qwertyus wrote:Such bullshit. We're being looked at like we're in the WCC, meanwhile, teams like North Carolina have 7 losses at #19 (they'll drop, but Clemson will just replace them). And they haven't even looked good in their wins...
Meanwhile, Texas will get talked about as a tourney team at 15-8, having just beaten an Oklahoma team ranked 12th, that is 16-6. Because the media has decreed the Big 12 as a great conference, losses won't hurt, and wins will count as wins against tourney teams, so despite 5 or 6 teams finishing with 10-12 losses, they'll still get 8 or 9 teams in.
Florida, a 3-point team with not much else, who lost to goddamn Loyola Chicago, just got shellacked at home by Alabama, which leaves both at 15-8. But, since the SEC is considered good, both of those teams are tourney bound, despite the fact that it's a conference led by an Auburn team of nobodies lead by Bruce f*cking Pearl! Mizzou, led by Cal reject Cuonzo Martin, just knocked off UK. Guess who's still in the tourney conversation at 15-8?
I understand that the PAC12 did poorly out of conference. But I'm not seeing great teams anywhere else in the country now. Because if there were any, mediocre-to-shitty schools wouldn't be handing out L's every week to these supposedly good ranked teams!
This has been happening repeatedly the past few years; but more so this year than last....sorta like SEC football teams always being more highly ranked than non-SEC teams, even when they play as weak of a OOC schedule.
Here's what Arizona is up against:
Play in the West - late games not viewed by many
So many games not on National TV (Please STFU about Pac-12 Network - its NOT National TV, period!)
Early season, embarrassing losses - regardless of injury, only Purdue was a credible opponent
Play in a weak conference that few are familiar with - losses to Washington and Colorado hurt perception.
Life is unfair.
“If you have the choice between humble and cocky, go with cocky. There's always time to be humble later, once you've been proven horrendously, irrevocably wrong.”
This team just might not make it past the first weekend. I’m getting myself prepared for another letdown (ala Wichita State first round loss). What a waste of talent. Of course that is to be expected when you have a very mediocre and small PG coupled with a team that plays crappy defense.
Decisive wins by Alabama and A&M this weekend against Tennessee and Kentucky. I seeing references that "Arizona's resume isn't all that good." I think the A&M win was huge. They were unbeaten and it was before their suspensions and injuries sidetracked their season. And 'Bama is a solid tourney team. Likely an 8-9 seed.
Just play with the same Intensity and focus as last night and I think things will take care of itself
Waiting at the Rose Bowl patiently for the cats to arrive
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
I have wondered how the committee with treat the FBI schools and maybe give them a tougher draw or maybe they won't care?
I don't see with our resume even if we get 7 more wins how we get anything better than a 4 seed
Waiting at the Rose Bowl patiently for the cats to arrive
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
Talk of a 2 seed is nuts. That went out the door with the UCLA loss. I suppose a 3 is possible if we don’t lose again before Selection Sunday. But a 4 feels most likely.
Irish27 wrote:I think the Cats can lose one more game and get a #4 if they win the Pac-12 tournament.
Yep. Obviously it helps if the one loss is to a tourney-bound team, but losing only one more reg season game means we’re Pac champs. That’s a strong resume builder, even in a down year for the league.
Beachcat97 wrote:Talk of a 2 seed is nuts. That went out the door with the UCLA loss. I suppose a 3 is possible if we don’t lose again before Selection Sunday. But a 4 feels most likely.
The NCAA just put out their official top 16 rankings as of today.
We are listed as the #14 team (A 4 seed)
2 spots higher (#12) and we will be a 3 seed
6 spots higher (8) and we will be a 2 seed.
There are 4 weeks to go. Moving up 6 spots is not that hard to do in a month as long as we are winning.
I'm not saying this team is capable of going something like 7-1 to finish the year... but it is certainly not nuts.
Beachcat97 wrote:Talk of a 2 seed is nuts. That went out the door with the UCLA loss. I suppose a 3 is possible if we don’t lose again before Selection Sunday. But a 4 feels most likely.
The NCAA just put out their official top 16 rankings as of today.
We are listed as the #14 team (A 4 seed)
2 spots higher (#12) and we will be a 3 seed
6 spots higher (8) and we will be a 2 seed.
There are 4 weeks to go. Moving up 6 spots is not that hard to do in a month as long as we are winning.
I'm not saying this team is capable of going something like 7-1 to finish the year... but it is certainly not nuts.
Fair enough, Alie.
I think I'm just trying to balance what I know about this team with the unbridled optimism that tends to emerge this time of year. There are a lot of moving parts here, and we don't know what the teams currently slotted as 2 and 3 seeds are going to do these next few weeks. So while I think a 4 is most likely, a higher seed isn't yet out of the question. If we win on Thursday, I'll definitely warm up to the idea of grabbing a 3 (or 2!).
A 4 seed is probably likely given the play of this team... All I'm saying is if we go on a hot streak (unlikely) we are currently in position to move up to a #2.
TatetheGreat wrote:Purdue would spank us again, assuming we make the S16
Of the possible #1 seeds, I agree that Purdue and Nova are the worst for us. Honestly, though, other than those two teams (plus Duke), I think we would beat the rest on that top 16 list. I would jump at the chance to play any of them (especially Clemson, Auburn, Texas Tech, Cincinatti)...
