collapse

* Stud of Colorado Game

Tyler Kolek

21 points, 5 rebounds,
11 assists, 1 steal,
40 minutes

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by Uncle Rico
[Today at 07:39:31 PM]


Where is Marquette? by WhiteTrash
[Today at 07:37:14 PM]


Dallas bars tonite by MarquetteVol
[Today at 07:30:33 PM]


2024 Transfer Portal by Goose
[Today at 07:05:04 PM]


Sweet 16 presser by Daniel
[Today at 07:04:13 PM]


10 years after “Done Deal” … It’s Happening! by Judge Smails
[Today at 07:02:27 PM]


2024 Coaching Carousel by the eagle
[Today at 06:05:16 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: NC State

Marquette
81
Marquette vs

NC State

Date/Time: Mar 29, 2024, 6:09 pm
TV: CBS
Schedule for 2023-24
Colorado
77

Author Topic: Hey, Tournament Committee...  (Read 9983 times)

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #25 on: March 25, 2017, 11:23:11 AM »
But now the SEC doing well doesn't validate their conference? It's utter BS to think the NCAA Tournament results change the perception of the conference?

To people that don't know the game? Sure. But that's for the "fans" that think the CBB season starts the first weekend in March. Nova's win last year was great for public perception. But it didn't make our conference better. The most significant results to determine conference superiority occur in November and December.

Big East wins make Marquette money, but it's just plain wrong-headed to act like the Tournament is some mandate on conference quality. Is the SEC decisively better than the Big 10 because of a miracle buzzer beater over a team 4 seed lines lower? Of course not, that's just ridiculous.

Again, you're better than that. It's a dumb theory that is only applied by people who think the CBB season is 4 weeks long.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #26 on: March 25, 2017, 11:27:00 AM »
And they've won as the favored seed 8 times. So two wins they weren't expected to get, or one less than Xavier has.

I'm not saying that proves anything about X, because it doesn't. But people overblow these results and use it to falsely claim a conference is superior.


If what you are saying is that extrapolating conference strength by NCAA tournament results is overrated, I agree with you.  The BE has proven through its regular seasons that it's a power conference.

However, the tournament does provide validation like it did for the BE last year.  And yeah while 8 of their wins are due to being a favored seed, they also avoided any losses as the favorite.  I believe they are the only Power 6 conferences to do that.

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9022
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #27 on: March 25, 2017, 11:34:00 AM »
Why use a one, two or three game sample when the same teams have 31-3x samples available?

Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

cheebs09

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4522
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #28 on: March 25, 2017, 11:36:48 AM »
I think it was more important early on to establish the Big East after realignment to prove it as a conference. Mainly a media thing and to show it's not some mid-major conference. I think we've gotten to the point now where March results aren't defining the conference as much. Nova last year and 7 teams this year helps.

ETA: the tournament credits are a big reason to be Pro-conference this time of year.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #29 on: March 25, 2017, 11:39:26 AM »
Why use a one, two or three game sample when the same teams have 31-3x samples available?

This exactly.

If one off results were the be-all, end-all, why weren't we a 1-seed after beating Villanova? Because the other 30 games mattered too.

The tournament is great fun, it's my favorite annual sporting event, but it's not the best way to determine or justify conference strength, nor is it even a particularly good way.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2017, 11:41:00 AM »
To people that don't know the game? Sure. But that's for the "fans" that think the CBB season starts the first weekend in March. Nova's win last year was great for public perception. But it didn't make our conference better. The most significant results to determine conference superiority occur in November and December.

Big East wins make Marquette money, but it's just plain wrong-headed to act like the Tournament is some mandate on conference quality. Is the SEC decisively better than the Big 10 because of a miracle buzzer beater over a team 4 seed lines lower? Of course not, that's just ridiculous.

Again, you're better than that. It's a dumb theory that is only applied by people who think the CBB season is 4 weeks long.

So when the 10th best team from the BE loses to the 2nd best ACC team in November when teams are still finding their identity and figuring out what they have we should put more value into that than when only the top teams are around to play each other in March and the 2nd best team in the SEC beats the 2nd best team in the B10?

Count me in as someone who thinks that's plain silly. If it's purely for public perception and it really doesn't matter what conferences do in March then why would people root for other BE teams to do well in the Tourney? Maybe guru is onto something here. I'd rather see Marquette be the best in the BE, so maybe we should all root for the BE teams to all be one and done in the Tourney of Tourney success means nothing.

