0 |
Subject: March Madness 2010
Posted by: Bond, James Bond
- Leader [04352469] Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 19:51
Could they give #1 overall ranked Kansas a more difficult region? Big 10 champ Ohio State; Big East conference runner-up Georgetown; ACC regular season co-champ Maryland; Big 10 regular season power Michigan State; and the only team to beat BOTH Kansas and Kentucky this year----Tennessee. Good grief! |
1 | Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 19:53
|
The selection committee must be composed of Duke's cheerleader squad. How do both Kansas and Kentucky get in brackets so obviously more loaded than Duke's?
|
2 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 19:55
|
OSU had quite a tourney, but I think they've peaked too soon--I think they'll get bopped very quickly. That is a tough bracket though.
I was very surprised to see Xavier get a #6 spot (against #11 Minnesota--should be an interesting matchup).
|
3 | Seattle Zen
ID: 1410391215 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:07
|
Duke is just average this year, as anyone who has watched them knows. This was not a stellar year for the ACC, they would have struggled in the Big East. They absolutely are not a one seed. I think there are 13-14 better teams in the country, starting with Maryland! TERPS!
|
4 | Donkey Hunter
ID: 568242321 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:16
|
Re post 1: Does the difficulty of the regions really matter that much? Of the 5 teams you mentioned they can play at most 2.
|
5 | Bond, James Bond Leader
ID: 04352469 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:23
|
Of course difficulty of regions matter. Otherwise, why should they bother seeding teams. Would you prefer they just draw the 65 teams out of a hat? No matter who you are, you want the weakest draw possible in order to better enhance your opportunity to advance. Right?
|
6 | Farn Leader
ID: 451044109 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:24
|
Who is carrying more pom poms: the selection committee or SZ in post #3?
|
7 | Guru
ID: 330592710 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:35
|
Market Madness Contest site is loaded and ready for action!
|
8 | Bond, James Bond Leader
ID: 04352469 Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 20:37
|
Seriously, can all the insane talk of expansion to 96 teams now stop?!? None of the teams left out (I'm talking to you Miss. State; Va. Tech; Illinois, etc.) should have any gripe whatsoever of being left out of the dance.
What I do have a gripe with is that we probably have TOO MANY teams as is. Whenever an Arkansas-Pine Bluff can get in (and they started the year at 0-11!!!!), then seriously, can we talk about some modifications please. Say what you want, but there is NO WAY, an Arkansas-Pine Bluff should even get a sniff of this tournament, let alone be a part of it.
|
9 | Bond, James Bond Leader
ID: 04352469 Mon, Mar 15, 2010, 23:55
|
Interesting info:
• When you start your bracket, just place the Nos. 1 and 2 seeds in the second round. In fact, place your 1-seeds in the third round. Since 1985, 1-seeds are 100-0 and 2-seeds are 96-4 in the first round. 1-seeds are 88-12 in second-round games. Even if a 1- or 2-seed loses its first-round game, 99.99% of all brackets take a big hit, thus evening the playing field.
• Odds are at least one No. 2 seed will fall in the second round. No. 2s are 64-32 in second-round games.
• No. 3 seeds fare a little worse than No. 2 seeds (52-33), but an amazing second-round stat is that 6 seeds are 35-31 in second-round games. Go ahead and put your favorite 6-seed in the Sweet 16.
• Nos. 4 and 5 seeds are close to even in the second round, but an interesting stat in this part of the bracket is how successful 12-seeds are (17-16). If you like a 12-seed that is a traditionally strong program from a major conference (like Arizona in 2009, Villanova in 2008, Missouri in 2002), it's not a bad idea for a bubble team with something to prove.
If your instinct is for a No. 4 or 5 seed to win a Sweet 16 matchup against a No. 1, strongly consider putting that school in the Final Four. 4-seeds are 9-5 in regional finals and 5-seeds are 4-1. If a team is good enough to beat a No. 1, it should be good enough to beat whomever it faces in the regional final, especially with a tournament-savvy coach.
• At least one No. 1, most likely two, will reach the Final Four. Only once in the last 25 years (2006) did a Final Four contain zero 1-seeds. Two No. 1s have reached the Final Four 11 times. Only once, in 2008, did all No. 1 seeds reach the Final Four. Don't get too upset-happy. Fifteen of the last 25 champions were 1-seeds.
• Cinderella stories (7 seeds and below) usually see their runs end in the Sweet 16 or Elite 8.
Also, this tournament is set up for top-heavy success. Forty-four 1-seeds, 22 2-seeds and 12 3-seeds have made the last 25 Final Fours. That's 78 out of the last 100 Final Four teams. If you include the nine 4-seeds, 87% of Final Four participants come from the top 16 teams in the bracket. Again, don't overdo it with upsets, especially as you go deeper in the tournament.
