Blog Entry

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Posted on: February 6, 2009 1:29 pm
Edited on: February 6, 2009 2:31 pm
 

My newest bracketology is out, and this time I have it in table form here on CBS. Check it out and make sure to comment below. On OSF (link at the bottom) is a full bracket that shows all of the matchups, so check that out also. Special thanks to Shueless Joe for some help on getting this to work.

For the tournament bracket showing the matchups and more bracketology coverage click here .

-Daniel Evans
OnlineSportsFanatic.com

Category: NCAAB
Tags: Bracketology
 
Comments

Since: Aug 18, 2006
Posted on: February 7, 2009 10:29 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

I agree Nova i will and always will hate Duke. The style of play just annoys me they play prissy basketball and when backed in to a corner (Clemson) they can't respond. Can you imagine them in the BE. Try playing Pitt, UConn, Louisville, Marquette. haha it honestly made me laugh thinking of Zoubek vs Thabeet. Henderson is the only one that would fit in the rugged BE. The rest would be pushed around like little kids. Scheyer and Paulus what do they do besides shoot the 3? Anything? And Dan when are you going to get payed to do this stuff? You know more then all the posters, bloggers, and writers on this site!

 

B4L24




Since: May 14, 2007
Posted on: February 7, 2009 2:54 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

I know this bracket doesn't reflect today's games, but I think it's time to admit G-Town's gotta go.

2 losses to Cincy, a loss to SHall, and, well, 3-7 in conference isn't exactly "Tourney-worthy", Imho. Providence deserves that slot.

Seeing Syracuse dog it today @ Nova also makes me question a 6th seed. They've been pathetic for weeks now.

And Duke is finally getting exposed by not playing ACC afterthoughts MD and VA for a change. Other than G-Town, who exactly have Coach K's Klutzes beaten? A 2 seed seems WAAAAAY overrated.




Since: Jan 27, 2007
Posted on: February 7, 2009 8:54 am
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Valid point, but looking at remaining games, I don't see PSU making it. Unlikely as it sounds, they'll finish behind Northwestern.




Since: Nov 13, 2007
Posted on: February 6, 2009 9:44 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

sdsu is still on next 4 out, yeah smart. VT is not in right now




Since: Mar 4, 2008
Posted on: February 6, 2009 8:47 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

An overall theme along the conference disparity lines is that in your bracket only three at-larges will go to "Mid-majors". I would have to think that if it shakes out that way, that would be one of the lowest totals in history. Dan, this is not a criticism of your bracket in any way, I only have 4 at-large bids going to "mid-majors" (and three of those are to the Mountain West, so if you count the 7th best conference as a major conference then there would only be one). I guess my question would be: Are the Mid-major teams and/or conferences down this year? You can put that as a mailbag question if you'd like.

 




Since: Oct 1, 2007
Posted on: February 6, 2009 8:43 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

going around on my blog and making predictions on the experts blogs. I started with you using this one.




Since: Mar 4, 2008
Posted on: February 6, 2009 8:35 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Dan, good job.

Only complaint I have is as Aztecrider mentioned, the Mountain West deserves three bids. We have five great teams in our conference (SDSU, Utah, BYU, UNLV and nobody talks about UNM). But you've already admitted that you think we deserve three bids, I'm just guessing that you don't think the committee will give us three bids, is that correct? I know the committee doesn't look at the number of teams from a particular conference but I have to think that either SDSU or BYU will get in along with Utah and UNLV.

An overall theme along the conference disparity lines is that in your bracket only three at-larges will go to "Mid-majors". I would have to think that if it shakes out that way, that would be one of the lowest totals in history.




Since: Jan 3, 2008
Posted on: February 6, 2009 7:45 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Having VT and Penn State as 13 seeds will never happen. The Big conference schools never get lower than 12 seeds and normally not lower than 11. Thats my only complaint.

This happens a lot more than people think. The general guideline is that an at large team isn't usually seeded below a 12 seed, but that's not necessarily always true. Usually at least one at large team gets a 13 seed, and at this point in time I have two at large teams getting 13 seeds. You are right about big named BCS schools usually getting a 11 seed or higher, but Penn State and Virginia Tech aren't exactly known for their basketball. So let me ask you this whs21. If Siena & Utah State both soar above 13 seeds (very likely) then what is the commitee going to do? Just punish the at large teams and say wait, we are going to have 6 12 seeds instead of making PSU & VT 13 seeds? That's not possible.

If Siena & Utah State keep winning, along with Butler, Davidson, and Northern Iowa, then this is going to happen. Those teams all have nice profiles and none of them deserve a 13 seed.

Thanks for the feedback though.




Since: Jul 22, 2008
Posted on: February 6, 2009 7:34 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Having VT and Penn State as 13 seeds will never happen. The Big conference schools never get lower than 12 seeds and normally not lower than 11. Thats my only complaint.




Since: Jan 3, 2008
Posted on: February 6, 2009 5:39 pm
 

Dantheman's Bracketology: February 6th

Nice job putting this together. I don't think the ACC will get 8 in, however.

Thanks! This is just if "the season ended today". I don't think the ACC gets 8 when it's all said and done either.



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