MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: KipsBayEagle on March 12, 2017, 04:40:58 PM

Title: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: KipsBayEagle on March 12, 2017, 04:40:58 PM
How does that work?  Maybe we can play our first round game next year in Kenosha.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: wadesworld on March 12, 2017, 05:04:07 PM
Good news is Dook fans will pack the arena, as they always do.  And they will root for Wojo against South Carolina.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: forgetful on March 12, 2017, 05:13:17 PM
I believe if possible they now try to slot teams in the nearest site, unless it would put the lower seed at a disadvantage.  Since we are the lower seed we get no courtesies.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: Slim on March 12, 2017, 05:15:36 PM
How does that work?  Maybe we can play our first round game next year in Kenosha.
You can all stay at my house!
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: dgies9156 on March 12, 2017, 05:51:01 PM
As I said elsewhere, we beat Creighton at CenturyLink. We beat Xavier at Cintas.

We can beat SC at Greenville. Love to see Wojo coach against K

Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2017, 05:52:58 PM
As I said elsewhere, we beat Creighton at CenturyLink. We beat Xavier at Cintas.

We can beat SC at Greenville. Love to see Wojo coach against K

We beat South Carolina's fellow SEC team, Georgia in Georgia.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: Jockey on March 23, 2017, 02:52:20 PM
Surprised that no one mentioned WHY the game was played in S Carolina.

It was moved because of the politics in N Carolina. Hate to say it, but Duke is the team that got screwed by this.

Legalized discrimination = no tournament games.

The same will occur next year if the law isn't changed.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: brewcity77 on March 23, 2017, 02:57:00 PM
Surprised that no one mentioned WHY the game was played in S Carolina.

It was moved because of the politics in N Carolina. Hate to say it, but Duke is the team that got screwed by this.

Legalized discrimination = no tournament games.

The same will occur next year if the law isn't changed.

No one? It was discussed numerous times here and on other forms of social media.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: MU82 on March 23, 2017, 02:58:45 PM
Surprised that no one mentioned WHY the game was played in S Carolina.

It was moved because of the politics in N Carolina. Hate to say it, but Duke is the team that got screwed by this.

Legalized discrimination = no tournament games.

The same will occur next year if the law isn't changed.

Ummm ... did you hear about the Lindbergh baby?

Also, JFK has been assassinated.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: mu03eng on March 23, 2017, 02:59:43 PM
Surprised that no one mentioned WHY the game was played in S Carolina.

It was moved because of the politics in N Carolina. Hate to say it, but Duke is the team that got screwed by this.

Legalized discrimination = no tournament games.

The same will occur next year if the law isn't changed.

You created an account for this?? Slow day in your bubble?
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: wadesworld on March 23, 2017, 03:02:52 PM
Not to mention, North Carolina didn't pass a bill between Selection Sunday and the first day of the Tournament.  The selection committee knew they were putting a 7 seed in South Carolina and absolutely could've avoided that.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 23, 2017, 03:14:33 PM
Not to mention, North Carolina didn't pass a bill between Selection Sunday and the first day of the Tournament.  The selection committee knew they were putting a 7 seed in South Carolina and absolutely could've avoided that.

This. It was, and remains, complete BS.  I love how in our postgame presser, someone asked the players how they felt about playing a road game, and if they felt jobbed.  JJJ started to answer, and Wojo cut him off and said something like "We don't feel jobbed at all. We are happy to be a part of this tournament and we will play anywhere they send us. The NCAA does a great job."  No way in the world he actually felt that, but he is the PC police.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: BM1090 on March 23, 2017, 03:21:27 PM
This. It was, and remains, complete BS.  I love how in our postgame presser, someone asked the players how they felt about playing a road game, and if they felt jobbed.  JJJ started to answer, and Wojo cut him off and said something like "We don't feel jobbed at all. We are happy to be a part of this tournament and we will play anywhere they send us. The NCAA does a great job."  No way in the world he actually felt that, but he is the PC police.

Completely agree.

It's actually pretty insane how often we've gotten jobbed on location the last 10 years.

2017 - SC in Greenville

2013 - Lexington against Davidson/Butler - fair, neutral location

2012- Murray State in Kentucky in Round 2 (as the better seed)

2011 - Xavier in Cleveland in Round 1

2010 - Washington in San Jose in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2009 - Utah State in Boise in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2008- Stanford in Anaheim in Round 2 (we were the worse seed, so whatever)

That's as far back as my memory goes off the top of my head, but we've received some crap placement.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 23, 2017, 03:24:32 PM
Completely agree.

It's actually pretty insane how often we've gotten jobbed on location the last 10 years.

2017 - SC in Greenville

2013 - Lexington against Davidson/Butler - fair, neutral location

2012- Murray State in Kentucky in Round 2 (as the better seed)

2011 - Xavier in Cleveland in Round 1

2010 - Washington in San Jose in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2009 - Utah State in Boise in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2008- Stanford in Anaheim in Round 2 (we were the worse seed, so whatever)

That's as far back as my memory goes off the top of my head, but we've received some crap placement.

