Originally Posted by smithandrew051:
We’ll find out this weekend how much playing a grinding schedule prepares teams for the tournament.
Will the Big 12 come out and dominate? Or be worn down?
I’m curious if these teams from other conferences will look like the Eagles defense playing their first elite QB of the season in the Super Bowl.
What I'm really curious to see is how the officiating changes. Will they allow teams to beat each other up like they did in the Big 12 all season, or are they going to start calling it tighter? I'm assuming it will be called tighter than any Big 12 team is used to, and if that's the case, how will they all react. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
This year, anyway... other years, it's explained that quad 1 wins and non-con SoS are deciding factors, and teams need to beef up their schedule and will be awarded for it.
Yea I think it's pretty clear this year was an outlier that broke the system. When you have literally every game in a conference be a quad 1 opportunity, there is no precedence and the committee clearly took the route of: quad 1 wins matter...to a point but at a certain point it stops mattering and can only hurt you. I thought the reasoning by OSU not making it spoke louder than KU being the 3. They basically said "well yea OSU had a bunch of q1 wins but that's because every game they played was tough so it basically doesn't matter". That's more or less the route they took with evaluating Kansas vs Houston. "We don't know how to evaluate so many more Q1 games played for Kansas so we will add in Q2 games and Houston wasn't too different and 3 losses is better than 7 so Houston is it". Generally there is a bump for a tough schedule but at a certain point you get diminishing returns for each win and KU clearly reached that point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fansy the Famous Bard:
You have a coastal team play the brutal schedule KU or other BigXII teams had, and that narrative would be different.
This is such an exhausting narrative.
West Coast teams complain about east coast bias constantly and they have more reason for it than KU does. (Nobody stays up late and watches their games)
But it's just whiny nonsense. Them favoring Houston has nothing to do with some kind of conspiracy. You think the defending champions are getting hosed in favor of Houston because of market size?
Just lmao on that, stop it. We're Kansas. The reason we're the third number 1 seed is because we got blown out and exposed twice by Texas.
It's definitely bullshit but not because of coastal bias. :-) [Reply]
I assume Orlando gets the first pod, and Sacramento the late time, so we probably either play at 5:00 or 6:00? Or Howard I guess, assuming we won't be able to handle their physical style of play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kiimosabi:
This is such an exhausting narrative.
West Coast teams complain about east coast bias constantly and they have more reason for it than KU does. (Nobody stays up late and watches their games)
But it's just whiny nonsense. Them favoring Houston has nothing to do with some kind of conspiracy. You think the defending champions are getting hosed in favor of Houston because of market size?
Just lmao on that, stop it. We're Kansas. The reason we're the third number 1 seed is because we got blown out and exposed twice by Texas.
It's definitely bullshit but not because of coastal bias. :-)
It's exhausting because it's been shown to be true, time and time again. It's not so much about Houston as it is that KU like OSU isn't given the attention to their resume. They'll look at face value statistics and move on. Look at the justification by Chris Reynolds.
Originally Posted by : we understand today they were out their best player. And so for that reason, we kept Houston at number two.
KU was without an All BigXII and All BigXII Defensive player, who is really only 5 players deep. The KU bench is essentially just minute eaters with no production.
No mention of that. No consideration, none. Oh and KU was without their HoF Head Coach, but ok.
Whether that's because the majority of the decisionmakers have coastal roots or it being viewership/market politics (aka $$) I like most of us don't have the visibility to know. But simply because folks complain about it incessantly doesn't make it nonsense... Just tiresome. There most definitely are Coastal biases. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefqueen:
Well, I am so oh so happy asked and oh so sorry nobody has answered your question. But you're in luck I googled the guy. It turns out our NCAA Tourney Committee Chair, Chris Reynolds, was an Indiana BB player from 1989 - 1991. In 2 of those years, 1991 & 1993, KU played Indiana in the NCAA Tourney. In both instances KU beat Indiana on their way to the Final 4. (NOTE: Indiana did reach the Final 4 in 1992, the year KU got "UTEP"ed.)
As for your second question, I have no idea, but based on what I found I think he was willing to do it for free.
:-) If he played from 89-91, then how is '93 one of the years he played?
Of course, he still remembers, I'd assume. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kiimosabi:
This is such an exhausting narrative.
West Coast teams complain about east coast bias constantly and they have more reason for it than KU does. (Nobody stays up late and watches their games)
But it's just whiny nonsense. Them favoring Houston has nothing to do with some kind of conspiracy. You think the defending champions are getting hosed in favor of Houston because of market size?
Just lmao on that, stop it. We're Kansas. The reason we're the third number 1 seed is because we got blown out and exposed twice by Texas.
It's definitely bullshit but not because of coastal bias. :-)
You know the program is in a good spot when the fanbase is bitching about which 1 seed it got for the Tourney [Reply]
Originally Posted by SithCeNtZ:
Yea I think it's pretty clear this year was an outlier that broke the system. When you have literally every game in a conference be a quad 1 opportunity, there is no precedence and the committee clearly took the route of: quad 1 wins matter...to a point but at a certain point it stops mattering and can only hurt you. I thought the reasoning by OSU not making it spoke louder than KU being the 3. They basically said "well yea OSU had a bunch of q1 wins but that's because every game they played was tough so it basically doesn't matter". That's more or less the route they took with evaluating Kansas vs Houston. "We don't know how to evaluate so many more Q1 games played for Kansas so we will add in Q2 games and Houston wasn't too different and 3 losses is better than 7 so Houston is it". Generally there is a bump for a tough schedule but at a certain point you get diminishing returns for each win and KU clearly reached that point.
I was looking at the guidelines the other day because someone had mentioned Iowa potentially playing in Des Moines in the 2nd round (and was wondering about the region protection of higher seeds).... and there's a fairly thorough document on the methodology of selecting seeds and putting the brackets together.
Seems like they could go one step further and define the value of quad 1 wins/losses and so forth... maybe not a CFB computer rating level or anything, but something that pushes teams to a more challenging non-con, as well as of course more clarity on what it's worth it to Kansas to play in November tournaments and risk taking a loss playing for a 3rd time in 3 days, for example, while Houston is playing Sisters of the Blind.
And in the past, they've split the travel burden with an opponent region... so they ship Kansas out West, but put Marquette as the 2 seed. Except Kansas gets shipped west and has UCLA. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fansy the Famous Bard:
You have a coastal team play the brutal schedule KU or other BigXII teams had, and that narrative would be different.
For years the ACC was said to be the best conference in America and were given the benefit of the doubt. The Big 12 has been in this position for a few years now and everyone thinks it doesn't or shouldn't matter now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kiimosabi:
Just lmao on that, stop it. We're Kansas. The reason we're the third number 1 seed is because we got blown out and exposed twice by Texas.
It's definitely bullshit but not because of coastal bias. :-)
Except the committee had us ranked behind Houston before that even happened a few weeks ago (when they released the preliminary rankings). And Houston went on to lose to Memphis at the same time as that happened.
In all likelihood, we never had a chance at the MW and just didn't know it. They clearly were not valuing the enormous difference in schedule at all. [Reply]
