Wednesday, March 29, 2006
RETRO: GEORGE MASON'D!!!!
I still like Florida over LSU for the final four, but they’re about even now. Nothing would really surprise me anymore.Tyrus Thomas is almost certainly coming out, and so is Yannick Noah. Al Horford and Big Baby Davis might go too. Thomas and Noah are reported to be top 5 picks, and the others guys would be in the top 15. So, this final will at least have some NBA talent on hand. Without UConn, though, it’s not nearly as much as it could be.
Monday, March 27, 2006
RETRO: my bracket sucks
George Mason!
I didn’t even see this game because I figured that UConn had to win by 20 or so. I was worried about all those close games they had, but then, there was no way that they could possibly blow this, right? This has to be up there with all the great upsets in tourney history – N.C. State, Kansas and Villanova winning titles in the 80’s, LSU making it as an 11 seed, everything. My one rule was that mid-majors can make the Elite Eight if things work out, but they never win. Well, a Colonial team is going to the Final Four. Unbelievable.
I don’t even know how this will affect pools across the country. I’m guessing that most people are done, but then, maybe everyone else is too. People will win this by just getting half of the Final Four right, not the championship. Diehard fans of these schools will be giddy that their brash picks will turn out true (how many Mason fans turned in a dream bracket and will see it become real?) I called Florida and I was tempted by LSU, and I think some people have those. A lot of people did pick UCLA for that region. Screw them. They should not be here. I will not let myself be sucked in by their run. They should have lost to Gonzaga.
So who wins this now? Some team that no one predicted before the season, that’s who. None of these teams seems to have the stars necessary to win it all, and after Duke, UConn, Texas, Memphis, Villanova, Gonzaga, North Carolina, Boston College, and Ohio State are out, how do we pick? No expert would have taken anyone besides those teams as a champion. Maybe some would have UCLA or Florida in the big game, but just a few, and now one of these teams is going to win it all. This is like the ’98 Kentucky-Utah game or 2003 when Arizona and Kentucky were supposed to be the overwhelming faves and neither made it to the Final Four, and a young Syracuse team snuck in there to win it all. There is no logic to this.
My pick now is Florida over LSU, since they are the only team from my original Four to make it. I think they’ve come on strong, and they have the big men to hang with LSU along with a load of guards to throw at them. I’m still doubting UCLA and I think George Mason has made it further than anyone imagined (actually, they did that with just one good win, let alone four). LSU is my second choice, then UCLA, then Mason. If the Colonial upstarts pull off the impossible some brash alumni might get very rich if they put down the money early on. Who’s to say how this will turn out? They’ve etched their place in history, at least.
I didn’t even see this game because I figured that UConn had to win by 20 or so. I was worried about all those close games they had, but then, there was no way that they could possibly blow this, right? This has to be up there with all the great upsets in tourney history – N.C. State, Kansas and Villanova winning titles in the 80’s, LSU making it as an 11 seed, everything. My one rule was that mid-majors can make the Elite Eight if things work out, but they never win. Well, a Colonial team is going to the Final Four. Unbelievable.
I don’t even know how this will affect pools across the country. I’m guessing that most people are done, but then, maybe everyone else is too. People will win this by just getting half of the Final Four right, not the championship. Diehard fans of these schools will be giddy that their brash picks will turn out true (how many Mason fans turned in a dream bracket and will see it become real?) I called Florida and I was tempted by LSU, and I think some people have those. A lot of people did pick UCLA for that region. Screw them. They should not be here. I will not let myself be sucked in by their run. They should have lost to Gonzaga.
So who wins this now? Some team that no one predicted before the season, that’s who. None of these teams seems to have the stars necessary to win it all, and after Duke, UConn, Texas, Memphis, Villanova, Gonzaga, North Carolina, Boston College, and Ohio State are out, how do we pick? No expert would have taken anyone besides those teams as a champion. Maybe some would have UCLA or Florida in the big game, but just a few, and now one of these teams is going to win it all. This is like the ’98 Kentucky-Utah game or 2003 when Arizona and Kentucky were supposed to be the overwhelming faves and neither made it to the Final Four, and a young Syracuse team snuck in there to win it all. There is no logic to this.
My pick now is Florida over LSU, since they are the only team from my original Four to make it. I think they’ve come on strong, and they have the big men to hang with LSU along with a load of guards to throw at them. I’m still doubting UCLA and I think George Mason has made it further than anyone imagined (actually, they did that with just one good win, let alone four). LSU is my second choice, then UCLA, then Mason. If the Colonial upstarts pull off the impossible some brash alumni might get very rich if they put down the money early on. Who’s to say how this will turn out? They’ve etched their place in history, at least.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
RETRO: ncaa 06 is fillet
With as much time as I spent last week on my bracket, I figured I would probably still be watching things burning and crashing and me looking stupid. Well, I’m actually doing alright, not terribly, although I’m still scratching my head over the West/Oakland regional. For the six online bracket contests I filled out, I think I put down five different winners. I didn’t like Kansas or UCLA or Memphis, but I also didn’t really trust my Gonzaga and Indiana polls. Well, Gonzaga took down Indiana, killing the only bracket I spent money on, but making me happy that Adam Morrison’s fantastic pedestache will live another day. I can only hope that Gonzaga keeps winning so that we can get more shots of it, and also so the local talk shows will shut up about UCLA. Seriously, the Pac Ten sucks. I don’t care how good Washington is playing.
So I’ll keep my online pick of Gonzaga in that one. But the more I think about it, the more I realized I should not have doubted Memphis. Rodney Carney can take it to the hole, so that alleviates their overreliance on the long ball. They are the most talented team in that bracket, and they did beat UCLA and Gonzaga earlier this year. Still not as good a story as the ‘stache.
I still like LSU over Duke, though they made me sweat with that narrow win over Texas A & M (whom I did call, you Syracuse jerks). I don’t think West Virginia is making a run this year as much as they’ve gotten favorable matchups. Texas is still my overall choice here.
