I know we say this every year, but really Duke has to play 1 team (probably Gonzaga) to get a chance to go to the final 4. They seem to get the easiest bracket year after year. How does that happen?
Duke's bracket....
- Thread starter maysvilleky
- Start date
Stop the whining. Utah is a Top 10 KenPom team and Gonzaga is legit- better than many of the people here give them credit for. Both are tough games.
Once again I ask- what is it about Duke that turns normally intelligent UK fans into whiny, obsessive, paranoid Louisville fans?
Once again I ask- what is it about Duke that turns normally intelligent UK fans into whiny, obsessive, paranoid Louisville fans?
The perks that come from being the overall #1 seed in the tourney no matter where you're ranked at the end of the year.
In the sweet 16, Duke has to face a team with a higher rating on KenPom than anyone Kentucky has left in their region, and ANY team left in the East region.
And Gonzaga is a MUCH stronger 2 than Kentucky had. I mean, Kansas may have been the worst 2 seed in the last decade. Has there EVER been a 2 seed that lost by 40 to the 1 seed in their bracket?
So yeah... I know people tend not to credit teams who are not traditional "names" in basketball, and I know you guys hate Duke, but let's not get too crazy.
Oh, and because people get all upset over 2010...in the 2010 tournament Duke faced 5 of the top 20 teams in the country per Kenpom in their run to the title. 5 of the top 20. By the time Kenpom figured in the tournament, Duke faced 3 of the top 10. That is lunacy, given how seeding is supposed to work, especially when you consider two of those happened on effectively home courts for those teams. The last four teams Duke faced averaged over 30 wins for the season. Yes, Kentucky lost so we didn't get to play, but we beat the team that beat you, so they can't have been that bad.
And Gonzaga is a MUCH stronger 2 than Kentucky had. I mean, Kansas may have been the worst 2 seed in the last decade. Has there EVER been a 2 seed that lost by 40 to the 1 seed in their bracket?
So yeah... I know people tend not to credit teams who are not traditional "names" in basketball, and I know you guys hate Duke, but let's not get too crazy.
Oh, and because people get all upset over 2010...in the 2010 tournament Duke faced 5 of the top 20 teams in the country per Kenpom in their run to the title. 5 of the top 20. By the time Kenpom figured in the tournament, Duke faced 3 of the top 10. That is lunacy, given how seeding is supposed to work, especially when you consider two of those happened on effectively home courts for those teams. The last four teams Duke faced averaged over 30 wins for the season. Yes, Kentucky lost so we didn't get to play, but we beat the team that beat you, so they can't have been that bad.
Utah is a great match up toughness wise for Duke. The game will be a struggle, and even is they should happen to win it won't be a twenty point cakewalk like the first two were. They will be beat up if they get past the Utes on Friday and have to play a good Gonzaga team on Sunday.
Umm, UK has the possibility of playing one "legit" team as well, and that team is a lower seed than Duke might potentially face. Honestly, the perk of being a one seed is that you don't have to face a top 12 team until the elite eight. Duke has so far played the exact same seed as UK - 16, 8, and 5, with the potential to play a 2 seed, where UK only has the potential to play a 3 seed. Quit acting like Duke doesn't play anyone. The ACC was light years better than the SEC this year. It really does come off as whiny bitching.
Having a run of Robert Morris, San Diego State, Utah, and Gonzaga is not exactly tough. Gonzaga has beaten NOBODY all season just like Villanova beat nobody. Gonzaga is Gonzaga and that hasn't changed. That is by far easier than having to play the ACC champions in the elite 8.
I don't think Duke is having to face any world-beaters, but considering we are 13.5 point favorites in our S16 game I don't think we really have much to complain about either.
Again... this feels like personal bias. Just look at Kenpom, which is purely stats based:
SDSU is 27th overall on Kenpom.
Utah is 8th.
Gonzaga is 7th.
