SIX SEED vs. #11 Utah State

[Jay Bee]

Recent History of 6 VS 11
Wins/Losses:
2008: #6 wins 3/4
2007: split
2006: split
2005: #6 wins 3/4
2004: #6 sweeps
2003: #6 wins 3/4.

Against the spread:
Same as Wins/Losses except in 2005, an 11 won ATS and in 2003, two 11s that lost beat the spread.

11's that won:
2008 K-State beats USC 80-67
2007 Winthrop beats Notre Dame 74-64
2007 VCU beats Duke 79-77
2006 George Mason over Mich. State 75-65
2006 UWM over Oklahoma 82-74
2005 UAB beats LSU 82-68
2003: Central Michigan beats Creighton 79-73

[lab_warrior]

Sounds like UState maybe will want to slow it down, but I know Mizzou will play uptempo, their coach is the old UAB coach, and loves to press.  I think we got a good draw...although I don't like the idea of a grindy-slow painful Big10 like game the first round...we'll have to try to pressure UState to get them to play faster.

[mustever]

I did not check 2 boxes on my NCAA ticket form.  One was Boise.  Aaaaarghhhhhhh!!!!!!!1

Call the MU ticket office,they may have not sold all their tickets for Boise.Worth a shot.

[reinko]

Anyone know when the times will be released, isn't it usually some time in the late morning tomorrow??

[Tugg Speedman]

Anyone know when we tip-off?

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

This is great. I'm going to be in Madison on Friday for the Wisconsin boy's state tournament. Where do the Warrior fans hide away to watch a game in Badgerland?

[MU111]

I'm much happier than I thought I was going to be with our matchups and seeding.  I like the first two potential matchups but agree that we're going to have to do everything possible to dictate the tempo against Utah State.  Considering some of the alternatives to seeding that were going around in my head, I won't complain.

[GregClausenForever]

I have to admit that I didn't watch any Utah St this year, but their resume is very lackluster.  After having played 3 #1 seeds in the past couple of weeks, these guys should be pretty underwhelming.

I love the Missouri match-up.  They play MU's style... they turn teams over a lot, and they protect the ball well.  They're a little longer than us, but they play fast. 

I was pessimistic prior to the seedings, but I think we have the best set-up we could hope for.  Agreed with all the comments above: we finally DIDN'T get screwed!

[NavinRJohnson]

Mizzou's best players also very experienced like MU.

[Badgerhater920]

Haha, Wisconsin with a 12 seed against FSU.

Wisconsin shouldn't even be in, but hopefully the Seminoles end the Badgers' season just like they did in football.

[mwbauer7]

Interestingly enough, on the Utah State board they are claiming the committee did them a favor and that they are "actually the true 6 seed" based on their RPI...

[Norm]

I watched the Utah State v Nevada game last night. Utah State is good. Marquette will have their hands full and it will be a tough game to win.

[skianth16]

Interestingly enough, on the Utah State board they are claiming the committee did them a favor and that they are "actually the true 6 seed" based on their RPI...

Not too far out of the question actually... They are number 25 in the most recent coaches poll. They have 30 wins (none of any real value though). They have to be the best 11 in a long time. I still think we have a good chance against them though

[Daniel]

If you are a 1 or 2 seed, your first game is easy.  After that for the most part, it is going to be a tough tourney.  Utah State looks pretty good on paper, and will be a challenge for us.  We need to be super ready and do what we do best. . .GO MARQUETTE!!

[NavinRJohnson]

One other quick thing...I believe that our likely first two opponents Mizzou has exactly zero games of tournament experience, and I believe Utah Sta has one player who has been there once.

[Shack]

You would think Dayton and Tennessee would also seem easy compared to playing Pitt, Louisville, and UCONN --- and look how that turned out.  Missouri is not a good matchup for us and definitely won't seem easy. 

[MUSF]

I don't know a lot about Missouri this year but I think I would rather face them than the other 3 seeds, Syracuse, Villanova, Kansas.

It seems to me that this is about as good of a path as we could get.  I would rather see Duke or MSU as the 2 in our bracket but sweet sixteen is definitely do-able. 

I don't want to down play Utah State but a loss to them would be a major disapointment ala Tulsa in 2002, IMO.

Let's go Warriors.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't know a lot about Missouri this year but I think I would rather face them than the other 3 seeds, Syracuse, Villanova, Kansas.

It seems to me that this is about as good of a path as we could get.  I would rather see Duke or MSU as the 2 in our bracket but sweet sixteen is definitely do-able. 

I don't want to down play Utah State but a loss to them would be a major disapointment ala Tulsa in 2002, IMO.

Let's go Warriors.

This game reminds me of that Tulsa game.  Tulsa had a very good RPI that year, they were only below us by about 10 spots despite them being a 12 seed.  This year, this USU team actually has a better RPI than us.  I think we win, but it will be a tough game is my guess. 

[77ncaachamps]

Winner: The selection committee. It seeded Marquette too high (No. 6) and Florida State too low (No. 5) but got the No. 1 seeds correct and balanced the regions. And if you think the committee plays favorites, well, just ask one of its members: UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero.

From Tournament Winners and Losers (http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_11921374)

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

Winner: The selection committee. It seeded Marquette too high (No. 6) and Florida State too low (No. 5) but got the No. 1 seeds correct and balanced the regions. And if you think the committee plays favorites, well, just ask one of its members: UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero.

From Tournament Winners and Losers (http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_11921374)

They do realize that of our last 5 losses, they were pretty much all close WITHOUT our starting PG AND playing the #1, #2, #4, #10, and #11 teams in the field based on the S-Curve (Louisville, Pitt, UConn, Villanova, Syracuse), right? 

All things considered, the committee probably did it about as good as they've done it in recent years.