UConn worried a lot of people with two close games, but some teams get these early and then never look back. I don’t think Washington has the size to contend with them. And yes, I totally saw that Wichita vs. George Mason game coming. Every year, there comes a broken bracket where a couple upsets lead to a low seed team making it far over another. For the record, I chose Wichita to advance, so my suave picking won’t really help me all too much if George Mason gets it, because nobody else picked them anyway. Wichita at least comes from a very good mid-major conference.
I almost got the Mid/Nova one, but Georgetown snuck in there. That’s not entirely surprising, though Ohio State was playing well. I still like Boston College to batter Nova with their big men, and for Florida to surpass everyone.
To recap, my updated picks for Thursday and Friday:
Memphis, Gonzaga, LSU, Texas, UConn, Wichita, Boston College, Florida
Final Four & Championship: same as last week (still intact) UConn over Texas (Gonzaga and Florida semis)
So I’ll keep my online pick of Gonzaga in that one. But the more I think about it, the more I realized I should not have doubted Memphis. Rodney Carney can take it to the hole, so that alleviates their overreliance on the long ball. They are the most talented team in that bracket, and they did beat UCLA and Gonzaga earlier this year. Still not as good a story as the ‘stache.
I still like LSU over Duke, though they made me sweat with that narrow win over Texas A & M (whom I did call, you Syracuse jerks). I don’t think West Virginia is making a run this year as much as they’ve gotten favorable matchups. Texas is still my overall choice here.
UConn worried a lot of people with two close games, but some teams get these early and then never look back. I don’t think Washington has the size to contend with them. And yes, I totally saw that Wichita vs. George Mason game coming. Every year, there comes a broken bracket where a couple upsets lead to a low seed team making it far over another. For the record, I chose Wichita to advance, so my suave picking won’t really help me all too much if George Mason gets it, because nobody else picked them anyway. Wichita at least comes from a very good mid-major conference.
I almost got the Mid/Nova one, but Georgetown snuck in there. That’s not entirely surprising, though Ohio State was playing well. I still like Boston College to batter Nova with their big men, and for Florida to surpass everyone.
To recap, my updated picks for Thursday and Friday:
Memphis, Gonzaga, LSU, Texas, UConn, Wichita, Boston College, Florida
Final Four & Championship: same as last week (still intact) UConn over Texas (Gonzaga and Florida semis)
Monday, March 13, 2006
RETRO: final four '06 preview
March madness… is now.
And though you may not care much about it or even know what it is, the NIT field was also released this week and I'm sad to say that La Salle was not in it, which is a f---ing shame. 14 years since a winning team, 18 wins, and third place in a middle level conference used to be good enough, but no, the NIT is different now, and they started whittling down invitees and giving them to either unknown, very low level teams with good records or mediocre teams from big conferences. I didn't want to see Penn State shut out, of course, but I don't know if they or Virginia are really worthy of it. The NCAA now also owns the NIT and made new rules that all regular season champions of every conference, if they don't win their tourney and get in the NCAA, must at least get in the NIT.
So all these teams from tiny conferences, which can be anyone, get in, and then the obvious snubs from the NCAA's, plus low-level big teams. Look, I know the ACC is tough, but to have all 12 teams playing in the postseason is unfair to all the other conferences. And if they're so good, why are only 4 teams in the big dance? Miami and Wake Forest are barely eligible (over .500). And many times, the one seed in low conferences isn't that much better than the rest of the league, and a lot of 2 or 3 seeds get in that are good. I hate to cut out he small ones, though, so I don't know. Also, if they're concerned about where teams finish, they should know that Temple and St. Joseph’s finished below La Salle in the A-10 standings. They are in. LS is out. Alas.
Down to the real brackets. I’ve made my complaints heard before and I stand by them. I don’t like a lot of these seedings but there’s nothing to say about that now. It’s time to go. I’ve made a lot of brackets this week in various contests and I don’t even know what all my picks have been. So it’s hard to say what my official thoughts are; I can see a lot of possibilities. I did, however, come up with a few rules of my own. Don’t take them too seriously; these are just my opinions and I never claimed to be a real expert. Just a fan. I haven’t won a pool yet, though I’ve been close. Here’s my thinking…..
1. Teams that live and die by the long ball make for good Cinderellas, but not favorites in the long run. Villanova and Memphis rely on 3’s a lot…. so what happens if they have an off night? Do they have other ways to score? Nova doesn’t have much post offense, so I worry about them. Good outside shooting can get you far, but bad nights and tough defenses can end that. There have been many favorites (a lot of those Duke and UNC teams never made it because of this) that made it far but just couldn’t get over the top because they relied too much on treys and went cold. Conversely, smaller teams that shoot a lot make for good underdogs to go for. UNC Wilmington and Northern Iowa are two teams in this tourney that chuck threes like crazy. That might get them a few upsets. However, don’t expect it to last the whole time. See, it’s hard to keep things up for 6 games. Teams like this can get hot for one weekend, but then what? Which brings me to my next point….
2. Momentum doesn’t always carry over two (or three) weekends. If you think one team is hot because they upset two people, then remember that they have a week to hear about how great a story they are and the other team has a week to defend. People cool off when they get out of that rhythm. And once you get to the actual Final Four, forget what happened in the earlier rounds. It’s a new game from there. Every weekend, every two rounds, are different. Different locations, different feelings.
3. Teams that did well at the end of the season are not guaranteed to do well in the tourney, and vice versa. People have been hopping on Syracuse (who shouldn’t even be seeded that high), UCLA, and Iowa for winning their conference tournaments last week. But that momentum may not carry over. Maryland pulled a similar move to Cuse two years ago, going from a bubble team to a 5 seed by winning the ACC. Many were thinking they’d make another run. They almost got beat in the first round and lost in the second. Similarly, some teams that have slumped during the season suddenly put it together at the end. Missouri was a 12 seed a few years ago after being rated high in the preseason. They were one of the lowest at-large bids, almost snubbed. But they won, their bracket opened up, and they made it far, not to mention they faced a UCLA team that was the 8 seed and had a similar run. And don’t forget UNC in 2000, who underachieved, got an 8 seed in an easy bracket, and made it to the Final Four.
