Hey, Tournament Committee...

[wadesworld]

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.

That's the difference. That's one team making a run at the right time. And I'd argue in those cases those single teams were under appreciated and the fact that while they did make those runs may not have proven they were legitimately a top 4 team in the country, it did prove that they legitimately could play with any team in the country on any night and I doubt many people in the country thought that was true going into the Tournament.

This is 3 teams from the same conference all making runs. And the only team that has challenged UNC so far this Tourney is another SEC team. When you're a 4 seed or a 7 seed you aren't expected to be in the E8. No matter who falls before you get to them, a 4 seed in the E8 is exceeding the expectation of them losing in the S16 like they were supposed to have done.

[brewcity77]

That's the difference. That's one team making a run at the right time. And I'd argue in those cases those single teams were under appreciated and the fact that while they did make those runs may not have proven they were legitimately a top 4 team in the country, it did prove that they legitimately could play with any team in the country on any night and I doubt many people in the country thought that was true going into the Tournament.

This is 3 teams from the same conference all making runs. And the only team that has challenged UNC so far this Tourney is another SEC team. When you're a 4 seed or a 7 seed you aren't expected to be in the E8. No matter who falls before you get to them, a 4 seed in the E8 is exceeding the expectation of them losing in the S16 like they were supposed to have done.

So if a 3 seed beat a 14, 11, and 15 to reach the Elite 8 they'd be overachievers, but if they lost to that 15 they'd be doing what they were supposed to? 

The only overachiever in the SEC is South Carolina. Which is why it's as meaningful as Wichita, VCU, or Butler, and frankly less so unless they win tomorrow.

The tournament is great entertainment. It allows non-CBB fans to jump in in March and enjoy the single elimination. But for avid CBB fans, ignoring 80% of the season because of the weekends at the end is nonsensical.

[wadesworld]

So if a 3 seed beat a 14, 11, and 15 to reach the Elite 8 they'd be overachievers, but if they lost to that 15 they'd be doing what they were supposed to? 

The only overachiever in the SEC is South Carolina. Which is why it's as meaningful as Wichita, VCU, or Butler, and frankly less so unless they win tomorrow.

The tournament is great entertainment. It allows non-CBB fans to jump in in March and enjoy the single elimination. But for avid CBB fans, ignoring 80% of the season because of the weekends at the end is nonsensical.

You are completely wrong. A 4 seed is supposed to lose in the S16. So yes, a 4 seed in the E8 is overachieving.

[brewcity77]

You are completely wrong. A 4 seed is supposed to lose in the S16. So yes, a 4 seed in the E8 is overachieving.

No, it's absolutely ridiculous to not take circumstances into account.

[Billy Hoyle]

I'll bet the Oregon board is whining like puppies over having to play a "road game" against a lower seed too.

[wadesworld]

I'll bet the Oregon board is whining like puppies over having to play a "road game" against a lower seed too.

A 1 seed? Interesting bet there.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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.

The general gist of your point is correct. Most teams improve from November to March. Though, I don't think it is by as much as you think or as universal as you think. I'm not sure what this has to do with the post you quoted.

[MU82]

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.

Common sense ... man, TAMU, you are boring.

[wadesworld]

I value games in March more because you're playing for a championship. In November-February you're playing for seeding for that championship.

Go ask DeAaron Fox if he felt the same way after Kentucky's loss to Tennessee in January. Ask Roy Williams if he felt the same after UNC's losses to Louisville and Notre Dame to start February of 2016 as he did after they lost to Villanova last year.

[MarquetteDano]

I value games in March more because you're playing for a championship. In November-February you're playing for seeding for that championship.

Go ask DeAaron Fox if he felt the same way after Kentucky's loss to Tennessee in January. Ask Roy Williams if he felt the same after UNC's losses to Louisville and Notre Dame to start February of 2016 as he did after they lost to Villanova last year.

Yup.  There are three things that matter in Division I basketball.  In order...

1. NCAA Tournament
2. Conference regular season title
3. Conference tourney title

Regular season wins are nice but let's face it... those don't mean jack compared to above.

[rocket surgeon]

When it comes to tournament time, people have short memories and it becomes "what have ya done for me lately". It's a long season, ratings change like a flip chart in the wind, early season upsets become a distant memory.  It's all about getting HOT at the right time and all the pieces fall together.  Lots of quality teams; a turnover, a flagrant foul, a missed call, an errant bounce...what a game!

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I value games in March more because you're playing for a championship. In November-February you're playing for seeding for that championship.

Go ask DeAaron Fox if he felt the same way after Kentucky's loss to Tennessee in January. Ask Roy Williams if he felt the same after UNC's losses to Louisville and Notre Dame to start February of 2016 as he did after they lost to Villanova last year.

I value the wins more as a fan. The wins feel better and the losses feel worse. No denying that. But when I evaluate the quality of team's season I don't value the games in March more than I do the games the rest of the season.