2011 March Madness Thread

[Shellin]

Any of the top 11 teams in that conference could've made it this far. That is how deep that conference was this year.

And yet only 2 of them did, with nearly every Big East team losing to a team seeded worse than they were, the only exception was West Virginia losing to Kentucky (and obviously the BE teams that knocked themselves out). When the top of the conference can beat up on Rutgers, Providence, South Florida and DePaul for an easy 6 wins or so it doesn't take much to finish 9-9 in conference. We shouldn't have to worry about them getting this many in in the future I guess though, since I seriously doubt the bubble will be this soft most years.

I guess most of what I'm frustrated with is having to hear how great the Big East is all the time. They have a lot of above average teams and no great ones, as this years tournament proves and yet ESPN and the national media won't shut up about them.

[Thundering Herd]

Any of the top 11 teams in that conference could've made it this far. That is how deep that conference was this year.

And yet only 2 of them did, with nearly every Big East team losing to a team seeded worse than they were, the only exception was West Virginia losing to Kentucky (and obviously the BE teams that knocked themselves out). When the top of the conference can beat up on Rutgers, Providence, South Florida and DePaul for an easy 6 wins or so it doesn't take much to finish 9-9 in conference. We shouldn't have to worry about them getting this many in in the future I guess though, since I seriously doubt the bubble will be this soft most years.

I guess most of what I'm frustrated with is having to hear how great the Big East is all the time. They have a lot of above average teams and no great ones, as this years tournament proves and yet ESPN and the national media won't shut up about them.

I totally agree with your second statement. The BE is all about depth, not much separates 1-11. Heck their #1 lost to 8 seeded Butler, who is very good in their own respect. And yes they are overhyped by the media, but the BE is still the best conference. Even if you don't like it.

[Shellin]

Oh, I won't disagree with you that the Big East is the best conference, just like I won't disagree with anyone that says the SEC is the best football conference. I just don't believe the Big East or SEC are miles and miles ahead of everyone else as the talking heads would like to have everyone believe.

[Thundering Herd]

Oh, I won't disagree with you that the Big East is the best conference, just like I won't disagree with anyone that says the SEC is the best football conference. I just don't believe the Big East or SEC are miles and miles ahead of everyone else as the talking heads would like to have everyone believe.

Agreed. It is kind of ironic that the BE has only two teams left. Plus the 10, 11, & 12 seeds are still left in the SW Region. I bet no one saw that one coming

[bonarae]

Eight simple words. I. Don't. Want. Duke. To. Win. It. All. I'm for Ohio State. My two previous teams (Princeton and Michigan) are already out.

[bluehenbillk]

My pool is in shambles 8 of Sweet 16, bottom third of almost every pool i'm in, ugh, went down with the Big East.

[89Hen]

27 of 32 in first round 9 of 16 second round but still have 6 of elite 8 still alive

[GannonFan]

Oh, I won't disagree with you that the Big East is the best conference, just like I won't disagree with anyone that says the SEC is the best football conference. I just don't believe the Big East or SEC are miles and miles ahead of everyone else as the talking heads would like to have everyone believe.

There were plenty of talking heads that were pointing out that the Big East didn't have a real national title contender in their mix, just a lot of good depth. Someone still had to get a #1 seed and Pitt did, but the other seeding was fair. And having their 10th and 11th place teams still around testifies to that.

[Silenoz]

Any of the top 11 teams in that conference could've made it this far. That is how deep that conference was this year.

And yet only 2 of them did, with nearly every Big East team losing to a team seeded worse than they were, the only exception was West Virginia losing to Kentucky (and obviously the BE teams that knocked themselves out). When the top of the conference can beat up on Rutgers, Providence, South Florida and DePaul for an easy 6 wins or so it doesn't take much to finish 9-9 in conference. We shouldn't have to worry about them getting this many in in the future I guess though, since I seriously doubt the bubble will be this soft most years.

I guess most of what I'm frustrated with is having to hear how great the Big East is all the time. They have a lot of above average teams and no great ones, as this years tournament proves and yet ESPN and the national media won't shut up about them.

As a Pitt fan (and Marquette to a degree), I agree. Conference wars are the gayest shit to happen to sports this decade and wish people would stfu about that stuff. I hate having to hear about it, and then having it thrown in our faces when a BE team doesn't win it all, as if I should care about WVU, UConn, Cuse, etc. failing

[tampajag]

And yet only 2 of them did, with nearly every Big East team losing to a team seeded worse than they were, the only exception was West Virginia losing to Kentucky (and obviously the BE teams that knocked themselves out). When the top of the conference can beat up on Rutgers, Providence, South Florida and DePaul for an easy 6 wins or so it doesn't take much to finish 9-9 in conference. We shouldn't have to worry about them getting this many in in the future I guess though, since I seriously doubt the bubble will be this soft most years.

