goramblers2011 wrote:
ramblermgr9599 wrote:
I believe Palm said injuries are considered with seeding but not with selection. He spoke of Custer in relation to Loyola's at large chances.
Which is exactly what is happening with ND--very much a bubble team. Their at-large profile is being considered by taking into account Colson's injury. Have heard multiple analysts cite ND's w/l record with and without him. The bias is unreal.
Not to mention--how in the WORLD is St. Mary's considered an at-large team (well, a bubble team at this point)? Loyola's profile is almost identical, maybe even slightly better, and we were told that LU would have little-to-no shot at an at-large bid.
I don't begrudge St. Mary's being considered an at large team. If you're 28-5 overall and 16-2 in conference, with an RPI of 45, of course you should get an at large, especially if it knocks an 8-10 Big 12 team with 13 season losses and a 47 RPI out of the tournament.
I'm more interested in seeding..... I don't understand how we're below Texas (the 8-12 Big 12 team I just mentioned) AND St. Mary's AND NC State AND Oklahoma (lost 7 of their last 9) AND Arizona State AND Baylor (another 8-12 Big 12 team, who's 17-13 on the year). The idea that all those teams are slotted for the 9 to 11 lines in most bracketology estimates, and we're considered a 12 is pretty ridiculous.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