4. If a team looks like it’s much worse than its seeding, then it probably won’t live up to it. There have been some questionable 1’s and 2’s in the past few years and they usually don’t prove the selection committee right. Last year, people were shocked when Washington got a 1 while Louisville got a 4. When they played, many fans picked Louisville. They won. Tennessee is this year’s WHAT? team. Note that some of the SEC’s 2 seeds have gone out very early.
5. Cinderella teams rarely do it two years straight. If teams make an amazing run in one tourney, they are very unlikely to surprise anyone again. I don’t think you’ll see people overlooking Bucknell or Wisconsin-Milwaukee this year. The only team I can remember that did it twice in a row was Gonzaga, but that was actually part of a process that made them a mid-major national power…. a very rare exception, and one of the most improbable developments in basketball over the past decade.
6. Mid majors can sneak into the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight, but the Final Four is almost always the big boys, even teams from major conferences you don’t think of. The only non-major teams to make it since 1994 are UMass (A-10) Marquette (CUSA) and Louisville (CUSA). These are the two leagues usually considered almost-majors. Sometimes you get a bracket with many upsets and a team like Kent State or Tulsa is playing for a spot in the Final Four. They haven’t done it yet. Yet 4 and 5 seeds from big conferences make it all the time. The 8 seeds that have made it have been from big conferences. The big guys just win out in the end.
7. Along with that, let me expound: power conferences often produce Final Four teams that aren’t the ones you expect. In 1996, everyone knew the Big East was loaded. UConn and Georgetown (with Ray Allen vs. Iverson) were tough and loaded for battle, and many thought they could rematch a great Big East final in the national title game. Villanova was also strong with Kerry Kittles. But it was the fourth best team, Syracuse, that made the final after getting through their bracket (the only Big East team in it). Two years ago, Georgia Tech and Oklahoma State made the Final Four by good bracket luck and skills. Not the best teams in each conference, but matchups helped them. Indiana in 2002 did the same. As did Wisconsin in 2000.
8. Teams with a big crisis can go either way, but usually strongly. Look at Indiana. Their head coach is out. They could easily lose in the first round. They could make it to the Final Four. Who knows? Experts say to stay away from teams with distractions, but sometimes it propels them. And yes, a lot of times, it kills them. But I think this year, someone like Indiana might take advantage of that notion. So my lesson is: don’t always say no. This is a very tough gamble to make.
9. If your key player has a discernable weakness, teams will exploit it. You need depth and options. One guy really can’t carry a team to the title by himself. Not anymore. There just aren’t guys like in the game nowadays, they have all left for the NBA. Watch out for Duke, whose main two guys are not as infallible as everyone thinks. When Maryland won, it was because Lonny Baxter dominated and helped out their backcourt. UNC won last year with six good players. Duke won with a stacked lineup. UConn won for the same reason. You need supporting guys who can step up.
10. In the end, talent and depth rule. The big guys with loaded lineups and at least one or two good bench players are usually the ones last standing. Consistency and several scorers are better than one star and a bunch of schmucks. If your team has a lot of people that can play in the NBA, it will probably go far. Or if they’re all really good for the college level. Not that hard to see.
So here are my picks, which probably mean the least because they have nothing but pride on the line (or does that make them the most valuable?) i.e. no cash or prizes. Every week I will update them as my paid brackets crash and burn terribly.
First weekend, first round….SOUTH (ATLANTA): Duke, George Washington, Texas A & M, LSU, Southern Illinois, Iowa, NC State, Texas
WEST (OAKLAND): Memphis, Arkansas, Pitt, Kansas, Indiana, Gonzaga, Marquette, UCLA
EAST (D.C.): UConn, Kentucky, Washington, Illinois, George Mason, UNC, Wichita, Tennessee
MIDWEST (MINNEAPOLIS): Villanova, Arizona, Nevada, BC, Oklahoma, Florida, Georgetown, Ohio StateFirst weekend, second round….
SOUTH: Duke, LSU, Iowa, Texas WEST: Memphis, Kansas, Gonzaga, Marquette
EAST: UConn, Illinois, George Mason, Wichita
MIDW: Nova, BC, Florida, Ohio St.
Yes, I picked a few upsets here. I don’t like UCLA or Michigan State or UNC all that much. I think Syracuse used up all their lives. The toughest call for me has been Florida-Ohio State or Gonzaga-Indiana. I still don’t know which Indiana team will show up. I think, in both cases, the winner of that game could make the Final Four.Here are my before tourney picks for the next rounds:Elite Eight: UConn vs. Wichita, BC vs. Florida, LSU vs. Texas, Gonzaga vs. Kansas
Some surprises? Wichita gets a broken bracket run. LSU can take down Duke with their big guys, who get Shelden Williams in foul trouble. Boston College has the post presence to hurt Villanova. Kansas has enough skill to get by Memphis, although I think Memphis is still the best and most talented team in that bracket. They seem like the number one no one wants to have, but you know, sometimes that means they’re the most likely one to make it. But their reliance on the three makes me nervous. In different contests, I have six different teams winning that region. Nothing would really surprise me.
Final Four: UConn vs. Florida, Texas vs. Gonzaga
I really want Adam Morrison to pull off a Bill Bradley/ Glen Rice type run, though I have a lot of doubts about that. But we need the 'stache. Florida puts together a run every few years when they have some athletes. UConn has it easy. No one in the bracket can touch them, not even the other big names. Texas has the depth to go far, and without Duke in the picture, they should cruise.
Final: UConn 74, Texas 68
UConn is the deepest and most talented team here. Texas is close behind them, but doesn’t have a real point to lead them. UConn has Marcus Williams, who might be the most important player in this tournament. At least, that’s what people have been saying. Rudy Gay isn’t always up to the task, but the Huskies have enough options to cover for him. Texas and Duke are too reliant on certain people.
