We DESERVE a 2 Seed!

#7
#7
We should be the last #1 seed or the 1st 2 seed! No one could make a debate on that having an understanding of basketball! At least not reasonable one!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrumpedUpVol
#12
#12
Best team is the SEC should be a 1 seed. UT is playing the best over the last 3 weeks hands down not even arguable. They have the non-conference schedule and many Q1 wins to go with the SEC tournament championship. NO bad losses, none.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and HeadVol77
#14
#14
We deserve a #1. The NCAA asks teams to play brutal non-conference schedules and we did. The SEC is also arguably the best conference overall. We also had the SEC schedule fall in a way where we had to play at Arkansas, at Kentucky, at Alabama and at LSU. So we had the toughest conference draw too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and HeadVol77
#16
#16
I feel like we *SHOULD* solidly be a 2 seed in spite of all these bad "bracketologists" saying we're a 3.

If we beat Texas back in January, maybe we're in the 1 seed discussion, but remember, we did have a loss to Villanova, which probably puts them ahead of us.

That said, outside of Gonzaga, Arizona, Baylor, Kansas, and 'Nova, I can't see a good argument for any other team above us. We just beat Kentucky 2 out of 3 times, including 1 on a neutral court. We won the SEC tournament. We beat Arizona and Auburn. On most ratings, we had a top 10 SOS. Our NET ranking is #8 and Houston (#3) and Kentucky (#5) are two of the teams above us, so we should probably be #6 on that. Most of the teams people are trying to put above us make no sense (e.g. Duke, which looked weaker down the stretch and is rated below us on virtually every relevant rating system in existence).
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, kbowersjr and JoAllan
#17
#17
We should have been a 0 seed. After today's win, we should have been a -1 seed.
 
#18
#18
I believe we will be a two, perhaps should be a one, no matter what the seed, we are going all the way this year, just watched a championship win with my sons, I have wanted to say that for a long time now!
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and HeadVol77
#19
#19
DiderotsGhost said:
I feel like we *SHOULD* solidly be a 2 seed in spite of all these bad "bracketologists" saying we're a 3.

If we beat Texas back in January, maybe we're in the 1 seed discussion, but remember, we did have a loss to Villanova, which probably puts them ahead of us.

That said, outside of Gonzaga, Arizona, Baylor, Kansas, and 'Nova, I can't see a good argument for any other team above us. We just beat Kentucky 2 out of 3 times, including 1 on a neutral court. We won the SEC tournament. We beat Arizona and Auburn. On most ratings, we had a top 10 SOS. Our NET ranking is #8 and Houston (#3) and Kentucky (#5) are two of the teams above us, so we should probably be #6 on that. Most of the teams people are trying to put above us make no sense (e.g. Duke, which looked weaker down the stretch and is rated below us on virtually every relevant rating system in existence).
Click to expand...
Nova also has a marginally “weaker” schedule than us though and has a Q2 loss on their resume that we don’t have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and chuckiepoo
#21
#21
DiderotsGhost said:
I feel like we *SHOULD* solidly be a 2 seed in spite of all these bad "bracketologists" saying we're a 3.

If we beat Texas back in January, maybe we're in the 1 seed discussion, but remember, we did have a loss to Villanova, which probably puts them ahead of us.

That said, outside of Gonzaga, Arizona, Baylor, Kansas, and 'Nova, I can't see a good argument for any other team above us. We just beat Kentucky 2 out of 3 times, including 1 on a neutral court. We won the SEC tournament. We beat Arizona and Auburn. On most ratings, we had a top 10 SOS. Our NET ranking is #8 and Houston (#3) and Kentucky (#5) are two of the teams above us, so we should probably be #6 on that. Most of the teams people are trying to put above us make no sense (e.g. Duke, which looked weaker down the stretch and is rated below us on virtually every relevant rating system in existence).
Click to expand...

That NET was also before todays win and the fact that historically Tourney Titles have counted for something
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big time vol
#22
#22
Resume wise we are a 1 seed without a doubt. Only Kansas has more quad 1 wins then us. Baylor is tied with us. Nobody has beaten 3 top 5 teams, 4 if u count Kentucky twice. We have no bad losses. All 7 we're quad 1. If we don't get a 2 seed it's jus a popularity contest. And we haven't been good long enough in basketball to be popular. Plain and simple. Also we have 4 sos. Only Kansas is better in that dept as well
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77 and SDVolTn
#23
#23
DiderotsGhost said:
I feel like we *SHOULD* solidly be a 2 seed in spite of all these bad "bracketologists" saying we're a 3.

If we beat Texas back in January, maybe we're in the 1 seed discussion, but remember, we did have a loss to Villanova, which probably puts them ahead of us.

That said, outside of Gonzaga, Arizona, Baylor, Kansas, and 'Nova, I can't see a good argument for any other team above us. We just beat Kentucky 2 out of 3 times, including 1 on a neutral court. We won the SEC tournament. We beat Arizona and Auburn. On most ratings, we had a top 10 SOS. Our NET ranking is #8 and Houston (#3) and Kentucky (#5) are two of the teams above us, so we should probably be #6 on that. Most of the teams people are trying to put above us make no sense (e.g. Duke, which looked weaker down the stretch and is rated below us on virtually every relevant rating system in existence).
Click to expand...
I (and all of us) have debated the seeding vs our SEC brethren but Duke and Purdue have infinitely weaker resumes than us and are considered to be the other 2 seeds. Duke has 4 Q2 losses compared to our 0 and only 4 Q1 wins compared to our 8. OOC schedule of 41 vs 48, 104, 119 and 187 for AU, UK, Duke and Purdue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong, iVolSoHard, Big time vol and 2 others
#24
#24
I think we have better portfolio than Baylor and Villanova. Also, the teams are not the same since the disgusting loss to Villanova. That was light years ago and now we would likely beat them.
DiderotsGhost said:
I feel like we *SHOULD* solidly be a 2 seed in spite of all these bad "bracketologists" saying we're a 3.

If we beat Texas back in January, maybe we're in the 1 seed discussion, but remember, we did have a loss to Villanova, which probably puts them ahead of us.

That said, outside of Gonzaga, Arizona, Baylor, Kansas, and 'Nova, I can't see a good argument for any other team above us. We just beat Kentucky 2 out of 3 times, including 1 on a neutral court. We won the SEC tournament. We beat Arizona and Auburn. On most ratings, we had a top 10 SOS. Our NET ranking is #8 and Houston (#3) and Kentucky (#5) are two of the teams above us, so we should probably be #6 on that. Most of the teams people are trying to put above us make no sense (e.g. Duke, which looked weaker down the stretch and is rated below us on virtually every relevant rating system in existence).
Click to expand...
 
#25
#25
VOLnFLA said:
Resume wise we are a 1 seed without a doubt. Only Kansas has more quad 1 wins then us. Baylor is tied with us. Nobody has beaten 3 top 5 teams, 4 if u count Kentucky twice. We have no bad losses. All 7 we're quad 1. If we don't get a 2 seed it's jus a popularity contest. And we haven't been good long enough in basketball to be popular. Plain and simple
Click to expand...

We are ahead of Baylor actually

They have 10, we have 11 after the win today
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big time vol, HeadVol77 and chuckiepoo
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top