An Observation

[vivid_red]

As of this moment there haven't been any major upsets, I guess Clemson's loss could be considered one but 12's have often beaten 5's. I am beginning to wonder if the portal era is impacting the tournament. Small colleges talent is being poached by the big schools preventing the opportunity for a 2 beating a 15 etc. Kind of a shame, that is one thing I thought made March Madness so special and entertaining. Truth be told I have been rather bored with the games so far. Bring on the upsets!

 

[LeFors4Ever]

As of this moment there haven't been any major upsets, I guess Clemson's loss could be considered one but 12's have often beaten 5's. I am beginning to wonder if the portal era is impacting the tournament. Small colleges talent is being poached by the big schools preventing the opportunity for a 2 beating a 15 etc. Kind of a shame, that is one thing I thought made March Madness so special and entertaining. Truth be told I have been rather bored with the games so far. Bring on the upsets!

I think the opposite effect of guys from Power programs sitting on the bench will get a chance to shine at a smaller school and such. You'll have lower paid guys that are working harder at smaller schools and they'll play a lot more like teams.

 

[KozmasAgain]

You might find a couple of smaller schools be competitive but never a champion.

 

[KenSucky]

Thursdays average margin was 15.68 and Fridays was 18.125. There's only been 5/32 upsets so far. So no it's not been good so far. Unless you have a Melo, AD, or Never Nervous Pervis, freshmen are not that impactful. So yes the portal is definitely impacting this tournament in a negative way.

 

[2330859]

Aside from the few elite SEC teams like Florida and Tennessee, the conference has failed to live up to the those lofty expectations that we have been forced to listen to from ESPN and the rest of the talking heads. I am not going to stick my neck out and predict a Creighton win over Auburn, particularly given the Tigers open up as an 8.5 point favorite, but if the Blue Jays execute their half court offense anywhere close to as effective as they did against the Cards …… they have a fair shot at an upset.

Texas, Missouri, Georgia, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, and Oklahoma represent 6 of the 14 who lost their first game, and Arkansas was very fortunate to have advanced, after witnessing the late 2nd half substitution decisions that Bill Self made. 2 seed Alabama was also most fortunate to sneak past 15 seed RMU, and there are many observers who believe the Tide is the most vulnerable of SEC elite to fall next.

I am not picking on the SEC, as I do believe that from top to bottom they are a very strong 18 team conference. However, the early OOC record that was used by Lunardi and advanced by every ESPN talking head to set the stage for 14 invitations was at the expense of a lot of other teams from conferences that were never given any respect. Today’s games are most interesting!

 

[jalovell23]

Could you imagine if UK had to play Creighton and UoL played Troy in the first round. Troy doesn't have a player taller then 6'9 on their team.

 

[vivid_red]

Could you imagine if UK had to play Creighton and UoL played Troy in the first round. Troy doesn't have a player taller then 6'9 on their team.

Many on this board said it and I agreed, it was all about who we matched up with. Teams that had a defensively good big man caused us problems. Love Scott, but he gave us very little offense in the middle

 

[LeFors4Ever]

Aside from the few elite SEC teams like Florida and Tennessee, the conference has failed to live up to the those lofty expectations that we have been forced to listen to from ESPN and the rest of the talking heads. I am not going to stick my neck out and predict a Creighton win over Auburn, particularly given the Tigers open up as an 8.5 point favorite, but if the Blue Jays execute their half court offense anywhere close to as effective as they did against the Cards …… they have a fair shot at an upset.

Texas, Missouri, Georgia, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, and Oklahoma represent 6 of the 14 who lost their first game, and Arkansas was very fortunate to have advanced, after witnessing the late 2nd half substitution decisions that Bill Self made. 2 seed Alabama was also most fortunate to sneak past 15 seed RMU, and there are many observers who believe the Tide is the most vulnerable of SEC elite to fall next.

I am not picking on the SEC, as I do believe that from top to bottom they are a very strong 18 team conference. However, the early OOC record that was used by Lunardi and advanced by every ESPN talking head to set the stage for 14 invitations was at the expense of a lot of other teams from conferences that were never given any respect. Today’s games are most interesting!

The 2011 Big East was the previous record holder and that year the Big East went 7-4 and then only 2-4 in the round of 32. The SEC went 8-6 this year. That's not some huge difference. Because 3 of our first round losses were to mid-majors (4 if you count Gonzaga beating SJs) By the Sweet 16 only 2 Big East teams remained. And by the Elite 8/FF, only one which was UConn. So in the record year for the Big East, we only sent 2 teams to the 2nd weekend and only one was left by the Elite 8. Take out UConn, the league went 7-10 that March.

So does that mean the 2011 Big East was overhyped!?!?!?! No, just means March is random.

Texas is the only one that didn't seem like they belonged, but then again do we think it was some SEC OVERRATED-ESPN-BIASED CONSPIRACY, or is it maybe that Ohio State, SMU, Wake Forest, and likely WVU wouldn't have done much better? There's more truth to the rest of the country was bad and the SEC's bottom teams were just above average and that got them in over other average teams.

