chicagojayfan wrote:
there is a slight chance ISU blue could take them out in the finals of the conference tourney. It happened a few years ago when Odem was a frosh, IIRC. If everything flips the right way, WSU could lose a slow, possession based game against them. Not likely, but not impossible either.
HoosierPal wrote:chicagojayfan wrote:
there is a slight chance ISU blue could take them out in the finals of the conference tourney. It happened a few years ago when Odem was a frosh, IIRC. If everything flips the right way, WSU could lose a slow, possession based game against them. Not likely, but not impossible either.
I agree that could happen. If it does, that means one less NCAA At Large slot available, as the Valley would then have two teams in the Dance.
chicagojayfan wrote:senditinjerome wrote:GumbyDamnit! wrote:So what happens when all of a sudden, instead of being an underestimated #6 seed you are rewarded with a #1 seed. The hunter becomes the hunted and the spotlight and target is on your back. You can no longer fly under the radar--a role that you thrive on. Kentucky, Fl, Kansas, Syr and Mich St are used to that top seed role. Last year Gonzaga as a mid major #1 didn't get out of the 1st weekend. This will be uncharted territory for WSU, so is it safe to assume that they may feel a little pressure to validate that #1 seed? Compound that with being undefeated. That too carries a weight. Is it outlandish and off the mark for me to suggest that the two things might cause the Shocker players to tighten a bit?
Excellent point...For these reasons, I think it would be better if Wichita actually lost a game now and dropped down to a #3 or #4 seed...There would be less pressure to validate the #1 seed. They would still have a target on their back and would still be the mid-major darling, but the target would not be as big and the spotlight not as bright.
there is a slight chance ISU blue could take them out in the finals of the conference tourney. It happened a few years ago when Odem was a frosh, IIRC. If everything flips the right way, WSU could lose a slow, possession based game against them. Not likely, but not impossible either.
notkirkcameron wrote:Yes, Wichita State is undefeated, and while some on this board thinks that carries some kind of inherent, mystical merit all it's own, it doesn't. A hammer is undefeated against a nail. As always, the committee always looks at "Who did you play, where did you play them, and who did you beat?"
Wichita State has one win against the Top 25. ONE. Saint Louis (#13) back in December. The Shockers have as many wins against the Top 50 as MARQUETTE does (2). You remember Marquette, the team that desperately needs quality wins just to even be in the bubble discussion? Looking at their resume, yes, they've never lost, but we really have no idea how good they are because they're essentially picking on the slow kid in class. At a time when most teams are in the toughest portion of their conference schedule, Wichita State has played FIVE teams with sub-200 RPIs in the last three weeks.
I also think it's a little strange to justify their nonexistent conference schedule just because "they tried to schedule tough in non-conference, but some teams under-performed."
It's worthwhile context here that Marquette scheduled Ohio State, a road trip to Arizona State and the Wooden Legacy (where they had to play a "neutral" site game against San Diego State in Anaheim), at Wisconsin, and another "neutral" site game against New Mexico in Las Vegas, all before getting into the meat grinder of the Big East. That's trying to schedule tough in nonconference, and MU, rightly or wrongly, got punished for it with losses to Arizona State, San Diego State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, and New Mexico.
But remember, with Wichita, we're talking about scheduling Tennessee (at home), BYU and DePaul at a "Neutral" Site (Kansas City, less than a 3-hour drive from their campus), Alabama (preseason picked to finish 6th in the SEC), and Tulsa (KenPom picked to finish 7th in Conference USA, because C-USA doesn't conduct a pre-season poll). Good on the Shockers for beating SLU on the road, but nonconference Chaifetz is hardly an arena that strikes terror into anybody's hearts yet. Otherwise, that's a lousy non-conference slate. Period dot.
Even if they finish the season undefeated, they should not be given a number one seed.
FlyJays wrote:If Wichita runs the table, which they will, they will be a #1 seed. And they will lose in the 2nd round. Their best win is against St. Louis - another mid-major. But, its tough to go 30-0 against any schedule.
They are going to miss Carl Hall in the tournament. He gave them a super physical presence, and while their big guy this season is improved, he's not on Hall's level. Furthermore, they aren't a great shooting team. Baker and Van Vleet are streaky, and if they get hot, they are dangerous, but I don't see them getting as hot as they did last March. No doubt WSU is a good team - probably a top 15 team. But I think it's going to be a wake up call when they hit the 2nd round and play a top 50 team, after facing 150+ RPI squads for the past couple of months (including several over 200).
FlyJays wrote:If Wichita runs the table, which they will, they will be a #1 seed. And they will lose in the 2nd round. Their best win is against St. Louis - another mid-major. But, its tough to go 30-0 against any schedule.
They are going to miss Carl Hall in the tournament. He gave them a super physical presence, and while their big guy this season is improved, he's not on Hall's level. Furthermore, they aren't a great shooting team. Baker and Van Vleet are streaky, and if they get hot, they are dangerous, but I don't see them getting as hot as they did last March. No doubt WSU is a good team - probably a top 15 team. But I think it's going to be a wake up call when they hit the 2nd round and play a top 50 team, after facing 150+ RPI squads for the past couple of months (including several over 200).
Return to Big East basketball message board
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 8 guests