NCAA MBB selections and game matchups.
- Thread starter ozzyrulz
- Start date
I feel really bad for Rutgers. They should be in ahead of several teams, including NC State, Pitt, Arizona State, and Nevada. Wow.
Xavier seems a little high as a #3, although I'm a Jack Nunge fan, and Indiana might be a bit high as a #4.
Houston a higher #1 seed than Kansas is totally inexplicable based on objective criteria, although I strongly dislike Kansas.
If Iowa could somehow get by Auburn, a huge if, of course, Houston is the best #1 for the Hawkeyes to face, IMHO, so that's a good thing . . . maybe.
BTW: Loved Clark Kellogg's reference to the "TCU Frog Horns."
And the panel had good things to say about both Iowa and Drake while ignoring ISU, so that was a pretty big surprise.
Xavier seems a little high as a #3, although I'm a Jack Nunge fan, and Indiana might be a bit high as a #4.
Houston a higher #1 seed than Kansas is totally inexplicable based on objective criteria, although I strongly dislike Kansas.
If Iowa could somehow get by Auburn, a huge if, of course, Houston is the best #1 for the Hawkeyes to face, IMHO, so that's a good thing . . . maybe.
BTW: Loved Clark Kellogg's reference to the "TCU Frog Horns."
And the panel had good things to say about both Iowa and Drake while ignoring ISU, so that was a pretty big surprise.I don't understand how the committee awards a 9 seed in Auburn what is essentially a home game. Also worried when the talking heads keep saying that Iowa should have the edge because Auburn struggles to score at times.
Nevada being in the play in round over many teams far more deserving is a joke.
Nevada being in the play in round over many teams far more deserving is a joke.
Interesting point. If Auburn, a 9 seed, gets to play 2 hours from its campus, an objective observer might ask why Iowa, an 8 seed, doesn't get to play in Des Moines, about 2 hours from the Iowa campus. I can't remember the last time Iowa was given any kind of edge in the NCAA tournament. I would guess "never" would be the case.
But the committee is not biased. It has no agenda. It is wholly objective and fair. All sites are neutral. And hundred dollar bills grow on trees.
The women deserved a #1 seed. The men, as an 8 seed, deserved better than playing Auburn in Birmingham. Pretty simple. And as I posted above, the committee blew it big time on the last teams in and the teams that were left out. And as I said in an earlier post, the committee does whatever the hell it wants, spins the facts to suit its predetermined outcomes, and the rest of us are left to live with it.
Sure, there is no perfect way to handle this. Sure, the committee has a tough job. But the issues pointed out on this board, in the press, and on other sites makes it clear that, once again, tough job or not, the results of this committee's work are bogus. It could have and should have done much better. It's a most unfortunate way to begin tourney play. As for both the Hawkeye men and women, the only thing they can do is rise above it and win.
This was my thought as well. Seems that we are always on the wrong side of those things. It would basically be like Iowa playing in DSM.
Iowa playing in DSM and there would have been a lot of cry. The only thing that could have been worse would be isu in DSM.
Every year this tournament gets more and more stale. They need new sponsors, better matchups, new announcers, smarter selection committees, and even some different commercials. How long do we have to watch the AT&T chick who has been passed around in Hollywood more than a joint at a slowpitch softball tourney? I miss the cola wars of the 80s. These insurance company wars make me wanna puke. I could do without the Charles, Spike, Samuel, Nance commercials as well.
This used to be my favorite time of the year. Now I could care less. And the Hawks still can't defend.
This used to be my favorite time of the year. Now I could care less. And the Hawks still can't defend.