(1) Ohio State vs. (4) Kentucky
(2) North Carolina vs. (11) Marquette

(1) Duke vs. (5) Arizona
(2) San Diego State vs. (3) Connecticut

(1) Kansas vs. (12) Richmond
(10) Florida State vs. (11) VCU

(4) Wisconsin vs. (8) Butler
(2) Florida vs. (3) BYU


What are your thoughts about the sweet 16? Anyone have predictions on how the tournament ends up? Who is the most suprising team to be in the sweet 16? Who is the favorite to win the National Championship?

1 of the 11 big east teams made it?

Barkely said early on they were overrated, and said not even 5 or 6 would make it.....

Saw this on a UNC forum

If the Final Four is

Duke
Kansas
UNC
Florida

and there is a very real possibility that happens,

it would be the past 4 national champions over the last 6 years. Interesting

SportsAndLady;720384 wrote:Saw this on a UNC forum

If the Final Four is

Duke
Kansas
UNC
Florida

and there is a very real possibility that happens,

it would be the past 4 national champions over the last 6 years. Interesting

That's nuts.

VCU, Richmond, Florida State all huge surprises obviously.

I'll still take the Bucks as the favorite. I'd love for them to play Kentucky, then UNC, then Duke, then Kansas. Take down all the blue bloods in a row for the National Championships, and the haters would still say they are overrated.

I don't think I've ever heard one person say OSU is overrated this year...except maybe Wisconsin's student section that one game they beat them lol

pretty wild that Richmond and VCU are both in it. My girlfriend is a VCU grad, so Go Rams in that bracket.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/sports/basketball/college/hoopstown-usa/

SportsAndLady;720384 wrote:Saw this on a UNC forum

If the Final Four is

Duke
Kansas
UNC
Florida

and there is a very real possibility that happens,

it would be the past 4 national champions over the last 6 years. Interesting

That would be crazy.

sleeper;720399 wrote:I'd love for them to play Kentucky, then UNC, then Duke, then Kansas..

That might be even more crazy, and I would consider that likely at this point if they keep winning.

SportsAndLady;720412 wrote:I don't think I've ever heard one person say OSU is overrated this year...except maybe Wisconsin's student section that one game they beat them lol

Yeah, I think everyone except Gibby knows Ohio State is the real deal.

thavoice;719959 wrote:1 of the 11 big east teams made it?

Barkely said early on they were overrated, and said not even 5 or 6 would make it.....

Marquette says hi.

thavoice;719959 wrote:1 of the 11 big east teams made it?

Barkely said early on they were overrated, and said not even 5 or 6 would make it.....

It's actually two, but it still doesn't change the point. Alot of average teams.

It's actually two, but it still doesn't change the point. Alot of average teams.

Does that prove that the Big East had quality depth and not any great teams? Marquette and UCONN were both 9-9 in league.

Prescott;720695 wrote:Does that prove that the Big East had quality depth and not any great teams? Marquette and UCONN were both 9-9 in league.

Well when you have 4 Big East teams playing each other 2 of them are bound to win and advanced. I don't think it proves anything besides that they got so many teams in that the ones who won their first round match ups some likely to play a BE team in the second round.

The Big East has some TERRIBLE teams at the bottom of that league that people just forget about:

Name --> Conference Record (Overall)
DePaul --> 1-17 (7-24)
South Florida --> 3-15 (10-23)
Providence --> 4-14 (15-17)
Rutgers --> 5-13 (15-17)
Seton Hall --> 7-11 (13-18)

The B10 only has 2 teams that bad

Indiana --> 3-15 (12-20)
Iowa --> 4-14 (11-20)
Also, arguably Minnesota, but they were playing well early in the season but I believe suffered injuries in conference play (hence the winning record but bad conference record):
Minnesota --> 6-12 (17-14)

The ACC With 2 teams (borderline 3 that bad)
Wake Forest --> 1-15 (8-24)
Georgia Tech --> 5-11 (13-18)
NCST --> 5-11 (15-16)

People just tend to ignore that while the Big East has more teams, they also have more TERRIBLE teams.

Fly4Fun;720750 wrote:Well when you have 4 Big East teams playing each other 2 of them are bound to win and advanced. I don't think it proves anything besides that they got so many teams in that the ones who won their first round match ups some likely to play a BE team in the second round.

The Big East has some TERRIBLE teams at the bottom of that league that people just forget about:

Name --> Conference Record (Overall)
DePaul --> 1-17 (7-24)
South Florida --> 3-15 (10-23)
Providence --> 4-14 (15-17)
Rutgers --> 5-13 (15-17)
Seton Hall --> 7-11 (13-18)

The B10 only has 2 teams that bad

Indiana --> 3-15 (12-20)
Iowa --> 4-14 (11-20)
Also, arguably Minnesota, but they were playing well early in the season but I believe suffered injuries in conference play (hence the winning record but bad conference record):
Minnesota --> 6-12 (17-14)

The ACC With 2 teams (borderline 3 that bad)
Wake Forest --> 1-15 (8-24)
Georgia Tech --> 5-11 (13-18)
NCST --> 5-11 (15-16)

People just tend to ignore that while the Big East has more teams, they also have more TERRIBLE teams.

Minny was definitely legit when Mbakwe, Nolen, and Joseph were all playing.

East- OSU looks good
West- Duke looks good
Southwest- probably Kansas, but if VCU keeps it up, look out
Southeast- any of those 4 could make the Final Four

This logic is flawed. I'm not one to take up for the Big East, but to call Rutgers and Seton Hall TERRIBLE is an wrong. What about the argument that they all have such crappy conference records because 90% of their games are against other NCAA Tournament caliber teams, and none were good enough to really win. The proof is in the pudding...

Seton Hall Results
Lost to Temple by 6
Beat Alabama by 5
Lost to Xavier by 5
Lost to Clemson by 6
Lost to Dayton by 4
Lost to Richmond by 8

I'd say they were slightly worse than the likes of Marquette, Cincinnati, Villanova, St. John's, but to call them terrible is very unfair. Anyone who saw them play would NOT compare them to Indiana, not even close. That's laughable.

Rutgers was not as good as Seton Hall, but they only lost to Princeton by 5, beat Miami FL by 16, beat Fairfield by 15 (won the MAAC) and beat St. Peters.

Again, their conference results show they really could never beat the NCAA caliber Big East teams, but to compare them to the likes of other "real" TERRIBLE teams like LSU, Indiana, Wake Forest and DePaul is unfair.

You're gonna argue that Seton Hall isn't terrible by pointing out 6 games in which they lost 5 of them; and that 1 win being against a team that didn't even get in the NCAA tournament?

And come on azu, they are not "slightly worse" than those 4 teams. They are a lot worse than those 4 teams.

Disagree. I'll even add that Seton Hall was without their leading scorer for much of the season.

My point isn't that Seton Hall was as good as those teams, it's that they are far better than Indiana, LSU, Wake Forest, Auburn and DePaul. Those were BAD, BAD BCS teams. "Terrible", to continue the wording already used in this thread.

You should be able to relate, as a Big 12 fan.

Iowa State and Oklahoma, last in the Big 12, but based on seeing them play, they would be in a class above those other teams. I hesitated to use Auburn because I saw marked improvement from Auburn since the beginning of the year. I question whether DePaul, Indiana, LSU or Wake Forest got better at all. They were getting crushed worse at the end of the year than the beginning.

I wouldn't hesitate to put Iowa State and Oklahoma in the same category as Indiana, LSU, Wake, Auburn, and Depaul

"Marquette says hi"

lol