Memphis #1? Give me a break

#1
Ole_Virgil_Cane

Ole_Virgil_Cane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
228
Likes
42
#1
So Memphis wins C-USA for the 4th year in a row. Their win streak in C-USA is unreal.

They need to get out of C-USA and find some real conference competition. Wiping the floor with Houston and Tulsa is not that impressive.

They are a great team, no doubt, but dont deserve a #1 seed. :hi:
 
#2
#2
Ole_Virgil_Cane said:
So Memphis wins C-USA for the 4th year in a row. Their win streak in C-USA is unreal.

They need to get out of C-USA and find some real conference competition. Wiping the floor with Houston and Tulsa is not that impressive.

They are a great team, no doubt, but dont deserve a #1 seed. :hi:
Click to expand...

they would if they could
 
#7
#7
Ole_Virgil_Cane said:
So Memphis wins C-USA for the 4th year in a row. Their win streak in C-USA is unreal.

They need to get out of C-USA and find some real conference competition. Wiping the floor with Houston and Tulsa is not that impressive.

They are a great team, no doubt, but dont deserve a #1 seed. :hi:
Click to expand...

If the committee gives them a #1 seed then you can e-mail them your displeasure !:whistling:
 
#8
#8
Ole_Virgil_Cane said:
So Memphis wins C-USA for the 4th year in a row. Their win streak in C-USA is unreal.

They need to get out of C-USA and find some real conference competition. Wiping the floor with Houston and Tulsa is not that impressive.

They are a great team, no doubt, but dont deserve a #1 seed. :hi:
Click to expand...

Why do they need to change conferences? It looks to me like the current formula is working pretty well for them.
 
#9
#9
cotton said:
Why do they need to change conferences? It looks to me like the current formula is working pretty well for them.
Click to expand...

had they not came within 5 1/2 minutes of a national title last year, I might agree with the OP. But they prove that even though they only play in Conference USA, they are still legit contenders.

Do I think Pitt, Louisville, UCONN, MSU and UNC are better? Absolutely. but Pitt and UCONN shouldn't have dropped a stink pinkle in their conference tourneys.
 
#10
#10
volfanbill said:
had they not came within 5 1/2 minutes of a national title last year, I might agree with the OP. But they prove that even though they only play in Conference USA, they are still legit contenders.

Do I think Pitt, Louisville, UCONN, MSU and UNC are better? Absolutely. but Pitt and UCONN shouldn't have dropped a stink pinkle in their conference tourneys.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say absolutely better. All of these teams are beatable. If Providence can beat Pitt, so can Memphis. If Notre Dame can beat U of L by 30 at home, Memphis could beat them also. UConn and UNC are definitely beatable without their injured guards. MSU -give me a freaking break. They couldn't handle Memphis' defensive length and quickness last year. They wouldn't score 40 on this better defensive version of the Tigers.
 
#11
#11
CALISKING said:
I wouldn't say absolutely better. All of these teams are beatable. If Providence can beat Pitt, so can Memphis. If Notre Dame can beat U of L by 30 at home, Memphis could beat them also. UConn and UNC are definitely beatable without their injured guards. MSU -give me a freaking break. They couldn't handle Memphis' defensive length and quickness last year. They wouldn't score 40 on this better defensive version of the Tigers.
Click to expand...

Don't even try and compare this team to last... The three top players lost last year were all better than anyone on this years team. And yes, all of those teams are ABSOLUTELY better. Can you beat them, yes. But upsets can happen with anyone.
 
#12
#12
Brewerw said:
Don't even try and compare this team to last... The three top players lost last year were all better than anyone on this years team. And yes, all of those teams are ABSOLUTELY better. Can you beat them, yes. But upsets can happen with anyone.
Click to expand...

The three lost from last year are irreplaceable. However, this years team is better defensively than last years. Don't believe me, just check out Cal's quote in Commercial Appeal today.
 
#14
#14
We'll know in a little while if it's a 1 or a 2 . I think it'll be a 2 , I just hope it's the #1-2 .
 