Also last week when that B1G team 4 seed lines below the SEC team beat our awesome BE brothers 7 seed lines above the B1G team the excuse here was the B1G team really had the talent of of a top 10 team like they were early in the season and half way through the B1G season so the loss for our 1 seed wasn't really as bad as it seems. But now we're going to downplay the 4 seed SEC team's win because they beat a team 4 seed lines below them.

We're talking out of both sides of our mouth here.

That win was a very good win against a really good Wisconsin team who has a group of seniors that won 13 NCAA Tournament games, and the SEC aid proving to have been a pretty dang solid conference at the top.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2017, 11:44:29 AM by wadesworld »
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2017, 11:52:51 AM »
So when the 10th best team from the BE loses to the 2nd best ACC team in November when teams are still finding their identity and figuring out what they have we should put more value into that than when only the top teams are around to play each other in March and the 2nd best team in the SEC beats the 2nd best team in the B10?

Sample size matters. You can use a 30+ game full season sample size, or the results of a one-off that boiled down to whether one shot rattled in or out. Sorry, but acting like any one play from one game is definitive is what's truly plain silly.

Count me in as someone who thinks that's plain silly. If it's purely for public perception and it really doesn't matter what conferences do in March then why would people root for other BE teams to do well in the Tourney? Maybe guru is onto something here. I'd rather see Marquette be the best in the BE, so maybe we should all root for the BE teams to all be one and done in the Tourney of Tourney success means nothing.

Did you miss the part about the Marquette making money for these games? Our league is in it together. That's why I cheer league success, because it profits all of us.

Also last week when that B1G team 4 seed lines below the SEC team beat our awesome BE brothers 7 seed lines above the B1G team the excuse here was the B1G team really had the talent of of a top 10 team like they were early in the season and half way through the B1G season so the loss for our 1 seed wasn't really as bad as it seems. But now we're going to downplay the 4 seed SEC team's win because they beat a team 4 seed lines below them.

I don't know whose argument that was. It wasn't mine. I've said repeatedly UW would probably win that game 20% of the time. Just because they got lucky and it happened to be one of their days doesn't make any bold, sweeping statement any more than Chiozza's shot rattling in does.

We're talking out of both sides of our mouth here.

Speak for yourself.

That win was a very good win against a really good Wisconsin team who has a group of seniors that won 13 NCAA Tournament games, and the SEC aid proving to have been a pretty dang solid conference at the top.

But that wasn't ever in question. The SEC had two teams in the top-20 that are still alive. Kentucky beat three teams that by pretty much any metric were ranked lower than them. Florida beat three teams that by pretty much any metric were ranked lower than them. We're supposed to suddenly act like they were in a power conference for doing that? That's preposterous.

So the one argument anyone has is South Carolina. So because one team overachieved after falling apart down the stretch of the regular season, the entire SEC is vindicated? Give me a break. That makes no sense.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2017, 12:51:40 PM »
And they've won as the favored seed 8 times. So two wins they weren't expected to get, or one less than Xavier has.

I'm not saying that proves anything about X, because it doesn't. But people overblow these results and use it to falsely claim a conference is superior.
How many games did the other conferences lose as the favorite seed? I believe that the NCAA tournament is proof which conference is best. The rankings are all flawed because they largely depend on non-conference wins that came in November and December. Teams improve at different rates and November wins are not a perfect barometer fro ranking conferences.

GooooMarquette

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
  • We got this.
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2017, 01:05:42 PM »
How many games did the other conferences lose as the favorite seed? I believe that the NCAA tournament is proof which conference is best. The rankings are all flawed because they largely depend on non-conference wins that came in November and December. Teams improve at different rates and November wins are not a perfect barometer fro ranking conferences.

The tournament is one piece of evidence about which conference is best, but it certainly isn't "proof."  If it was, you could argue that the Horizon was the second best conference a few years back.  It wasn't.

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22058
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2017, 01:30:04 PM »
Why does everything have to be an absolute?  It is good for public perception to win in the tournament.  But it also represents only one part of the entire season. Both sides are right.
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #35 on: March 25, 2017, 01:34:11 PM »
Fair enough. If a single BE team goes on a magical run and wins the National Title while the rest of the BE flames out in the NCAA Tournament like Nova and the BE last year the BE is validated as a legitimate power.

