Blog Entry

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

Posted on: March 13, 2009 9:03 am
Edited on: March 13, 2009 9:31 am
 

So now what?

Is Pittsburgh still a No. 1 seed?

What about Oklahoma?

And Connecticut?

And what does this mean for Michigan State and Memphis?

Never fear, I've got the some answers.

First, let me say this: I can't imagine any scenario under which Pitt won't get a No. 1 seed.

Yeah, the Panthers lost to West Virginia in the quarterfinals of the Big East tournament. But Pitt is still No. 1 in the RPI, 7-3 against the top 25, 8-3 against the top 50 and 16-4 against the top 100 with just one loss outside the top 20. If you can find four bodies of work better than that, by all means, feel free to bump Pitt off the top line. But I don't think there are four bodies of work better than that, and there won't be four on Selection Sunday, either.

Thus, the Panthers should still be one of our four No. 1 seeds.

I think that's pretty clear.

North Carolina should/will be another. That's a safe bet. And the other two will almost certainly come from some combination of Louisville, Connecticut, Michigan State, Memphis and Duke -- sorry OU; I can't see a team that didn't win the Big 12 regular-season title or Big 12 tournament title getting a No. 1 seed -- and reasonable minds can and will have different opinions.

With UConn and Pitt out of the Big East tournament, things have set-up nicely for the Cards to win that event, which would clearly earn a No. 1 seed. To me, that makes Louisville the lone school of the above-mentioned group that essentially controls its own fate, if only because any school that wins the Big East regular-season title and Big East tournament title has to be a No. 1 seed.

So Louisville will get a No. 1 if it wins out.

We can all agree on that, I think.

But will Memphis get one if it wins out?

Not sure.

Will Duke get one if it wins out?

Not sure.

Will Michigan State get one if it wins out?

Not sure.

Truth be told, UConn (17-4 against the top 100 with just one loss outside the top 15) might still have a better body of work than any of those come Selection Sunday -- although Memphis will be on a 25-game winning streak if it wins the C-USA tournament, Duke will (at least) have the second-best RPI if it wins the ACC tournament, and Michigan State will likely be 15-2 against the top 50 if it wins the Big Ten tournament. Strong stuff, all-around. Under those circumstances, each school would have a reasonable argument. So the best thing to do is sit back, see how it unfolds and have a blast watching four teams (Louisville, Michigan State, Memphis and Duke) attempt to build a resume more impressive than UConn's resume in hopes of joining Pitt and UNC as No. 1 seeds.

May the best schools win.

And if not the best, at least the most accomplished.

Category: NCAAB
Comments

Since: Jan 24, 2008
Posted on: March 14, 2009 7:04 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

And Pitt lost to Providence.

What's you point again ? 



jamammy
Since: Feb 15, 2009
Posted on: March 14, 2009 1:15 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Dec 30, 2007
Posted on: March 13, 2009 4:54 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

 

Memphis certainly deserves a 3 seed and consideration for a 2 seed.  End of story.

May be the end of your story. Memphis, if they win out, won't be considered for a two seed, they WILL get a two seed.

 As far as the conferences, I am just comparing the number of teams in the top 100 RPI and averaging that. The teams that are RPI 100+ really shouldn't matter to a legitimate top team (although Okla. did lose to one this year). If two conferences have 5 top 100 teams, then one conference has a bunch from 100-200, while the other has a few over 200, I don't really consider that. If one team is ranked 150 and the other is ranked 200, is there really a difference in the ability of the top teams in the conference beating them? There shouldn't be.

Comparing the losses doesn't really prove anything. Tulsa also beat Texas A&M by more than they beat Mo. St. Does this mean Mo. St. is better than A&M, who also beat Oklahoma and Missouri? By your reasoning, Tulsa is better than Missouri and Oklahoma.




Since: Nov 7, 2007
Posted on: March 13, 2009 3:22 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

I believe what he was trying to say is that if Louisville wins the Big East Tourny, too it should leave no doubt that they should be a No. 1 seed, not that they may not be already.  By comparison OK and Duke and Michigan State's body of work (even with the latter two winning out) wouldn't measure up to Louisville's.  Pretty much saying that their destiny is truly in their hands if they win what has been touted the best college basketball conference this season. 

Keep in mind that Louisville struggled a little earlier in the season and now have to play some catch-up.  Anyway, No 1 or 2 seed, doesn't really matter that much except for school pride.  They are playing well now, so be happy for that.




Since: Feb 23, 2009
Posted on: March 13, 2009 3:13 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

 I believe that North Carolina, Pitt, and Connecticut should all be 1 seeds.  The only team that has a better record than them is Memphis and their SOS is bad and they have not beat any team that will be a 1, 2, 3, or even a 4 seed in the tournament.  Memphis's best win was against Tennessee which has 10 losses and will be a 5 seed at best and more likely a 7-8 seed.  If you have not beat a 1-2 seed type team you really should not be in consideration for a #1 seed.  Those 3 teams I mentioned above have wins against other teams that will be 1-2 seeds and in fact I think they all have 2 or more. 

Now that I made the case why Memphis should not be in the running for a #1 seed the same thing can be said for Oklahoma who beat no team that will be a top 4 seed.  They have not proven they can beat any top 1-2 seed teams so they should not be above those 3 teams with the same records or better that have won against other teams with 1-2 seed resume's.

