Texas out of tournament

[Wexahu]

This just gives Texas a reason to get rid of their coach. He has not been popular down there.

He's not a good coach. That should be reason enough.

 

[bc puckett]

Just wait, there will more expansion talk after this year, like always. There just aren't enough teams that are given a chance!

They've already pretty much ruined the regular season with the 64-team tournament, I guess why not just let every team in and be done with it. We are heading that way with football too.

Juice boxes and orange slices for everybody

 

[Frognosticator]

Just wait, there will more expansion talk after this year, like always. There just aren't enough teams that are given a chance!

They've already pretty much ruined the regular season with the 64-team tournament, I guess why not just let every team in and be done with it. We are heading that way with football too.

I disagree. I love the NCAA tournament, especially the first two days.

 

[CardFrog]

Texas losing = Chub

 

[Wexahu]

I disagree. I love the NCAA tournament, especially the first two days.

The NCAA Tournament is great, that's not the issue. The issue is that nobody really cares about college basketball until March, because so many teams make the tournament that the games featuring the better teams don't really mean anything.

And the NCAA Tournament would be just as good with 32 teams IMO. I'd argue it would be even better because you wouldn't have so many lopsided games. For all the talk about "cinderella", there are a whole bunch of lousy games that are played just for the sake of inclusion. The cinderella angle gets talked up way too much, I personally would rather just see the best teams play each other. The second weekend of the tournament is much better because most if not all of the clutter is gone, you see quality matchups.

 

[An-Cap Frog]

Would they have fired him had they won?

 

[Mean Purple]

I don't care what conference you're in, if you go 6-12, you don't deserve to be in the NCAA tourney.

It was brand [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ].

 

[Wexahu]

Would they have fired him had they won?

Won 1 game in the tournament? Yes, I think so. Had they won 3 or 4? No, probably not.

 

[Mean Purple]

The NCAA Tournament is great, that's not the issue. The issue is that nobody really cares about college basketball until March, because so many teams make the tournament that the games featuring the better teams don't really mean anything.

And the NCAA Tournament would be just as good with 32 teams IMO. I'd argue it would be even better because you wouldn't have so many lopsided games. For all the talk about "cinderella", there are a whole bunch of lousy games that are played just for the sake of inclusion. The cinderella angle gets talked up way too much, I personally would rather just see the best teams play each other. The second weekend of the tournament is much better because most if not all of the clutter is gone, you see quality matchups.

This is true. I didn't even really keep up with both men and ladies frogs until the last couple of weeks.

 

[Wexahu]

It was brand [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ].

Indiana and Ohio State were two of the first four out according to Lunardi. Is Texas a bigger basketball brand than those two?

When 68 freaking teams win the tournament, you're going to have to pick some "undeserving" teams somewhere along the way.

 

[TopFrog]

I would say half of the field is undeserving.

From Chat GPT:

The lowest-seeded team to win the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is Villanova, which won the championship in 1985 as a #8 seed.

That victory remains one of the most surprising and memorable in NCAA Tournament history, as Villanova defeated Georgetown in the final to claim the title.

In the history of the NCAA men's tournament, teams higher than a 10 seed that have made the Sweet Sixteen:

• No. 11 seed: 9 times
• No. 12 seed: 4 times
• No. 13 seed: 3 times
• No. 14 seed: 2 times
• No. 15 seed: 1 time
• No. 16 seed: 0 times (no team seeded 16 has ever made the Sweet Sixteen)

 

[Wexahu]

I would say half of the field is undeserving.

From Chat GPT:

The lowest-seeded team to win the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is Villanova, which won the championship in 1985 as a #8 seed.

That victory remains one of the most surprising and memorable in NCAA Tournament history, as Villanova defeated Georgetown in the final to claim the title.

In the history of the NCAA men's tournament, teams higher than a 10 seed that have made the Sweet Sixteen:

• No. 11 seed: 9 times
• No. 12 seed: 4 times
• No. 13 seed: 3 times
• No. 14 seed: 2 times
• No. 15 seed: 1 time
• No. 16 seed: 0 times (no team seeded 16 has ever made the Sweet Sixteen)

So in the 40 years of the 64-team tournament, here have been the odds of the seeds to win TWO GAMES. Not advance to the Final Four or actually win the thing, but win two freaking games.

11 seed - 5.6%
12 seed - 2.5%
13 seed - 1.9%
14 seed - 1.3%
15 seed - 0.6%
16 seed - 0.0%

And they think expansion is a good idea? LOLOLOL!!

As I said, the cinderella thing is way overblown. The 64-team field simply includes way many teams that either don't have any business being in the tournament by virtue of them being totally out of their league, or they had such an average regular season that they don't deserve to play. This idea that any time a team gets upset it supposedly "proves" that the tournament is great is dumb. Yeah, weird stuff happens sometimes and it's kinda fun to watch, but a pretty big cost is paid and those moments are fleeting and don't happen near as often as people think.