If our coach was Cooley, we would have had better placements.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: GoldenZebra on March 23, 2017, 03:44:50 PM
I still don't get why a 7 seed essentially got a home game, Im not stating this was a reason we lost, but it definitely one of the factors. Every time SCAR made a basket, the crowd was revved up, it definitely was a factor. Especially vs Duke.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: Benny B on March 23, 2017, 04:09:57 PM
Completely agree.

It's actually pretty insane how often we've gotten jobbed on location the last 10 years.

2017 - SC in Greenville

2013 - Lexington against Davidson/Butler - fair, neutral location

2012- Murray State in Kentucky in Round 2 (as the better seed)

2011 - Xavier in Cleveland in Round 1

2010 - Washington in San Jose in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2009 - Utah State in Boise in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2008- Stanford in Anaheim in Round 2 (we were the worse seed, so whatever)

That's as far back as my memory goes off the top of my head, but we've received some crap placement.

Top four seeds in a region are only protected from a potential home-crowd disadvantage for the first round games.  While it sucks to have to be shipped out west so many years in a row, just because the other team is closer geographically doesn't mean that they have a home-crowd advantage. 

2009 - a) Logan is 300+ miles from Boise b) OK and Memphis (#2) got preference to KC... if given the option to play in KC as a 7-seed or Boise as a 6-seed, I think most would choose Boise c) sure, swapping 6-seeds and putting MU in Mpls would have been great for MU, but then WVU would have been shipped out west.

2010 - Seattle to San Jose is a day's drive (13 hours according to Google Maps).

2011 - As an 11-seed, being slotted into Cleveland (next best to Chicago) is probably the best MU could have hoped for.  Xavier is on the other side of Ohio any way, and they were the better seed, so no gripe there.

2012 - Arguably, swapping the 3/6 pods in Columbus and Louisville (but leaving Belmont in Columbus) would have eliminated the potential second round home-crowd disadvantage for MU vs. Murray State, but as mentioned, that's not part of the committee's bracketing criteria.  Georgetown was the #3 in Columbus, which was mildly better for them than Louisville, and MU had just beat them a week prior, so this "jobbing" may have some merit to it... but we beat Murray State rather than running into the buzzsaw of NC State like Georgetown did.

2017 - In hindsight, this was bad.  But after the selection, I saw SC as more of a 9 or 10-seed than a 7 considering how they ended the regular season.  As a 10-seed, I'd much rather play another 10-seed on a quasi-home court than play an actual 7-seed on a truly neutral court... I bet most coaches would agree.  Not to take away anything from SC, but I thought Duke was a vulnerable 2-seed, so I didn't have any issue with a potential 2nd round matchup with them in the Carolinas either... again, I'd rather play a weak 2-seed three hours from home than a much stronger #2 seed on a truly neutral court.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: BM1090 on March 23, 2017, 04:13:20 PM
Top four seeds in a region are only protected from a potential home-crowd disadvantage for the first round games.  While it sucks to have to be shipped out west so many years in a row, just because the other team is closer geographically doesn't mean that they have a home-crowd advantage. 

2009 - a) Logan is 300+ miles from Boise b) OK and Memphis (#2) got preference to KC... if given the option to play in KC as a 7-seed or Boise as a 6-seed, I think most would choose Boise c) sure, swapping 6-seeds and putting MU in Mpls would have been great for MU, but then WVU would have been shipped out west.

2010 - Seattle to San Jose is a day's drive (13 hours according to Google Maps).

2011 - As an 11-seed, being slotted into Cleveland (next best to Chicago) is probably the best MU could have hoped for.  Xavier is on the other side of Ohio any way, and they were the better seed, so no gripe there.

2012 - Arguably, swapping the 3/6 pods in Columbus and Louisville (but leaving Belmont in Columbus) would have eliminated the potential second round home-crowd disadvantage for MU vs. Murray State, but as mentioned, that's not part of the committee's bracketing criteria.  Georgetown was the #3 in Columbus, which was mildly better for them than Louisville, and MU had just beat them a week prior, so this "jobbing" may have some merit to it... but we beat Murray State rather than running into the buzzsaw of NC State like Georgetown did.

2017 - In hindsight, this was bad.  But after the selection, I saw SC as more of a 9 or 10-seed than a 7 considering how they ended the regular season.  As a 10-seed, I'd much rather play another 10-seed on a quasi-home court than play an actual 7-seed on a truly neutral court... I bet most coaches would agree.  Not to take away anything from SC, but I thought Duke was a vulnerable 2-seed, so I didn't have any issue with a potential 2nd round matchup with them in the Carolinas either... again, I'd rather play a weak 2-seed three hours from home than a much stronger #2 seed on a truly neutral court.

Eh. I'm probably going to skip over your post so I can keep believing that the committee screws MU.

In all seriousness, it's not a big deal outside of this year. But why can't we ever get a situation where we say "MU got to player closer to home because it was the higher seed". It seems like we ALWAYS have to play further away from home than our opponent. Is it a big deal? Probably not. But it gets annoying.

