Am I crazy or is he?
I was thinking 6-8
I think he was saying if we had DJ still, without him we are a 7 unless we win two in the BE then maybe 5
I'm pretty sure he was saying we were a 3 or 4 before, and now may be a 5. He's clueless.
Sounds right to me. We are not good enough to beat the top 5-7 teams in the country but we are a top 20 team. A team that is 20th should be the last 5 seed.
All of you think it is a major stretch to think that we are a top 20 team?
Quote from: mufanatic on March 11, 2009, 02:41:22 PM
Sounds right to me. We are not good enough to beat the top 5-7 teams in the country but we are a top 20 team. A team that is 20th should be the last 5 seed.
All of you think it is a major stretch to think that we are a top 20 team?
If only it was that easy....
We were a top 20 team before we lost DJ. And we are playing very well today.
BUT....
We have lost our last 5 games
We will get docked 1-2 lines because of DJ's injury
We will probably get docked another line to avoid a Big-East matchup in the first 2 rounds.
I know what the buts are, but I dont think that is what Len Elmore is saying. I know why we are going to get screwed and not get a 4 or 5 seed but Len Elmore thinks we are a good enough team that based on ability we are a 4 or 5 seed if you take out the ifs ands or buts. I hope that makes sense.
Maybe this is easier, forget RPIs, records, last 10, last 12, strength of schedule, DJ injury. After watching one half of play, Len thinks we are a 4/5 seed.
Quote from: ReneeRowarrior on March 11, 2009, 02:52:38 PM
We were a top 20 team before we lost DJ. And we are playing very well today.
BUT....
We have lost our last 5 games
We will get docked 1-2 lines because of DJ's injury
We will probably get docked another line to avoid a Big-East matchup in the first 2 rounds.
We were a top 10 team before we lost DJ... we are a top 20 team now.
If we beat St. Johns and Nova we will receive a 4 or 5 seed... beat St. Johns and lose respectively to Nova... 6-7 seed lose to St. Johns 8 or 9 seed.
completely agree, McC.
Win the BET and we are a 3-4
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on March 11, 2009, 03:07:53 PM
completely agree, McC.
Win the BET and we are a 3-4
With our limited bench I do not want us playing in the BET title game. Winning 2 games in the BET is fine with me.
Quote from: SCdem@MU on March 11, 2009, 04:14:32 PM
With our limited bench I do not want us playing in the BET title game. Winning 2 games in the BET is fine with me.
NO!!Win the BET!! Get a 3-4 seed and get to rest for 4-5 days. Be the BET Champions in the toughest league in the history of college BB!!
If we lost today, then I'd accept us as an 8-9 seed. It would be tough to argue losing our last 5 games.
But a blowout victory today means that we really can't suffer a bad loss from this point forward. A win tomorrow could make us a 4, but otherwise I don't think we should be higher than a 6.
None of our guys are from NYC, so he can't blabber on about how "tough" we are.
With none of our players from NYC, he's got no talking points, so he just pulls stuff out of thin air about seeding.
Quote from: BrewCity on March 11, 2009, 04:19:08 PM
NO!!
Win the BET!! Get a 3-4 seed and get to rest for 4-5 days. Be the BET Champions in the toughest league in the history of college BB!!
This is NOT the toughest league in the history of college BB. Very good, yes, toughest in the history of the game, quite doubtful. Many would argue it isn't even the best this year.
Quote from: ReneeRowarrior on March 11, 2009, 02:52:38 PM
We were a top 20 team before we lost DJ. And we are playing very well today.
BUT....
We have lost our last 5 games
We will get docked 1-2 lines because of DJ's injury
We will probably get docked another line to avoid a Big-East matchup in the first 2 rounds.
I must have missed when we lost to Georgetown
Quote from: SCdem@MU on March 11, 2009, 04:14:32 PM
With our limited bench I do not want us playing in the BET title game. Winning 2 games in the BET is fine with me.
It's a myth that going 4 in 4 would hurt us. The reason 4 in 4 teams lose is b/c they usually weren't supposed to be there anyways (MU, SLU, UGA) and what caught up to them is karma, not fatigue. Since these bubble at best teams make the tourney they are a low (bad) seed and play a good team. We would be a 3 seed at worst and playing a 14 seed.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on March 11, 2009, 06:09:59 PM
It's a myth that going 4 in 4 would hurt us. The reason 4 in 4 teams lose is b/c they usually weren't supposed to be there anyways (MU, SLU, UGA) and what caught up to them is karma, not fatigue. Since these bubble at best teams make the tourney they are a low (bad) seed and play a good team. We would be a 3 seed at worst and playing a 14 seed.
