MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: mug644 on January 31, 2009, 04:45:03 PM

Title: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: mug644 on January 31, 2009, 04:45:03 PM
Going into this week:

Louisville--AP#7 (1351 votes), ESPN/USA Today#7 (547 votes)
MU--AP#8 (1209 votes), ESPN/USA Today#8 (538 votes)

Both teams now 8-0 in the BEast. Louisville 17-3, MU 18-2

In this past week, Louisville beat USF(NR/NR) at home 80-54, and beat WVU(NR/NR) 69-63 at home
In this past week, MU won at ND(NR/22) 71-64, and beat G'town(25/23) 94-82 at home.

There were losses among teams ranked above them, but not really among the teams just below them.

Who will be ranked higher come Monday?
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: nyg on January 31, 2009, 04:49:46 PM
Louisville.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Gwaki on January 31, 2009, 04:51:04 PM
Louisville because they are Louisville
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: ErickJD08 on January 31, 2009, 04:58:53 PM
No brainer... First off, there is no reason for us to jump them but also they are Louisville.  If you swapped records and schedules, Lousiville would still be ranked higher.  Although I think the bandwagon will get much more crowded this week.  Good pub for MU.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Big Papi on January 31, 2009, 05:02:14 PM
Louisville but we have 2 winnable road games.  If we take care of business, will this team be top 5 in a week?
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: MUWarrior06 on January 31, 2009, 05:08:36 PM
I could see top 5 if we go into Nova 10-0. I would like to see us 13-0 going into our last 5 games. We SHOULD be 13-0.


No way we jump Louisville. The nation's got a man-crush on Pitino and Louisville in general. Whoever said it up there that swap records and schedules and they'd still be ranked higher than MU was dead on.

Even if Louisville lost to UConn, I would bet they'd only be 1-2 behind MU.


However, in their defense (and I can't believe I'm coming to Louisville's defense), they have beaten a top 5 and a top 10 team.

MU will get their shot at them, and when we beat them it'll be so sweet.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: ecompt on January 31, 2009, 05:12:35 PM
Louisville. They've already played a tougher BE schedule than we have, and, like it or not, they are probably a little bit better than we are. I think talking about 13-0 is very premature. Let's just try to win at DePaul and go from there. Winning three games in a row on the road in this conference is far from easy.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: TallTitan34 on January 31, 2009, 05:17:09 PM
Louisville.  Pitino has the voters wrapped around his finger.  Plus they deserve it.

We should be 18-0 if we played the best we can every night.  That won't happen though.

Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: mug644 on January 31, 2009, 05:19:17 PM
Okay. Clearly the thinking is that Louisville stays ahead of MU on Monday. And I agree with that.

Now, let me add a twist. UConn (who's likely to be #1 on Monday) plays at Louisville on Monday.

If we win out this week--given our "lighter" games against DePaul and USF--do we move ahead of the loser of that game?
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: MUWarrior06 on January 31, 2009, 05:24:08 PM
Quote from: mug644 on January 31, 2009, 05:19:17 PM
Okay. Clearly the thinking is that Louisville stays ahead of MU on Monday. And I agree with that.

Now, let me add a twist. UConn (who's likely to be #1 on Monday) plays at Louisville on Monday.

If we win out this week--given our "lighter" games against DePaul and USF--do we move ahead of the loser of that game?

This is a more realistic question.

I would say yes, we move ahead if we win these next 2 games, but maybe 1-2 spots ahead. If Louisville loses to UConn I would see them falling maybe to 8 or 9, assuming MU moves up to 7. If UConn loses, I think MU will be ranked higher without a doubt (UConn maybe 10-11)
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Badgerhater920 on January 31, 2009, 05:32:53 PM
I'm not sure that we jump Uconn if they lose at Louisville. That's about as good of a loss as you can have.  Plus, UConn is likely to be #1 on Monday.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: mosarsour on January 31, 2009, 05:39:11 PM
Quote from: Badgerhater920 on January 31, 2009, 05:32:53 PM
I'm not sure that we jump Uconn if they lose at Louisville. That's about as good of a loss as you can have.  Plus, UConn is likely to be #1 on Monday.

+1
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: ErickJD08 on January 31, 2009, 05:42:15 PM
I am cheering for UConn.  Louisville lose will potentially help our ranking (provided that we win) and sole ownership to the top of the BEast 
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: mug644 on January 31, 2009, 05:51:43 PM
Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 31, 2009, 05:42:15 PM
I am cheering for UConn.  Louisville lose will potentially help our ranking (provided that we win) and sole ownership to the top of the BEast 

I fully agree about wanting UConn to win, but not because of the ranking. It only has to do with the BEast. An undefeated MU has a serious leg up on any opponent--especially is there are no other undefeated teams--and the more wins we have going towards the end of the season, the more pressure there is on our opponents. They way everyone talks about the last five games, wouldn't it be great to play them win "nothing" to lose, meaning our record going in is so solid (even with a loss or two) that teams MUST beat us?

