AFTER years and years of getting crap seeds...

The naysayers that claim 10 was too nice, haven't lived through the years we were top 25-30 ranked and RPI and got 8-9 seeds or worse and then the underseeded opponents, locations.



They can all stick it, we played the Big 12 champ to a standstill, we took Oregon at their place to OT, we stomped Texas (wasn't as close as the score indicated) and we were one of the few top 100 teams even willing to consider playing Wichita State when we accepted the bit to the Sprint tourney.



I'm not high on this team, I didn't think we had it in us to win 25 games... but I'm high on the future and I'm high on how we scheduled.



It's about time we get what we deserve.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BYU_Cougars_men%27s_basketball_seasons" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



2000–2001 Steve Cleveland 24–9 10–4 1st NCAA First Round (12 seed)

2001–2002 Steve Cleveland 18–12 7–7 T-4th NIT Second Round

2002–2003 Steve Cleveland 23–9 11–3 T-1st NCAA First Round (12 seed)

2003–2004 Steve Cleveland 21–9 10–4 2nd NCAA First Round (12 seed)

2004–2005 Steve Cleveland 9–21 3–11 T-7th

2005–2006 Dave Rose 20–9 12–4 T-2nd NIT First Round

2006–2007 Dave Rose 25–9 13–3 1st NCAA First Round (8 seed)

2007–2008 Dave Rose 27–7 14–2 1st NCAA First Round (8 seed)

2008–2009 Dave Rose 25–8 12–4 T-1st NCAA First Round (8 seed)

2009–2010 Dave Rose 30–5 13–3 2nd NCAA Second Round (7 seed)

2010–2011 Dave Rose 32–5 14–2 T-1st (13th in nation) NCAA Sweet Sixteen (3 seed)



WE WENT 30-5 IN 2010 AND HAD A 7 SEED.... 27-7 IN 2008 AND GOT A 8 SEED? (both times inside the top 25 in the RPI... complete robbery)



IT'S ABOUT TIME WE'RE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BAD SEEDING FENCE





http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2001" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2001 we deserved better than a 12 and the 4 we got? Cincy cruised to the sweet 16 and was better than a 4



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2003" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2004" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

12 seed and get Syracuse a 5 seed? the defending national champs with 3 NBA players on the 04 team (6 NBA players on the 03 team)



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2007" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

8 seed vs Xavier in Lexington Kentucky.... :(



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2008" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

8 seed vs A+M



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2009" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

8 seed vs A+M



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2010" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

7 seed vs a Florida team with 4 NBA players on it (and we still won) then had to play a Kstate team that was a 1 seed most of the year in the footprint of Kstate



http://www.databasesports.com/ncaab/tourney.htm?yr=2011" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shine On! oh Enlightened One. Great stuff. Great recall of history. Naysayers be damned. Now go kick it Cougs!!!! I hope this further motivates and doesn't cause hubris to set in. Love that its a pay-back/ unfinished business opponent. GO GET IT, COUGS!!!!

You're almost condemning yourself with that post... from 2000 to 2010, the Cougs made the NCAA tourney 8 times and lost 6 times in round 1 - this is why the Cougs typically get no respect from the NCAA committee (not to mention the conferences they've played in over the years with the MWC and now WCC).

Wolfman wrote:
You're almost condemning yourself with that post... from 2000 to 2010, the Cougs made the NCAA tourney 8 times and lost 6 times in round 1 - this is why the Cougs typically get no respect from the NCAA committee (not to mention the conferences they've played in over the years with the MWC and now WCC).

Not even condemning... if I put you in a spelling B with 63 other 1st graders and while I knew you were smarter than 30 of them I gave you a seed of 12, the odds are not in your favor to beat the other 1st grader.



Seeding and location matter, and we've gotten shafted in the past. It's not like we're playing 16 seeds, we've been playing teams that were underseeded like us.. that doesn't bode well. Matchups matter and based on or previous records and RPIs our seed didn't match up.