68 teams is too many. I don't think it matters who is the last 4 in or out. We let the SEC label get to us because many here just see SEC=Kentucky and Kentucky fans are annoying so we just pick at it more. But at the end of the day, the bubble teams just aren't good.

When playing for a championship, who cares about Texas, Vandy, IU, Xavier, UNC, etc. type teams. They aren't winning a title and they got bids because the tournament is too big.

 

[KozmasAgain]

Knowing how much the selection committee is influenced by matching teams that have some kind of history between them instead of using the metrics they probably selected teams based on population for more viewers. Sorry for the run on sentences.

 

[bigloucards]

i believe that if you don’t have a winning record in conference you shouldn’t qualify for the tournament

 

[2330859]

The 2011 Big East was the previous record holder and that year the Big East went 7-4 and then only 2-4 in the round of 32. The SEC went 8-6 this year. That's not some huge difference. Because 3 of our first round losses were to mid-majors (4 if you count Gonzaga beating SJs) By the Sweet 16 only 2 Big East teams remained. And by the Elite 8/FF, only one which was UConn. So in the record year for the Big East, we only sent 2 teams to the 2nd weekend and only one was left by the Elite 8. Take out UConn, the league went 7-10 that March.

So does that mean the 2011 Big East was overhyped!?!?!?! No, just means March is random.

Texas is the only one that didn't seem like they belonged, but then again do we think it was some SEC OVERRATED-ESPN-BIASED CONSPIRACY, or is it maybe that Ohio State, SMU, Wake Forest, and likely WVU wouldn't have done much better? There's more truth to the rest of the country was bad and the SEC's bottom teams were just above average and that got them in over other average teams.

68 teams is too many. I don't think it matters who is the last 4 in or out. We let the SEC label get to us because many here just see SEC=Kentucky and Kentucky fans are annoying so we just pick at it more. But at the end of the day, the bubble teams just aren't good.

When playing for a championship, who cares about Texas, Vandy, IU, Xavier, UNC, etc. type teams. They aren't winning a title and they got bids because the tournament is too big.

The 2011 Big East was the previous record holder and that year the Big East went 7-4 and then only 2-4 in the round of 32. The SEC went 8-6 this year. That's not some huge difference. Because 3 of our first round losses were to mid-majors (4 if you count Gonzaga beating SJs) By the Sweet 16 only 2 Big East teams remained. And by the Elite 8/FF, only one which was UConn. So in the record year for the Big East, we only sent 2 teams to the 2nd weekend and only one was left by the Elite 8. Take out UConn, the league went 7-10 that March.

So does that mean the 2011 Big East was overhyped!?!?!?! No, just means March is random.

Texas is the only one that didn't seem like they belonged, but then again do we think it was some SEC OVERRATED-ESPN-BIASED CONSPIRACY, or is it maybe that Ohio State, SMU, Wake Forest, and likely WVU wouldn't have done much better? There's more truth to the rest of the country was bad and the SEC's bottom teams were just above average and that got them in over other average teams.

68 teams is too many. I don't think it matters who is the last 4 in or out. We let the SEC label get to us because many here just see SEC=Kentucky and Kentucky fans are annoying so we just pick at it more. But at the end of the day, the bubble teams just aren't good.

When playing for a championship, who cares about Texas, Vandy, IU, Xavier, UNC, etc. type teams. They aren't winning a title and they got bids because the tournament is too big

 

[2330859]

In all fairness Lefors …… it is not a fair comparison, as the 2025 SEC consists of an 18 member Conferences that is largely comprised of transfer portal players, something that was not remotely close to what the 2011 Big East Conference enjoyed.

Too early to make a lot of projections at this point, but all things considered right now, the Lunardi/ESPN accolades and premium projected seeding might be better directed to the Big 10 at 9-0 going into today.

 

[CardsFirst]

Knowing how much the selection committee is influenced by matching teams that have some kind of history between them instead of using the metrics they probably selected teams based on population for more viewers. Sorry for the run on sentences.

A 12 beating a 5 is still an upset. But they were taking about this very point on game day and they said that their belief was the portal and NIL has effected the upsets.

 

[LeFors4Ever]

In all fairness Lefors …… it is not a fair comparison, as the 2025 SEC consists of an 18 member Conferences that is largely comprised of transfer portal players, something that was not remotely close to what the 2011 Big East Conference enjoyed.

Too early to make a lot of projections at this point, but all things considered right now, the Lunardi/ESPN accolades and premium projected seeding might be better directed to the Big 10 at 9-0 going into today.

But I keep going on about making way too much about these lower rated teams getting in.
Whether Texas got a bid over WVU and Ohio State doesn't matter to me or anyone.

The SEC and Big Ten each had 8 teams make the next round. If the six SEC teams that lost were replaced with 6 Big Ten teams? Then the Big Ten would've been 8-6 and the SEC would've been 8-0.

People equate that the SEC is tough and has 14 tournament teams with "OMG ESPN is saying the SEC has 14 national title contenders and they'll steamroll through March!!! Such BIAS!!!" but it's more like the SEC has 3-4 really strong teams and then a lot of quality top to bottom. Texas isn't great, but they're decent. No one is saying that they're a title contender. They're one of the last 4 bubble teams that got in compared with teams like West Virginia and Indiana.

