Some may think this is premature, but being that the Hawks are getting their asses kicked to the tune of 74-40 at the moment, I don't think it's a poor assumption.
So what does this mean for the tournament? Will St. Joe's still get a #1 seed? You'd just like to think the NCAA would look for an excuse to deny them that, being that they're a *dirty* mid-major and all...
If the WWF decided to use a Super Mario Brothers gimmick...
"Mah gawd, King! Garrison Cade just bounced a fireball toward Rene Dupree!" "And look, Mark Jindrak just jumped on top of Conway's head! I think he's out cold, JR!" "What're they up to now..where did that huge pipe come from?!" "They're going down in the pipe! They're..they're gone!" --Mike Sweetser
"Oh my god, JR. Cade just shrunk after he was hit by that chair!" "Here comes RVD, King. What's that he has in that bag?" "Are those Mushrooms, JR?" "Cade's eating the Mushrooms. BAH GAWD, KING! Cade just grew twice his size!" --Mr. Tuesday
It's a final now, 87-67. I think with the severity of the loss, they probably get a 2 seed. If it had been closer, St. Joe's would have more of a claim to the top seed, I think. Then again, this is the only time of year I pay real close attention to college hoops.
In the context of baseball, the use of drugs hurts only the player. In the context of baseball, the use of alcohol hurts only the player. In the context of baseball, womanizing hurts whom? Maybe the wife of the player? In the context of baseball, felonies are crimes against society, not against baseball. In the context of baseball, gambling is the only crime against baseball.
Gambling, in the context of baseball, is a capital offense and Rose has richly earned-- hell, he agreed to-- his death sentence. Let him hang.
Bob Kohm, co-owner of Rotojunkies.com (rotojunkies.com) , and a large market kind of guy.
This is the worst loss that a #1 seed has had against an unranked opponent this late in the season in history. The polls were waiting for a reason to drop St.Joe's and this certainly was it. Losing by a few fine still a #1 losing by 15 a #2 losing by 20 = #3 or worst #2. Expect a huge drop.
I think that St. Joes may be given a 1 seed, but it is possible that they slip to a 2. I don't think that a team deserving of a 1 seed loses by 20 in the first round of their conference tournament.
As far as Xavier shooting 70% ... my beloved Wildcats haven't allowed anyone to shoot better than 50% all year long. I'd dare say that Xavier isn't as good as the majority of the teams that Kentucky has played this year - no knock on Xavier at all. I just feel that a team that deserves a 1 seed wouldn't have that much of a defensive meltdown.
I'm torn on the mid-major topic. I do feel that many mid-major teams are quite good, but at the same time I would think that the followers of the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 would argue that St. Joes would have lost at least 4 games in those conferences and probably would have lost at least 2 or 3 games in the Big 10, Pac 10, or C-USA.
I think this opens up the door for something Rick Stansbury was lobbying for a few days ago...Kentucky and Miss. State COULD both get #1 seeds now. The only way I can see that going down is a Sunday matchup between the two in the SEC tournament, with UK pulling out a nailbiter. I think, in addition, teams like Pittsburgh and Ok. State may have to lose their respective tournaments. But it's possible.
(edited by chuckc14 on 11.3.04 1505) 19-7 (8-7) - goin' dancin...next: Sat at UGA
As a St. Joseph's grad I feel a lot better going into the tournament with one loss than undefeated. Watching the games has been torture this past few weeks as the streak has made me nervous. The pressure these guys are under is enormous and a drop from a 1 seed to a 2 or 3 is almost meaningless. The difference between a 14, 15, and 16 seed is nil. In the second round you will probably meet someone who upset 6-8 seed. The difference comes in the sweet 16 round where you will more than likely meet a higher quality team.
Having a loss like this before the tournament gets the press off the kids backs and allows them to focus on the game rather than the streak.
As far as their record in a top conference. I don't doubt that there would have been a few losses, except in the Pac10 which is horrible this year. I was discussing in another forum about how Arizona is a bubble team dispite their RPI. In fact I will post it in another thread to get the tournament talk going.
Are you a professional halfwit or talented amateur?
Originally posted by RudoublesedoublelI do feel that many mid-major teams are quite good, but at the same time I would think that the followers of the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 would argue that St. Joes would have lost at least 4 games in those conferences and probably would have lost at least 2 or 3 games in the Big 10, Pac 10, or C-USA.
I can't really speak for all of these conferences, but I know the A10 was actually higher in the conference RPI than the PAC10, making St. Joe's record more impressive than Stanford's if you're making the conference argument. I think the A10 was No. 8 overall and the Pac10 was No. 9.
At least some day maybe I'll understand why some day maybe you never can. Or something like that.
I wasn't aware of the conference RPI ratings, that's an interesting point.
The only reason that I want UK to have a 1 seed is to avoid a regional pairing with dUKe. I'd prefer to play them in San Antonio if we're going to have to play them. At the same time, I'm more concerned about UK playing Georgia today. I hope the third time is the charm - IF Georgia beats Kentucky today it will be the first time since 1979 that a team has beaten the Wildcats 3 times in one season (in '79 it was Tennessee), and then the previous time was 1920.
Originally posted by Rudoublesedoublel IF Georgia beats Kentucky today it will be the first time since 1979 that a team has beaten the Wildcats 3 times in one season (in '79 it was Tennessee), and then the previous time was 1920.
What chance did Kentucky have against Tennessee in 1979? Tennessee had a dominating high-flying powerhouse center on their team named......Kevin Nash!!
Who's judging American Idol? Paula Abdul? Paula Abdul judging a singing contest is like Christopher Reeve judging a dance contest!
His timing really couldn't be any worse. ESPN - Anthony arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence Of course, it is just suspicion. Still, bringing bad publicity to your club at a time like this helps no one.