This year the seeding was fair... do I expect to win? No... could we, absolutely, however the seeding was fair. Can't say that about the last 20 years.

craigoscarson wrote:
This year the seeding was fair... do I expect to win? No... could we, absolutely, however the seeding was fair. Can't say that about the last 20 years.

I agree with you about the last 20 years, however, at the same time...



Cougs have lost 7 of 9 first round games since 2000



In 2014...



2-7 vs. 9 quality non-conference opponents

4 bad losses to teams ranked 110 or lower in the country

Wolfman wrote:

This year the seeding was fair... do I expect to win? No... could we, absolutely, however the seeding was fair. Can't say that about the last 20 years.

I agree with you about the last 20 years, however, at the same time...



Cougs have lost 7 of 9 first round games since 2000



In 2014...



2-7 vs. 9 quality non-conference opponents

4 bad losses to teams ranked 110 or lower in the country

2-5 non con vs the RPI top 100.. (the best lies wolfie are the almost truths.. 2-7 looks a lot worse and yet it's a lie)



what makes that impressive, is that only one of those games was at home and it was a free throw or non-clawed face away from a W against the Big 12 champs.



Find me another team in the entire country that played a tougher non con road schedule (you can't)..



http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You keep saying 2-7 like you think that's correct



but at the end of the day we were .500 against the RPI top 100 from beginning to end.. we played the 2nd hardest non con schedule and the hardest non con road schedule in the country.. that's what we're dancing and the Utes who played cupcakes at home are stuck getting ready to lose at St. Mary's. (a team we beat both times this year)

Wolfman wrote:
You're almost condemning yourself with that post... from 2000 to 2010, the Cougs made the NCAA tourney 8 times and lost 6 times in round 1 - this is why the Cougs typically get no respect from the NCAA committee (not to mention the conferences they've played in over the years with the MWC and now WCC).

Hey bitter beer face. Your team didnt make the Dance. Take your pathetic schtick back to your loser Ute sites. You are not welcome here.

Mods? Are you asleep? Take out the garbage before it gets ugly-- again.

It's no coincidence the year we won multiple games in the NCAA tourney was the year we were a 3 seed. Seeding is extremely important.



A team can get into the tournament 20 years in a row as a 16 seed and never win a game. Doesn't necessarily mean the team is bad (although 16 seed teams usually are), it's just really hard to beat a 1 seed.



As 12 seeds we were playing 5 seeds, not gimmies. As 8 seeds we were playing teams equal or close to equal in ability and we lost those 50/50 games.



Thursday's game could go either way. Doesn't mean we didn't belong or that we're a bad team.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

craigoscarson wrote:

craigoscarson wrote:
This year the seeding was fair... do I expect to win? No... could we, absolutely, however the seeding was fair. Can't say that about the last 20 years.

I agree with you about the last 20 years, however, at the same time...



Cougs have lost 7 of 9 first round games since 2000



In 2014...



2-7 vs. 9 quality non-conference opponents

4 bad losses to teams ranked 110 or lower in the country

2-5 non con vs the RPI top 100.. (the best lies wolfie are the almost truths.. 2-7 looks a lot worse and yet it's a lie)



what makes that impressive, is that only one of those games was at home and it was a free throw or non-clawed face away from a W against the Big 12 champs.



Find me another team in the entire country that played a tougher non con road schedule (you can't)..



http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You keep saying 2-7 like you think that's correct



but at the end of the day we were .500 against the RPI top 100 from beginning to end.. we played the 2nd hardest non con schedule and the hardest non con road schedule in the country.. that's what we're dancing and the Utes who played cupcakes at home are stuck getting ready to lose at St. Mary's. (a team we beat both times this year)

You're right, my bad... they've played 7 games against quality non-conference opponents, not 9, thus, they are 2-5.

Define Quality



Beating USU and Weber State counts more than 80% of U non-confetence opponents.