Other than UConn, my second pick would be Duke after all. If they make it past LSU, they might go all the way. Texas would be third, but they struggled against Duke and a rematch would be hard. They have the talent, but not enough shooting. Other teams that can win: Memphis, if things fall the right way and they get their act together; and Villanova, though it will take a lot. If someone other than those five wins I’ll never write a word about college basketball again.
Unless it’s Gonzaga. That would be sweet.
[EDITOR'S POST NOTE: So... um... George Mason broke how many of my rules? 5? 6? It was a virtual impossibility, even though I had them in the sweet 16. Good for them, they made lots of people look stupid.]
And though you may not care much about it or even know what it is, the NIT field was also released this week and I'm sad to say that La Salle was not in it, which is a f---ing shame. 14 years since a winning team, 18 wins, and third place in a middle level conference used to be good enough, but no, the NIT is different now, and they started whittling down invitees and giving them to either unknown, very low level teams with good records or mediocre teams from big conferences. I didn't want to see Penn State shut out, of course, but I don't know if they or Virginia are really worthy of it. The NCAA now also owns the NIT and made new rules that all regular season champions of every conference, if they don't win their tourney and get in the NCAA, must at least get in the NIT.
So all these teams from tiny conferences, which can be anyone, get in, and then the obvious snubs from the NCAA's, plus low-level big teams. Look, I know the ACC is tough, but to have all 12 teams playing in the postseason is unfair to all the other conferences. And if they're so good, why are only 4 teams in the big dance? Miami and Wake Forest are barely eligible (over .500). And many times, the one seed in low conferences isn't that much better than the rest of the league, and a lot of 2 or 3 seeds get in that are good. I hate to cut out he small ones, though, so I don't know. Also, if they're concerned about where teams finish, they should know that Temple and St. Joseph’s finished below La Salle in the A-10 standings. They are in. LS is out. Alas.
Down to the real brackets. I’ve made my complaints heard before and I stand by them. I don’t like a lot of these seedings but there’s nothing to say about that now. It’s time to go. I’ve made a lot of brackets this week in various contests and I don’t even know what all my picks have been. So it’s hard to say what my official thoughts are; I can see a lot of possibilities. I did, however, come up with a few rules of my own. Don’t take them too seriously; these are just my opinions and I never claimed to be a real expert. Just a fan. I haven’t won a pool yet, though I’ve been close. Here’s my thinking…..
1. Teams that live and die by the long ball make for good Cinderellas, but not favorites in the long run. Villanova and Memphis rely on 3’s a lot…. so what happens if they have an off night? Do they have other ways to score? Nova doesn’t have much post offense, so I worry about them. Good outside shooting can get you far, but bad nights and tough defenses can end that. There have been many favorites (a lot of those Duke and UNC teams never made it because of this) that made it far but just couldn’t get over the top because they relied too much on treys and went cold. Conversely, smaller teams that shoot a lot make for good underdogs to go for. UNC Wilmington and Northern Iowa are two teams in this tourney that chuck threes like crazy. That might get them a few upsets. However, don’t expect it to last the whole time. See, it’s hard to keep things up for 6 games. Teams like this can get hot for one weekend, but then what? Which brings me to my next point….
2. Momentum doesn’t always carry over two (or three) weekends. If you think one team is hot because they upset two people, then remember that they have a week to hear about how great a story they are and the other team has a week to defend. People cool off when they get out of that rhythm. And once you get to the actual Final Four, forget what happened in the earlier rounds. It’s a new game from there. Every weekend, every two rounds, are different. Different locations, different feelings.
3. Teams that did well at the end of the season are not guaranteed to do well in the tourney, and vice versa. People have been hopping on Syracuse (who shouldn’t even be seeded that high), UCLA, and Iowa for winning their conference tournaments last week. But that momentum may not carry over. Maryland pulled a similar move to Cuse two years ago, going from a bubble team to a 5 seed by winning the ACC. Many were thinking they’d make another run. They almost got beat in the first round and lost in the second. Similarly, some teams that have slumped during the season suddenly put it together at the end. Missouri was a 12 seed a few years ago after being rated high in the preseason. They were one of the lowest at-large bids, almost snubbed. But they won, their bracket opened up, and they made it far, not to mention they faced a UCLA team that was the 8 seed and had a similar run. And don’t forget UNC in 2000, who underachieved, got an 8 seed in an easy bracket, and made it to the Final Four.
4. If a team looks like it’s much worse than its seeding, then it probably won’t live up to it. There have been some questionable 1’s and 2’s in the past few years and they usually don’t prove the selection committee right. Last year, people were shocked when Washington got a 1 while Louisville got a 4. When they played, many fans picked Louisville. They won. Tennessee is this year’s WHAT? team. Note that some of the SEC’s 2 seeds have gone out very early.
5. Cinderella teams rarely do it two years straight. If teams make an amazing run in one tourney, they are very unlikely to surprise anyone again. I don’t think you’ll see people overlooking Bucknell or Wisconsin-Milwaukee this year. The only team I can remember that did it twice in a row was Gonzaga, but that was actually part of a process that made them a mid-major national power…. a very rare exception, and one of the most improbable developments in basketball over the past decade.
6. Mid majors can sneak into the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight, but the Final Four is almost always the big boys, even teams from major conferences you don’t think of. The only non-major teams to make it since 1994 are UMass (A-10) Marquette (CUSA) and Louisville (CUSA). These are the two leagues usually considered almost-majors. Sometimes you get a bracket with many upsets and a team like Kent State or Tulsa is playing for a spot in the Final Four. They haven’t done it yet. Yet 4 and 5 seeds from big conferences make it all the time. The 8 seeds that have made it have been from big conferences. The big guys just win out in the end.
