Jump to content

The non-IU National Tournament thread…


Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Yep…should go back to 45…so they can do the same…dribble dribble dribble lol.

Coaches need to stop micro managing as well. They need to start the offense right away.  It seems like they set there offense up to just get one look at the end of the clock. Every pass or player movement objective should be to get you a shot

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Look at NW out of conference schedule. The only two quality teams they played they lost to Auburn and Pitt. There best ooc win is either Georgetown or Liberty 

Creighton was 11-1 in Quad 3 & 4 games.  Norhwestern was 10-0.  Not only did Creighton play MORE bad teams, they lost to one of them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Coaches need to stop micro managing as well. They need to start the offense right away.  It seems like they set there offense up to just get one look at the end of the clock. Every pass or player movement objective should be to get you a shot

I see very little micro management by the coaches except at the end of games when it matters most. I see players making plays within the context of the offense they run 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Creighton was 11-1 in Quad 3 & 4 games.  Norhwestern was 10-0.  Not only did Creighton play MORE bad teams, they lost to one of them.  

Aren't you nit picking s little between 1 seed line with Creighton and ISU. like I said the difference could have came down to having to switch NW down a spot for bracketing purposes.

 

Edited by IU Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Aren't you nit picking s little between 1 seed line with Creighton and ISU. like I said the difference could have came down to having to switch NW down a spot for bracketing purposes.

 

Just let him be right…there is no point arguing about a seed line. These teams are all so close who knows what metric separated them…but I can pretty well guarantee they didn’t decide the B1G sucks and that was it. It just isn’t worth arguing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geez the shooting in this Marquette/MSU game is terrible…also been pretty physical game which benefits Michigan St. just not impressed with Marquette….they don’t look like a 2 seed. They’ve traveled like a million times and spent more time on the floor than the towel boys.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

Yes they will, and it will have zero effect on what CMW is building. 

I agree, and I think one of Coach Woodson's goals is to recruit long athletic types like they have in the SEC...

Michigan probably has the closest to an SEC roster I've seen... But they don't have a guy that can coach them... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Aren't you not picking s little between 1 seed line with Creighton and ISU like I said the difference could have came down to having to switch NW down a spot for bracketing purposes.

 

I was simply using Creighton and Northwestern to counter the posts that indicated the number of Quad 1 wins played a 'huge' part in Xavier being seeded a 3 versus Memphis a 9.  My point is that, if that 'huge' difference played a part in seeding in the Xavier example, why did the same 'huge' difference have no bearing in the NW seeding.

The committee is on the record as stating that they RANK the teams first and then use the metrics to sort out from there.  So, if the metrics played no part ranking the teams, what did?

Hmmm, maybe just maybe, WHILE DOING THEIR RANKINGS, the committee had the perception that the Big 12 was really, really good, the Big 10 was pretty good, but not at the Big 12 level, the Big East was good, and the American basically sucked. And maybe, just maybe, those perceptions played a part in the seed certain teams received.  

Because if it isn't perceptions, and it sure as heck isn't the metrics, then what the hell did they use to do their initial rankings?  Mascot popularity? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Geez the shooting in this Marquette/MSU game is terrible…also been pretty physical game which benefits Michigan St. just not impressed with Marquette….they don’t look like a 2 seed. They’ve traveled like a million times and spent more time on the floor than the towel boys.

The Big East teams are over-seeded, but that's a different discussion.  :coffee:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Steubenhoosier said:

Bottom line, I’d just like to sit in my recliner, drink in hand, and enjoy the games without worrying about who got screwed by the selection committee 

My point really isn't about who got screwed.  It's about the importance of the perception the conference has.  And, if the Big 10 flames out yet again, then it could impact conference teams, including IU, in the future.  It would be a very good thing for both MSU and IU to win today.  

  • 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...