BYU as a 10 seed means the committee saw BYU as a Top 40 team. Reasonable.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Just for clarification, BYU has won in the first round of the NCAA torunament in each of its last three apperances, and in the past 4 years is 4-3 in the toruney, (not counting the NIT run last year) which really is more informative about our team and coaches than what BYU did some 14 years ago, when members of the current team hadn't yet begun the first grade...

Those seasons when we were matched up w/Syracuse, UConn, and A&M were nightmare seeds. Has the +2 BYU rule finally outlived its relevance?

mizzoucoug wrote:
Those seasons when we were matched up w/Syracuse, UConn, and A&M were nightmare seeds. Has the +2 BYU rule finally outlived its relevance?

They blame it on No Sunday Play. If they are thinking 10 seed, but no Sunday slot is open in the region, they bump us back a seed or 2 until they can make it work. They never bump up to make it work.



Best case, we get what they originally peg us at. We never get better than that. If they need to juggle - we get worse than they originally pegged. I read something a few weeks ago that explained it that way.



So, no, the plus 2 is probably not gone. They just did not need to juggle this year to get us in a Sunday bracket.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

BYU vs Iona as 14 seeds in Dayton is a perfect example of the +2. The committee even said as much when asked about it. And it wasn't even the 2nd and 3rd round that was the problem, it was the sweet 16 site that caused the issue that time.

CraigO I have been following this seeding thing for years, and agree that BYU usually gets a seeding 2 or 3 worse than they have earned. But I disagree that they got a good one this year. I looked at 6 different RPI calculations (ESPN, CBS, Real Time, Pomeroy, NCAA, Rivals) BYU's average RPI in these 6 ratings is 34.17. Dividing 34.17 by 4 gives an earned seeding of 8.54. If you throw out the Pomeroy RPI (they had Utah at 36 and BYU at 50 - so obviously their computer is broken) then the average of the other 5 RPI's (32,31,31,31,30) is 31. 31 divided by 4 is 7.75. So, I would say after years of getting crap seeds, BYU gets a crap seed once again. They should have had a 7 or 8 seed.

Alphaleonis wrote:
CraigO I have been following this seeding thing for years, and agree that BYU usually gets a seeding 2 or 3 worse than they have earned. But I disagree that they got a good one this year. I looked at 6 different RPI calculations (ESPN, CBS, Real Time, Pomeroy, NCAA, Rivals) BYU's average RPI in these 6 ratings is 34.17. Dividing 34.17 by 4 gives an earned seeding of 8.54. If you throw out the Pomeroy RPI (they had Utah at 36 and BYU at 50 - so obviously their computer is broken) then the average of the other 5 RPI's (32,31,31,31,30) is 31. 31 divided by 4 is 7.75. So, I would say after years of getting crap seeds, BYU gets a crap seed once again. They should have had a 7 or 8 seed.

You bring up an interesting point, but I'm curious, of the current 7 or 8 seed teams, how many bad loses does each team have? We have 4, which is an awful lot.

hawkwing wrote:

CraigO I have been following this seeding thing for years, and agree that BYU usually gets a seeding 2 or 3 worse than they have earned. But I disagree that they got a good one this year. I looked at 6 different RPI calculations (ESPN, CBS, Real Time, Pomeroy, NCAA, Rivals) BYU's average RPI in these 6 ratings is 34.17. Dividing 34.17 by 4 gives an earned seeding of 8.54. If you throw out the Pomeroy RPI (they had Utah at 36 and BYU at 50 - so obviously their computer is broken) then the average of the other 5 RPI's (32,31,31,31,30) is 31. 31 divided by 4 is 7.75. So, I would say after years of getting crap seeds, BYU gets a crap seed once again. They should have had a 7 or 8 seed.

You bring up an interesting point, but I'm curious, of the current 7 or 8 seed teams, how many bad loses does each team have? We have 4, which is an awful lot.