And another new twist. Given Pitt's loss to Villanova (albeit in Philly), is either Louisville or MU ahead of Pitt, seeing that Pitt has two BEast losses now?
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: NavinRJohnson on January 31, 2009, 06:14:49 PM
Louisville, because they're better.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: normandy on January 31, 2009, 06:18:23 PM
why does anyone care where marquette is ranked?  In front of louisville or behind it does not matter to me.  Who is the better team will work itself out with conference games.  Rankings are simply used for tv ratings.  Rankings are stupid and whoever takes them with more than with a grain of salt is misguided.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: MR.HAYWARD on January 31, 2009, 06:26:41 PM
i care, i want the 7 teams ahead of to lose...i want to be number f'ing 1
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: normandy on January 31, 2009, 10:23:57 PM
great mr. hayward you want mu to be ranked #1.  Then if marquette were to lose in the first round of the ncaas where would we be?  losers thats where.  i want to be number one at the end of the season and the rankings right now are fairly meaningless.  get some perspective.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: 77ncaachamps on January 31, 2009, 10:48:33 PM
Marquette.


Psyche. UL. Duh. They get more nationwide love than we do.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Doctor V on February 01, 2009, 01:40:35 AM
it bothers me when people say the rankings dont matter. the publicity alone is good for the school and the program

maybe we should lose a game every once in a while so that we never get ranked too high?

kind of an odd week for rankings- MU wins at ND and beats Gtown and may not move up at all... itll be interesting to see where Duke and Wake end up also, and how much Pitt drops.

If you ask me, Pitt should be below us based on the 2 conference losses. I feel like Im the only one that thinks we should just Louisville also, even though i dont think we will. They have one more loss than MU, and other than Pitt a pretty comparable schedule to MU. I guess it wont matter much cause Monday will tell if they should or shouldnt be ahead of Marquette
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: normandy on February 01, 2009, 07:11:11 AM
the ranking does not provide notoriety for the school, winning does.  Then for you mudimitri to jump to the irrational conclusion that marquette 'should lose a game every once in a while so we never get ranked too high' is quite the stretch.  in my original post i stated rankings do not matter, so in my eyes we could never get ranked too high because the rankings once again do not matter.   
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: jce on February 01, 2009, 07:27:23 AM
I think the only schools that benefit from rankings are the mid-major schools, like Butler, who get their highlights on ESPN when they usually wouldn't.  Otherwise they don't matter one bit.  No one cares, or remembers, who was ranked ahead of whom the last week in January.  Hell, no one remembers who was ranked where the last poll before the tournament starts.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: warriorfred on February 01, 2009, 10:14:17 AM
Rankings are good PR, but beyond that do not account for much.  Whether a team is ranked 5 or 12 does not make a huge difference.

Realistically, there are 3-4 teams that are favorites for the National Championship (at this point, probably UCONN, Louisville, and Duke).  After that, there are maybe 6 -12 teams that could make a run at the title (at this point, probably MU, Oklahoma, PITT, and a few others), assuming a good match-up in the tourney and a bit of luck.  Beyond number 15 in the rankings, there are probably 25 teams that could argue they should be ranked, and could win the title with a huge amount of luck (Kansas - 1988).  Is Gonzaga better than Dayton, is West Virginia better than Minnesota, difficult to say?

One you get beyond number 15 in the rankings . . . well, the rankings are useless. 

I would prefer Marquette is always ranked for publicity purposes, but I don't put too much faith in the ranking, particularly when a team ranked 16 - 25.

Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: tower912 on February 01, 2009, 10:58:19 AM
Louisville, because they are Louisville and he is Rick.   We are solidly in the top 10 right now.   Who cares if this week Louisville is one spot ahead of us?   They are a helluva team.   So are we.   What a joy that the only things we can complain about is whether 'ville gets 20 more votes than we do and that Buzz had a hiccup during his postgame interview.    Gentlemen and ladies, this is as good as it gets.   Lets enjoy the ride.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Daniel on February 01, 2009, 11:42:11 AM
Louisville will undoubtedly stay ahead of us.  Why not?  They won't drop below us.
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: tower912 on February 01, 2009, 11:55:26 AM
mudimitri, what was George Mason's rank the year they went to the final 4?   Kansas when they won with Manning?   NCState in '83?    How high were we ranked in 03?   Who was the regular season BEast champ last year?   Which team made a heck of a run in the BEast tourney?    Wisconsin was actually #1 last year.   Do you remember that or another Big Dance flameout? 
         As MU fans, we will long remember this season.   If we go to a FF, Buzz will be canonized and we will talk about it when we remember nothing else.   
Title: Re: higher rank--MU or Louisville?
Post by: Doctor V on February 01, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
im not saying that a teams ranking is a predictor of how well they will do in the tournament, all im saying is that the ranking is a barometer of how successful a team is to that point in the season.

norm- the more wins a team has, the higher its ranking. so you say wins give a team notoriety, common sense says that those wins lead to a higher ranking

also, while it may mean nothing to the team, the higher ranking is good for the fans- brings more fans out and gets people excited in the program.

I enjoy the team, not the ranking but i am a big basketball fan. For those that may not be, they hear the ranking and get excited about the team. That excitement leads to bigger crowds and better notoriety.

If nothing else, its fun to see the team you root for consider one of the 5/10 best teams in the country
EhPortal 1.39.9 © 2025, WebDev