If a football conference is written off as garbage and has basically every team that makes it to the Tournament overachieve (Florida was a wildly popular pick to be upset in the first round and was given basically no chance to make it to the second weekend, let alone the E8 and on, Vandy expected to lose right away and did, Arkansas basically a toss up first round and got a win and played with UNC, Kentucky is where they should be but many had UCLA winning that game given they lost to UCLA at home in the ever important December schedule, and Sourh Carolina was predicted to lose first round by just about everyone and is sitting in the E8) sends 3 teams to the E8 and is guaranteed at least 1 FF team but hey, NCAA Tournaments don't mean anything towards conference strength or how they should be viewed. Crap shoot, right?

Fair enough.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2017, 01:35:53 PM by wadesworld »
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22058
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #36 on: March 25, 2017, 03:17:42 PM »
Again. Why does everything have to be an absolute? I think the SEC sending 3 teams to the Elite 8 absolutely does wonders for the perception (and bottom line) of that conference. I also think that the three of them making the elite 8 does not mean that they were underseeded to start the tournament. The two are not mutually exclusive.
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2017, 03:19:32 PM »
Again. Why does everything have to be an absolute? I think the SEC sending 3 teams to the Elite 8 absolutely does wonders for the perception (and bottom line) of that conference. I also think that the three of them making the elite 8 does not mean that they were underseeded to start the tournament. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I agree that they weren't underseeded at all. But I do think it was an under appreciated basketball conference.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22058
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2017, 03:40:42 PM »
I agree that they weren't underseeded at all. But I do think it was an under appreciated basketball conference.

That's fair. It doesn't change my personal perception of the SEC. I don't value games in March more than any other game (besides the publicity and money it brings).
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2017, 03:48:54 PM »
That's fair. It doesn't change my personal perception of the SEC. I don't value games in March more than any other game (besides the publicity and money it brings).

I don't totally disagree with that. I don't think it changes my view on the SEC overall but this year I think the conference as a whole was probably somewhat undervalued/under appreciated. Clearly some of the teams in the conference were better than thought to be. There were talks at points of the year the the conference might only be worthy of 3 total bids. Now 3 of their members are in the E8.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2017, 04:14:32 PM »
There were talks at points of the year the the conference might only be worthy of 3 total bids. Now 3 of their members are in the E8.

Tournament bids are based on what you do from November to February. NOTHING that happens after the tournament starts justifies a bid. That is the very definition of flawed logic.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

forgetful

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4726
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2017, 04:26:22 PM »
Clearly some of the teams in the conference were better than thought to be. There were talks at points of the year the the conference might only be worthy of 3 total bids. Now 3 of their members are in the E8.

I don't think that is how it works.  South Carolina, Kentucky and Florida were all highly valued most of the year.  South Carolina only lost value because they closed the conference season going 3-6.  With the only wins coming against Tennessee and Mississippi State, two very bad teams.  Even late in the season they were still getting votes in the coaches poll for top 25. 

Everyone agreed all season that those 3 teams were tournament teams.  After them, almost everyone agreed that Arkansas was a good team (and tournament team).  The problem for the SEC is everyone below there was not good. 

That means 3 dominant teams (all made the elite 8), and one so-so team that won 1 NCAA game as an 8-seed. 

They've outperformed expectations as Florida/SC are closer to top 20 than top 8 teams, but that doesn't mean the SEC was better than advertised.  It mostly means SC is back to playing ball like they were when they were 19-4 and a top 20 team.

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #42 on: March 25, 2017, 04:30:38 PM »
Tournament bids are based on what you do from November to February. NOTHING that happens after the tournament starts justifies a bid. That is the very definition of flawed logic.

Who said otherwise?

Fact of the matter is, they got the 5 they deserved and they're proving they can play some ball.

You can think that getting 2 quality wins, 1 win over a mid major, maybe 1 loss to a really good team, and beating a bunch of cupcakes spread out over 2 months while teams are finding an identity is more impressive and important than 2 quality wins following a win over a quality mid major in consecutive games, resulting in an E8 run and maybe even FF. I think every coach in the world would disagree.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2017, 04:36:14 PM by wadesworld »
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #43 on: March 25, 2017, 04:33:06 PM »
I don't think that is how it works.  South Carolina, Kentucky and Florida were all highly valued most of the year.  South Carolina only lost value because they closed the conference season going 3-6.  With the only wins coming against Tennessee and Mississippi State, two very bad teams.  Even late in the season they were still getting votes in the coaches poll for top 25. 

Everyone agreed all season that those 3 teams were tournament teams.  After them, almost everyone agreed that Arkansas was a good team (and tournament team).  The problem for the SEC is everyone below there was not good. 

That means 3 dominant teams (all made the elite 8), and one so-so team that won 1 NCAA game as an 8-seed. 

