Jump to content

The non-IU National Tournament thread…


Recommended Posts

A thought occurred to me about the impact of the NIL rules- it essentially leveled the playing field versus whatever Cal used to do to get the top recruits. One reason we are seeing so much parity in this tournament is because the top talent is being spread around more. Cal was always more of a recruiter than a coach. It’s fun to watch them implode. Now, if IU can just win tonight, it would give us something we haven’t had against all of our rivals in either end of the state for a long while- bragging rights 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

Scott is like every other American that only reads the headlines without actually understanding the context of the rebuttal! 

I understand the NCAA tournament process quit well and have followed it for years. I saw Fouls thinking the big ten had some bad seeding which I disagree with that 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SawatchHoosier said:

MSU came ready to play. They're killing Marquette on the offensive glass right now. 

Well it's a bunch of crap. I'm sitting in 5th in my work pool out of 170.  Top 3 get amazon gift cards. 1st place guy has FAU winning it all. I'm so close right now. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SawatchHoosier said:

The amount of ankle sprains so far in the tournament has been terrible. I can't help thinking that the slick floors they're using is contributing to this issue.

It’s almost like the grounds crew from the Super Bowl is working the NCAA. Also, I have never been a fan of the low cut shoes they are all wearing, I think that contributes 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, John S said:

And too plodding.  This has been the situation for years.  

It became a copy cap league…Wisconsin started having success with that and Purdue was only too happy to also to play that game. Adding Penn St and Rutgers over the years who saw the only way to compete was to muck it up didn’t help. Michigan St has always been that physical team…but come March it really is not a recipe for a lot of success. You need some good matchups for that style and Wisconsin has made a couple runs…but most of B1Gs best teams over the past decade or two Illinois, Ohio St, Michigan, Indiana have had a very up tempo or balanced approach. Heck Purdues best team came from an up tempo (for them) point guard and sharpe shooting two and athletic wing. We just have suffered from not having those elite/athletic guards…those that can make those dangerous runs.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

It gets tiring seeing teams run the shot clock down to where they have to take bad shots to avoid a shot clock violation 

Taking a really bad shot is just like a turnover. I'd rather see a shot clock violation than take a bad shot and have the opposition start a transition fast break. At least with the shot clock violation, they have to take it out of bounds and you have a chance to set up your defense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BGleas said:

They are not the result of conference affiliation, except for how the teams you play make up your team sheet. The committee doesn't even really look at the NET, they look at your team sheet and what details are on the sheet. 

Conference affiliation is not part of that on the surface level. They aren't looking at two teams and say, "well, team A's conference did really well in the tournament last year and Team B's didn't, so let's give Team A a 5 seed and Team B a 9 seed" 

It just doesn't work that way. These are essentially blind sheets in terms of the conference affiliation until they get to the point of ensuring conference teams aren't matched up in the first two rounds. 

At the end of the day, the Big Ten's performance this year will have absolutely nothing to do with where IU is seeded next year, assuming we make it. 

Edit: As was mentioned by our Illini friend, Xavier had 9 Quad 1 wins vs Memphis with 4. That's a massive difference. 

 

21 minutes ago, BruceDouglas said:

9 Q1 wins vs 4 is a huge difference.

So is Northwestern with 7 Quad 1 wins compared to Creighton with 3.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Rev_AK said:

It’s almost like the grounds crew from the Super Bowl is working the NCAA. Also, I have never been a fan of the low cut shoes they are all wearing, I think that contributes 

And here I thought I was weird thinking about WTF are you all wearing low tops... But as normal, I have WONDERFUL ideas, shortly after everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 5fouls said:

 

So is Northwestern with 7 Quad 1 wins compared to Creighton with 3.

 

You can keep bouncing around to different metrics and different teams, but the bottom line is that the committee is not taking conference tournament performance into consideration whatsoever. Literally it's not a consideration at all. 

They also aren't looking at conference affiliation in terms of seeding, other then to ensure conference teams aren't playing each other. 

The way conference affiliation comes into play is that the teams in your conference go a long way in terms of building your team sheet. How many Quad 1 wins you had, your SOS, etc.  But, it's not like IU's sheet is stamped with a "Big 10" on it and then IU is getting docked because of some conspiracy theory or because Purdue has gotten upset the last 3 years. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...