• Major conferences factor: Your Final Four teams will come from the six major conferences (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10 or SEC). Since 1985, 88% of Final Four participants came from the majors. In the last 11 years, just four non-major conference schools — Memphis in 2008, George Mason in 2006, Louisville in 2005 and Marquette in 2003 — reached the Final Four. And, Louisville and Marquette now play in the Big East. Only two champions in the last 25 years (Louisville in 1986 and UNLV in 1990 — it's been 20 years!) have come from schools outside the six major conferences. At least three schools from the majors have made every Final Four since '85.
• Tournament experience of players and coaches: The combination of a tournament-hardened coach and players with tournament experience is a solid indicator of tournament success, whether the school is in one of the six major conferences or not. A double-digit seed from a mid-major or even smaller school that retained its coach and most of its players from a tournament appearance the year before is primed for a first- or even a second-round victory.
• By the way, only one school in the last 25 years (Syracuse in 2003) won the title after missing the tournament the previous year. An amazing freshman (Carmelo Anthony) helped there. Do I hear a shout-out for Kentucky (John Wall)?
All this may not be helpful in Guru's Market Madness Contest but can be very helpful in other bracket contests you enter.
Hope you enjoyed.
|
10 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Tue, Mar 16, 2010, 16:46
|
I remember Sister Rose from my time at Xavier. She's very good at what she does. And she's 77-0.
|
11 | robkat08
ID: 252181713 Wed, Mar 17, 2010, 14:18
|
the entire espn announcement team is and have always worn duke skirts and waved their pom poms..thars why they get preferential treatment every year
|
12 | Guru
ID: 330592710 Thu, Mar 18, 2010, 15:58
|
I've posted a sortable summary of the unit selections in the RotoGuru Market Madness contest. Click on any linked column heading to sort by that column. Kansas, the Big 12 basket, West Virginia, Baylor, Kansas State, and Kentucky are the most popular longs, while the #4 seed basket, Purdue, the ACC basket, Duke, Villanova, and the Big 10 were the most heavily shorted.
|
13 | Seattle Zen Leader
ID: 055343019 Thu, Mar 18, 2010, 22:11
|
HUSKIES!
|
14 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138 Sat, Mar 20, 2010, 09:11
|
The big east is killing me aaarrrggghhhhhhhh
|
15 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Sat, Mar 20, 2010, 19:53
|
I like underdogs. Except when they f-up my bracket. Damn you, Northern Iowa!
|
16 | GoatLocker Leader
ID: 060151121 Sat, Mar 20, 2010, 20:11
|
What an amazing win by the Panthers. Gotta love it.
|
17 | Seattle Zen
ID: 1410391215 Sat, Mar 20, 2010, 20:12
|
See post 13!
|
18 | Astade
ID: 38542218 Sun, Mar 28, 2010, 19:17
|
SZ, hope you are as happy as I am to see Duke back in the Final Four! :)
|
19 | Great One
ID: 592262415 Mon, Mar 29, 2010, 09:09
|
I'm pulling for Duke just because I see how angry it makes Maryland fans lol... who have been strangely quiet since they got booted on that last second shot. Its funny too, cause when I was in college, we knocked Maryland out of the tourney as well (College of Charleston). And they were just as cranky then. Fear the turtle haha...
|
20 | Da Bomb Donor
ID: 487112814 Mon, Mar 29, 2010, 09:50
|
??? I don't understand what you expect to happen to fans after a team loses in a tournament.
|
21 | Great One
ID: 592262415 Mon, Mar 29, 2010, 11:59
|
I guess my point is, they get as upset at being knocked out themselves, as they do with they aren't even involved and Duke is winning.
|
22 | Da Bomb Donor
ID: 487112814 Mon, Mar 29, 2010, 13:07
|
Sounds a lot like Red Sox/Yankees ;)
|
23 | Great One
ID: 592262415 Mon, Mar 29, 2010, 13:10
|
Yeah, I guess its that schaudenfruede thing or however it was spelled.
|
24 | astade Sustainer
ID: 214361313 Tue, Mar 30, 2010, 01:25
|
Da Bomb, feel free to take out your angst in the Dirty Dozen keeper league... in the interim, let's see if Duke can take advantage of their bracket (very fortunate) and seal the deal.
|
25 | Bond, James Bond Leader
ID: 04352469 Fri, Apr 02, 2010, 00:28
|
Can anyone explain the rationale behind the NCAA going to a 96 team tournament? Besides $$$ of course. ;>)
I don't understand why the college presidents would sign off on this but not on creating a playoff system for football that certainly would bring in big bucks as well.
Furthermore, with 96 teams, can you imagine just how tiny some of the print has to be just to get all the names listed on one's bracket? LOL
|
26 | Farn Leader
ID: 451044109 Fri, Apr 02, 2010, 01:49
|
96 teams means 32 teams more get in the tournament which means 32 more coaches can tell their administration they had a great season. That would reduce the amount of coaches getting fired. Plus the biggest factor is the money.
College football won't go to a tournament because they are afraid to hurt the money intake of the bowl games. They are afraid to tell the Rose Bowl its a semi final game.
|
27 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Fri, Apr 02, 2010, 03:35
|
96 teams? Might as well call it "March Low Grade Fever."
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|