I would have to say a toss up between OU and Miami.

OU. They are worthless carp.

I would agree with OU as well.

south alabama. they didn't even deserve to be in the tournament. they had one quality win against msu and that's it.

but i would definitely put miami and ou up there.

ou. Arizona St got the shaft.

ou

the land thieves

Baylor

quote:

---

Arizona St got the shaft.

---

How so? ASU's RPI was 82 and their SOS was 77 with a 9-10 conference record. ASU had NO business being in the tourney field.


"F PlanoGuy!!" - Maroon & White Recruiting Forum

ou

*******************************************************

Purdue is not a 6 seed.. Same for USC

Purdue is not a 6 seed.. Same for USC

Miami as a 7 seed is a joke. It only helps t.u. get to the sweet 16 since Miami should be a 9 seed.

I agree with Miami. Our resume is alot better than them and we also went farther in our conference tourney. Not really sure how they got a 7 if we got a 9.

OU for sure.

O-K-L-A-H-O-M-A

and Miami

Before I clicked on the thread my answer was already OU. They looked lousy against Colorado. And their resume isn't much better than ours.

Zero U. and maybe even Drake. I know they're good....but a 5?

Definitely OU.

anyone else think K State got shafted?

georgia...4 wins, seriously?

quote:

---

anyone else think K State got shafted?

---

I think it is bad news for them to be against USC, who should be higher than a 6 seed.

But being an 11 seed is better than being a 9.

They are playing a marginally better team than you guys in the first game, a hell of a lot easier in their second.*

*This is all as a general rule, like I said, USC should not be a 6 seed.

[This message has been edited by Theo (edited 3/17/2008 2:07a).]

straight up numbers though, no way Kstate is that low...

Overrated:
Washington St. - should be around a 5/6 instead of a 4
Oklahoma - not by much, 7 is probably right
Oregon - 11 seed for a team that should've been one of the last teams in
Miami - not by much, 8/9 seed is right
West VA - also should've been an 8/9, not worthy of a 7

Underrated:
Purdue - top of the Big 10, should've been a 5
Kansas St. - thought they'd be a 9/10 seed
Davidson - really underrated at 10 IMO, could see them as high as a 7
Indiana - biggest snub here IMO, should be around a 4/5 not an 8
Butler - thought they deserved a 5 seed, should be switched with OU probably

That's my issues with the bracket, but there are huge question marks in the bracket every year. Nothing new.

quote:

---

Indiana - biggest snub here IMO, should be around a 4/5 not an 8

---

Any chance the NCAA is hinting that they are lucky just to be there?

Good point, but I think they effectively could've screwed a #1 seed in the process.

It's not those players fault that Sampson is a cheating SOB, and I don't think it's fair to punish them for that.

I haven't thought of that before you brought it up though.

ou big time

what is the explanation for their seeding compared to ours?

quote:

---

georgia...4 wins, seriously?

---

You can't really get worse than than a 14....

quote:

---

ou big time

what is the explanation for their seeding compared to ours?

---

Their SOS is a lot better than ours. They had 7 wins against the Big 12 South, Arkansas, Gonzaga, at West Va. They also went 9-7 in conference despite playing I think 4 games without their best player. I think they should've been a 7, and we should've been an 8. But there's no difference in an 8/9, so I don't think they're that overrated where they are.

I feel the committee gave OU a bit higher seed than was deserved, and bumped K-State and A&M down a line.

My thoughts on the B12 seeds:
KU 1
tu 2
ou 7
A&M 8
KSU 10
BU 11

[This message has been edited by Basketball & Chain (edited 3/17/2008 3:16a).]

zero u without question. They must have paid a few people on the committee to get that 6th seed. It's how they win everything else!

Full Speed Ahead - Fire At Will - Gig'em

"I have never enjoyed any position more than being president of Texas A&M University." Robert Gates 11/08/06

quote:

---

ou big time

what is the explanation for their seeding compared to ours?

---

A strong finish - the committee weights the last 10-12 games more heavily than the earlier contests. It's easier for teams that are peaking at the right time (ou was 7-3) to ride their momentum than for teams that peaked too soon (A&M was 4-6). This is why $Bill and Turge need to schedule those tough teams and road games early. The committee will remember the big early season wins more than losses.

OU

2 of their conference wins were luck and them only beat the 12 seed in the Big 12 tourney. Easily could have been 7-9 in the league and NIT bound and then they get a 7 seed.

Luck shot against Tech

and

luck win at home against Baylor - nice job Mr. Bruce

By far, Oregon received the most generous seeding of any team in the field. Oregon should have been considered one of the fringe bubble teams, yet it received a 9 seed. Although Oregon finished 9-9 in the Pac-10, it also lost at Nebraska and at Oakland (remember Oakland Aggies) in non-conference play, has an RPI of 58 (behind KSU and Baylor), and has a strength of schedule of 167 (behind KSU and Baylor, although the Committee commented after the selections that Oregon had a nice strength of schedule, which seems puzzling).

Purdue, which is why Baylor got so freaking lucky

12th Manchild Free Tourney Pool, winner gets a Free A&M Nike Polo
http://www.the12thmanchild.com/story/2008/3/16/232658/382

Baylor should be in the NIT.