They beat a #1 and #4 and a #2 seed. Pretty good resume for your "all time greatest 8 seed".

 

1985 Villanova wants a shot at that title as well.

 

1985 Villanova and 2011 Butler were teams that actually had the talent of #8 seeds but got hot at the right time and had some favorable matchups.

 

The 2014 Kentucky team has the talent of a #1 or #2 seed but underachieved all season.

 

 

Nate Silver has found that preseason rankings a surprisingly good indicator of tournament success.

 

The 2011 Butler team isn't nearly as good as the 2014 Kentucky team. That 2011 team didn't have Heyward.

 

Wichita State was ranked 16 in pre-season.

 

So does that mean they were overrated as a #1?

 

Either way, you need to beat good teams to win a championship. Correct me if Im wrong, but Wichita State never beat a top 25 rpi team.

Wichita State was ranked 16 in pre-season.

 

So does that mean they were overrated as a #1?

 

Either way, you need to beat good teams to win a championship. Correct me if Im wrong, but Wichita State never beat a top 25 rpi team.

 

Preseason rankings are A factor in tournament success, but not the only one. Seeds are earned based on performance and not on talent (which may be a flaw in the seeding system).

 

The problem with ranking a team like WSU in either preseason, or at any point during, is that they were never really challenged because Top 25 teams are too chicken to play them.

 

The advanced metrics like Pomeroy and BPI did have them as a Top 5 team despite their schedule.

 

We will never know, but I strongly believe WSU would have handled any other team in the tournament seeded 5-8, and probably half of those seeded 1-4.

Preseason rankings are A factor in tournament success, but not the only one. Seeds are earned based on performance and not on talent (which may be a flaw in the seeding system).

 

The problem with ranking a team like WSU in either preseason, or at any point during, is that they were never really challenged because Top 25 teams are too chicken to play them.

 

The advanced metrics like Pomeroy and BPI did have them as a Top 5 team despite their schedule.

 

We will never know, but I strongly believe WSU would have handled any other team in the tournament seeded 5-8, and probably half of those seeded 1-4.

Other than Kansas who else was offered a home and home with them?

 

And although they MAY have beaten other teams we will never know, so its all theories which mean little to nothing at this point. Duke could have made a run too, but they didnt.

Even if you only watched one WSU game this year and it was yesterday, your eyes should tell you that it is a very good basketball team.

 

We're talking about a one possession game here. If they lost by 15 points, I'd be more apt to listen to the overrated crap. If that shot goes in, or any other shot goes in/doesn't go in, is the narrative changed that dramatically? It doesn't really change how good the basketball team is, it just means they got the shorter end of the stick in that particular game.

 

Does your narrative change based on what Kentucky does now? Or if they lose to Louisville, what Louisville does?

Even if you only watched one WSU game this year and it was yesterday, your eyes should tell you that it is a very good basketball team.

 

We're talking about a one possession game here. If they lost by 15 points, I'd be more apt to listen to the overrated crap. If that shot goes in, or any other shot goes in/doesn't go in, is the narrative changed that dramatically? It doesn't really change how good the basketball team is, it just means they got the shorter end of the stick in that particular game.

 

Does your narrative change based on what Kentucky does now? Or if they lose to Louisville, what Louisville does?

 

When a team with the talent that Kentucky has, plays the kind of game they played, there is no shame in closing to them, no matter who you are.

I partially agree with Rock and that's why them losing pissed me off so much yesterday. They're going to be remembered as overrated by people who never saw them play during the course of the regular season, trust me I'm already dealing with this crap. Unfortunately they ran into a team with the most NBA talent who happened to play their best game of the season. And yes, the Valley was way down this year but it's not like they ran through the SWAC. They absolutely destroyed the 11th rated conference winning almost every game by double digits. They also had the 28th best out of conference schedule so they were tested, just didn't have a real heavy weight on their schedule. Looking at any single game isn't overly impressive but as a whole it's pretty insane what they were able to accomplish.

 

Im obviously a tad biased but there's no doubt in my mind they were one of the top teams in the country. Whether it's the eye test or looking at stats they pass with flying colors, unfortunately for them yesterday was a bad day to run into Kentucky.

So I have to admit, I only saw a few minutes here and there of Kentucky during the regular season, and saw basically none of Wichita State (aside from highlights).

 

But I watched the full Kentucky vs Wichita State game. My impressions of Kentucky is that they have a lot of talent, though not as much maybe as they are hyped to have. They have a ton of size and athelticism. They also play very lazy, and are either poorly coached and/or very uncoachable. Possibly just a lot of not-very-bright guys. Wichita State, to me, looked exactly like a team with enough athleticism, skills and novel game play to beat any medicore team and most good teams, but not enough size or talent to beat elite squads. And for that matter, I didn't think Wichita State looked very well-coached either.

