South Region

[RockRaines]

Im just so happy never to hear about Aaron Craft from announcers again, team was losing and then lost and yet announcers still calling him a "winner."

He averaged 29 wins a season through his career and is a two time academic all American heading to med school to become a surgeon.

 

I'd call that winning.

[Brian]

He averaged 29 wins a season through his career and is a two time academic all American heading to med school to become a surgeon.

 

I'd call that winning.

 

The Craft hate comes from the media falling in love with him and shoving him down fans throats despite offensive limitations. It's the Tebow Effect.

 

He's obviously a smart kid who plays hard and has great instincts. Now he can go to med school and out of my life.

[bigruss]

The Craft hate comes from the media falling in love with him and shoving him down fans throats despite offensive limitations. It's the Tebow Effect.

 

He's obviously a smart kid who plays hard and has great instincts. Now he can go to med school and out of my life.

Exactly, if Craft was on my team i would've loved him, but he isn't so I don't.

 

And it's not Craft, it's the announcers. How can you say "kid flat out wins, he's a winner" when his team just lost? It's just a stupid phrase that seemingly every announcer used during an OSU game that I watched.

[RockRaines]

The Craft hate comes from the media falling in love with him and shoving him down fans throats despite offensive limitations. It's the Tebow Effect.

 

He's obviously a smart kid who plays hard and has great instincts. Now he can go to med school and out of my life.

I think it's funny to hate on the media shoving good kids down people's throats. Those are exactly the kids they should make people aware of, the good role models, the kids that are what's right about college athletics.

[IlliniKrush]

I think it's funny to hate on the media shoving good kids down people's throats. Those are exactly the kids they should make people aware of, the good role models, the kids that are what's right about college athletics.

Dakich saying he'd take him over ANYONE ELSE in college basketball? It's not about good kid, it's how overrated he became.

[RockRaines]

Dakich saying he'd take him over ANYONE ELSE in college basketball? It's not about good kid, it's how overrated he became.

Well we all know the Dakich family are a bunch of clowns.

 

Anyone who knows college Bball knows craft is a great glue guy and role player. That's it. However I have no problem with them highlighting a kid who is a success off the court. We need more Aaron crafts and less thugs, criminals, and guys who get 0.0 gpas.

[farmteam]

Well we all know the Dakich family are a bunch of clowns.

 

Anyone who knows college Bball knows craft is a great glue guy and role player. That's it. However I have no problem with them highlighting a kid who is a success off the court. We need more Aaron crafts and less thugs, criminals, and guys who get 0.0 gpas.

There's a difference between highlighting and slobbering all over him. That's what gets annoying.

[IlliniKrush]

Well we all know the Dakich family are a bunch of clowns.

 

Anyone who knows college Bball knows craft is a great glue guy and role player. That's it. However I have no problem with them highlighting a kid who is a success off the court. We need more Aaron crafts and less thugs, criminals, and guys who get 0.0 gpas.

Don't disagree.

 

There's a difference between highlighting and slobbering all over him. That's what gets annoying.

But yes, this.

[farmteam]

[caulfield12]

 

 

 

It's pretty ironic they were passed over for the play-in game because of the fact that Dayton was the host site.

 

A ton of "expert" brackets had them in one of the two play-in games, along with BYU/SMU/Providence/Stanford/Xavier/S.Miss/LaTech/Minnesota/Nebraska...especially after they lost to St. Joseph's in the A-10 conference tourney.

 

 

It's pretty clear they didn't seed Colorado/Pitt and BYU correctly.

[cabiness42]

It's pretty ironic they were passed over for the play-in game because of the fact that Dayton was the host site.

 

A ton of "expert" brackets had them in one of the two play-in games, along with BYU/SMU/Providence/Stanford/Xavier/S.Miss/LaTech/Minnesota/Nebraska...especially after they lost to St. Joseph's in the A-10 conference tourney.

 

 

It's pretty clear they didn't seed Colorado/Pitt and BYU correctly.

 

The selection committee is supposed to put Dayton in the play-in games if they feel that's where they belong. If they chose not to do so because of Dayton being the host, then they weren't following instructions.

