ESPN Insider...Lunardi says MU was"measurably underseeded"

[ChicosBailBonds]

He has a huge analysis of the NCAA selections from 1995 to 2007.  For 2007 he mentions 7 teams that were UNDERSEEDED and MU is one of them.


• Seeding: The following teams were measurably underseeded in the 2007 Tournament: UNLV, Niagara, UCLA, Marquette, Texas, Nevada, Creighton. And the following teams were demonstrably over-seeded: Gonzaga, George Washington, Texas Tech, Long Beach State, Virginia, Albany, Stanford. It was, quite simply, the worst seeding/pairings performance we've seen in my 13 years of Bracketology. I'll discuss the problem at length in Friday's wrap up to this series. In the meantime, let's also not forget the procedural errors in allowing two early-round rematches from 2006 (Indiana versus Gonzaga, Southern Illinois versusVirginia Tech) and one potential rematch (UCLA versus Gonzaga). Time constraints or not, these things have to be checked.

[77fan88warrior]

We definitely proved the committee's wrongdoing.

[The Lens]

I agree w/ JL and think we should have been a 6 - but instead of him pointing out the obvious I'd like to hear if he thought we dropped b/c of McNeal or an incompotent selection committee (or both).

[MUAlum99]

How could we "prove" anything?  From a oddsmakers perspective, the 8-9 matchups are a tossup.  So, we weren't necessarily expected to win that game.

What happens if we get Duke's 6 seed instead?  Who knows, but I like my chances with that seed more than with what we got hosed with.

[ChicosBailBonds]

We definitely proved the committee's wrongdoing.

As he states in his column, that type of answer is bogus.  Just like the responses from people when they don't make the NCAA and lose in the NIT it somehow "validates" they shouldn't have made the NCAA.  It doesn't.

MU was underseeded, plain and simple.

[Harrison]

based on our performance...our seeding was a gift

[rocky_warrior]

based on our performance...our seeding was a gift

But seeding isn't based on performance in the tournament, it's based on performance for the entire season.

We were under seeded, and THEN we underperformed.  Hard to argue that.

[77fan88warrior]

I thought we were underseeded and obviously MSU was as well.

[jmayer1]

based on our performance...our seeding was a gift

You are going to base where we should be seeded on one bad game?  Maybe our seed should have been based solely on the North Dakota St loss or the Providence loss?  Or maybe our seed should have been based on one of the wins against Pitt?  Or the win against Duke?  or the Louisville win?

Should Wisconsin have been a 8/9 because they lost in the second round?

No, seed should be based on the entire season, that was Lunardi's point.  Based on the entire season Marquette maybe should have been a 7, more likely a 6.

[Murffieus]

Ordinarily with the RPI we had we wouldn't have been "underseeded"-----but what did us in was going 3-5 prior to selection Sunday. My understanding is that the committee weighs late season performance into its formula!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Ordinarily with the RPI we had we wouldn't have been "underseeded"-----but what did us in was going 3-5 prior to selection Sunday. My understanding is that the committee weighs late season performance into its formula!

Ahem...convenient cutoff to use 8 games when everyone else in the world uses the last 10.  We were 5-5 down the stretch.  Or to go further, we were 11-5 in the last 16.


There were other teams that had poorer stretches in the last 10 that seemed totally unaffected.  Lunardi is right, we were underseeded.

[4everwarriors]

This is unbelievable. You people are bitching about getting hosed on seating? Come on! MU was placed just about where they belonged and were spanked badly by a better team.
The beauty of the tourney is that you get to play your way to the top, if worthy.
Seeding doesn't matter. Do you really think Florida doesn't win it if they're an 8th seed? Seeds are for planting.

[Final Four or Bust]

. . . . eh . . . who cares.  We didn't win.  We were embarrassed.  We didn't score a point in 10 minutes.  We may have been underseeded, but we were embarrassed in the game.  People should look forward and try to forget that time, and quickly -- if possible.  (I know I am struggling to let it go.)

[Marquette84]

. . . . eh . . . who cares.  We didn't win.  We were embarrassed.  We didn't score a point in 10 minutes.  We may have been underseeded, but we were embarrassed in the game.  People should look forward and try to forget that time, and quickly -- if possible.  (I know I am struggling to let it go.)

Perhaps if we had a fair seed we would have won the first round game. 

[MUAlum99]

This is unbelievable. You people are bitching about getting hosed on seating? Come on! MU was placed just about where they belonged and were spanked badly by a better team.
The beauty of the tourney is that you get to play your way to the top, if worthy.
Seeding doesn't matter. Do you really think Florida doesn't win it if they're an 8th seed? Seeds are for planting.

So what you're saying is that if Marquette was a #1 seed and played Tallahassee Community College for the Blind in the first round that we would have lost because, seeding doesn't matter?  Your arguement makes no sense - you make it seem like we were "destined" to lose in the first round.

And no, Florida doesn't even get to the Elite Eight if they were an 8 seed. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

No one here is bitching, we're having a polite conversation and posting information from people in the field (i.e. Joe Lunardi) that have credibility in this situation.  Thus why your statement of "seeds don't matter and are for planting" is thrown out due to humor.  The number of 8 seeds that have made the Final Four I think is zero.  Seeding matters, just like size matters.  Get bigger shoes.   

No bitching, just passing on some expert opinions from an expert in Lunardi.

Have a fantastically wonderful and pleasant afternoon.  Tee time at 3:38pm...it's a beautiful day in the neighborhood

[CTWarrior]

The number of 8 seeds that have made the Final Four I think is zero.  Seeding matters, just like size matters.  Get bigger shoes.   

Villanova won the tournament for Massimino as an 8 seed.  Didn't Wisconsin under Bennett go to the FF as an 8?

But your larger point is well taken.  It is much, much harder to advance to the FF as an 8 as it is a top 4.

BTW, I think we were hosed in seeding two years in a row.  I thought we deserved a 5 or 6 in 2006 (most "experts" had us as one or the other) and we got a 7.  I thought 6 for sure this year.

Our seeding doesn't excuse the way we played, however.  Given the same quality performance, we probably still lose as a 6 or 7 this year.  But no one knows for sure.  Maybe Izzo has the Big Brother kind of vex over TC and we would have won as an 8 against a different 9.

[IAmMarquette]

Tee time at 3:38pm...it's a beautiful day in the neighborhood

Envy.

[drewm88]

So what you're saying is that if Marquette was a #1 seed and played Tallahassee Community College for the Blind in the first round that we would have lost because, seeding doesn't matter?

No, we would have lost because we don't have the bigs that they do. Until we get a coach who can recruit solid big men, we will never be able to compete with the TCCFTB's of the world.

[Marquette84]

No, we would have lost because we don't have the bigs that they do. Until we get a coach who can recruit solid big men, we will never be able to compete with the TCCFTB's of the world.

I'm happy competing (rather successfully, I might add) with the Pitts and Dukes and Texas Techs and Louisvilles and UConn's and West Virginia's and Villanova's of the world. 

Apparently, we have a coach who can recruit big men who are solid enough to compete with these teams. 

[4everwarriors]

Play better during the season and you will get a better seed. BTW, losing to North Dakota State adds loads to one's resume'.

[Marquette84]

Play better during the season and you will get a better seed. BTW, losing to North Dakota State adds loads to one's resume'.

No, I think you're wrong on this.  It might actually hurt if you don't offset it by beating Duke, Texas Tech, Pitt (twice), Louisvlle, Villanova and UConn.

Of course, Marquette DID beat DUke, Texas Tech, Pitt (twice), Louisville, Villanova and UConn, so losing to ND State is at worst a don't care.