|
Who takes it all? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gonzaga |
|
16 | 3.91% |
| Duke |
|
15 | 3.67% |
| Louisville |
|
61 | 14.91% |
| Miami |
|
24 | 5.87% |
| Indiana |
|
45 | 11.00% |
| Kansas |
|
28 | 6.85% |
| The field |
|
101 | 24.69% |
| gently caress Bo Ryan |
|
119 | 29.10% |
| Total: | 409 votes | ||
|
Mod reminder that nobody gives a poo poo about your bracket so someone create a separate thread for complaining about cheats and bad beats. If you want to show off by telling us about your dear alma mater and their team then read the following quote SteelAngel2000 posted:The regular season is over, Championship Week is over, the brackets are out, and we all know who is going dancing. There are currently sixty-eight teams in the field, sixty four after Tuesday. A lot of us know a lot about these teams, at least the big powers, and a lot of us don't know jack poo poo about half of the teams. There are a few bracket challenges: Yahoo goon backet challenge : http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...hreadid=3539148 Group ID: 149274 Password: FuckBoRyan I can change the scoring system later but default is 1-2-4-8-16-32. Let me know what you would prefer. If someone does one on ESPN then let me know and I will edit it into the OP. Dr. Gitmo Moneyson posted:You uhhh, forgot to edit one on ESPN into the OP. Happy bracket filling! Wall St Journal blind bracket: http://projects.wsj.com/blindfold-brackets-2013/ e: BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I mean good for them, but they ain't got that money. Frot Lesnar fucked around with this message at Mar 31, 2013 around 16:18 |
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 22:53 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 00:32 |
|
|
Is the Wall Street Journal doing that Blind Bracket thing again? That was an interesting way to compare picks, I thought.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 22:56 |
|
|
Mike_V posted:Is the Wall Street Journal doing that Blind Bracket thing again? That was an interesting way to compare picks, I thought. It should be up in a day or two.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 22:57 |
|
|
WE COMIN FOR YOUR PUDDIN POPS, COSBY
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:01 |
|
RIVALS!!!!!
|
Voted Miami (over Gonzaga)
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:04 |
|
|
Of course, the bracket show starts off talking about the #17 seed, Kentucky. gently caress off, bald Kentucky guy.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:05 |
|
|
vegaji posted:Of course, the bracket show starts off talking about the #17 seed, Kentucky. gently caress off, bald Kentucky guy. Let me cherry pick 3 common opponents to make the decision look ridiculous.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:06 |
|
|
Any potential upsets sticking out to anyone? I think Minnesota matches up really well against UCLA, and Oregon is obviously highly under-seeded.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:06 |
|
|
I've got Belmont winning vs. Arizona in basically all my brackets. Belmont's a very good team.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:07 |
|
|
TITY BOI posted:Any potential upsets sticking out to anyone? I think Minnesota matches up really well against UCLA, and Oregon is obviously highly under-seeded. Miss over Wisconsin, Creighton over Duke. But I also really hate Wisconsin and Duke.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:08 |
|
|
gently caress Duke, I hope Albany runs a train on y'all
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:15 |
|
|
Frot Lesnar posted:I can change the scoring system later but default is 1-2-4-8-16-32. Let me know what you would prefer. If someone does one on ESPN then let me know and I will edit it into the OP.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:17 |
|
|
Fast Luck posted:That's a nutso scoring system. 32 for the champion? So picking Duke and then they win it all is worth as much as getting every first round game? It should be something like 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 I dunno... Every round is worth the same. Picking the Final Four and the champion SHOULD be worth as much as all the first round games.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:19 |
|
|
For reference, here's the official ranking of all 68 teams: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...a-168-seed-list
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:24 |
|
|
the NCAA needs to stop trying to make a UNC-KU rivalry happen, it's not going to happen
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:25 |
|
|
Looking at the seeding, it seems like the committee didn't give teams much credit for missing key players during the season this year. Duke landed where they should've, but Miami and Oregon seem to have essentially been docked for losing some close games while missing key players.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:25 |
|
|
Ole Miss over Wisconsin is one upset that stands out to me right away. KenPom's site must be getting hammered, I can barely get it to load.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:36 |
|
|
Nimmy posted:Every round is worth the same. Picking the Final Four and the champion SHOULD be worth as much as all the first round games.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:36 |
|
|
Jeff Wiiver posted:Ole Miss over Wisconsin is one upset that stands out to me right away. KenPom's site must be getting hammered, I can barely get it to load. Ole Miss plays at the fastest pace in their conference. Top 12 overall.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:37 |
|
|
Milovan Drecun posted:Ole Miss plays at the fastest pace in their conference. Top 12 overall. Wisconsin has never really had problems with major conference foes in the Tournament either. I know that doesn't really mean anything, but it's still something. Really fast teams tend to also be very sloppy, and waste a lot of possessions because they aren't as valuable. Fast Luck posted:You suck and must hate the NCAA tournament. You think the chaos and most fun part of the event, the 32 games of the first "real" day, all 32 games should only be worth as much as picking the proper top ten team to win it all haha. I'm sorry for you. The first weekend is by far the most fun, but when it comes to who should win a bracket pool, I want it to go to the guy who picks the winner and 3/4 Final Four teams, not some schmuck who nailed a Bucknell upset.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:41 |
|
|
Nimmy posted:The first weekend is by far the most fun, but when it comes to who should win a bracket pool, I want it to go to the guy who picks the winner and 3/4 Final Four teams, not some schmuck who nailed a Bucknell upset.
