Nice being a protected seed...

[Geode]

Really not a complicated issue. And this has zero to do with SU. Why does anybody, but particularly low seeds, need to play in arenas 50 miles from their campus? Never gotten a good answer to that question but I guess that's because there isn't one.

Agree, that is a good question.

 

[jncuse]

That makes zero phuking sense.

Sure it does.

5, 6, 7, 8 seeds are not protected in first round. Commitee places 5,6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 12 teams as close to home as possible while adhering to bracketing rules and keeping teams within one line of s-curve (conference teams cannot meet until E8, top 3 from each conference in different region). Bracketing rules make it difficult to place many 5-12 teams close to home.

If Cal had been a 13 seed it would not be in San Jose, because Syracuse is protected from such a matcup in first round. UNLV as a 5 seed is not.

 

[bpo57]

Cal definetely deserved a 12 seed. Could have easily been a play in team.

Overall, committee seeded teams fairly on top 12 lines with 3 exceptions IMO.

Marquette as a 3
Pitt as 8
Ore Ducks as 12.

13/14 lines were a little off as well.

I can easily add a few more just off the top of my head. Ole Miss, who you thought shouldn't be in the tournament, finished on a big roll at the end of the season, had a decent record and won the SEC tourney by beating Florida. They were playing much better than a 12 seed at the time of selection.

No way on earth Gtown should have been seeded ahead of Michigan State. Sparty would wax them. The Hoyas play in a much weaker league (played a weak OOC as usual) and that's where the Committee falls short is that they are unable or unwilling to draw distinctions between leagues.

The respect given to the MWC was overdone, particularly UNM. All of those teams had goofy RPIs not based on any sort of reality. UNM beat other highly rpi ranked MWC teams. Whoopty damn do.

I already told you Minnesota was a screw-up at 11. That league easily has 6 or 7 of the top 30 teams in the country. That's been obvious all year long. Too bad the Committee couldn't figure that out.

 

[NineOneSeven]

I have friends living in Tahoe who are making the trip to the game. There will be at least five cuse fans cheering their heads off!

 

[bpo57]

Sure it does.

5, 6, 7, 8 seeds are not protected in first round. Commitee places 5,6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 12 teams as close to home as possible while adhering to bracketing rules and keeping teams within one line of s-curve (conference teams cannot meet until E8, top 3 from each conference in different region). Bracketing rules make it difficult to place many 5-12 teams close to home.

If Cal had been a 13 seed it would not be in San Jose, because Syracuse is protected from such a matcup in first round. UNLV as a 5 seed is not.

So you think it's unfair for a 4 seed to play a first round game in a much lower seed's nearby arena but it's fine and dandy for that 4 seed to play a game two nights later against that same low seed in that nearby arena. :crazy:

 

[Chris02M]

I hate the notion of anybody getting a very obvious home court advantage but when I said that a week ago I was told not to worry about it. Only happens to lower seeded teams and not "protected seeds". It's a reward for having a great season, blah, blah. Now we're playing a 12 seed 50 miles from their campus. Lovely.

PS I think we'll win anyway so not looking for excuses. It's the principle involved.

the ncaa doesnt protect seeds after the round of 64 after that the ncaa doesnt worry about because there are more important things to avoid like matching up conference teams

 

[bpo57]

the ncaa doesnt protect seeds after the round of 32 after that the ncaa doesnt worry about because there are more important things to avoid like matching up conference teams

Yeah we know what their philosophy is- I'm just saying it's stupid. Why say it's ok for a 5 to play a low seed in a nearby arena but not a 4? Why is it ok for the 4 to play the 12 in their backyard but not the 13? The thing is it all could be very easily avoided.

 

[OrangeDW]

We were, but Oklahoma was still the higher seed. If, say, Kansas were to end up playing Florida in Miami I'm sure it would come up as well.

I've always felt like Albany evened things out for being underseeded as a 3. We were 23-4(13-3) going into the tournament. How is a 23-4 regular season big East champion a 3 seed?

 

[jncuse]

So you think it's unfair for a 4 seed to play a first round game in a much lower seed's nearby arena but it's fine and dandy for that 4 seed to play a game two nights later against that same low seed in that nearby arena. :crazy:

Once again you cannot read, say I stated someting I did not, and attack it. I merely stated NCAA policy.

From post #44 in this exact tread no less... I stated.

Syracuse playing Cal today is fully within guidelines of NCAA. Fair from that perspective.

Of course one could make a valid claim that a rule needs to be adjusted for reasons of fairness.

 

[bpo57]

Once again you cannot read, say I stated someting I did not, and attack it. I merely stated NCAA policy.

From post #44 in this exact tread no less... I stated.

I'm afraid you're the one with the reading comprehension problem. I know what the guidelines are. I am saying it is indefensible and makes no sense. You say "sure it makes sense" in post # 52. You tried to defend it. I say it's stupid and explained why. respond to that if you don't agree.

 

[kirbivore]

Two in Albany and two in Buffalo.

the two in Buffalo are when SU was a #1 seed. How many times have Duke/UNC opened in North Carolina as #1 seeds?

 

[MiniCuse]

Is 99% of the time a choice?