Conference play-outs

by limnonectes on Mar 19, 2007 2:21 PM CDT

Here's a rundown of the major conference bid numbers and the number of teams remaining in the Sweet 16:

ACC - 7,1
Big East - 7,2
Big 10 - 6,1
Big 12 - 4,2
Pac 10 - 5,2
SEC - 5,3

Of particular interest to me are the ACC and Big 10. I know only a quarter of teams can make into the third round, but you would still expect a conference that is given enough respect to earn 6 or 7 bids from the commitee would perform better.

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Question to all BONers

Do you still feel the Pac 10 is overrated? USC, Oregon and UCLA are still in it, but Arizona and Washington St both lost to lower seeded teams.

by Wells on Mar 19, 2007 4:09 PM CDT reply actions

I went ahead

And ate crow

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Mar 19, 2007 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions

Got to agree with you

my brackets would be a lot better if I had a little more respect for the Pac 10.

Also, don't pick teams just because they have good coaches (Duke, Texas Tech, Maryland, Gonzanga)

by Wells on Mar 19, 2007 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions

good coaches

you forgot Izzo, Pitino & Lute.

maybe you picked the wrong good coach -cough-BCG-cough-?

by WacArnolds on Mar 19, 2007 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions

I was just mentioning the picks

that hurt my bracket. I picked correctly when Izzo, Pitino & Lute would leave. I got ATM in the final 4, but not on the strength of their coaching.

by Wells on Mar 19, 2007 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions

oh, gotch ya

but my props go out to Billy, outcoaching Mr. Tournament himself. We outscored them 12-4 after trailing 65-60 at the 5:30 mark.

Do you guys see it as a credit to BCG or more of a by-product of the amount of experience we put out on the court?

by WacArnolds on Mar 19, 2007 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions

Wac

In case you missed the announcement last week, SBN now has a Texas A&M blog. It's an outstanding one, and you'll be able to get your Aggie fixin' there (as well as here) now too.

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Mar 19, 2007 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions

screw that

I tire of views A&M's views on A&M. I see the Ags with the same maroon-colored glasses they do, although mine might be of a slightly-lighter shade.

Am I not welcome here anymore?

by WacArnolds on Mar 19, 2007 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions

More than welcome

Just making sure you knew - I just mentioned it once last week. Wanted to be sure folks who about his launch. That's all.

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Mar 19, 2007 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions

ok then

i've been checking out that site since before it was on SBN and its pretty good. just doesn't have the interaction level you guys present.

and may i suggest jamming out to Pepper for your next morning coffee session. i saw them perform with the mad caddies this weekend and those guys put on a hell of a show.

by WacArnolds on Mar 19, 2007 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions

Actually, I think Wac

should stay. He gives me hope that Aggies are actually intellectual/rational people. His arguments are usually well thought out and he doesn't go from normal to dickhead in 3.2 posts.

Horns up, Okies Down.

by kicker @ Burnt Orange Nation on Mar 19, 2007 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions

Well...

UCLA just barely squeaked by a mediocre Indiana team in what might have been the worst-played game of the tournament by both teams involved.

Oregon had a lot of trouble with Miami, and avoided a hard matchup against ND.

USC has definitely impressed, although I don't see any way for them to contain Hansbrough. While Floyd's strategy of putting smaller but tenacious defenders on Durant might have worked 20 feet from the basket, Hansbrough is going to be on the blocks all night long.

by jc25 on Mar 19, 2007 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm not sure I had

feelings either way. I saw some of the USC/UCLA games and was pretty impressed w/ both teams. My gut told me that USC could probably beat Texas -- and my head told me that UCLA would probably dismantle them.

I was spot-on with the Big 10. Wiscy and OSU had no business being discussed as top 5 teams this season. That conference is not up to it's typical form. I told my BIG 10 relatives that Wiscy and the Bucks would be early exits and I was half right, though the Buckeyes should be going home after a close win over Xavier.

Cats and dogs sleeping together.

by EYESofBEVO on Mar 19, 2007 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions

i don't think

you can really look at the record of a whole conference in one NCAA tournament and say that it's overrated or underrated.

say two conferences each have teams that we think are about equal as 2-seeds, but team A gets a 1-seed and team B gets a 3-seed. we then claim that team A's conference is overrated and B's conference is underrated. this may be true. but then we look at the results in the tournament: team A gets to the sweet 16 easily (as a vast majority of 1-seeds do), but team B (who has to play a 6-seed in the second round) loses. but if the seeds had been reversed, B would have made the sweet 16 as a 1-seed and A would have lost as a 3-seed.

the point is, seeding in the tounament (and indeed individual matchups) matter a lot to how teams do in the tournament -- at least for the first 2 rounds. And so a team that is overrated coming into the tournament will often do well in the tournament because they are seeded very high, reversing our expectations.

So this year, the Pac10 teams with the mediocre 8- and 11-seeds lost in the first round. One Pac10 team with the high 3 seed has beaten a 14-seed and an 11-seed. The other 3-seed beat the 14-seed but lost to the 6-seed. The 5-seed beat a 12- and a 4-seed. The 2-seed beat a 15 and a 7. That's a pretty mixed bag. Oregon doesn't have a win over a team seeded higher than 11. USC looked good beating a 4-seed, but if (as many of us claimed) they were overrated coming into the tourney, then they should have been maybe a 7-seed. Would they have beaten a 2-seed in the second round? I don't know, but the odds of that are certainly less than the odds of them beating a 4-seed.

My point, as always, is inconclusive, but you have to look harder than just at conference records.

by billyzane on Mar 19, 2007 4:34 PM CDT reply actions