I completely agree. These are young kids, they have 5 days minimum to bounce back.
I can't wait until Pitt plays and Len can talk about all that New York pride ooozing everywhere in MSG. What insight!
Quote from: vealdogs on March 11, 2009, 06:25:05 PM
I can't wait until Pitt plays and Len can talk about all that New York pride ooozing everywhere in MSG. What insight!
you'll be waiting a while. Elmore and Shulman have the early games each day and Pitt plays in the second session.
What does Elmore know? He's from NY.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 11, 2009, 06:14:07 PM
I completely agree. These are young kids, they have 5 days minimum to bounce back.
and yet weren't you the one saying all year that buzz plays the guys too many minutes and they would burn out at the end of the season?
Quote from: Marquette_g on March 11, 2009, 04:48:09 PM
This is NOT the toughest league in the history of college BB. Very good, yes, toughest in the history of the game, quite doubtful. Many would argue it isn't even the best this year.
Buzz said on his TV show this week that it is the best league ever. :P
He's not the only one who believes that...I'm not saying it's a fact, but it has been widely brought up.
Quote from: BrewCity on March 12, 2009, 08:14:35 AM
Buzz said on his TV show this week that it is the best league ever. :P
He's not the only one who believes that...I'm not saying it's a fact, but it has been widely brought up.
yup. it is pretty widely recognized that this year's BE is one of the toughest conferences ever.
with 3 potential #1 seeds for the dance, you are going to argue?
ok, lets hear the argument.
Quote from: muwarrior87 on March 11, 2009, 06:31:31 PM
you'll be waiting a while. Elmore and Shulman have the early games each day and Pitt plays in the second session.
Actually, I think you'll get there tomorrow, as I believ the Bilas/Raftery team move on to the ACC tourney, and Elmore and Shulman work the BE on Friday and Saturday night.
that mean those two have all 4 games today?
This is not the best conference ever. Its very strong at the top with Pitt and Uconn legitimate title contenders with Lville perhaps one as well, The second tier of MU, Nova and Syracuse is also good and West Virginia is looking strong as well. That right there is a very strong conference, but that's only 7 teams out of 16.
There's been a lot of bad basketball played in the first 2 rounds of the BET. If the games were replayed, it would be hard to see which ones would have a different outcome. The bottom half of the league just isn't very strong and that includes ND and Gtown.
Where would Memphis finish in the BE?
Where would the #2 and 3 teams from the ACC, Big 10 and Big 12 finish in the BE?
Probably somewhere in the 4-9 range in my opinion.
Per Dickie V, Memphis would finish around 7th. Use that as a barometer.
what criteria would you use to measure the 'best conference ever' then?
every team going undefeated going into conference play, playing top 50 opponents the whole way... and then everyone beats up on each other so every team has a .500 record... and then all 16 teams make the sweet 16?
I live in reality.
name a better conference in a year, and we can actually have a legitimate discussion.
The Big Ten, every year.
Hards I have to disagree. The top half of the Big East is really good (I'll include WVU and Providence in that discussion so we get the number of teams to an even 8...enough for a conference to stand on its own). If those top 8 were a conference...it would hands down be the best in nation and probably best ever. But you can't ignore the bottom half. After Providence there is a HUGE drop-off.
Might be the best 8 teams ever in the same conference in a given year. But top to bottom, you can't say its the best entire conference ever.
Memphis would finish 4th or 5th...right around us. I think the ACC teams like Duke, Wake, and UNC would all be in title contention. Big East is better than the ACC this year (we are the best conference in the country, just not the best conference ever). Top 3 of ACC and top 3 of Big East are pretty even though.
I agree about UNC, but I don't think Duke or Wake would be any higher than 4th and maybe as low as 7th in the BE.
ok, then to summarize my previous post.
SHOW ME A BETTER ONE.
I know there were years in the 1980s when the (much smaller) Big East would get 3 teams into the Final Four, and I think there was even a year when it was an all-Big East championship game. If your argument is based on the top teams in the conference I think you would have to argue the conference was stronger in those years, when it had fewer teams. Of course, maybe that will happen this year. If you get 3 teams into the Final Four and 2 Big East teams squaring off against one another for the National Championship this year, you would have a better argument.
actually, since you have no actual data, my argument still stands.
don't make a claim if you can't back it up with something more than, "I think" or "probably"
again, name a year with something to back it up and I will gladly drop the topic and admit I was wrong.