It's not that we're always playing road games, just that the other team's fans seem to always be within driving distance (for example, Logan is a 300+ mile drive from Boise but I'm sure a lot of MU fans would make the trip if we could drive for 5 hours instead of having to buy a round trip plane ticket. At least us recent grads.)

Oh well. Let's just start getting 1/2 seeds and problem solved.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: wadesworld on March 23, 2017, 04:21:13 PM
Top four seeds in a region are only protected from a potential home-crowd disadvantage for the first round games.  While it sucks to have to be shipped out west so many years in a row, just because the other team is closer geographically doesn't mean that they have a home-crowd advantage. 

2009 - a) Logan is 300+ miles from Boise b) OK and Memphis (#2) got preference to KC... if given the option to play in KC as a 7-seed or Boise as a 6-seed, I think most would choose Boise c) sure, swapping 6-seeds and putting MU in Mpls would have been great for MU, but then WVU would have been shipped out west.

2010 - Seattle to San Jose is a day's drive (13 hours according to Google Maps).

2011 - As an 11-seed, being slotted into Cleveland (next best to Chicago) is probably the best MU could have hoped for.  Xavier is on the other side of Ohio any way, and they were the better seed, so no gripe there.

2012 - Arguably, swapping the 3/6 pods in Columbus and Louisville (but leaving Belmont in Columbus) would have eliminated the potential second round home-crowd disadvantage for MU vs. Murray State, but as mentioned, that's not part of the committee's bracketing criteria.  Georgetown was the #3 in Columbus, which was mildly better for them than Louisville, and MU had just beat them a week prior, so this "jobbing" may have some merit to it... but we beat Murray State rather than running into the buzzsaw of NC State like Georgetown did.

2017 - In hindsight, this was bad.  But after the selection, I saw SC as more of a 9 or 10-seed than a 7 considering how they ended the regular season. As a 10-seed, I'd much rather play another 10-seed on a quasi-home court than play an actual 7-seed on a truly neutral court... I bet most coaches would agree. Not to take away anything from SC, but I thought Duke was a vulnerable 2-seed, so I didn't have any issue with a potential 2nd round matchup with them in the Carolinas either... again, I'd rather play a weak 2-seed three hours from home than a much stronger #2 seed on a truly neutral court.

I don't think that's true.  I've been listening to Gary Parrish's podcast with Matt Norlander since someone shared it on Scoop after MU beat Nova and they reference how much harder it is to beat a team on the road than it is at home.  I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was something like it's easier to beat the 20th ranked team at home than it is the 50th ranked team on the road, or something to that effect.  There aren't 30 teams between a 7 and a 9/10 seed.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: Benny B on March 23, 2017, 04:34:08 PM
I don't think that's true.  I've been listening to Gary Parrish's podcast with Matt Norlander since someone shared it on Scoop after MU beat Nova and they reference how much harder it is to beat a team on the road than it is at home.  I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was something like it's easier to beat the 20th ranked team at home than it is the 50th ranked team on the road, or something to that effect.  There aren't 30 teams between a 7 and a 9/10 seed.

Well.. hopefully the committee took notice of the crowd in Greenville and considers that in the future.  Even though the 10-seed doesn't deserve home-crowd protection, no 5-12 seed should be slotted into a pod an hour away from campus if it can be avoided.

That said, if the NCAA nullified all of the results from this past weekend and decided that everyone keep their original seed but the first round was going to be rebracketed and replayed tomorrow, would you rather play Michigan or South Carolina in Greenville?
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: BM1090 on March 23, 2017, 04:39:51 PM
Well.. hopefully the committee took notice of the crowd in Greenville and considers that in the future.  Even though the 10-seed doesn't deserve home-crowd protection, no 5-12 seed should be slotted into a pod an hour away from campus if it can be avoided.

That said, if the NCAA nullified all of the results from this past weekend and decided that everyone keep their original seed but the first round was going to be rebracketed and replayed tomorrow, would you rather play Michigan or South Carolina in Greenville?

South Carolina in Greenville, but I'd rather play St. Mary's or Dayton than SC in Greenville.

And they would avoid MU/UM because we played earlier this year. So I think we got the worst of 3 possible scenarios.
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: Eldon on March 23, 2017, 04:45:32 PM
Completely agree.

It's actually pretty insane how often we've gotten jobbed on location the last 10 years.

2017 - SC in Greenville

2013 - Lexington against Davidson/Butler - fair, neutral location

2012- Murray State in Kentucky in Round 2 (as the better seed)

2011 - Xavier in Cleveland in Round 1

2010 - Washington in San Jose in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2009 - Utah State in Boise in Round 1 (as the better seed)

2008- Stanford in Anaheim in Round 2 (we were the worse seed, so whatever)

That's as far back as my memory goes off the top of my head, but we've received some crap placement.

Well it all equals out

2014 - Milwaukee

2015 - Milwaukee

2016 - Milwaukee
Title: Re: South Carolina in Greenville, South Carolina?
Post by: BM1090 on March 23, 2017, 04:56:25 PM
Well it all equals out

2014 - Milwaukee

2015 - Milwaukee

2016 - Milwaukee

You're killing me.