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:46 |
|
|
Fast Luck posted:You suck and must hate the NCAA tournament. You think the chaos and most fun part of the event, the 32 games of the first "real" day, all 32 games should only be worth as much as picking the proper top ten team to win it all haha. I'm sorry for you. 1-2-4-8-16-32 is definitely one of the conventional bracket scoring systems. I think something like 1-2-4-6-8-12 or 1-2-4-6-10-15 is probably a little fairer, but honestly I don't think it's a huge deal. Then again, my brackets have always been trashed by the end of the second weekend anyway so I don't care about them so much. Nimmy posted:Wisconsin has never really had problems with major conference foes in the Tournament either. I know that doesn't really mean anything, but it's still something. Really fast teams tend to also be very sloppy, and waste a lot of possessions because they aren't as valuable. I still think it really sucked that one year when the committee made Belmont play you guys in the first round. 
|
| # ? Mar 17, 2013 23:46 |
|
|
If Duke and/or Indiana reach the Sweet 16 I will do something that will most likely cause self bodily harm and also possibly be criminal. I just really hate those two teams this year, and it's not the usual emotional hate... it's scientific hate. Indiana goes 3-3 to end the season and gets outed in their first game of their conference tourney and they get a #1 Seed??? Duke... doesn't win a historically weak ACC regular season title, doesn't win the conference title, in fact much like Indiana loses in their first game of the conference tourney. They play terrible defense. They will lose the first game Kelly doesn't score over 20, no matter what round that is.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:12 |
|
|
Nimmy posted:Wisconsin has never really had problems with major conference foes in the Tournament either. I know that doesn't really mean anything, but it's still something. Really fast teams tend to also be very sloppy, and waste a lot of possessions because they aren't as valuable.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:23 |
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:Indiana goes 3-3 to end the season and gets outed in their first game of their conference tourney and they get a #1 Seed??? I've got some news for you.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:24 |
|
|
Really hoping the Aztecs make the sweet sixteen since I might be going to their game against Oklahoma, but I just don't see it considering they're probably going to play Georgetown. Shame.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:32 |
|
|
Unironically excited for Marshall Henderson vs. Bo Ryan. Hoping we get off-balance fadeaway 30-footers instead of Ryan's "First to 40" crap.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:33 |
|
|
Jeff Wiiver posted:Ole Miss over Wisconsin is one upset that stands out to me right away. KenPom's site must be getting hammered, I can barely get it to load. Plus, it has everyone's least-favorite coach going against Marshall Henderson, who has spent the SEC tournament calling every coach in his conference "losers", reportedly telling Mizzou players "gently caress you" in the handshake line and then saying that they didn't shake hands with him because they all suck, and Gator-chomping for several minutes after they won. 
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:34 |
|
|
responding from the GDT thread pending closureRumbleFish posted:Yeah, I'm pretty drat tired of the Kansas ~*storyline*~ matchup. I'm tired of it as well, particularly in a year where the two teams aren't really on the same level. I thought we might have played ourselves into a #7 seed, given how vastly we improved as the season progressed, but I guess we just had too many bad losses early in the season. Still, I don't really understand how you can justify giving UCLA a #6 seed in the same region. The committee definitely did not think much of the ACC this season, particularly given the fact that I thought one of Maryland and Virginia should be in the Dance, but it's not like the Pac-12 was an amazing league this season. edit: also, assuming we get past Nova, our game against Kansas would be in *Kansas City* swizz fucked around with this message at Mar 18, 2013 around 00:57 |
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:41 |
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:If Duke and/or Indiana reach the Sweet 16 I will do something that will most likely cause self bodily harm and also possibly be criminal. You do realize who they played during those last 6 games, right?