7. Along with that, let me expound: power conferences often produce Final Four teams that aren’t the ones you expect. In 1996, everyone knew the Big East was loaded. UConn and Georgetown (with Ray Allen vs. Iverson) were tough and loaded for battle, and many thought they could rematch a great Big East final in the national title game. Villanova was also strong with Kerry Kittles. But it was the fourth best team, Syracuse, that made the final after getting through their bracket (the only Big East team in it). Two years ago, Georgia Tech and Oklahoma State made the Final Four by good bracket luck and skills. Not the best teams in each conference, but matchups helped them. Indiana in 2002 did the same. As did Wisconsin in 2000.
8. Teams with a big crisis can go either way, but usually strongly. Look at Indiana. Their head coach is out. They could easily lose in the first round. They could make it to the Final Four. Who knows? Experts say to stay away from teams with distractions, but sometimes it propels them. And yes, a lot of times, it kills them. But I think this year, someone like Indiana might take advantage of that notion. So my lesson is: don’t always say no. This is a very tough gamble to make.
9. If your key player has a discernable weakness, teams will exploit it. You need depth and options. One guy really can’t carry a team to the title by himself. Not anymore. There just aren’t guys like in the game nowadays, they have all left for the NBA. Watch out for Duke, whose main two guys are not as infallible as everyone thinks. When Maryland won, it was because Lonny Baxter dominated and helped out their backcourt. UNC won last year with six good players. Duke won with a stacked lineup. UConn won for the same reason. You need supporting guys who can step up.
10. In the end, talent and depth rule. The big guys with loaded lineups and at least one or two good bench players are usually the ones last standing. Consistency and several scorers are better than one star and a bunch of schmucks. If your team has a lot of people that can play in the NBA, it will probably go far. Or if they’re all really good for the college level. Not that hard to see.
So here are my picks, which probably mean the least because they have nothing but pride on the line (or does that make them the most valuable?) i.e. no cash or prizes. Every week I will update them as my paid brackets crash and burn terribly.
First weekend, first round….SOUTH (ATLANTA): Duke, George Washington, Texas A & M, LSU, Southern Illinois, Iowa, NC State, Texas
WEST (OAKLAND): Memphis, Arkansas, Pitt, Kansas, Indiana, Gonzaga, Marquette, UCLA
EAST (D.C.): UConn, Kentucky, Washington, Illinois, George Mason, UNC, Wichita, Tennessee
MIDWEST (MINNEAPOLIS): Villanova, Arizona, Nevada, BC, Oklahoma, Florida, Georgetown, Ohio StateFirst weekend, second round….
SOUTH: Duke, LSU, Iowa, Texas WEST: Memphis, Kansas, Gonzaga, Marquette
EAST: UConn, Illinois, George Mason, Wichita
MIDW: Nova, BC, Florida, Ohio St.
Yes, I picked a few upsets here. I don’t like UCLA or Michigan State or UNC all that much. I think Syracuse used up all their lives. The toughest call for me has been Florida-Ohio State or Gonzaga-Indiana. I still don’t know which Indiana team will show up. I think, in both cases, the winner of that game could make the Final Four.Here are my before tourney picks for the next rounds:Elite Eight: UConn vs. Wichita, BC vs. Florida, LSU vs. Texas, Gonzaga vs. Kansas
Some surprises? Wichita gets a broken bracket run. LSU can take down Duke with their big guys, who get Shelden Williams in foul trouble. Boston College has the post presence to hurt Villanova. Kansas has enough skill to get by Memphis, although I think Memphis is still the best and most talented team in that bracket. They seem like the number one no one wants to have, but you know, sometimes that means they’re the most likely one to make it. But their reliance on the three makes me nervous. In different contests, I have six different teams winning that region. Nothing would really surprise me.
Final Four: UConn vs. Florida, Texas vs. Gonzaga
I really want Adam Morrison to pull off a Bill Bradley/ Glen Rice type run, though I have a lot of doubts about that. But we need the 'stache. Florida puts together a run every few years when they have some athletes. UConn has it easy. No one in the bracket can touch them, not even the other big names. Texas has the depth to go far, and without Duke in the picture, they should cruise.
Final: UConn 74, Texas 68
UConn is the deepest and most talented team here. Texas is close behind them, but doesn’t have a real point to lead them. UConn has Marcus Williams, who might be the most important player in this tournament. At least, that’s what people have been saying. Rudy Gay isn’t always up to the task, but the Huskies have enough options to cover for him. Texas and Duke are too reliant on certain people.
Other than UConn, my second pick would be Duke after all. If they make it past LSU, they might go all the way. Texas would be third, but they struggled against Duke and a rematch would be hard. They have the talent, but not enough shooting. Other teams that can win: Memphis, if things fall the right way and they get their act together; and Villanova, though it will take a lot. If someone other than those five wins I’ll never write a word about college basketball again.
Unless it’s Gonzaga. That would be sweet.
[EDITOR'S POST NOTE: So... um... George Mason broke how many of my rules? 5? 6? It was a virtual impossibility, even though I had them in the sweet 16. Good for them, they made lots of people look stupid.]
Sunday, March 12, 2006
RETRO: before the ncaa, some thoughts
I wish that the original Dickie V, Mr. Vitale, would be doing these games and not the loathsome Billy Packer. CBS sucks. If Disney/ABC/ESPN had the tourney, they could show the first game on ABC just like CBS does, but then have the others available on ESPN and ESPN2, and maybe the last one on ABC Family. They could switch them around as ABC changed their main coverage just like CBS does, but then people could see more with cable. Why haven't they bought this yet? CBS's coverage is always annoying, especially the damn theme song.
I didn't get to see a lot of the games this weekend, but you know what? Most of them shouldn't have mattered. Unless teams that were never supposed to get in suddenly won conference tournaments in conferences that had multiple entries, including some on the bubble, the title games should not mean everything. What a team does over the course of a season SHOULD be more important. It's nice to win tourney games, and it can bump you up a seed or two, but it isn't the entire thing to think about.
