The Case for A #3 Seed

The closer we get to March, the less I want a #1 seed. The acknowledgment of a #1 would be awesome and ground-breaking for the ever-discounted Cougars hoops, but I think I'd rather have a #3 seed this go around, just so I can enjoy the Tourney better.



With a one-seed, anything less than the Final Four would be a disappointment. I've had my share of disappointment in the NCAA Tournament over the last 15 or so years. I'd like to enjoy the ride. With a 3-seed, the Sweet Sixteen would be expected, and anything thereafter would be icing. With a 1-seed, Sweet Sixteen is only halfway to what you are supposed to achieve.



I'm not saying I don't think BYU is #1 worthy--I think they are. What I am saying is that the Tourney might be more enjoyable without that added expectation lumped on the Cougs.

I'll take the path of least resistance, the #1 seed. I know its not always the case, but I think the pub, regardless of how well we do as long as we hit the sweet 16, will be great for BYU. If we're a 3 seed, not so much. And I'm not selfish enough to want BYU to get less exposure because I want to enjoy the tourney more, I already enjoy it a ton (not trying to take a jab at you, Sno, just trying to look at the big picture, I guess).



Sure, its also more pressure on the team, but look at the games where we've performed the best -- the big ones. I think our team responds really well to pressure and would rise to the challenge of a #1 seed positively.

By that logic wouldn't a 16 seed be even better because even being competative in a first round loss would be icing and you would get have your icing in game one.



I'll take the 1 or 2 seed that puts us closest to home, misses Sunday so there is no dilema, and keeps us West longest. At this point anything less than a final four in my book would be underacheiving. We have one of the very few teams that can win it all. Unlike the pundits I expected to win at SDST. In following this team I don't need blue goggles to understand that it is by far one of the best and most complete teams. And when hitting on all cylinders cannot be stopped-or even slowed for that matter.



What I am looking at in the NCAA and the team placements is which team is going to be hot and may take BYU down to the wire or to OT before we win it. I expect BYU to be one of the final four teams left standing. Anything less will be disappointing regardless of seed. But I will not be happy with just a final four. I want it all! I want the trophy and I believe in this team that they can do it.

snoscythe wrote:
The closer we get to March, the less I want a #1 seed. The acknowledgment of a #1 would be awesome and ground-breaking for the ever-discounted Cougars hoops, but I think I'd rather have a #3 seed this go around, just so I can enjoy the Tourney better.



With a one-seed, anything less than the Final Four would be a disappointment. I've had my share of disappointment in the NCAA Tournament over the last 15 or so years. I'd like to enjoy the ride. With a 3-seed, the Sweet Sixteen would be expected, and anything thereafter would be icing. With a 1-seed, Sweet Sixteen is only halfway to what you are supposed to achieve.



I'm not saying I don't think BYU is #1 worthy--I think they are. What I am saying is that the Tourney might be more enjoyable without that added expectation lumped on the Cougs.

Snos, a lot of your posts are well thought out and based on logic and reasoning. This one is not... not one bit.

We've learned with this BYU team that expectations aren't an issue. We show up, we play, give a full effort, and leave it all out on the floor. The results follow.

Based on that understanding, our seeding and outcome aren't that important, HOWEVER the path of least resistance is the #1 seed and the best chance to go deep is a one seed.

Jimmer has a chance to get calls and the benefit of the doubt as a one seed. The odds of going to double overtime in the 1st round and being exhausted in the 2nd game are much slimmer as a one seed.

This season has been too much fun and aside from losing in the 1st round (we won't , we're too fundamentally sound) this season has been awesome and not much can deflate me. It's exceeded all my expectations and I don't see a 2nd round exit as a disaster (though as a 1 seed, I also think we'll move on to the sweet 16... after that it's all gravy)



It's 1 seed or bust as i see it; Denver (then Anaheim) will be rocking.

This team answers. They don't fold. I'll take a #1 seed and the accompanying pressure. I'm not afraid of the expectations and neither is this group of Cougars.

The question for you is; would you rather play a 4 in the sweet sixteen or a 2? The 1 seeds are set up to go far in the tourney. You want the highest seed that you can get.

Great thread guys. NOt based on blind hype but well thought out points.

Wrubell just tweeted that 19 of 20 seeds made it to the Sweet 16. Only 14 of 20 #2 seeds have made it to Sweet 16.

I saw KU get taken down last year by that No Iowa team. Iirc, Craig was there as well. So #1's can go down.

