Some serious trash talking the last few possessions

Here they come again.

I think Arkansas will finish it out, but playing essentially only 5 guys 35 mins a game doesn't feel sustainable for the next six weeks.

Combo of dumb fouls by Ark and kind officiating for Texas

What bad memories

Good - screw that school.

The comments are great.

Someone get High Knees outta here pic.twitter.com/hRQtpkSaT0

— ᗩᑎT ᗯᖇIGᕼT (@itsAntWright) February 6, 2025

Great website

https://barttorvik.com/teamsheets.php?year=2025

...and the SEC just got a 14th team in the tourney.

Arkansas? I'm not sure. They smell a bit like A&M from 3 years ago. SHOULD get in. But don't.

I think Arkansas still has a lot of work to do, but they have a fairly manageable schedule.

94chem said:

---

...and the SEC just got a 14th team in the tourney.

---

I don't see the SEC getting more than 13 in at the end of the day and 12 is probably even more likely. Things would have to go just right for 14.

Sort of reminds me of the big 12 a couple years ago where everyone down the stretch got the wins they needed and they got 9 of 10 teams in.

Yeah that was the peak year for Big 12 Bid Optimization Strategy.

I think you could map out a path to 14 bids, but I think realistically it's going to be hard to get more than 12 unless the top end teams start throwing games to the bubble teams.

PJYoung said:

---

94chem said:

---

...and the SEC just got a 14th team in the tourney.

---

I don't see the SEC getting more than 13 in at the end of the day and 12 is probably even more likely. Things would have to go just right for 14.

---

I'm assuming that anybody who gets to 7 wins is a lock, and there may be a 6 win team or 2. LSU and USC need to keep helping everybody out. If they can put up 33-34 L's, it would be a big help.

Guessing there won't be more than a handful of teams in the tourney with bigger road wins than Arkansas' last 2 games.

I think 6 is only going to work if the bubble is absolutely massive and it's one of the teams that at least had a decent non-con performance (like Oklahoma.)

But the get out of jail free card is going to be anyone beating Auburn or Alabama. Vandy still has a shot at Auburn, Texas still has Alabama, Arkansas still has both of them, Georgia has Auburn.

bobinator said:

---

I think 6 is only going to work if the bubble is absolutely massive and it's one of the teams that at least had a decent non-con performance (like Oklahoma.)

But the get out of jail free card is going to be anyone beating Auburn or Alabama. Vandy still has a shot at Auburn, Texas still has Alabama, Arkansas still has both of them, Georgia has Auburn.

---

Yeah, but remember that crazy resume' that OU had...2 years ago? Massive victories over ranked teams, and a ton of terrible losses. Ended up not getting in. Nobody has anything lower than quad 2 on their remaining schedules, unless LSU or USC end up there - I haven't checked.

That's the thing is that nobody is going to have terrible losses. It's why all of these teams are still in play at 7 league wins. But some of them definitely hold better cards than the others.

I really can't wrap my head around 14 teams coming from the same conference. The % of at large teams from just one conference just seems crazy. I think there is going to be a bias against it that will leave 1-2 teams with deserving metrics out.

ColleyvilleAg06 said:

---

Rutgers upsets Illinois

Illinois is a weird case of having predictive numbers of a 3/4 seed but their resume numbers are that of an 8 seed. They should settle into a 6/7 seed for now.

Good win for Rutgers, but they still need to just about win out to get into the thick of the at large conversation.

---

Crazy.

Wild stat:

From January 1st through February 9th, Rutgers plays 11 (!!!) straight Quad 1 games. 12 of their first 13 Big Ten games are currently Quad 1, with the 13th being a Quad 2 home game vs Penn State.

So much talk about the SEC being historically elite, and deservingly… https://t.co/ANDgXMw1lZ

— JBR Bracketology (@JBRBracketology) February 6, 2025

I think the bias is more likely to be on the seed lines than it is on the cut line. I think there's a decent chance some teams like Missouri or the Mississippi schools get underseeded quite a bit.

bobinator said:

---

I think the bias is more likely to be on the seed lines than it is on the cut line. I think there's a decent chance some teams like Missouri or the Mississippi schools get underseeded quite a bit.

---

Agree with this. There's too many qualified 5-6 seed type teams, someone's going to get an 8/9 and be pissed. My money is on State but it could easily by Ole Miss if they slip up a little bit down the stretch.

bobinator said:

---

I think the bias is more likely to be on the seed lines than it is on the cut line. I think there's a decent chance some teams like Missouri or the Mississippi schools get underseeded quite a bit.

---

Is there some sort of "rule of thumb" that the committee would prefer setting up the seeds to avoid teams in the same conference playing each other before the Sweet Sixteen? I could swear I've heard that somewhere.

Yeah, there's some hard rules and some soft rules. Theoretically teams from the same conference, or teams that played in the regular season, shouldn't meet until at least the second weekend, but there's just no way that's going to happen this year.

The emphasis is going to be more on teams that have played multiple times, and hopefully trying to keep the really high seeds from the same conference apart.

I think the bracketing principal is no teams from the same conference before the regional final but that obviously only works if you have 8 or fewer teams from the same conference.

What I don't want to see is a scenario where chalk leads you to a sweet 16 matchup from the same conference. In other words, I don't want to see a 1 and a 4 or a 2 and a 3 from the same conference in the same region.

In the areas where you have to place two conference teams in the same half of a region, it needs to be a 2 and a 6....or a 1 and a 5...or a 3 and a 7 or 10...so that the only way you get a conference game in the sweet 16 is if the lower seeded team pulls an upset or has their path cleared by an upset by someone else.

If we're discussing bracket principles an interesting one that could come into play this year is that there's no gaming the "first four."

The committee has some flexibility to juke teams around a bit to avoid rematches, conference matchups, etc, but not with the First Four. Where you land is where you land, so definitely could see two teams from the same conference playing against each other there.

bobinator said:

---

Yeah, there's some hard rules and some soft rules. Theoretically teams from the same conference, or teams that played in the regular season, shouldn't meet until at least the second weekend, but there's just no way that's going to happen this year.

The emphasis is going to be more on teams that have played multiple times, and hopefully trying to keep the really high seeds from the same conference apart.

---

In the 1990 NCAA tournament (as well as in 1989), Arkansas was a 4 seed and Texas was a 10 seed in the same regional. Houston also made the tourney as an 8 seed.

Arkansas had a legit final 4 contender, and Texas was a second weekend caliber squad. When UNC knocked OU out in the second round, the region opened wide, and Arkansas beat Texas in the regional final. Looking back, it shows the lack of respect for the SWC just throwing them both in the same region. Or maybe they just thought OU was so unbeatable that it didn't matter who they dumped in the backet (UNC was on its way to its 10th straight Sweet 16, so OU didn't exactly get any favors). Ultimately the committee may not have cared about any of it, since UNLV basically steam-rolled the field...except for a mostly forgotten nail-biter...against Ball State...the more you know.

bobinator said:

---

If we're discussing bracket principles an interesting one that could come into play this year is that there's no gaming the "first four."

The committee has some flexibility to juke teams around a bit to avoid rematches, conference matchups, etc, but not with the First Four. Where you land is where you land, so definitely could see two teams from the same conference playing against each other there.

---

I have zero issue with this. I've always thought the First Four should all be 12 seed play ins.