But, of course, the committee doesn't think that way. In fact, they often don't seem to think in any logical fashion at all. I know it's impossible to please everybody and there are a million pundits and coaches and players and fans bitching about snubs and seedings and everything else. Everyone has a problem, unless they're Duke and people s their d.
But really… WTF?
Syracuse was a bubble team [not a sure thing, for you rookies] before the Big East tourney. By beating UConn, they were in. They might have had a 10 seed at that point. Meanwhile, Pitt was ranked last week and was, at worst, a 5 or 6 seed. Maybe a 4, based on their ranking. They might have gotten a 3 if they won the tourney, even a 2 if the cards fell right. So, these two teams both advanced to the title game, beating tough opponents (each took down one of the eventual top seeds) and Syracuse won in a tough battle. They were both given 5 seeds.
Again…. WTF?
By making it to the title game and beating Nova, Pitt should have gotten a 3 or 4. Syracuse, once thought not to be in, might have gotten a 6 or 7 with a good week. But no, the committee saw them as equals. Why?
Meanwhile, in the SEC, Tennessee and Florida were both ranked similarly before last week. Florida was, in fact, a few spots ahead. Tennessee lost early on in the tourney, while Florida won the whole thing. But they gave Tennessee a 2 seed and Florida a 3. HONESTLY! WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? THE INCONSISTENCY IS MADDENING!!!!!!!
Also, George Washington… yeah, I know, the Atlantic 10 had a down year. But they were undefeated during the regular season, did good against a decent schedule, and were ranked in the top ten. Yet they get an 8 seed. Meanwhile, Gonzaga plays in a weak conference, had a better schedule but still wasn't a major, and gets a 3. I think Gonzaga is fine with that 3, but GW needs more love. They had a great, great season in a mid-major, not the best this year, but better than a lot of smaller ones. If GW won their tourney, I would've given them a 3 at least. For losing one game? An 8????? No way. No effing way. St. Joseph's pulled off a 1 seed just a few years ago from a similar situation. The conference was tougher then, but… this is inexcusable.
I know they have all kinds of criteria and a system called the RPI (Ratings Percentage Index) which factors in a lot of things. They like strength of schedule, how teams are doing at the end of the season, and their chances of doing well in the tourney (teams can be put down if the committee knows a key player is hurt). But it really comes down to human decision, and if it was just one person, that's easy, mistakes could be easily made. The question is how several people who know basketball very well can continue to make brackets that baffle everybody.
I need a couple days to make my picks. My only hope is that the online contests don't require them by Tuesday when the play-in game starts. I really don't like this addition. Please, it's a nice idea, but it will not have an effect on the overall tourney. I'd like to see a 16 seed pull off the upset but it hasn't happened yet and I doubt it ever will. And even so, would they last two rounds? And would it matter whether it's Jacksonville State or Northwestern Montana in that last seed? They seem to be dissing the SWAC by always making them play in that game. This is the conference that holds all the old all-black schools in the South like Grambling. They have a lot of tradition. Don't keep them down. Even though they get to be on ESPN for one night, possibly getting more exposure than they would as a 16 seed whose game might not be seen by many people, they're not really in the tournament. It was a real cop-out to come up with this idea. I say something needs to happen to consolidate a few conferences. Shouldn't the big expansion by the Big East and the ACC create enough of a domino effect to make someone merge? The Mountain West conference is the one that pushed us into this era by breaking off from the WAC. Well, they just added TCU, and if the Big Ten and Pac Ten add some teams, maybe they'll get more. I made a plan to get college basketball and lower budget sports (i.e. not football) under one less conference by moving a few teams around. It can be done.
Anyway, I will post my official picks Wednesday night and I can only hope that any good bracket-maker will wait until Thursday morning to require them. I need time to make sense of this mess. But here are a few of my instant thoughts, aside from the questionable seeds:
If you look at my old blog, you will see that, before the season, I picked UConn to go all the way. I also had Duke and Texas as final four picks, in my top three, and my last pick was the proverbial sleeper team, George Washington. Well, Duke, Texas, and GW are all in the same region, so I can't stay with that. Stupid tourney makers. They could switch GW and Syracuse around and it would make more sense. Honestly. I'd love GW as a sleeper even more now because they are seeded lower, and that alleviates pressure and increases revenge feelings. Look at how Gonzaga has struggled since they got the high seeds. But they'll get Duke in the second round, and Duke almost never loses early when seeded high. Not since that weird Austin Croshere-led Providence team has a Duke team of 3 seed or higher lost early. But they're in what was called the South region, not the East region, and that makes a big difference. They can be beat in the South. They usually make it in the East. Don't know why, but that's how it's been. I'm going to think this region over.
UConn didn't get the top overall seed, but they seem to have the easiest bracket. As I said, Tennessee should not be a 2, and the other teams don't impress me. Michigan State was supposed to be a contender, and has talent, but they haven't shown anything recently. They made it last year by surviving the worst bracket. UNC has been much better than anyone thought, but they are still young and I can't see them making it far. Any low seed in that half has a good chance. Don't laugh if you see George Mason or Wichita State in the Elite 8. Their conferences were strong this year. They have a chance. Washington and Illinois are solid but are not doing it this year after losing too many key people. I don't think I'll have to ponder this bracket much. But you never know. Watch Kentucky make a run after they underachieved and blew a lot of high seeds the past few years.