 

[TooColdU]

 

[helcap]

While I acknowledge that the SEC was the best league this season, Texas was 6-12 in Conference and did not have 20 wins and IMO never should have been selected, even for a play in game. I hope as Georgia is losing big that these bottom SEC teams all get knocked out early to lay bare the Selection Committees bias.

 

[Brog]

Give a nod in this discussion to neighboring McNeese State. Clemson wasn't expecting to be eliminated quite this quickly. (No 12 beats No 5)

 

[Wexahu]

Give a nod in this discussion to neighboring McNeese State. Clemson wasn't expecting to be eliminated quite this quickly. (No 12 beats No 5)

Upsets happen from time to time. They will always happen. Doesn’t mean they need to be in this tournament.

TCU could’ve beaten Clemson too. Did we belong?

 

[Spike]

A moment of silence. OK that's long enough.

 

[froginmn]

So in the 40 years of the 64-team tournament, here have been the odds of the seeds to win TWO GAMES. Not advance to the Final Four or actually win the thing, but win two freaking games.

11 seed - 5.6%
12 seed - 2.5%
13 seed - 1.9%
14 seed - 1.3%
15 seed - 0.6%
16 seed - 0.0%

And they think expansion is a good idea? LOLOLOL!!

As I said, the cinderella thing is way overblown. The 64-team field simply includes way many teams that either don't have any business being in the tournament by virtue of them being totally out of their league, or they had such an average regular season that they don't deserve to play. This idea that any time a team gets upset it supposedly "proves" that the tournament is great is dumb. Yeah, weird stuff happens sometimes and it's kinda fun to watch, but a pretty big cost is paid and those moments are fleeting and don't happen near as often as people think.

I think you're missing or ignoring what makes March Madness fun.

McNeese State from the Southland conference just upset Clemson from the ACC. Nobody expects them to make a run and reach the Final Four or win the thing; it's interesting and fun that McNeese just won their first tournament game.

A bunch of random people who don't know much about basketball picked this upset and will brag about it and have fun. People who hate the ACC (and people who are fans of other conference schools who hate Clemson) will revel in it and rag on their Clemson friends.

There will be several other similar upsets with the same result. Heck, we're posting in a KF.c thread about an eleven seed losing to another 11. The tournament is interesting exactly because of its size and its inclusion of small schools.

If this had been a 32 team field, you know how many people would be equally interested in Purdue beating Clemson? Exactly zero.

If the tournament were just about the end result you should reduce it to 16 teams, because in 39 years only three teams outside of #4 seeds have won it. You'd have loads of perfect brackets and a completely uninteresting tournament.

 

[Wexahu]

I think you're missing or ignoring what makes March Madness fun.

McNeese State from the Southland conference just upset Clemson from the ACC. Nobody expects them to make a run and reach the Final Four or win the thing; it's interesting and fun that McNeese just won their first tournament game.

A bunch of random people who don't know much about basketball picked this upset and will brag about it and have fun. People who hate the ACC (and people who are fans of other conference schools who hate Clemson) will revel in it and rag on their Clemson friends.

There will be several other similar upsets with the same result. Heck, we're posting in a KF.c thread about an eleven seed losing to another 11. The tournament is interesting exactly because of its size and its inclusion of small schools.

If this had been a 32 team field, you know how many people would be equally interested in Purdue beating Clemson? Exactly zero.

If the tournament were just about the end result you should reduce it to 16 teams, because in 39 years only three teams outside of #4 seeds have won it. You'd have loads of perfect brackets and a completely uninteresting tournament.

Let’s just do away with the regular season and everything that happens between November and the first couple weeks of March then. Because this week is fun.

Very few people care about college basketball until now. Nobody cares about conference championships. Even seeding is almost irrelevant. You’ve got teams that finished .500 or lower in their league on more or less even footing with teams that lost 5 games or less all year….after playing 35 games. It’s kinda dumb. But yeah, a few games are fun.

 

[Wexahu]

I think you're missing or ignoring what makes March Madness fun.

McNeese State from the Southland conference just upset Clemson from the ACC. Nobody expects them to make a run and reach the Final Four or win the thing; it's interesting and fun that McNeese just won their first tournament game.

A bunch of random people who don't know much about basketball picked this upset and will brag about it and have fun. People who hate the ACC (and people who are fans of other conference schools who hate Clemson) will revel in it and rag on their Clemson friends.

There will be several other similar upsets with the same result. Heck, we're posting in a KF.c thread about an eleven seed losing to another 11. The tournament is interesting exactly because of its size and its inclusion of small schools.

If this had been a 32 team field, you know how many people would be equally interested in Purdue beating Clemson? Exactly zero.

If the tournament were just about the end result you should reduce it to 16 teams, because in 39 years only three teams outside of #4 seeds have won it. You'd have loads of perfect brackets and a completely uninteresting tournament.

What would be uninteresting about a 16-team tournament?