TatetheGreat wrote:Purdue would spank us again, assuming we make the S16
Of the possible #1 seeds, I agree that Purdue and Nova are the worst for us. Honestly, though, other than those two teams (plus Duke), I think we would beat the rest on that top 16 list. I would jump at the chance to play any of them (especially Clemson, Auburn, Texas Tech, Cincinatti)...
A week ago I would have agreed with this...actually 2 days ago I would have agreed...but there is a rather silent trajectory that is gaining momentum and that is Dusan and the bench starting to play defense and score...we actually don't need a LOT from these metrics just maybe 25% more than the rest of the season...
I we play Ayton against Purdues big they don't scare me as much...it sort of evens out the playing field and I think the rest of our team is better.
RaisingArizona wrote:Can someone explain to me why in the heck Xavier is getting mentioned as a 1 seed? Their resume seems pretty damn meh to me.
Agreed. They don’t have a 1 seed-ish resume. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the top seeds end up being Nova, UVA, MSU, and Purdue.
Wow. There are truly no unbeatables this year. No teams that just look like a lock for the FF. I expect upsets galore. Great year for low seeds to get far.
If we could swap Purdue for Virginia that would be my dream bracket. I don't believe in KU or UNC and while UVA has a historic defense they don't have much offense and they play the packline we know so well. I think we could pick it apart. Wouldn't mind a Xavier rematch, though I think Coach Mack would find a way to pester Ayton out of the post, which has been a bit of a thorn in our heel in bad games.
YoDeFoe wrote:If we could swap Purdue for Virginia that would be my dream bracket. I don't believe in KU or UNC and while UVA has a historic defense they don't have much offense and they play the packline we know so well. I think we could pick it apart. Wouldn't mind a Xavier rematch, though I think Coach Mack would find a way to pester Ayton out of the post, which has been a bit of a thorn in our heel in bad games.
We've got history with Xavier, Nova, Purdue, MSU, Duke...I say bring it on. If this team is gonna go where we want them to, these match-ups with heavyweights are inevitable. I don't care if they happen in the S-16 or later. If the season's on the line, might as well be against a team with the prestige and hype that this group has.
Love the Stewart Mandel bracket today. 4 in the west but manageable.
Side note, asu is a six seed right now. New Mexico State is a 12. If GCU can beat NMSU in the WAC tournament there is a good chance asu and GCU play each other.
2018 Bear Down Wildcats Conference Championship Challenge Champion
Why is Purdue a bad match up for us? I know, I know...the Bahamas. Don’t think we’re the same team. They’ve got two 7 footers. So do we. Our backcourt is arguably better. I’d rather face Painter than Izzo.
As far as moving up, we are never going to move ahead of the current top 4 (Nova, Virginia, Purdue and Xavier)
So, I'm going to keep track of the W/L record of teams 5-16 for the rest of the year since the top 16 announcement, to see realistically where we are in the pecking order.
I'll keep updating this list
Kansas (plays today)
Auburn
Duke
Cincinnati
Clemson
Michigan St. (plays today)
Texas Tech (plays today)
North Carolina (1-0)
Tennessee (plays today)
Ohio State
Arizona
Oklahoma
Alieberman wrote:As far as moving up, we are never going to move ahead of the current top 4 (Nova, Virginia, Purdue and Xavier)
So, I'm going to keep track of the W/L record of teams 5-16 for the rest of the year since the top 16 announcement, to see realistically where we are in the pecking order.
I'll keep updating this list
Kansas (plays today)
Auburn
Duke
Cincinnati
Clemson
Michigan St. (plays today)
Texas Tech (plays today)
North Carolina (1-0)
Tennessee (plays today)
Ohio State
Arizona
Oklahoma
In addition to W/L records of the above, could you also establish differing weights of wins and losses as related to home and away games, strength of opponents, and azcat49's "eye test" divided by the amount of potential top 4-seed's games he watches, but stretched along a analytically-determined curve advertisement-induced snack distractions?
In addition to W/L records of the above, could you also establish differing weights of wins and losses as related to home and away games, strength of opponents, and azcat49's "eye test" divided by the amount of potential top 4-seed's games he watches, but stretched along a analytically-determined curve advertisement-induced snack distractions?
Alieberman wrote:As far as moving up, we are never going to move ahead of the current top 4 (Nova, Virginia, Purdue and Xavier)
So, I'm going to keep track of the W/L record of teams 5-16 for the rest of the year since the top 16 announcement, to see realistically where we are in the pecking order.
I'll keep updating this list
Kansas (plays today)
Auburn
Duke
Cincinnati
Clemson
Michigan St. (plays today)
Texas Tech (plays today)
North Carolina (1-0)
Tennessee (plays today)
Ohio State
Arizona
Oklahoma
Great idea, thank you for doing this.
As far as a deeper dive on quality of opponent, home vs road, etc - a tracking of the team sheets is probably the easiest way to accomplish that. The nitty gritty report in particular does a good job of summarizing teams for comparison and the NCAA updates those daily.
So, I'm going to keep track of the W/L record of teams 5-16 for the rest of the year since the top 16 announcement, to see realistically where we are in the pecking order.
I'll keep updating this list
Kansas (1-0)
Auburn (1-0)
Duke (1-0)
Cincinnati (plays today)
Clemson (0-1)
Michigan St. (1-0)
Texas Tech (1-0)
North Carolina (1-0)
Tennessee (1-0)
Ohio State (plays today)
Arizona (plays today)
Oklahoma (0-1)