I kinda like to see Villanova do well, even though they are an archrival, because I like to represent Philly and I always rooted for Temple before we became enemies. Still, their one guard is hurt and unbalanced teams don't do as well. I wish it was easier to say that guard play or big man play matters more in the tourney, but it changes. I mean, guard play is always always important, but big men have carried weak backcourts before and vice versa (see UMass '96 and Kansas '88 for bigs, Georgia Tech '04 and Ohio State '99 for guards). So, does Nova have a problem? They've handled big guys all season, but if they rely on outside shooting and can't rebound, what happens if they have an off shooting night? They seem too vulnerable for me, though I love how they play. They do play tough D and they get to the ball very well for their size. If he does not indeed come back, I can't pick them. But maybe… hmmm. I see their half of the bracket contains some good teams with quality post players. Arizona can match their quickness and Boston College is very experienced and doing pretty well, having taken down UNC and almost Duke last week. Nevada has a great big man. It'll be tough for them. The other half includes Ohio State and Florida, two teams that could be favored ahead of Villanova in the rankings next week. They have some tough low seeds, too. Florida and OSU are both playing great, yet they've done good with young people, so who knows. They both have great big men. Nova is in serious trouble. I'll have a tough time in this region. Watch Oklahoma ruin everything, as things usually go.
Memphis was questionable because their conference sucks now, but it's not terrible, and they did play a couple top teams very well. This is a weird bracket because UCLA might not be quite worthy of a 2 and Gonzaga might, or they might be a 4 or 5, if you don't like their conference competition. I'm skeptical of UCLA despite what the media out here says. This is not worthy of those O'Bannon Brother teams in the mid-90's or even the Gadzuric-Baron Davis ones. I would love to pick Gonzaga here and watch Morrison carry them, but as I said, they've struggled with being a high seed. Teams are out to get them now. Xavier got on a roll last week and will be tough right away. But why does Indiana get a 6 seed? Weren't they on the bubble? They struggled, but they could put it together to spite everyone for their lame-duck coach. Weird things happen here. Also, Pitt got dissed, and they get the dreaded 5-12 game, with Kent State, who took them down a couple years ago in the Sweet Sixteen, on board and a very hot Kansas team looming. A lot of people will take Kansas over Memphis, maybe for the final four. I don't know yet. But I will say that Marquette has a shot to get past UCLA in the second round. They beat some good people this year. Man, I don't like this bracket either. I want the Zags so we can get more shots of Morrison's great pedestache, but they'll be challenged.
As far as final predictions? I think I'll stay with UConn, who has the depth necessary to last six games and the overall package. Plus, they have the easiest road to the Final Four, and that helps. They also won't have to play Duke or Texas or whoever else until the final. They made a rematch with Villanova possible in the semis, but I don't know if Nova can make it that far. Well, I said another UConn over Duke final, I think, so I guess I will keep it that way for now. But that might change in the next few days. I really like LSU and I still am intrigued by Texas. You've been warned, Dukies.
Interesting how the committee gave all the love to UConn and not Duke this year. They gave Duke a hard bracket and the unlikable South (vs. East) region, even though they were the overall top seed. I think, for rating's sakes, they want Duke, UConn, Nova, and Gonzaga, but I doubt that will happen. Then you get a Big East grudge match semi, and on the other side, a match of the two best players, the white shadow gunners. That would be a great story. But it rarely works out like that.
I didn't get to see a lot of the games this weekend, but you know what? Most of them shouldn't have mattered. Unless teams that were never supposed to get in suddenly won conference tournaments in conferences that had multiple entries, including some on the bubble, the title games should not mean everything. What a team does over the course of a season SHOULD be more important. It's nice to win tourney games, and it can bump you up a seed or two, but it isn't the entire thing to think about.
But, of course, the committee doesn't think that way. In fact, they often don't seem to think in any logical fashion at all. I know it's impossible to please everybody and there are a million pundits and coaches and players and fans bitching about snubs and seedings and everything else. Everyone has a problem, unless they're Duke and people s their d.
But really… WTF?
Syracuse was a bubble team [not a sure thing, for you rookies] before the Big East tourney. By beating UConn, they were in. They might have had a 10 seed at that point. Meanwhile, Pitt was ranked last week and was, at worst, a 5 or 6 seed. Maybe a 4, based on their ranking. They might have gotten a 3 if they won the tourney, even a 2 if the cards fell right. So, these two teams both advanced to the title game, beating tough opponents (each took down one of the eventual top seeds) and Syracuse won in a tough battle. They were both given 5 seeds.
Again…. WTF?
By making it to the title game and beating Nova, Pitt should have gotten a 3 or 4. Syracuse, once thought not to be in, might have gotten a 6 or 7 with a good week. But no, the committee saw them as equals. Why?
Meanwhile, in the SEC, Tennessee and Florida were both ranked similarly before last week. Florida was, in fact, a few spots ahead. Tennessee lost early on in the tourney, while Florida won the whole thing. But they gave Tennessee a 2 seed and Florida a 3. HONESTLY! WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? THE INCONSISTENCY IS MADDENING!!!!!!!
Also, George Washington… yeah, I know, the Atlantic 10 had a down year. But they were undefeated during the regular season, did good against a decent schedule, and were ranked in the top ten. Yet they get an 8 seed. Meanwhile, Gonzaga plays in a weak conference, had a better schedule but still wasn't a major, and gets a 3. I think Gonzaga is fine with that 3, but GW needs more love. They had a great, great season in a mid-major, not the best this year, but better than a lot of smaller ones. If GW won their tourney, I would've given them a 3 at least. For losing one game? An 8????? No way. No effing way. St. Joseph's pulled off a 1 seed just a few years ago from a similar situation. The conference was tougher then, but… this is inexcusable.
I know they have all kinds of criteria and a system called the RPI (Ratings Percentage Index) which factors in a lot of things. They like strength of schedule, how teams are doing at the end of the season, and their chances of doing well in the tourney (teams can be put down if the committee knows a key player is hurt). But it really comes down to human decision, and if it was just one person, that's easy, mistakes could be easily made. The question is how several people who know basketball very well can continue to make brackets that baffle everybody.
