The Holy Land of Hoops

From Lunardi's latest bracket:

4 teams in, all top 5 seeds:

Villanova - 1 seed
Xavier - 2 seed
Creighton - 4 seed
Butler - 5 seed

However nobody else even on the bubble.

If the final bracket looks like this, would you consider it a success or a failure for the league as a whole?

if this were the final bracket-
I wouldn't like where Creighton and Butler are. Creighton playing in Salt Lake City with still a road disadvantage vs Arizona in rd 2(I would really hope the committee didn't do that!). Butler in Milwaukee seeing Wisconsin rd 2 kind of stinks.

Heck, I wouldn't like Xavier in Indianapolis vs Ohio St in rd 2.

As far as your larger question, if Big East got 4 in but all 4 were top 4-5 seeds- with a 1 and a 2- where could I sign up? having the ability to get 3-4 teams in week 2 of the tourney IMO trumps considerably getting more teams in at the bottom(but costing those top teams important seed lines).

Although I want as many Big East teams in the NCAAT as possible, if we were to get as our only bids 4, top 5 seeds, I consider that a success. The teams would have a much better opportunity to make deep runs compared to having 1 or 2 top 5 seeds and 3 or 4 6-11 seeds (as we had last year).

Personally, I think Lunardi is overreacting to Seton Hall's losses, and I believe they are currently firmly on the bubble. Once the RPI numbers settle in, I think we're a 5-bid league, minimum.

bluejayfanatic wrote:Although I want as many Big East teams in the NCAAT as possible, if we were to get as our only bids 4, top 5 seeds, I consider that a success. The teams would have a much better opportunity to make deep runs compared to having 1 or 2 top 5 seeds and 3 or 4 6-11 seeds (as we had last year).

Personally, I think Lunardi is overreacting to Seton Hall's losses, and I believe they are currently firmly on the bubble. Once the RPI numbers settle in, I think we're a 5-bid league, minimum.

Teams get tourney bids, not conferences. If Seton Hall loses to both Cal and South Carolina, they would have 4 OOC losses. Lets say they go 10-8 in conference play. That's 18-12. Right now, that record projects to only a 53.8 RPI. That's clearly bubble.

Where the conference would really hurt for tourney teams is if the top 4 run the table for the most part on the other 6. If they all go like 11-1. That would give teams at least 6-7 losses each just from the top 4 teams. So a team like Seton Hall with 6 losses even vs those 4 would need to go 8-2 vs the other 5 teams to even get to 18 wins and get on the bubble really even.

bluejayfanatic wrote:Although I want as many Big East teams in the NCAAT as possible, if we were to get as our only bids 4, top 5 seeds, I consider that a success. The teams would have a much better opportunity to make deep runs compared to having 1 or 2 top 5 seeds and 3 or 4 6-11 seeds (as we had last year).

Personally, I think Lunardi is overreacting to Seton Hall's losses, and I believe they are currently firmly on the bubble. Once the RPI numbers settle in, I think we're a 5-bid league, minimum.

I agree, I think SH ends up with a few wins against the top 4 teams in the BE and ends up around a 9 or 10 seed.

Hopefully there is a 5th team that emerges but these would be great seeds for 4 Big East teams.

All depends on what the 4 teams do in the tourney. Number of wins rules the day, not the number of teams in.

Sign me up for a game with Ohio State!

5 in (Marquette last four in)
Seton Hall First Team Out
Providence Next Four Out

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology

whiteandblue77 wrote:5 in (Marquette last four in)
Seton Hall First Team Out
Providence Next Four Out

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology

Considering how snobby I was about our status three years ago i never thought I'd see the day where I'd be thanking God for a play in game. Please let at least this happen