I guess most of what I'm frustrated with is having to hear how great the Big East is all the time. They have a lot of above average teams and no great ones, as this years tournament proves and yet ESPN and the national media won't shut up about them.

As a Pitt fan (and Marquette to a degree), I agree. Conference wars are the gayest **** to happen to sports this decade and wish people would stfu about that stuff. I hate having to hear about it, and then having it thrown in our faces when a BE team doesn't win it all, as if I should care about WVU, UConn, Cuse, etc. failing

I agree but it's the nature of the beast, you can't expect a league to get almost 70% of their teams in and nobody say anything when they screw the pooch. ACC only got four in, people would crack on them if only one of the four had made it to the sweet 16. it is what it is.

[Silenoz]

I don't see a problem with the selections, especially since they're getting deeper and deeper into the realms of mediocrity with the new play-in games. I mean it's not like the last ACC team in set the world on fire.

I just figure most people who fell for the Big East hype are the same people who don't watch a single basketball game all year, listen to a few talking heads while filling out their bracket, and act shocked when things don't work out for them. Parity is the name of the game anymore and the only safe bets are the truly elite teams. Which the Big East certainly did not have this year. But they did have 11 good to decent teams.

[dbackjon]

I don't see a problem with the selections, especially since they're getting deeper and deeper into the realms of mediocrity with the new play-in games. I mean it's not like the last ACC team in set the world on fire.

I just figure most people who fell for the Big East hype are the same people who don't watch a single basketball game all year, listen to a few talking heads while filling out their bracket, and act shocked when things don't work out for them. Parity is the name of the game anymore and the only safe bets are the truly elite teams. Which the Big East certainly did not have this year. But they did have 11 good to decent teams.

But definately over-seeded...5 of the teams had top four seeds. Only one of those made it to the Sweet Sixteen.

[Silenoz]

No argument there. Though it was much, much worse last year. Pitt and Georgetown at #3 seeds was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

[bandl]

No argument there. Though it was much, much worse last year. Pitt and Georgetown at #3 seeds was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Have you ever seen women play tackle football? It's pretty ridiculous.
Have you ever seen midgets play soccer? It's even more ridiculous.
Have you ever seen Texas? I rest my point.

I think you need to get out more if you think two Big East teams getting #3 seeds is the most ridiculous thing you've ever seen.

[Silenoz]

No argument there. Though it was much, much worse last year. Pitt and Georgetown at #3 seeds was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Have you ever seen women play tackle football? It's pretty ridiculous.
Have you ever seen midgets play soccer? It's even more ridiculous.
Have you ever seen Texas? I rest my point.

I think you need to get out more if you think two Big East teams getting #3 seeds is the most ridiculous thing you've ever seen.

I actually haven't seen any of those things

But okay, it was very ridiculous. Not in the league of titans such as
[youtube][/youtube]

[GannonFan]

I don't see a problem with the selections, especially since they're getting deeper and deeper into the realms of mediocrity with the new play-in games. I mean it's not like the last ACC team in set the world on fire.

I just figure most people who fell for the Big East hype are the same people who don't watch a single basketball game all year, listen to a few talking heads while filling out their bracket, and act shocked when things don't work out for them. Parity is the name of the game anymore and the only safe bets are the truly elite teams. Which the Big East certainly did not have this year. But they did have 11 good to decent teams.

But definately over-seeded...5 of the teams had top four seeds. Only one of those made it to the Sweet Sixteen.

But which of those top 4 seed teams should've been seeded lower? And who should've been seeded ahead of them? Of the eight #5's and #6 seeds, only one is still playing - Arizona. So maybe Louisville should've been a 5 and Arizona a 4? Is that all the change we'd be talking about?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

But definately over-seeded...5 of the teams had top four seeds. Only one of those made it to the Sweet Sixteen.

But which of those top 4 seed teams should've been seeded lower? And who should've been seeded ahead of them? Of the eight #5's and #6 seeds, only one is still playing - Arizona. So maybe Louisville should've been a 5 and Arizona a 4? Is that all the change we'd be talking about?

the problem was the "mushy middle" after the 2 and maybe the 3 seeds - there was little difference between seeds 4-13... none of those teams were overly remarkable - they were all just "pretty good" if you look at the first round - it was like it was most years - mostly chalk with a few upsets. the difference this year has been 1) that upset teams are winning a second game and 2) the teams "upset" fall in to the "traditional powers" categories, making them perhaps more noteworthy

[dbackjon]

But definately over-seeded...5 of the teams had top four seeds. Only one of those made it to the Sweet Sixteen.

But which of those top 4 seed teams should've been seeded lower? And who should've been seeded ahead of them? Of the eight #5's and #6 seeds, only one is still playing - Arizona. So maybe Louisville should've been a 5 and Arizona a 4? Is that all the change we'd be talking about?