I need a couple days to make my picks. My only hope is that the online contests don't require them by Tuesday when the play-in game starts. I really don't like this addition. Please, it's a nice idea, but it will not have an effect on the overall tourney. I'd like to see a 16 seed pull off the upset but it hasn't happened yet and I doubt it ever will. And even so, would they last two rounds? And would it matter whether it's Jacksonville State or Northwestern Montana in that last seed? They seem to be dissing the SWAC by always making them play in that game. This is the conference that holds all the old all-black schools in the South like Grambling. They have a lot of tradition. Don't keep them down. Even though they get to be on ESPN for one night, possibly getting more exposure than they would as a 16 seed whose game might not be seen by many people, they're not really in the tournament. It was a real cop-out to come up with this idea. I say something needs to happen to consolidate a few conferences. Shouldn't the big expansion by the Big East and the ACC create enough of a domino effect to make someone merge? The Mountain West conference is the one that pushed us into this era by breaking off from the WAC. Well, they just added TCU, and if the Big Ten and Pac Ten add some teams, maybe they'll get more. I made a plan to get college basketball and lower budget sports (i.e. not football) under one less conference by moving a few teams around. It can be done.
Anyway, I will post my official picks Wednesday night and I can only hope that any good bracket-maker will wait until Thursday morning to require them. I need time to make sense of this mess. But here are a few of my instant thoughts, aside from the questionable seeds:
If you look at my old blog, you will see that, before the season, I picked UConn to go all the way. I also had Duke and Texas as final four picks, in my top three, and my last pick was the proverbial sleeper team, George Washington. Well, Duke, Texas, and GW are all in the same region, so I can't stay with that. Stupid tourney makers. They could switch GW and Syracuse around and it would make more sense. Honestly. I'd love GW as a sleeper even more now because they are seeded lower, and that alleviates pressure and increases revenge feelings. Look at how Gonzaga has struggled since they got the high seeds. But they'll get Duke in the second round, and Duke almost never loses early when seeded high. Not since that weird Austin Croshere-led Providence team has a Duke team of 3 seed or higher lost early. But they're in what was called the South region, not the East region, and that makes a big difference. They can be beat in the South. They usually make it in the East. Don't know why, but that's how it's been. I'm going to think this region over.
UConn didn't get the top overall seed, but they seem to have the easiest bracket. As I said, Tennessee should not be a 2, and the other teams don't impress me. Michigan State was supposed to be a contender, and has talent, but they haven't shown anything recently. They made it last year by surviving the worst bracket. UNC has been much better than anyone thought, but they are still young and I can't see them making it far. Any low seed in that half has a good chance. Don't laugh if you see George Mason or Wichita State in the Elite 8. Their conferences were strong this year. They have a chance. Washington and Illinois are solid but are not doing it this year after losing too many key people. I don't think I'll have to ponder this bracket much. But you never know. Watch Kentucky make a run after they underachieved and blew a lot of high seeds the past few years.
I kinda like to see Villanova do well, even though they are an archrival, because I like to represent Philly and I always rooted for Temple before we became enemies. Still, their one guard is hurt and unbalanced teams don't do as well. I wish it was easier to say that guard play or big man play matters more in the tourney, but it changes. I mean, guard play is always always important, but big men have carried weak backcourts before and vice versa (see UMass '96 and Kansas '88 for bigs, Georgia Tech '04 and Ohio State '99 for guards). So, does Nova have a problem? They've handled big guys all season, but if they rely on outside shooting and can't rebound, what happens if they have an off shooting night? They seem too vulnerable for me, though I love how they play. They do play tough D and they get to the ball very well for their size. If he does not indeed come back, I can't pick them. But maybe… hmmm. I see their half of the bracket contains some good teams with quality post players. Arizona can match their quickness and Boston College is very experienced and doing pretty well, having taken down UNC and almost Duke last week. Nevada has a great big man. It'll be tough for them. The other half includes Ohio State and Florida, two teams that could be favored ahead of Villanova in the rankings next week. They have some tough low seeds, too. Florida and OSU are both playing great, yet they've done good with young people, so who knows. They both have great big men. Nova is in serious trouble. I'll have a tough time in this region. Watch Oklahoma ruin everything, as things usually go.
Memphis was questionable because their conference sucks now, but it's not terrible, and they did play a couple top teams very well. This is a weird bracket because UCLA might not be quite worthy of a 2 and Gonzaga might, or they might be a 4 or 5, if you don't like their conference competition. I'm skeptical of UCLA despite what the media out here says. This is not worthy of those O'Bannon Brother teams in the mid-90's or even the Gadzuric-Baron Davis ones. I would love to pick Gonzaga here and watch Morrison carry them, but as I said, they've struggled with being a high seed. Teams are out to get them now. Xavier got on a roll last week and will be tough right away. But why does Indiana get a 6 seed? Weren't they on the bubble? They struggled, but they could put it together to spite everyone for their lame-duck coach. Weird things happen here. Also, Pitt got dissed, and they get the dreaded 5-12 game, with Kent State, who took them down a couple years ago in the Sweet Sixteen, on board and a very hot Kansas team looming. A lot of people will take Kansas over Memphis, maybe for the final four. I don't know yet. But I will say that Marquette has a shot to get past UCLA in the second round. They beat some good people this year. Man, I don't like this bracket either. I want the Zags so we can get more shots of Morrison's great pedestache, but they'll be challenged.
As far as final predictions? I think I'll stay with UConn, who has the depth necessary to last six games and the overall package. Plus, they have the easiest road to the Final Four, and that helps. They also won't have to play Duke or Texas or whoever else until the final. They made a rematch with Villanova possible in the semis, but I don't know if Nova can make it that far. Well, I said another UConn over Duke final, I think, so I guess I will keep it that way for now. But that might change in the next few days. I really like LSU and I still am intrigued by Texas. You've been warned, Dukies.
Interesting how the committee gave all the love to UConn and not Duke this year. They gave Duke a hard bracket and the unlikable South (vs. East) region, even though they were the overall top seed. I think, for rating's sakes, they want Duke, UConn, Nova, and Gonzaga, but I doubt that will happen. Then you get a Big East grudge match semi, and on the other side, a match of the two best players, the white shadow gunners. That would be a great story. But it rarely works out like that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