There is only one #1 seed on a thurs/sat schedule. I dont know which bracket that is.

So a #2 in Denver or Anaheim is much preferable ,not just for fans, but for travel and who knows, maybe bracket strength.

This team has passed several big tests. So I am less worried about the pressure of a 1 seed. BUt I still think BYU playing as an underdog (vs sdsu) is much more likely to play their best games than as a #1 (we're all that and a bag of chips) seed.

I'll take a 2 seed!

frdbtr wrote:
The 1 seeds are set up to go far in the tourney.

The NCAA Tournament is all about matchups. How many times in the last 20 years can you remember a Final Four in which #1 and #2 seeds weren't present. There are anomaly years but it seems like there are at least a couple every year (and the anomaly years only strengthen my argument below).



It is a little bit of a chicken and egg argument, and of course you have to have been good during the regular season to merit a 1 or 2 seed. However, it seems like there are definitely big name teams (and conferences) that get some extra poll credibility based on the brand they have created and the conference they play in. For example, how is it possible that 11 Big East teams could make the 64 team field? Yet, I read an article this morning on ESPN.com that argues in favor of that idea. Are almost 20% of the best teams in the entire country really in the Big East? In almost any other conference, if all the teams cannibalized each other like they have in the Big East this year, it would have resulted in all of the teams falling out of the Top-25 rather than all being included.



I really think that to some extent, the brands of the big name schools and conferences are burnished every year by their high seeds. Quite simply, they have built momentum over decades of having high seeds and relatively easier access to milestones like Sweet 16, Elite 8 and Final 4 in the tournament. Success begets success over the long-term.

NebraskaCoug wrote:

The 1 seeds are set up to go far in the tourney.

The NCAA Tournament is all about matchups. How many times in the last 20 years can you remember a Final Four in which #1 and #2 seeds weren't present. There are anomaly years but it seems like there are at least a couple every year (and the anomaly years only strengthen my argument below).



It is a little bit of a chicken and egg argument, and of course you have to have been good during the regular season to merit a 1 or 2 seed. However, it seems like there are definitely big name teams (and conferences) that get some extra poll credibility based on the brand they have created and the conference they play in. For example, how is it possible that 11 Big East teams could make the 64 team field? Yet, I read an article this morning on ESPN.com that argues in favor of that idea. Are almost 20% of the best teams in the entire country really in the Big East? In almost any other conference, if all the teams cannibalized each other like they have in the Big East this year, it would have resulted in all of the teams falling out of the Top-25 rather than all being included.



I really think that to some extent, the brands of the big name schools and conferences are burnished every year by their high seeds. Quite simply, they have built momentum over decades of having high seeds and relatively easier access to milestones like Sweet 16, Elite 8 and Final 4 in the tournament. Success begets success over the long-term.

I think you were misinterpreting what I was trying to say. i wasn't saying that the deck is stacked in the 1 seeds favor, I was saying that a 1 seed gets an easier sched simply by being a 1. That is the way tourney's work. the 1 gets a 16 to start, then the winner of the 8/9 game, then the winner of the 4/12 game and so on. Simply by being a 1, so would you rather play that sched or the 3 seed sched which isn't nearly as "easy".

[quote="NebraskaCoug(and the anomaly years only strengthen my argument below).[/quote]



I didn't really flesh out this idea above, so let me clarify what I meant. In the years that the Final Four is made up of an inordinate number of "Cinderellas" that demonstrates to me that some highly seeded teams were given more credibility by the committee than they deserved. Obviously the "Cinderellas" showed on the court who was better. Imagine if the Dukes, UNCs, Pitts, Syracuses, Ohio States, etc. consistently were seeded from 8-12 like the MWC and WAC representatives are. I think we would see them have similar long-term success in the Tournament to the MWC and WAC teams that consistently get those seeds. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. I am not saying that those programs aren't excellent programs, but considering that they have been reaping the recruiting and monetary and notoriety rewards that have come with their tournament success over the years, I would expect there to be less parity than there actually is. I would expect those teams to be head and shoulders above every other school, and they are not, in my opinion. I am hoping that a BYU breakthrough this year will start some momentum for more credibility in the future for our program.

(and the anomaly years only strengthen my argument below).