The difference is that the SEC had 14 teams that were decent/average and only 2 that were crap. The Big Ten had some quality, but after their 8 teams that made the tournament you had IU & a 17-15 Ohio State. Followed by Rutgers, Minnesota, Northwestern, USC, Iowa, Nebraska, Penn State, and Washington. I would say that Oklahoma probably is better than all of those team judging by when we played them and what I saw versus UConn.

Sometimes we can just recognize their league was the best and just ignore the fact that you know who is in the league. It doesn't make all 14 teams title contenders, it just means it was a tough league. The Big Ten was tough too, but they had a little more filler and average at the bottom.

I mean then look at the Big 12, after WVU as their one bubble team, everyone else in their league had a losing conference record and their bottom 8 was unimpressive.

I just want consistency, if the SEC was overrated then what league and what teams were screwed over? I'm looking around and other than a 19-13 WVU that was 10-10 in their own league, there's really no case that certain leagues got screwed over the SEC.

 

[LeFors4Ever]

In all fairness Lefors …… it is not a fair comparison, as the 2025 SEC consists of an 18 member Conferences that is largely comprised of transfer portal players, something that was not remotely close to what the 2011 Big East Conference enjoyed.

Too early to make a lot of projections at this point, but all things considered right now, the Lunardi/ESPN accolades and premium projected seeding might be better directed to the Big 10 at 9-0 going into today.

The SEC in 2025 is 16 teams.
The Big East in 2011 had 16 teams.

 

[2330859]

I stand corrected Lefors; appreciate the qualification. I do not disagree with the majority of the points you just made above.

In all fairness, my point is actually coming from a different perspective, one that admittedly may be a bit disingenuous to your position. In fact, my issue is entirely with ESPN, Lunardi and the undue influence they have on the NCAA selection Committee that not only picks the teams, but seeds them conveniently to further meet their own expectations.

I have been consistent all year in recognizing that Florida, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama and even UK are each excellent, and worthy of their seeding; it’s the other 9 schools that I find as beneficiaries of more indoctrination, than information. It rises to negligence when not applying objective consideration to the other Power conferences and mid major schools, when the SEC was consuming all of the accolades.

Yes, anyone could make an argument for TXA&M, TX, Missouri, Arkansas and all the rest of those SEC schools who were included, but at what expense is it to all the other schools who were denied any serious consideration, particularly given the selection process is behind closed doors and fails to follow any consistent and identifiable criteria?

I believe (my exact numbers may not be 100% accurate) going into today’s games, the BIG 10 is 9-1, BIG 12 6-1 while the SEC is 8-6. Can anyone deny that perhaps the BIG 10 & 12 Conferences were worthy of more consideration given their actual performance?

Bottom line, my issue is with ESPN, Lunardi and those influential media using in the volume of TV, Internet, Radio and Print to advance their own agenda.

 

[bigloucards]

I stand corrected Lefors; appreciate the qualification. I do not disagree with the majority of the points you just made above.

In all fairness, my point is actually coming from a different perspective, one that admittedly may be a bit disingenuous to your position. In fact, my issue is entirely with ESPN, Lunardi and the undue influence they have on the NCAA selection Committee that not only picks the teams, but seeds them conveniently to further meet their own expectations.

I have been consistent all year in recognizing that Florida, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama and even UK are each excellent, and worthy of their seeding; it’s the other 9 schools that I find as beneficiaries of more indoctrination, than information. It rises to negligence when not applying objective consideration to the other Power conferences and mid major schools, when the SEC was consuming all of the accolades.

Yes, anyone could make an argument for TXA&M, TX, Missouri, Arkansas and all the rest of those SEC schools who were included, but at what expense is it to all the other schools who were denied any serious consideration, particularly given the selection process is behind closed doors and fails to follow any consistent and identifiable criteria?

I believe (my exact numbers may not be 100% accurate) going into today’s games, the BIG 10 is 9-1, BIG 12 6-1 while the SEC is 8-6. Can anyone deny that perhaps the BIG 10 & 12 Conferences were worthy of more consideration given their actual performance?

Bottom line, my issue is with ESPN, Lunardi and those influential media using in the volume of TV, Internet, Radio and Print to advance their own agenda.

I believe that the NCAA selection committee has way too many conflicts of interest and they should bring in a 3rd party maybe a arbitrator type deal

 

[vivid_red]

I believe that the NCAA selection committee has way too many conflicts of interest and they should bring in a 3rd party maybe a arbitrator type deal

Time to let AI pick the field of 64, take the influence AD's have on picks, seeding and placement out of the equation. Feed the data of all teams, using the rating systems, Ken Pom etc., into the computer and let it do the seeding and placing the most 64 deserving teams. One metric could be the made for TV match-ups, AI can do it all and fairly.

 

[KozmasAgain]

I agree just enter all the metrics into the computer and let AI take care of it. To much corruption to let the human element take care of it.