JohnWardForever
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 13,477
- Likes
- 11,289
Yeah, they've tightened up the résumé disparity in the last couple weeks. It's a lot closer than it was.Well that is a ridiculous statement. They beat Alabama and Auburn on the road. They are higher in NET and BPI and would have another win against Alabama at a neutral site. They would still have 1 less loss than us and currently they are thought to be the consensus last #1 seed. Losing in the conference finals has hardly if ever lost a team a top spot. Not saying we could not take the spot away but to say Florida has "way less resume" is without any factual backing.
Well if there was any chance to earn an NCAA #1 seed it is right in front of us. Wins over lock #1 seed Auburn followed by a win over #1/2 seed FLA or #2 seed Bama might do it. Thoughts?
He also said going into the tournament that whichever of the three is the last one standing would get the last #1 seed. Lunardi flip flops his opinion like a teenage girl. He also had Texas as his last team in prior to yesterday's games with UNC behind them. He then flipped them afterJust heard him say he believes the winner of the Florida-Bama game will get the #1 seed in the West.
No. The committee should ignore "tourny winners" now just like they should when we won Bahamas early in the season. They should stick to the formula of judging evenly from wk #1 through this Sunday, base everything on a game by game basis, and ignore how conferences do these redundant tourneys. JMHOI’d love to think we could earn a number one seed by winning - and maybe just maybe this one time - just this once - the committee will have a contingency bracket worked out where the SEC champ gets the spot along with Auburn- that’s what I would do - if it’s truly as close as people say, then giving the champ the lower seed might look pretty bad.
But I’ll believe it when I see it.
Said differently, it’s more likely that Rick Barnes is gonna fly out of my rectal cavity riding a bat than they wait that long to finalize the brackets.
No. The committee should ignore "tourny winners" now just like they should when we won Bahamas early in the season. They should stick to the formula of judging evenly from wk #1 through this Sunday, base everything on a game by game basis, and ignore how conferences do these redundant tourneys. JMHO
This is the truth. I wish we could undo this complete waste of time. Give four more games per year, to conference and two out of conference. Make the SEC champion mean what it should, which is to earn it over the course of a season not a hot streak or a cold street early in one week.For teams like UF, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, Duke, etc these tournaments mean very little. They just present opportunities for your top players to get hurt at the most inopportune time, see eg Duke. Otherwise, the only teams that care are those that need 1-2 wins to get to 20.
I think it would be the other way around, no? We have the head to head and a better record than Alabama so if they beat Florida and we beat them we will have 2 wins over them and 2 fewer losses, no way the committee still gives them the final seed in that case, right?We probably need bama to lose to have a (long) shot at #1 seed, right?
I am fully prepared to win the SEC Tournament and still wind up as a two seed because life is miserable.
If I could like it twice,, I would!!I think our best case is to beat Auburn tomorrow and beat Alabama in the finals. I agree with you that a Florida win tomorrow gives them a #1 seed.
And I think we are the top #2 seed, at worst, due to our head to head over Alabama if we win tomorrow.
Edit: let’s also not discount the eye test and how that could be a factor. Although the three teams are, in the words of Joe Lunardi, “4, 5, and 6 in whatever order you want to put them,” and are there in the metrics, as well, both Alabama and Florida have looked the part of juggernauts while we just keep winning without blowing teams out or scoring a ton of points. “Lunch pail” basketball, if you will.