The bad losses are taken into account in RPI.

Alphaleonis wrote:
CraigO I have been following this seeding thing for years, and agree that BYU usually gets a seeding 2 or 3 worse than they have earned. But I disagree that they got a good one this year. I looked at 6 different RPI calculations (ESPN, CBS, Real Time, Pomeroy, NCAA, Rivals) BYU's average RPI in these 6 ratings is 34.17. Dividing 34.17 by 4 gives an earned seeding of 8.54. If you throw out the Pomeroy RPI (they had Utah at 36 and BYU at 50 - so obviously their computer is broken) then the average of the other 5 RPI's (32,31,31,31,30) is 31. 31 divided by 4 is 7.75. So, I would say after years of getting crap seeds, BYU gets a crap seed once again. They should have had a 7 or 8 seed.

I was driving all day yesterday and had a lot of time to listen to the talking heads on Sirius XM. One of the shows had a guest who used to be on the selection committee a few years back. I think his last name was Sheehy or something like that. Anyways, there was a lot of interesting insight into what the 4 month long process is like for committee members leading up to Selection Sunday. The question was asked as to whether or not RPI is as vauable a tool today as it was 5-7 years ago. The consensus was that it is an oudated and overated tool (especially amongst fans), but is still useful for gathering some starting point data and discussions. It was a pretty interesting interview with this guy. Go Cougars!

Alphaleonis wrote:
CraigO I have been following this seeding thing for years, and agree that BYU usually gets a seeding 2 or 3 worse than they have earned. But I disagree that they got a good one this year. I looked at 6 different RPI calculations (ESPN, CBS, Real Time, Pomeroy, NCAA, Rivals) BYU's average RPI in these 6 ratings is 34.17. Dividing 34.17 by 4 gives an earned seeding of 8.54. If you throw out the Pomeroy RPI (they had Utah at 36 and BYU at 50 - so obviously their computer is broken) then the average of the other 5 RPI's (32,31,31,31,30) is 31. 31 divided by 4 is 7.75. So, I would say after years of getting crap seeds, BYU gets a crap seed once again. They should have had a 7 or 8 seed.

The vast majority of people thought we were 50/50 at best to get in the tourney and that a play in game was our almost guaranteed destination (I never thought that as I put forth the last couple of weeks)



RPI isn't the only factor, but this is why I said 10 would be the worst we'd get when it seemed crazy to say. I think it's fair and I think we might have been penalized for the loss of KC when others thought 10 was out of reach with KC. I think with KC we're an 8-9 right now and if we had finished against Oregon, Iowa State, and Portland (just those 3 games) we're a 6 seed in spite of the other bad losses.



Our bad losses really hurt though... hard to overlook them. But with a few more free throws in a few select games and I think we're looking at a drastically better seed.



I'm not celebrating 10, I'm saying that I feel it's fair particularly in light of not having KC.



What was not fair was being a dominant team with a dominant player like Araujo and getting a 12 seed and having to play a 5 seed of Syracuse, defending national champs with 3 remaining NBA players on their team (minus Carmelo, Wilcox from the previous year).. That was an absolute travesty; it wasn't just our seeds it was our opponent, and sometimes our location (Lexington vs Xavier ring a bell?)



I'm content this year and I think it's not far from what we deserve. I personally don't think we'll beat Oregon (unless we get career games from our bigs), but it's nice to get what we deserve for once in the tourney.

Personally, I think Oregon is over seeded. We took them to OT on their home court. With KC- I think BYU would win this game. Without him, the boys played inspired ball for 10 minutes - not sure they can do that for 40 minutes with an opponent who has time to prepare for the changes. One slight advantage - they will not know exactly what Rose will put on the floor.



If I were Oregon, I would come at Austin and his replacements over and over and over until there were none left. Might try to get Carlin in foul trouble just out of curiosity to see who our back-up PGA even is. We lost our depth at two spots when KC went down.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">