 

[RockRaines]

It's pretty ironic they were passed over for the play-in game because of the fact that Dayton was the host site.

 

A ton of "expert" brackets had them in one of the two play-in games, along with BYU/SMU/Providence/Stanford/Xavier/S.Miss/LaTech/Minnesota/Nebraska...especially after they lost to St. Joseph's in the A-10 conference tourney.

 

 

It's pretty clear they didn't seed Colorado/Pitt and BYU correctly.

Seeding isnt based on what happens in the tourney, its based on the regular season. Losing in the tourney doesnt say anything about the seeds it just says that team lost to another team.

 

And more than 90% of Dayton fans are also OSU fans. Many of my friends who went to UD dont understand why everyone is treating them like some bulls*** cinderella, they've always though more of their program than that.

Edited March 21, 2014 by RockRaines

[caulfield12]

The selection committee is supposed to put Dayton in the play-in games if they feel that's where they belong. If they chose not to do so because of Dayton being the host, then they weren't following instructions.

 

 

Well...it's definitely interesting to see them paired with another school from the same state in the first round.

 

Obviously, Ohio State was overrated, but I'm not sure how fair that was. Then again, if they couldn't beat a good but not great Dayton team, they probably don't deserve to continue playing regardless.

 

I'm just thinking if I was an Iowa/ISU fan and we had UNI/Drake...or let's say the Univ of Illinois and we had to play someone like Illinois State, UIC or Southern Illinois, it would feel like a no-win situation.

Edited March 21, 2014 by caulfield12

[RockRaines]

Well...it's definitely interesting to see them paired with another school from the same state in the first round.

 

Obviously, Ohio State was overrated, but I'm not sure how fair that was. Then again, if they couldn't beat a good but not great Dayton team, they probably don't deserve to continue playing regardless.

 

I'm just thinking if I was an Iowa/ISU fan and we had UNI/Drake...or let's say the Univ of Illinois and we had to play someone like Illinois State, UIC or Southern Illinois, it would feel like a no-win situation.

Ohio State had that seeding because of what they did in the regular season including RPI and top 100 wins. "Rating" would be their AP ranking prior to the tournament starting which is now already moot.

[caulfield12]

Seeding isnt based on what happens in the tourney, its based on the regular season. Losing in the tourney doesnt say anything about the seeds it just says that team lost to another team.

 

And more than 90% of Dayton fans are also OSU fans. Many of my friends who went to UD dont understand why everyone is treating them like some bulls*** cinderella, they've always though more of their program than that.

 

 

I don't think this is 100% accurate. Iowa went from a 7-8-9 seed all the way down to 10 and then actually 11/play-in when they lost to Northwestern, largely because of NU's 150+ RPI.

 

Nebraska was in the play-in game in a lot of brackets but moved off due to their play against WI and the B10 tourney, despite losing an 18 point lead.

[RockRaines]

I don't think this is 100% accurate. Iowa went from a 7-8-9 seed all the way down to 10 and then actually 11/play-in when they lost to Northwestern, largely because of NU's 150+ RPI.

 

Nebraska was in the play-in game in a lot of brackets but moved off due to their play against WI and the B10 tourney, despite losing an 18 point lead.

Regular season meaning not the NCAA tournament. Once the seeds are complete and the tournament starts there is no "ranking" until its over. Those teams are seeded where their resume is and you survive and advance.

Edited March 21, 2014 by RockRaines

[caulfield12]

Ohio State had that seeding because of what they did in the regular season including RPI and top 100 wins. "Rating" would be their AP ranking prior to the tournament starting which is now already moot.

 

 

Iowa lived off upsetting Ohio State in Columbus because at the time it seemed like a huge win.

 

In fact, they lived off that win, at home against Michigan and a lot of close losses all the way until the last week of the season...when they were STILL ranked 24th despite losing two road games at Indiana and Minnesota.

 

 

OSU was just living off Matta's reputation and Craft and the fact that they've been so good for so long now you just expect them to be in the Top 25...but it was obvious by some of their head-scratching losses they just didn't have the horses to go very far this year.

[RockRaines]

Iowa lived off upsetting Ohio State in Columbus because at the time it seemed like a huge win.