That's pretty respectable. Notre Dame is ranked BELOW both of Utah and Gonzaga on Kenpom, and has lost to Syracuse, Pitt, and Providence this year, none of which are particularly elite teams, along with a 30 point loss to Duke and a loss to Virginia, who already got dumped from the tournament.
Add in the fact that Gonzaga has been a top 5 team all year, Utah has hovered in the mid-to-high teens all year... yes, they might not be "name" teams but they are good basketball teams.
I am on the side of the argument that our path is just as easy or easier, but any metrics pumping up San Diego State can GTFO. Those guys are/were horrible. Also, I think Utah's kenpom rating looks good on paper, but will be exposed on the court.
Just face it, the dukies got it easy (as usual), but UK fans have no room to whine about it this year with the draw we got.
Just face it, the dukies got it easy (as usual), but UK fans have no room to whine about it this year with the draw we got.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this year. 2010? Not.
The South was a sick, sad joke in 2010, because that appears to be the 1st of 5 straight years (it seems to have mostly ended this year) when the selection committee got completely idiotic about the "geography is a high priority" concept. First of all, Duke had no business whatsoever being rated as the #3 overall team over Syracuse, meaning that, even with geography trumping logic, they should have gone West, not to Houston. Second, your "5 top 20" Pomeroy teams included Cal, a team that had 0 wins over ranked teams that year (but did have a 22 point loss to Syracuse and a 15 point loss to Kansas) and Purdue, which was playing without Robbie Hummel, and entered the tournament coming off a 27 point loss to Minnesota in the B10 tourney (after beating them at Minnesota 2 weeks earlier with Hummel). Villanova as a 2 seed had lost 5 of 7. And Baylor was Baylor, a team that didn't really challenge in the perpetually overrated Big 12 (11-5), lost to KState in the B12 conference semis, and played a 14, 11 (2 games in which they struggled) and a 10 seed to get to the Elite 8 that year.
I don't buy the "Duke always gets an easy path" argument, but don't try to deny that you completely lucked out in 2010. Because you did. And if Gonzaga blows it against UCLA, and you beat Utah to play them in the Elite 8, the same will be true this year, although I think that will have more to do with randomness than a crappily constructed gift of a region (like 2010).
FWIW, the remaining seed # totals for each region are as follows:
West: 13
Midwest: 16
South: 19
East: 22
Granted, UCLA skews the South a bit as an 11 seed.
But this shows the West toughest, East easiest at least by this metric.
Of course this assumes that the Selection Committee did a good job with seeding. That's a whole 'nother debate.
West: 13
Midwest: 16
South: 19
East: 22
Granted, UCLA skews the South a bit as an 11 seed.
But this shows the West toughest, East easiest at least by this metric.
Of course this assumes that the Selection Committee did a good job with seeding. That's a whole 'nother debate.
Arizona should have been the 1 on Duke's side and play UK in the championship. The committee "needed" to make that UK v Duke championship game though. Duke should be playing Wisconsin in the E8 IMO. Other one seeds should have been Virginia and Nova. Virginia got screwed due to duke love
Arizona absolutely did not deserve that. Why would they?
Anyway OP, you would have been saying the same thing about Duke in 2002, 2006 & 2011. Despite their 'easy' brackets those years they lost early in the Sweet 16. 2015 could be a lot like those years.
So stop whining about it.
Anyway OP, you would have been saying the same thing about Duke in 2002, 2006 & 2011. Despite their 'easy' brackets those years they lost early in the Sweet 16. 2015 could be a lot like those years.
So stop whining about it.
You missed some. Add 2000 and 2005 to that list. 5 losses as the 1 seed in the Sweet 16 in 15 years.
By comparison, UK is 14-3 in the Sweet 16 as the higher seed since seeding started, and 16-5 overall. The only upset losses UK has had were in 1980, 1988, and 2001. The Elite 8 has been another story, but UK has dominated the Sweet 16.