I didn't really flesh out this idea above, so let me clarify what I meant. In the years that the Final Four is made up of an inordinate number of "Cinderellas" that demonstrates to me that some highly seeded teams were given more credibility by the committee than they deserved. Obviously the "Cinderellas" showed on the court who was better. Imagine if the Dukes, UNCs, Pitts, Syracuses, Ohio States, etc. consistently were seeded from 8-12 like the MWC and WAC representatives are. I think we would see them have similar long-term results in the Tournament to the MWC and WAC teams that consistently get those seeds. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. I am not saying that those programs aren't excellent programs, but considering that they have been reaping the recruiting and monetary and notoriety rewards that have come with their tournament success over the years, I would expect there to be less parity than there actually is. I would expect those teams to be head and shoulders above every other school, and they are not, in my opinion. I am hoping that a BYU breakthrough this year will start some momentum for more credibility in the future for our program.

snoscythe wrote:
The closer we get to March, the less I want a #1 seed. The acknowledgment of a #1 would be awesome and ground-breaking for the ever-discounted Cougars hoops, but I think I'd rather have a #3 seed this go around, just so I can enjoy the Tourney better.



With a one-seed, anything less than the Final Four would be a disappointment. I've had my share of disappointment in the NCAA Tournament over the last 15 or so years. I'd like to enjoy the ride. With a 3-seed, the Sweet Sixteen would be expected, and anything thereafter would be icing. With a 1-seed, Sweet Sixteen is only halfway to what you are supposed to achieve.



I'm not saying I don't think BYU is #1 worthy--I think they are. What I am saying is that the Tourney might be more enjoyable without that added expectation lumped on the Cougs.

whimp :D :P



this team needs a one seed. craigs post about jimmer getting the calls as a one seed is very persuasive to me. path of least resistance with the notariety that it gives is best. this team has proven that they thrive on pressure. a number one seed will just make them more dangerous.

frdbtr wrote:

frdbtr wrote:


I think you were misinterpreting what I was trying to say. i wasn't saying that the deck is stacked in the 1 seeds favor, I was saying that a 1 seed gets an easier sched simply by being a 1. That is the way tourney's work. the 1 gets a 16 to start, then the winner of the 8/9 game, then the winner of the 4/12 game and so on. Simply by being a 1, so would you rather play that sched or the 3 seed sched which isn't nearly as "easy".

I don't think I misunderstood what you were saying, nor do I misunderstand how the system works. I don't think I misinterpreted what you were saying either, although I apologize if I twisted it a little. I am just arguing that the "power conferences" and big-brand teams get more credibility based on their brand and their history than they deserve some years. I think this is one of those years.



According to the ESPN poll, although it is close, less than half of respondents believe that BYU deserves a #1 seed. SDSU got a lot of national love and credibility until they lost to BYU twice, and the effect isn't for most people to believe that BYU is "that good" but to believe that SDSU is overrated.



I'm just saying that in the media-created "public opinion," a Big East team that beats another ranked Big East team gets the benefit of the doubt for being "that good" without diminishing the stature of the team they beat. MWC teams don't get that benefit of the doubt. That credibility (read "bias") carries over into tournament seeding, and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy over time.

I've gotta go with take the best seed we can get and come ready to play. If that is a 1 seed, that would be fantabulous. After watching BYU dismantle SDSU on Saturday, I realistically think this team will reach the quarter finals, or elite 8.



If BYU wins a min of 4 of the next 5 games, and at least 4 of those in a row, BYU will be a 2 seed and no less. Win the MWC Tournament and BYU will be a 1 seed. I think they get a 1 seed if they go 31-3 going into the NCAA tournament.



I don't think it's 1-seed-or-bust either. That's even more extreme than settling for a 3 seed. BYU just needs to close out the conference schedule 15-1 and they lock up a 2 seed as the best team in the West and will be rewarded with a favorable schedule starting in Denver. Win the MWC tournament and they will get a 1 seed.

Very slim options.

There is only 1 saturday play #1 seed and it is i nthe southeast bracket.

there is only 1 #2 seed that plays all games thursday or saturday--its in Anaheim and the west region.

Havent looked for the 3 seeds, bc I think we have wrapped up a 2 seed. Even if we lose in the semi game in vegas.

I would take anaheim anyday over, come to thnk of it I dont know where the SE bracket plays.

NebraskaCoug wrote:

The 1 seeds are set up to go far in the tourney.

The NCAA Tournament is all about matchups. How many times in the last 20 years can you remember a Final Four in which #1 and #2 seeds weren't present. There are anomaly years but it seems like there are at least a couple every year (and the anomaly years only strengthen my argument below).