 

Kentucky looked like a team nearly impossible to seed, ranging from a 2 or 3 seed down to a play-in seed, depending on what they felt like doing that day. Wichita State looked like a 5 seed to me, in this tournament.

 

Just my impressions.

 

What seed was Kansas the year they beat OU in the national championship behind Danny Manning?

 

I think that KU team lost twice, if not three times, to OU in the regular season and B8 tourney.

 

 

Or NC State in 1983?

Edited March 24, 201412 yr by caulfield12

So I have to admit, I only saw a few minutes here and there of Kentucky during the regular season, and saw basically none of Wichita State (aside from highlights).

 

But I watched the full Kentucky vs Wichita State game. My impressions of Kentucky is that they have a lot of talent, though not as much maybe as they are hyped to have. They have a ton of size and athelticism. They also play very lazy, and are either poorly coached and/or very uncoachable. Possibly just a lot of not-very-bright guys. Wichita State, to me, looked exactly like a team with enough athleticism, skills and novel game play to beat any medicore team and most good teams, but not enough size or talent to beat elite squads. And for that matter, I didn't think Wichita State looked very well-coached either.

 

Kentucky looked like a team nearly impossible to seed, ranging from a 2 or 3 seed down to a play-in seed, depending on what they felt like doing that day. Wichita State looked like a 5 seed to me, in this tournament.

 

Just my impressions.

 

Do you watch a lot of basketball? To me that was one of the top 2-3 games of the entire season in terms of quality of play from both teams for 40 minutes. College bball always has some ugly shots/turnovers, but that's to be expected since they're not professional level players, and those that are still haven't mastered the game.

 

 

Do you watch a lot of basketball? To me that was one of the top 2-3 games of the entire season in terms of quality of play from both teams for 40 minutes. College bball always has some ugly shots/turnovers, but that's to be expected since they're not professional level players, and those that are still haven't mastered the game.

There was a time I watched a ton. Last few years? Just a little. As I said, being honest, I hadn't watched much of either team. But I've been watching this tournament a lot, more than the last few years, and neither of those teams looked to me like a squad worthy of their hype. That's compared to other teams I watched.

 

I do think coaching and approach are amplified in their importance in the tourney.

 

When Wichita State lost, did everybody see how the 1976 IU team all got together and celebrated with champagne?

 

Oh wait, they didn't do that, because they aren't all douches.

Michigan is going to lose tonight. I say this based only on the fact that they're -2.5 and it looks like a gift from God. Vegas knows something that we don't to have an 11 seed only +2.5 against a 2 seed. Dayton is +10.5 against Florida, for example.

Michigan is going to lose tonight. I say this based only on the fact that they're -2.5 and it looks like a gift from God. Vegas knows something that we don't to have an 11 seed only +2.5 against a 2 seed. Dayton is +10.5 against Florida, for example.

 

Tennessee is statistically a better team than Michigan. Dayton is by far and away the worst team left in the tournament.

Tennessee is statistically a better team than Michigan. Dayton is by far and away the worst team left in the tournament.

Tennessee hasn't beaten a ranked team all year. They might be statistically better than Michigan, but I would bet they've played an easier schedule too.

 

Agreed on the Dayton part.

 

E: It looks like they beat UVA when they were unranked, so there's that.

Edited March 28, 201411 yr by Boogua

Jerks

Jerks

Haha, thoughts on the game?

 

I do think Michigan is going to win, but the line is just weird. I get scared when I see things like that.

I assume Wite is going straight off Kenpom for those numbers and he adjusts based on opponent.

 

I love Kenpom's site but there's a few teams that his formula seems to always be off for and Michigan is one of them.

Haha, thoughts on the game?

 

I do think Michigan is going to win, but the line is just weird. I get scared when I see things like that.

 

I'd like to think Michigan ends up winning by 10 but anyone can beat anyone right now so it's natural to be worried.

 

Tennessee isn't turning the ball over and Michigan is not very good defensively, so that could be a big problem.

I'd like to think Michigan ends up winning by 10 but anyone can beat anyone right now so it's natural to be worried.

 

Tennessee isn't turning the ball over and Michigan is not very good defensively, so that could be a big problem.

If Michigan doesnt go ice cold they will win. They are very dependent on their long range shots falling, as long as they do, they wont get beat.

Big wreck on I-65 North about 12 miles north of Louisville. Lots of UL/UK fans likely to miss tipoff.

Edited March 28, 201411 yr by HickoryHuskers

Big wreck on I-65 North about 12 miles north of Louisville. Lots of UL/UK fans likely to miss tipoff.

 

Can tell with small crowd now.

 

Horford is such a liability.

Apparently, the NCAA is very upset with Indy. They sent the four most obnoxious fan bases all to their regional.

Apparently, the NCAA is very upset with Indy. They sent the four most obnoxious fan bases all to their regional.

 

Notre Dame football fans in the house?

Notre Dame football fans in the house?

 

Not even close.