First, UAB over Iowa State was the biggest upset of the tournament. This weakened Duke's region, clearly.
Second, people are worried about West Virginia but call Utah a cake walk?
Third, UK's #2 (Kansas) seed was clearly the worst one, they showed it during the year with 11 losses, in their ***-beating by UK and in their round of 32 exit. For those saying they would rather be looking at Gonzaga after WVU instead of Notre Dame/Wichita State are crazy.
QUIT COMPLAINING.
Second, people are worried about West Virginia but call Utah a cake walk?
Third, UK's #2 (Kansas) seed was clearly the worst one, they showed it during the year with 11 losses, in their ***-beating by UK and in their round of 32 exit. For those saying they would rather be looking at Gonzaga after WVU instead of Notre Dame/Wichita State are crazy.
QUIT COMPLAINING.
A good take,KU played both Utah and WVa, all 3 games were closeso you could make the case that WVa and Utah are similar in terms of which is the best team.There seems to be a lot of bias against the Zags here but they are a pretty good team,if they can play enough defense in a match up with Duke it will be a good game.I think the Zags give Duke some problems on the offensive end.
UCLA is probably the most improved team(since e played them) left in the tourney.I rthink people get to caught up in Kenpom ratings and other rating systems,at this point it is all about how you match up with the team you are playing and who is on a roll at the time(emotion plays a big part in games this time of year.
I stopped my Gonzaga bashing once they manhandled Iowa (who I thought was a decent team).
Now, I do still think they would have way too many issues to overcome to keep it close if they got to the title game against UK. Their bigs and Wiltjer couldn't guard any of our guys. And put WCS on Kyle and he wouldn't be able to do a thing.
Believe me, I'm not sold on Utah or Gonzaga beating Duke, despite what I want to happen. However, to cry conspiracy over it is a joke. Heck, if UK makes the Final Four beating an 8, 5 and 7 seed, you could make the same argument. We all know it isn't easy regardless, as the opponent who you're playing as you advance is there for a reason.
Interesting that UL could end up beating a 5, 8 and 7 (if they face MSU) as well...
Interesting that UL could end up beating a 5, 8 and 7 (if they face MSU) as well...
Forget about a loss by 2 points in December. On selection sunday, these are the 4 best teams in the nation:
1.) Kentucky
2.) Arizona
3.) Wisconsin
4.) Virginia, Villanova, Duke
To put Kentucky, Arizona, and Wisconsin all on the same side of the bracket was not fair to the overall #1 seed.
Based on what? Wisconsin and Duke played, and Duke won with relative ease, at Wisconsin. Duke also beat Virginia the only time they played. At Virginia.
It was nearly impossible to separate Villanova, Duke, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Arizona, and I think they did a good job with it. They rewarded Duke for winning head-to-head (especially since those were road games), but they tried to minimize the potential screw job for everyone. Virginia wanted to argue that they were a 1? Maybe they should have been, but they got to travel less, and avoided UK as a 1 seed. Arizona? They got to stay close to home. Wisconsin and Duke could theoretically complain about distance, but they got the 1 seeds. And maybe the selection committee shouldn't have fallen for Villanova, but Villanova did everything right, and it was hard to drop them without any real evidence that they were vulnerable.
They did a far better job this year than they have this entire decade. That may end up working in Duke's favor, but that's not something that was predictable when the tournament started (unlike 2010).
What 2 point December loss are you referring to? Arizona has losses to teams that finished with a combined record of 52-44
Was going to comment on Duke 2010, but MJ2K10 beat me to it.
I think Duke's bracket is tough enough, but I don't appreciate a Duke fan jumping in trying to rewrite history. Especially a Duke fan who has admitted he doesn't watch many games.
Also seems kind of weird for a Duke fan to be downplaying the strength of ND. Not that I'm scared of ND, but the fact that they beat Duke twice head to head should count for something. I could just as easily argue that Duke isn't very tough because they were trounced at home by a weak Miami team. That would be silly, right?
