March Madness...LSU #8 Seed in South Region

put it this way, tx didnt close as poorly.

 

We got hosed pretty well. I mean, I was thinking 7-seed at worst, but leaning toward a 6-seed. On March 4th we were ranked #12 in the nation and on March 15th we're an 8 seed? That's a far drop in 11 days.

People talk about closing strong and how the NCAA views that as being so important, but that's B.S. At least if they were consistent with the teams they pick and the seeding, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Arizona dropped 5 of their last 6 games and got bounced in the first game our their conference tourney, but they made it in at 19-13??? Where does the "finishing strong" rule fit in there?

LSU dropped 3 out of their last four (after clinching the SEC title). We would have liked to win those games, but they weren't as important to us than those before we clinched the title. You know, that thing that the players play for... It's not like we lost the first game in the tourney. We beat UK and then lost to the eventual SEC tourney champ. Of course ,we didn't get that much help from the refs who gave State 35 free throws to our 13 (which I found disturbing). They were playing more aggresive and needed the win, yet we almost tripled their foul total? Since we couldn't hit 3s, driving in was our only option and they barely called fouls on State so we had no chance. We lost because we didn't play well, but the refs gave us zero chance.

I know the SEC was down this year, but it wasn't like there was a bunch of easy wins. It's just that the teams were very inconsistent and there were no dominant teams (other than LSU at times). We won 13 in a row in our conference. That should count for something rather than just looking at the last few games. It's the whole season. Yeah, I know about our OOC, but still...

Well, having SEC commissioner at the head of the selection committee really helped out the SEC. They put our two highest seeded teams in two of the toughest spots possible. Even if they win one, they match up with a #1 seed in the second game.

Oh well, I agree with what Trent Johnson said about the seeding in the end. You have to go out there and win no matter where they put you, and with the parity, it's never easy. I just wish the committee was consistent.

If we shoot like we're capable of shooting, then Butler better be scared. If not, then I'll feel like many others on the board.

 

lsu beat all of ONE ncaa at large team.

 

That is a difficult thing to point out. Had more SEC teams gotten bids, then that number goes up. It has a snowball effect.

Let's take a random example: Duke.

Let's say only UNC, Duke, and Wake Forest got into the tournament.

Duke would have had 4 wins against at-large teams. Michigan, Xavier, Purdue (weren't an at-large technically), and Wake.

For a 2-seed, that doesn't seem terribly impressive, does it? Well, add 4 more conference teams, and that number rockets up.

 

Yeah, but still...

I realize that, that's why I just talked about the SEC and noted the OOC. I mean, we had only one win against an "at large" team when we were ranked #12 under two weeks ago as well. So we lost a few (somewhat) meaningless games (obviously not that meaningless) and we plummet?

I don't feel like it's the worst injustice or anything, but I do believe they should have been a spot or two higher or at least in a better position.

We didn't start really clicking until shortly after SEC play began. You could say it's because the SEC only has three teams in the tourney (one of them LSU). But I don't buy that.

Teams like Florida, Auburn and South Carolina could have made the tourney and beaten many teams. And we were dominant for a stretch. If we had a one-and-done SEC tourney, I would agree with the seed. But we had to play Kentucky and I think we all know that they didn't want to break their tourney streak. Yet, we beat them again at least before getting knocked out.

Oh well, like Trent said, you gotta win no matter who you play or what your seed is...

 

We could'nt have begged, borrowed, stolen, or paid for a harder bracket. If we make it past Butler then UNC, I would say we got a shot at the Final Four. Problem is first getting by Butler. Well, it was a very nice and surprising season.

The selection committee did a good job at trying to make sure UNC gets to the Elite 8.

 

Didn't do much for Butler (9) or Tennessee (9). They are 24 and 25 in the RPI. Oklahoma State is 19 (8).
Utah is 9th (5)

Yet 59th Boston College gets a 7-seed.

LSU finished at 37.

TV and bias (just like in football FOR the SEC) affects what people think of teams. We get pumped all year that the Big East and ACC are JUST that good.

All year, Georgetown and ND are so good. But they finished with horrible conference records, so that must mean that the Big East is just beyond incredible.

The inconsistency is just infuriating. Arizona got an at-large bid, but there are thirteen teams ranked ahead of them in the RPI (including Florida and USC). Either use the RPI, or don't. You can't use it when it helps reinforce you argument, and then ignore it when you don't like the results.