 

In fact, they lived off that win, at home against Michigan and a lot of close losses all the way until the last week of the season...when they were STILL ranked 24th despite losing two road games at Indiana and Minnesota.

 

 

OSU was just living off Matta's reputation and Craft and the fact that they've been so good for so long now you just expect them to be in the Top 25...but it was obvious by some of their head-scratching losses they just didn't have the horses to go very far this year.

For their ranking, sure. But the seeding is based on RPI, SOS and wins against top 100 teams. OSU was a clear favorite to get upset (which I picked) but the resume is what gave them the seeding.

 

You have to disconnect ranking from seeding. Lou was a top 5 RANKED team seeded 4th in a region based on that math.

[caulfield12]

For their ranking, sure. But the seeding is based on RPI, SOS and wins against top 100 teams. OSU was a clear favorite to get upset (which I picked) but the resume is what gave them the seeding.

 

You have to disconnect ranking from seeding. Lou was a top 5 RANKED team seeded 4th in a region based on that math.

 

 

Yeah, I get that. Ohio State was seeded where they ended up in the polls.

 

Louisville got screwed, pretty inexplicably. Many had (and still do have) them winning the whole thing again. If they want to punish the conference fine, but to seed a team that won the preceding national championship at #4 is ludicrous with how they've played the last month.

[RockRaines]

Yeah, I get that. Ohio State was seeded where they ended up in the polls.

 

Louisville got screwed, pretty inexplicably. Many had (and still do have) them winning the whole thing again. If they want to punish the conference fine, but to seed a team that won the preceding national championship at #4 is ludicrous with how they've played the last month.

i understand it because they have to be somewhat consistent in how they seed. I have them going quite a ways regardless, it just makes it tougher for them.

[LittleHurt05]

Yeah, I get that. Ohio State was seeded where they ended up in the polls.

 

Louisville got screwed, pretty inexplicably. Many had (and still do have) them winning the whole thing again. If they want to punish the conference fine, but to seed a team that won the preceding national championship at #4 is ludicrous with how they've played the last month.

 

That has absolutely zero bearing on seeding and rightfully so. See 2013 Kentucky.

[caulfield12]

That has absolutely zero bearing on seeding and rightfully so. See 2013 Kentucky.

 

 

Pretty much completely different comparison here.

 

 

 

The Cardinals were the #3 team in the USA Today Coaches preseason poll and picked to win American conference by the media and the coaches. The Cardinals returned 7 of 9 players from a team that won the 2013 NCAA Championship and both Big East regular season and tournament championships.^[1] The team is lead by captains, All-American Russ Smith, 2013 Final Four MOP Luke Hancock and Montrezl Harrell.^{[2] [3]}

[RockRaines]

Pretty much completely different comparison here.

 

 

 

The Cardinals were the #3 team in the USA Today Coaches preseason poll and picked to win American conference by the media and the coaches. The Cardinals returned 7 of 9 players from a team that won the 2013 NCAA Championship and both Big East regular season and tournament championships.^[1] The team is lead by captains, All-American Russ Smith, 2013 Final Four MOP Luke Hancock and Montrezl Harrell.^{[2] [3]}

But they were 19th in RPI. The math is what got them the seed regardless of the players. Now WHERE they play can be extremely subjective.

[LittleHurt05]

Pretty much completely different comparison here.

 

 

 

The Cardinals were the #3 team in the USA Today Coaches preseason poll and picked to win American conference by the media and the coaches. The Cardinals returned 7 of 9 players from a team that won the 2013 NCAA Championship and both Big East regular season and tournament championships.^[1] The team is lead by captains, All-American Russ Smith, 2013 Final Four MOP Luke Hancock and Montrezl Harrell.^{[2] [3]}

 

No it isn't. When Kentucky just missed the tourney last year, the committe didn't care that it was the defending national champs. You seed teams based on what they did that season, not what you think they might do because of their past. Do you want to start seeding teams by the preseason poll?

[RockRaines]

No it isn't. When Kentucky just missed the tourney last year, the committe didn't care that it was the defending national champs. You seed teams based on what they did that season, not what you think they might do because of their past. Do you want to start seeding teams by the preseason poll?

Polls should continue to have little to nothing to do with it IMO.