomorrow night and pull off another upset at the MCI Center against Pitt on Sunday.

 

Hoyas, baby.

Texas Tech has an impressive resume...for the NIT

 

11-10

RPI: 136

0-3 vs. RPI top 50

2-7 vs. RPI top 100

 

I wouldn't even count on the NIT. TTU has been horrendous this year trying to break in 7 freshmen. Next year they should challenge for the Big 12, but this year, just yuck.

Edited January 31, 200620 yr by Palehosefan

I wouldn't even count on the NIT. TTU has been horrendous this year trying to break in 7 freshmen. Next year they should challenge for the Big 12, but this year, just yuck.

I thought Jackson and Zeno alone would atleast be enough to be decent this year but yeesh...they've been horrendous.

Kansas is looking damn good, we are now back to the running syle and these kids could really carry us.

Kansas is looking damn good, we are now back to the running syle and these kids could really carry us.

 

 

Too bad Mr. Rush will be gone next year.

I don't know about that. Something tells me he stays 2. Don't be bitter now Cyclone.