|
|
Post by medusa on Dec 7, 2021 17:08:57 GMT -5
Washington or Texas vs Wisconsin for the big C
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 7, 2021 17:24:15 GMT -5
I will die with you on that hill. The year Texas got the 4 seed and Kansas got the 5 seed, when KU won the Big 12 in a full round robin of play was complete bullsh!t. As it turned out, KU go upset in the 2nd round and Texas would have hosted regardless. Conference standings need to carry some weight. Sorry, but no. Texas' dan Kansas' non-conference schedule was night and day. Texas was rewarded for playing a tougher non-conference schedule; the committee sent a message that clearly a lot of teams still don't understand. I lean more toward the idea that the actual message is "be Texas or Penn State or Stanford or Nebraska, because we will always try to find a justification for why these teams should be seeded more highly". It especially helps that they play each other almost every year, which then is used to justify the whole group as being elite because they play other elite teams. |
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Dec 7, 2021 17:30:20 GMT -5
OOC UCLA lost to San Diego UW lost to Illinois UCLA beat Georgia Tech (on a neutral court) UW won AT Illinois. Conference UW had 3 losses, all to teams that made the tournament (including UCLA). UCLA had 4 losses, (including UW) and lost to two teams that did not make the tournament. So explain to me, like you're talking to a first-grader, why UCLA got a higher seed. UCLA had a Top 10 win. UW didn't. 4/8 UW opponents had losing records (and a fifth was barely .500), while only 2/8 UCLA ones did. UW actually got lucky Portland cancelled. Hell, if Iowa had cancelled too UW might have gotten a top 10 seed. You conveniently left out the UCLA loss to ASU, losing record of 14-17 and only 7 wins in conference. And UCLA lost to USC, who also would have had a losing record had they not pulled an end-run and scheduled volleyball powerhouse Brown at the last minute like a scorned shoe tycoon trying to find another football coach. Oh, never mind, those are in-conference matches. And those don't count for squat. |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 7, 2021 17:34:13 GMT -5
UCLA had a Top 10 win. UW didn't. 4/8 UW opponents had losing records (and a fifth was barely .500), while only 2/8 UCLA ones did. UW actually got lucky Portland cancelled. Hell, if Iowa had cancelled too UW might have gotten a top 10 seed. You conveniently left out the UCLA loss to ASU, losing record of 14-17 and only 7 wins in conference. And UCLA lost to USC, who also would have had a losing record had they not pulled an end-run and schedule volleyball powerhouse Brown at the last minute like a scorned shoe tycoon trying to find another football coach. Oh, never mind, those are in-conference matches. And those don't count for squat. Meh losses never count for as much as big wins. That's one thing the Committee is actually consistent on. UCLA had wins over GT and Utah (x2) that UW couldn't match. The issue isn't that UW was seeded below UCLA, but that UW was seeded so low in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Dec 7, 2021 17:38:41 GMT -5
You conveniently left out the UCLA loss to ASU, losing record of 14-17 and only 7 wins in conference. And UCLA lost to USC, who also would have had a losing record had they not pulled an end-run and schedule volleyball powerhouse Brown at the last minute like a scorned shoe tycoon trying to find another football coach. Oh, never mind, those are in-conference matches. And those don't count for squat. Meh losses never count for as much as big wins. That's one thing the Committee is actually consistent on. UCLA had wins over GT and Utah (x2) that UW couldn't match. The issue isn't that UW was seeded below UCLA, but that UW was seeded so low in the first place. This is the point I’ve been waiting to hear. In aggregate; the PAC was underseeded. At this point it’s just a ‘that’s how the cookie crumbles’ situation. |
|
|
|
Post by tempesthorn on Dec 7, 2021 17:52:08 GMT -5
I will die with you on that hill. The year Texas got the 4 seed and Kansas got the 5 seed, when KU won the Big 12 in a full round robin of play was complete bullsh!t. As it turned out, KU go upset in the 2nd round and Texas would have hosted regardless. Conference standings need to carry some weight. Sorry, but no. Texas' and Kansas' non-conference schedules were night and day. Texas was rewarded for playing a tougher non-conference schedule; the committee sent a message that clearly a lot of teams still don't understand. The committee can still send a message to schedule tough non-conference without totally disregarding conference standings. They don't have to be mutually exclusive. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Dec 7, 2021 18:03:25 GMT -5
Sorry, but no. Texas' and Kansas' non-conference schedules were night and day. Texas was rewarded for playing a tougher non-conference schedule; the committee sent a message that clearly a lot of teams still don't understand. The committee can still send a message to schedule tough non-conference without totally disregarding conference standings. They don't have to be mutually exclusive. We're talking about separation by one national seed (as far as Kansas versus Texas several years ago, and UCLA versus Washington this year). When each team beat the other, the next metric is what other top wins did each team have that separates themselves from the other. |
|
|
|
Post by pbmu on Dec 7, 2021 18:03:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pbmu on Dec 7, 2021 18:04:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Dec 7, 2021 20:27:49 GMT -5
Sorry, but no. Texas' dan Kansas' non-conference schedule was night and day. Texas was rewarded for playing a tougher non-conference schedule; the committee sent a message that clearly a lot of teams still don't understand. I lean more toward the idea that the actual message is "be Texas or Penn State or Stanford or Nebraska, because we will always try to find a justification for why these teams should be seeded more highly". It especially helps that they play each other almost every year, which then is used to justify the whole group as being elite because they play other elite teams.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2021 20:39:26 GMT -5
Do husky fans do anything s except whine? “Nobody will play us” “so what we scheduled a ton of bad teams we want a good seed” “the other good programs get more special treatment”
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 7, 2021 20:42:36 GMT -5
Do huskie fans do anything s except whine? “Nobody will play us” “so what we scheduled a ton of bad teams we want a good seed” “the other good programs get more special treatment” Well, I guess unlike Kentucky fans this year, besides whining, we are also still watching our team play in the tournament. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2021 20:44:22 GMT -5
Do huskie fans do anything s except whine? “Nobody will play us” “so what we scheduled a ton of bad teams we want a good seed” “the other good programs get more special treatment” Well, I guess unlike Kentucky fans this year, besides whining, we are also still watching our team play in the tournament. lol? Okay? You sure got me there! We didn’t need 2 NC rings in one year anyway 😘 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2021 20:47:10 GMT -5
Anyway. Hook ‘em
|
|
|
|
Post by Longhorn20 on Dec 7, 2021 20:50:48 GMT -5
Ooh. Welcome to the dark side. |
|