Winner.



I do not care if it is a #1 or a #2 seed. either one would be just fine. you are basically playing the same types of teams. I care more about the match-ups and the teams you have to play along the way. Getting a #1 supposedly should give you better matchups, but not always the case. But it is safe to say that a #1 seed will give you better matchups than a #3 seed. And really, if overexpectations is your problem, it could be worse, couldn't it.

CougarPeasant wrote:
I've gotta go with take the best seed we can get and come ready to play. If that is a 1 seed, that would be fantabulous. After watching BYU dismantle SDSU on Saturday, I realistically think this team will reach the quarter finals, or elite 8.



If BYU wins a min of 4 of the next 5 games, and at least 4 of those in a row, BYU will be a 2 seed and no less. Win the MWC Tournament and BYU will be a 1 seed. I think they get a 1 seed if they go 31-3 going into the NCAA tournament.



I don't think it's 1-seed-or-bust either. That's even more extreme than settling for a 3 seed. BYU just needs to close out the conference schedule 15-1 and they lock up a 2 seed as the best team in the West and will be rewarded with a favorable schedule starting in Denver. Win the MWC tournament and they will get a 1 seed.

I certainly don't mean that 1 seed or bust means we fail if we don't get one. My expectations for this season have already been surpassed; aside from an upset in the 1st round (wont' happen) very little can take me off this cloud. We should win and even when I expect a let down it rarely happens.

snoscythe wrote:
The closer we get to March, the less I want a #1 seed. The acknowledgment of a #1 would be awesome and ground-breaking for the ever-discounted Cougars hoops, but I think I'd rather have a #3 seed this go around, just so I can enjoy the Tourney better.



With a one-seed, anything less than the Final Four would be a disappointment. I've had my share of disappointment in the NCAA Tournament over the last 15 or so years. I'd like to enjoy the ride. With a 3-seed, the Sweet Sixteen would be expected, and anything thereafter would be icing. With a 1-seed, Sweet Sixteen is only halfway to what you are supposed to achieve.



I'm not saying I don't think BYU is #1 worthy--I think they are. What I am saying is that the Tourney might be more enjoyable without that added expectation lumped on the Cougs.

Not exactly the toughened legal mentality I would expect from you Sno.

Bottom line, we need to rest our starters, especially if we win out and take the conf tourney.



A #1 seed would allow us to rest our starters at least some, hopefully for the entire second half.



Then we play 2 days later, hopefully win and rest our guys a little bit again.



Then we play 2 days later either against a Cinderella team (#12 seed) that is probably REALLY gassed winning some close ones, or against a 4 seed, that will be a pretty decent game. If we win that, well that is one for the storybooks in my opinion. Think how much cred the Pukes got for going to the elite 8 how many years ago.



But yeah, RESTING our starters and getting subs playing time is the key. So we go with the path of least resistance.

craigoscarson wrote:

I've gotta go with take the best seed we can get and come ready to play. If that is a 1 seed, that would be fantabulous. After watching BYU dismantle SDSU on Saturday, I realistically think this team will reach the quarter finals, or elite 8.



If BYU wins a min of 4 of the next 5 games, and at least 4 of those in a row, BYU will be a 2 seed and no less. Win the MWC Tournament and BYU will be a 1 seed. I think they get a 1 seed if they go 31-3 going into the NCAA tournament.



I don't think it's 1-seed-or-bust either. That's even more extreme than settling for a 3 seed. BYU just needs to close out the conference schedule 15-1 and they lock up a 2 seed as the best team in the West and will be rewarded with a favorable schedule starting in Denver. Win the MWC tournament and they will get a 1 seed.

I certainly don't mean that 1 seed or bust means we fail if we don't get one. My expectations for this season have already been surpassed; aside from an upset in the 1st round (wont' happen) very little can take me off this cloud. We should win and even when I expect a let down it rarely happens.

I understand your point, but had to tease you a bit. It is a terrific season. I was on my mission when Ainge took the Cougs to the elite 8. I did get to watch the Virginia game with some prospects/converts, so that was fun. And I was still at BYU when they won 16 in a row to open the season in '88 if I remember correctly. But this season tops them all as far as what they've accomplished so far.



One more thing, I think if BYU were to get a 1 seed, they would be very eager to prove they belong, knowing there are doubters out there. SO either way, they will play with a chip on their shoulder to either prove they belong or show they deserved a higher seed.



In the end, just win baby, and the rest takes care of itself.