I believe it should be between Louisville and MSU and if they both win their tournaments Louisville should get the edge.  They both have 5 losses but Louisville has a victory over a #1 seed and also a victory over a #2-3 seed in Villanova.  MSU has a win over Kansas which will most likely be a #3 seed which is a better win than Memphis and Oklahoma have but not as good as if Louisville wins the Big East Tourney.  Top 50 wins are nice but when talking about #1 overall seeds I really don't care how many 25-50 ranked teams you beat but how many top 25 teams you beat and even more important how many top 10 teams you beat because those teams are the ones that are going for the 1-2 seeds.  The Big 10's 2nd best team will be a 5 seed at best so they really did not have the top competition in their league.  The Big East has 3 teams that have #1 seed type resume and another that will be a 2-3 seed.  Teams like Syracuse, WVU, and Marquette will also be 4-6 seeds so you have to give the edge to Louisville over MSU if they both win out the rest of the way.

Do I think this will happen and 3 Big East teams get #1 seeds?  No, but it should if Louisville wins out.  Pitt and Connecticut have better records and resume's than any team but North Carolina and deserve to be #1 seeds and so does Louisville if they win the Big East Tournament.




Since: Oct 13, 2007
Posted on: March 13, 2009 2:22 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

 they lost to VMI. period. thats all that matter about that, as far as a full season, so far they haven't really earned it, i think they will be a number one, but thats why they are not a #1 yet...




Since: Sep 25, 2008
Posted on: March 13, 2009 2:11 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

Most years I defend C-USA..matter of fact I thought the conference got shafted on bids last year.  Did I exaggerate a little bit on how bad C-USA is this year?  Probably.  There is no disputing the A-10 and Mountain West is better; if we cannot agree on that, our argument cannot be saved.  The conference in question would then be the Missouri Valley, Horizon, and WAC.  I will give you the WAC is definately not better than C-USA...they are closer though than you would think.  That leaves Horizon and Missouri Valley. 

Missouri Valley has been better than C-USA ever since Louisville, Marquette, and DePaul jetted for Big East.  They consistently get 3-4 teams in the tournament.  This year in particular the Missouri Valley is down but I feel still has an edge over C-USA based on the head-to-head factor: Tulsa (C-USA's #2 team) only beat Missouri St (MVC's WORST team) by 3 in Tulsa.  Missouri State was 11-20 (3-15) this year.  In the only other head-to-head match-up Illinois State defeated SMU by 11; that is 1-1 with an egg laid by Tulsa at home.  Memphis would probably beat any MVC team, but I do not think they would go undefeated (IMO).  The Horizon has less of an argument because the bottom of that conference is dreadful but I will make the argument that Butler beat some quality teams and deserves a top 25 ranking.  Cleveland St. won the conference tournament and also beat Syracuse this year which is a better win than anyone can say from MVC or CUSA.  Top to bottom CUSA is better than Horizon but up top they are fairly close.

Again, I was being sarcastic when I ripped C-USA, but my overall point is still clear...C-USA is not strong enough of a conference for a team to warrant a #1 seed considering the alternatives out there.  Just because Memphis did not lose a game in conference does not mean they are more deserving than teams from Big East, ACC, Big 12, etc.  Butler, Xavier, Gonzaga, and BYU are very strong teams that are not getting top line consideration despite nice resumes and winning mid-major conferences, so why should Memphis?  Memphis lost to Xavier on a neutral court, lost to Georgetown, and lost to Syracuse at home.  There is no shame in any of those losses.  But who did they beat?  What was their best win?  Gonzaga and then Seton Hall.  Meanwhile Pitt beat UCONN twice, Syracuse, Marquette, Florida State, etc.  UCONN beat Gonzaga, Wisconsin, Michigan and Miami out of conference and beat Louisville, Villanova, Marquette, etc. in conference.  UNC beat Kentucky, Notre Dame, Michigan St, Duke twice, etc.  Oklahoma beat Purdue, USC, Utah, Texas, Texas A&M, etc.

I could go on forever. 

Memphis certainly deserves a 3 seed and consideration for a 2 seed.  End of story.

    




Since: Feb 14, 2008
Posted on: March 13, 2009 12:52 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

 

In examining UCONN don't you have to take into account Dyson's injury?  This would mean that you have to discount UCONN's close wins over Gonzaga, WVU and Nova.  Instead you'd focus on what they've done post-Dyson which is go 4-3 with losses to Pitt (2x) and Syracuse and close wins over ND and Marquette.  While this record certainly isn't worthy of pushing them way down the rankings its not what you'd expect out of a #1 seed either.  Overall I'd say UCONN is on shaky ground for a #1 if two of Louisville, Mich St, Memphis and Duke win their conf tournaments.  At this point the first 3 are favorites to win their tournaments and if Lawson continues to sit out the ACC tournament Duke might be the ACC favorite too.




Since: Feb 24, 2009
Posted on: March 13, 2009 12:34 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

Pitt should still be another one seed, but a loss like this is not good. I think they take teams to lightly and feel they can coast thru these games. They did not play aggressively on the boards and Blair needs to start playing like co-player of the year instead of street ball. I'm just hoping they'll make by the sweet 16. Good luck Pitt




Since: Dec 30, 2007
Posted on: March 13, 2009 12:26 pm
 

Pitt should still be a No. 1 seed

 This year, Conference USA is inferior to the Atlantic 10, Missouri Valley, Horizon, WAC, and Mt. West; and I can argue Colonial, WCC, Sun Belt, and MAC are better if you exclude Memphis carrying the C-USA in RPI. 

How did you determine this? Real Time RPI has CUSA ranked tenth, Pomeroy has them ranked eighth. You have them ranked at least 12th. Is this just your opinion or are you basing it on any hard facts?

CUSA has five teams in the top 100 RPI, WAC has two and Horizon has four. 

If you exclude Memphis, you must exclude the top team from the other conferences also. If you take out Creighton and Memphis, the two top RPI from those conferences, the next four teams for CUSA average 69 RPI, the next four for the MVC average 74 RPI.

I would love to see your argument for the Colonial, WCC, Sunbelt and MAC, but remember, if you take out Memphis, you also have to take out the top team in the other conferences.

 



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com