1984-85 Big East. Villanova, St. John's, and Georgetown all in the Final Four. Nova over G-town in the championship. Happy?
Quote from: muwarrior87 on March 12, 2009, 08:32:40 AM
that mean those two have all 4 games today?
No, they'll still split the sessions today, but just Elmore/Shulman Friday and Saturday...I think.
Quote from: ReneeRowarrior on March 12, 2009, 11:57:21 AM
1984-85 Big East. Villanova, St. John's, and Georgetown all in the Final Four. Nova over G-town in the championship. Happy?
not really, since that feat is absolutely replicable by this year's Big East... because the tourney isn't over yet.
always have some wiggle room :P
How strong were teams 4-5-6-7-8 in 1984-85? How many went to the Sweet 16?
haha that was going to be my next question as well... since that was what he was using as his criteria earlier. ;)
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on March 12, 2009, 10:41:17 AM
actually, since you have no actual data, my argument still stands.
don't make a claim if you can't back it up with something more than, "I think" or "probably"
again, name a year with something to back it up and I will gladly drop the topic and admit I was wrong.
I laugh at your demand for facts on the
internet.
Apples and Oranges fellas. Smaller conference. It will be impressive if the Big East sends 3 teams to the Final Four and 2 to the championship this year with 16 teams. Doing it with 9 is completely different. But here you go.
St. John's 15-1 .938 31-4 .886 NCAA #1 seed 4-1 Final Four
Georgetown 14-2 .875 35-3 .921 NCAA #1 seed 5-1 2nd Place
Syracuse 9-7 .563 22-9 .710 NCAA #7 seed 1-1
Villanova 9-7 .563 25-10 .714 NCAA #8 seed 6-0 National Champs
Pittsburgh 8-8 .500 17-12 .586 NCAA #12 seed 0-1
Boston College 7-9 .438 20-11 .645 NCAA #11 seed 2-1 Sweet Sixteen
Connecticut 6-10 .375 13-15 .464
Providence 3-13 .188 11-20 .355
Seton Hall 1-15 .063 10-18 .357
Yes, that's correct. 6 out of 9 teams in the NCAAs.
http://www.sportsstats.com/bball/otherconfs/BigEast/standings/1985
Is this the part where you drop the topic and admit you were wrong? ::)
Quote from: ReneeRowarrior on March 12, 2009, 04:08:48 PM
Apples and Oranges fellas. Smaller conference. It will be impressive if the Big East sends 3 teams to the Final Four and 2 to the championship this year with 16 teams. Doing it with 9 is completely different. But here you go.
St. John's 15-1 .938 31-4 .886 NCAA #1 seed 4-1 Final Four
Georgetown 14-2 .875 35-3 .921 NCAA #1 seed 5-1 2nd Place
Syracuse 9-7 .563 22-9 .710 NCAA #7 seed 1-1
Villanova 9-7 .563 25-10 .714 NCAA #8 seed 6-0 National Champs
Pittsburgh 8-8 .500 17-12 .586 NCAA #12 seed 0-1
Boston College 7-9 .438 20-11 .645 NCAA #11 seed 2-1 Sweet Sixteen
Connecticut 6-10 .375 13-15 .464
Providence 3-13 .188 11-20 .355
Seton Hall 1-15 .063 10-18 .357
Yes, that's correct. 6 out of 9 teams in the NCAAs.
http://www.sportsstats.com/bball/otherconfs/BigEast/standings/1985
Is this the part where you drop the topic and admit you were wrong? ::)
This is the part when I ask "How many of the four #1 seeds in 1985 came from the Big East? Three? I didn't think so. And how many were #3 seeds?
7/16 in 2009 (ACC and Big 10 also got 7)
6/9 in 1985. You do the math (hint...divide the little number by the big number)
We'll see how the tournament plays out...but even if UConn, and Pitt and 'ville go all the way to the Final Four...I don't think you can argue this year was BETTER than 1985...maybe just as good.
I will argue that 5 teams seeded 3 or better (5 of the top 12 teams in the NCAAs) and 7 teams seeded 7 or better (7 of the top 28 in the NCAAs) is better than the 6 teams from 1985, two of which barely made it in (11 and 12 seeds). Granted, they could all lay eggs in this year's tourney and I will shut up. But I don't think that's gonna happen.
I never disappear when I am wrong... in fact, I will tell you.
at this point, Brew and I have valid points.
looking at those records pre tourney in the 9 team BE, you can, with a straight face, say that conference was better?
okay, I just disagree
Maybe we are splitting hairs here...