They've outperformed expectations as Florida/SC are closer to top 20 than top 8 teams, but that doesn't mean the SEC was better than advertised.  It mostly means SC is back to playing ball like they were when they were 19-4 and a top 20 team.

Florida and SC were far from "dominant." Even Kentucky was not dominant."
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

MarquetteDano

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #44 on: March 25, 2017, 04:35:37 PM »
If everyone took their brackets through the Sweet Sixteen and added up the conference wins  I would bet good money a lot of people had the ACC and Big 12 with double digit wins.  No one had the SEC with double digit wins.  They are 10-2.

That is the very definition of underrated.


wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #45 on: March 25, 2017, 04:36:43 PM »
If everyone took their brackets through the Sweet Sixteen and added up the conference wins  I would bet good money a lot of people had the ACC and Big 12 with double digit wins.  No one had the SEC with double digit wins.  They are 10-2.

That is the very definition of underrated.

Bingo.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #46 on: March 25, 2017, 05:06:39 PM »
If everyone took their brackets through the Sweet Sixteen and added up the conference wins  I would bet good money a lot of people had the ACC and Big 12 with double digit wins.  No one had the SEC with double digit wins.  They are 10-2.

That is the very definition of underrated.

By what standard? "Everyone" So Alice in the office pool picking ACC teams based on uniform colors is as valid as what avid fans pick, or what TV pundits pick, or what a coin-flip picks? That's completely subjective.

The SEC was rated just fine. Kentucky won games in which they were seeded higher, rated higher in computer rankings like Pomeroy, and favored by Vegas. Florida won games in which they were seeded higher, rated higher in computer rankings, and favored by Vegas. South Carolina is the only outlier of the three.

If you want to argue that other conference underperformed relative to expectations, I'd grant that. But anyone saying that USC's run (and that's the ONLY outlier the SEC has) is some declaration of an underrated conference and some heretofore unknown conference strength is making an irrational argument.

The only way, the ONLY way, that assertion would be valid is if it were accompanied by statements that the 2010 Horizon League, the 2011 Colonial Athletic Association and Horizon League, and the 2013 Missouri Valley Conference were top four leagues in those respective years due to having representatives in the Final Four. Anything less would be disingenuous.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

forgetful

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4726
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #47 on: March 25, 2017, 05:08:42 PM »
Florida and SC were far from "dominant." Even Kentucky was not dominant."

Admitted, I am using dominant here loosely.  I'm using in reference to a top 20 national team.  Amongst the top 20, it is a bit of a crapshoot on who makes the elite 8 in the NCAA.  Florida and SC were top 20 teams this year...SC dropped out of that range when they lost 6 of their last 9 games...got in a funk.

MarquetteDano

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #48 on: March 25, 2017, 05:33:46 PM »
By what standard? "Everyone" So Alice in the office pool picking ACC teams based on uniform colors is as valid as what avid fans pick, or what TV pundits pick, or what a coin-flip picks? That's completely subjective.

The SEC was rated just fine. Kentucky won games in which they were seeded higher, rated higher in computer rankings like Pomeroy, and favored by Vegas. Florida won games in which they were seeded higher, rated higher in computer rankings, and favored by Vegas. South Carolina is the only outlier of the three.

If you want to argue that other conference underperformed relative to expectations, I'd grant that. But anyone saying that USC's run (and that's the ONLY outlier the SEC has) is some declaration of an underrated conference and some heretofore unknown conference strength is making an irrational argument.

The only way, the ONLY way, that assertion would be valid is if it were accompanied by statements that the 2010 Horizon League, the 2011 Colonial Athletic Association and Horizon League, and the 2013 Missouri Valley Conference were top four leagues in those respective years due to having representatives in the Final Four. Anything less would be disingenuous.

Not talking about seeding. What I am saying is other than SEC territory no one had the conference going 10-2 at this point. Though  I bet they had  double digit wins  for conferences like the ACC et al.

Thus they were underrated by people. That sinple.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Hey, Tournament Committee...
« Reply #49 on: March 25, 2017, 05:39:49 PM »
That's fair. It doesn't change my personal perception of the SEC. I don't value games in March more than any other game (besides the publicity and money it brings).
The teams that are in the tournament have spent the whole year getting better to the point they are at in March. There is not a team in the tournament that would not absolutely destroy their November team, if it was possible to have such a game. For example MU would just roll over the team that MU was in the first game of the season. At that time Markus and Sam were not starters.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2017, 05:42:29 PM by bilsu »