I think Duke's bracket is tough enough, but I don't appreciate a Duke fan jumping in trying to rewrite history. Especially a Duke fan who has admitted he doesn't watch many games.
Also seems kind of weird for a Duke fan to be downplaying the strength of ND. Not that I'm scared of ND, but the fact that they beat Duke twice head to head should count for something. I could just as easily argue that Duke isn't very tough because they were trounced at home by a weak Miami team. That would be silly, right?
We had to have this thread today. We have it everyday even if it not true. Just like we have to have an announcer thread everyday.
Is complaining about the brackets still a thing? That's too bad.
For months this board was cluttered with the mere thought that Wisconsin MIGHT be our #2 seed. Not only did that not happen, but UK was given the weakest possible 2 seed. So week in fact that they couldn't even beat a Wichita State team that has no interior players.
So now we are complaining that Duke might have an easier path? I don't believe that is true, by the way, Utah is very good..... much better than West Virginia.
I think some people need to come to grips with the fact that there are other good teams left in the tournament. We don't need anyone else to do our heavy lifting for us. If we have to play Wisconsin/Arizona and then Duke to win the title. Then we should gladly accept that path.
For months this board was cluttered with the mere thought that Wisconsin MIGHT be our #2 seed. Not only did that not happen, but UK was given the weakest possible 2 seed. So week in fact that they couldn't even beat a Wichita State team that has no interior players.
So now we are complaining that Duke might have an easier path? I don't believe that is true, by the way, Utah is very good..... much better than West Virginia.
I think some people need to come to grips with the fact that there are other good teams left in the tournament. We don't need anyone else to do our heavy lifting for us. If we have to play Wisconsin/Arizona and then Duke to win the title. Then we should gladly accept that path.
I listen to national sports talk radio on XM satellite, mostly MadDog and the college sports channel 91, it's not just UK fans that think Duke got it easy. Both talking heads and callers have been saying so since the brackets were announced. Not sure why some can't just admit it.
Think about it
Who, for Duke, would guard Wiltjer if they meet?? He'd have a field day from 3.
Gonzaga is a terrible match up for Duke. The Zags have serviceable big men to put on Okafor.
Zags would win this game.
I'm not sure Duke makes it past Utah.
Who, for Duke, would guard Wiltjer if they meet?? He'd have a field day from 3.
Gonzaga is a terrible match up for Duke. The Zags have serviceable big men to put on Okafor.
Zags would win this game.
I'm not sure Duke makes it past Utah.
Flip side, they beat every team they should have. Bad losses = let down, no effort games. They schooled Utah on their own home court where Utah didn't lose all season and ran teams out of the gym.
Bottom Line, on Selection Sunday:
1.) Kentucky
2.) Arizona
3.) Wisconsin
4.) Everyone Else.
KY, AZ, WI = 3 best teams on the same bracket.
Duke = fantastic offense, awful defense, they will struggle with the top 3 teams. They lost their tournament, they didn't win their conference, and lost to Miami at home. #1 seed? Duke had horrible losses too. LOL
How it should have been seeded:
AZ - #1 in West
WI - #1 in South
Duke = #2 in West
Virginia, Villanova = other #1s
I also think UK got the weakest 2 seed. I never believed all the Big 12 hype, and still can't believe KU got a 2 seed with 8 losses. 5 of the 7 Big 12 teams didn't last the first weekend, and the other 2 are likely going to lose before Saturday. I know KU had a very high SoS and RPI, but at some point how many games a team looses should matter.
But Arizona did? You can't have it both ways. You can't argue that Duke didn't deserve a 1 seed because of bad losses, then say that a team with more bad losses deserved a 1. And you can't just ignore that Duke had road wins against 2 of the teams we're talking about.
Actually, you can do all of that, but you can't try to sell that it's based on facts and logic. Because it's not.