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:42 |
|
|
swizz posted:I thought we might have played ourselves into a #7 seed, given how vastly we improved as the season progressed, but I guess we just had too many bad losses early in the season. Still, I don't really understand how you can justify giving UCLA a #6 seed in the same region. The committee definitely did not think much of the ACC this season, particularly given the fact that I thought one of Maryland and Virginia should be in the Dance, but it's not like the Pac-12 was an amazing league this season. Yeah, I really don't know what's with UCLA getting a six seed but Oregon getting a twelve. With the possible exception of Arizona, there really just didn't seem to be that much distance to me between the top Pac-12 teams.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 00:59 |
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:If Duke and/or Indiana reach the Sweet 16 I will do something that will most likely cause self bodily harm and also possibly be criminal. Scientifically, Indiana won the Big Ten outright, was the only program to win @MSU OR @UM this year, has more wins than anyone in the country against the top 25 of the RPI(7), didn't lose to a non-tournament team all year, and only has one double-digit loss. Who would you put as a #1 over Indiana, scientifically?
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:07 |
|
|
UVA is a 1 seed in the NIT, so whoopty poo poo I guess? Seriously do think it's better for them to compete in a tournament they can actually win. If they can make MSG, it'll pay off next year.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:11 |
|
|
Milovan Drecun posted:Ole Miss plays at the fastest pace in their conference. Top 12 overall.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:21 |
|
|
Fisticuffs posted:Scientifically, Indiana won the Big Ten outright, was the only program to win @MSU OR @UM this year, has more wins than anyone in the country against the top 25 of the RPI(7), didn't lose to a non-tournament team all year, and only has one double-digit loss. Who would you put as a #1 over Indiana, scientifically?
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:38 |
|
|
I'm not sure I get the Ole Miss over Wisconsin upset unless its just the gently caress BO RYAN sentiment, which I definitely agree with. All you really have to do is have someone in Henderson's face constantly, and the rest of the team is going to have a lot of trouble scoring. Their only other big scoring threat is Holloway, and he's an undersized forward. Their frontcourt is Holloway and Buckner, and Wisconsin seems to have an entire roster full of guys roughly of their size and ability, so I can't see them being much of a factor. Basically to beat Ole Miss you put your best defender on Marshall Henderson and play big and push them around. That seems like more or less what Wisconsin does on defense all the time. Add in that Henderson is a headcase and pretty easy to frustrate and Wisconsin's boring rear end style on offense is going to bother him as much or more than anyone watching, and he'll probably start tossing up stupid shots from near half court and it seems like Wisconsin has the upper hand all around to me. That is, unless he's just hitting all of those stupid shots with a dude in his face, but then again you're going to lose to anyone if you've got a guy just going nuts like that.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:40 |
|
|
Fast Luck posted:Scientifically, Indiana's record in the Big Ten was worse than Ohio State's. They won the regular season after Michigan gifted them the missed front ends of two one-and-ones. They lost three of their last six. They lots to Big Ten also-rans Minnesota and Illinois. Scientifically, Ohio State won their last 8 games in a row, and Miami won their conference and conference tournament. Should Indiana have been a no. 1 seed? Probably, actually, yeah. But they're not a strong one. So... if you agree that IU is a #1 seed what is your point exactly? Indiana has a better resume than Miami or Ohio State which was my point. You can say OSU has a better record against Big Ten teams, but their record against the top 25 of the RPI, or the best teams on their schedule, isn't as good as Indiana's. At best they have better losses, but again Indiana didn't lose to any teams that didn't make the tournament. OSU can say that as well, but IU has better wins. Significantly better, I think. Miami won the ACC and the ACC tournament, but they also don't have wins as good as Indiana's and they lost to a handful of teams that missed the NCAAs. I don't think you can form a good argument that IU should be a #2 seed, at least not objectively.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 01:57 |
|
|
My point is basically that Indiana probably is worse than Ohio State and Miami. Just look at how they each played out the season. You look at the whole resume, the entire season, and all that, and I have no complaint that IU got the 1 seed. But after the Big Ten season started, they were not the best team in the conference. That's indisputable. Even with a gift win from Michigan that they were lucky to have, their Big Ten record was not as good as OSU's, and they did not finish as strongly.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 02:00 |
|
|
Fast Luck posted:My point is basically that Indiana probably is worse than Ohio State and Miami. Just look at how they each played out the season. You look at the whole resume, the entire season, and all that, and I have no complaint that IU got the 1 seed. But after the Big Ten season started, they were not the best team in the conference. That's indisputable.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 02:03 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 00:32 |
|
|
Fast Luck posted:You suck and must hate the NCAA tournament. You think the chaos and most fun part of the event, the 32 games of the first "real" day, all 32 games should only be worth as much as picking the proper top ten team to win it all haha. I'm sorry for you.
|
| # ? Mar 18, 2013 02:09 |
|