Valid point, but as a whole, The Big East got way too much credit - seeding lines could have been bumped down several notches. Case in point Villanova a 9 was insane - they should not have been in the tourney at all. Louisville a 4? Not even close

[GannonFan]

But which of those top 4 seed teams should've been seeded lower? And who should've been seeded ahead of them? Of the eight #5's and #6 seeds, only one is still playing - Arizona. So maybe Louisville should've been a 5 and Arizona a 4? Is that all the change we'd be talking about?

Valid point, but as a whole, The Big East got way too much credit - seeding lines could have been bumped down several notches. Case in point Villanova a 9 was insane - they should not have been in the tourney at all. Louisville a 4? Not even close

But it can't be done in a vacuum - you can't say the Big East should have gotten lower seeds and not say who was more worthy of those seeds. It's not like you're going to leave some seeds blank because you can't think of a team worthy of the seed.

As for nova - I agree that 9 was too high, should've been 11 and maybe a play in game - but out of the tournament altogether? Again, can't be done in a vacuum - which team that didn't make the tournament should've gotten in over them?

And as for Louisville, was was #4 too high? Based on what? Their RPI was something like #16, so that's right in line. Kenpom had them at #14 so that's still in line. They finished the year with 7 wins in 10 games, so no red flag there. And they finished 4th in their conference, so it's not like they tanked during the year. So if a #4 seed was "not even close", where should they have been seeded? And is there any basis for that except looking back after the fact?

[dbackjon]

Colorado and Va Tech over Villanova

[EPJr]

No argument there. Though it was much, much worse last year. Pitt and Georgetown at #3 seeds was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.

Have you ever seen women play tackle football? It's pretty ridiculous.
Have you ever seen midgets play soccer? It's even more ridiculous.
Have you ever seen Texas? I rest my point..

actually the Lingerie League was pretty hot


The Uruguay National Team was pretty good
Texas has decent FB and BB teams

[GannonFan]

Colorado and Va Tech over Villanova

So that's your earth shattering change that should've happened? The Big East gets 10 teams rather than 11? And really, Colorado? Their best OOC win was, wait for it - Indiana? And while nova struggled down the stretch, Colorado didn't really do much better - Colorado finished the regular season on a 5-8 stretch in their last 13, and only won 3 road games all year (and that includes the road win at always hostile Cal St Bakersfield - apparently Cal St Taft was not available).

Va Tech is a better choice and really, is almost a coin flip with nova. But they had plenty of warts - only one quality OOC win (against Penn St) while nova had three quality OOC wins (Temple, UCLA, and Maryland). And while nova had bad losses against Providence and Rutgers, Va Tech found a way to get swept by Boston College and Virginia over 4 games - that's a feat that's hard to do. And beating Duke was great and all, but St John's beatdown of Duke carried a lot of weight when comparing the conferences. Resume-wise, it's hard to make a compelling argument for Va Tech over nova, although you're welcome to try.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

considering the fuss and bother about who got it in... it's kind of a wash.

people were pissed about 11 big east teams - but remember that an at-large bid is based on the cumulative body of work - not last 10 games...

UAB - probably shouldn't have made it, less so than any big east team - and proved it - getting smoked in the opening round (

VCU - proving all the haters wrong beating 3 major conference teams thusfar

but if you tossed out Nova or Marquette for Va Tech or Colorado - that would have been what everyone was (rightly) pissed about... besides - neither team was going to be more than one and done anyway. There's a reason they were bubble teams - and with the expanded field - they have NO excuse... they'd have been next four out teams in 2010...

[GannonFan]

considering the fuss and bother about who got it in... it's kind of a wash.

people were pissed about 11 big east teams - but remember that an at-large bid is based on the cumulative body of work - not last 10 games...

UAB - probably shouldn't have made it, less so than any big east team - and proved it - getting smoked in the opening round (

VCU - proving all the haters wrong beating 3 major conference teams thusfar

but if you tossed out Nova or Marquette for Va Tech or Colorado - that would have been what everyone was (rightly) pissed about... besides - neither team was going to be more than one and done anyway. There's a reason they were bubble teams - and with the expanded field - they have NO excuse... they'd have been next four out teams in 2010...

Even though I'm from the CAA, let's be honest, VCU didn't deserve to be in the tourney. Their big in OOC was UCLA (good) and I guess Wichita St, but then they lost to Tennessee, Richmond, UAB, and South Florida. And they went 5-6 in their last 11 games. You seldom see mid major teams tank that badly to end the season and still get in. And their RPI and other numbers were awful. While they may be proving the "haters" wrong, they're also proving themselves wrong - there's a reason why there's no video of the team celebration when they got into the tourney, and it's because they didn't even meet as a team since a selection was thought to be impossible. They had to call around to find everyone on the team to meet up after the fact. With that said, good for them that they've played so well through 3 games.

[ASUG8]

At the risk of jinxing myself I'm leading our work pool and according to ESPN my bracket picks put me in the 99.1 percentile of all entries. I have Dook to repeat, so we'll see how the weekend goes.