#15
#15
TIGER DEN said:
We'll know in a little while if it's a 1 or a 2 . I think it'll be a 2 , I just hope it's the #1-2 .
Click to expand...

Do they even really do that anymore? I thought I heard somewhere that the emphasis was going to be on keeping teams close to home, you know, because of the economy and because the criteria needs to change every year to keep everybody off-balance.
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
cotton said:
Do they even really do that anymore? I thought I head somewhere that the emphasis was going to be on keeping teams close to home, you know, because of the economy and because the criteria needs to change every year to keep everybody off-balance.
Click to expand...

I may be mistaken cotton but I think you are also playing for the higher seed in each round so you get to play a little closer to home. Again i'm not 100% sure about it though.

I did listen to Cals post game show and he said he wouldn't be that upset about not being a #1 , but defintely wanted to be the #1-2.
 
#17
#17
TIGER DEN said:
I may be mistaken cotton but I think you are also playing for the higher seed in each round so you get to play a little closer to home. Again i'm not 100% sure about it though.

I did listen to Cals post game show and he said he wouldn't be that upset about not being a #1 , but defintely wanted to be the #1-2.
Click to expand...

I saw some statistics last night on ESPN showing the relative success of 1 seeds vs 2 seeds since the tournament expanded in the mid-80s. Basically, the 1s had a lot more final fours, championship appearances, and championships. My immediate thought was that the point they were trying to prove was wrong.

While on the surface it seems like it is better to be a 1 than a 2 because 1s have more success, they completely ignored the fact that, on average, 1s are better than 2s, and would have more success if you reversed them every year.

All that to say is that I don't think it matters whether a particular team gets a 1 or 2. If you are deserving of either, you should breeze to 16. From there, you are going to have to be really good an play really well to make the final four, and more than likely beat a team the same caliber as you are.
 
#18
#18
cotton said:
I saw some statistics last night on ESPN showing the relative success of 1 seeds vs 2 seeds since the tournament expanded in the mid-80s. Basically, the 1s had a lot more final fours, championship appearances, and championships. My immediate thought was that the point they were trying to prove was wrong.

While on the surface it seems like it is better to be a 1 than a 2 because 1s have more success, they completely ignored the fact that, on average, 1s are better than 2s, and would have more success if you reversed them every year.

All that to say is that I don't think it matters whether a particular team gets a 1 or 2. If you are deserving of either, you should breeze to 16. From there, you are going to have to be really good an play really well to make the final four, and more than likely beat a team the same caliber as you are.
Click to expand...

True . Well i'm headed to the shop to watch the Vols Kick As$ . Once again and not that you need it ,but



GOOD LUCK VOLS FANS
 
#20
#20
UTLCA said:
When Tennessee is your best quality win, you shouldn't be a 1 seed.
Click to expand...

WOW , Dont flatter yourself for 1 minute thinking that beating the vols was our best win .We trounced #11 Gonzaga @ there place. I barely caught this before I shut off the computer. Good day sir.
 
#21
#21
The RPI says Tennessee. Gonzaga is another team that benefits in the rankings from playing in a bad conference, one that is worse than last year.

Either way. Wow, Gonzaga is their best win then? Still doesn't merit a 1 seed.
 
Last edited:
#23
#23
It doesn't matter put Memphis 1 or 2 and let them play and prove again. If they get a 2 seed which is fine, Cal will just use that as motivation.
 
#24
#24
cotton said:
Do they even really do that anymore? I thought I heard somewhere that the emphasis was going to be on keeping teams close to home, you know, because of the economy and because the criteria needs to change every year to keep everybody off-balance.[/QUOTE]

I heard a rumor that Barack Obongo commissioned the NCAA to do this. Part of his Change.
Click to expand...
 
#25
#25
UTLCA said:
The RPI says Tennessee. Gonzaga is another team that benefits in the rankings from playing in a bad conference, one that is worse than last year.

Either way. Wow, Gonzaga is their best win then? Still doesn't merit a 1 seed.
Click to expand...

Gonzaga beat the vols twice and the vols are not ranked . Come on let all the excuses go .

I say we deserve a #2 but I dont make those decisions and neither do you.:ermm:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top