College Basketball Thread 2014-15

[fondybrewfan]

So my first bracket includes a Final 4 of Wisconsin, Kentucky, Iowa State, and Virginia. I am really struggling to pick the winner of the east regional. I don't like Villanova at all and Virginia has been less than impressive lately. I have thought about both Michigan State and Providence but I am having a hard time convincing myself that a 6 or 7 team can make it out.

 

I was also considering Gonzaga in place of Iowa St; but I think Iowa St is the better team.

[FVBrewerFan]

As I filled out my bracket, I realized just how difficult the West is compared to the other brackets- especially the East and South. Duke has a cake walk to the Final 4. Over-seeded Gonzaga, IA St., and Georgetown as the 2-4 seeds.

[fondybrewfan]

I really like Iowa St over Duke though; probably no rational reason for it.

 

But I agree the 1-4 seeds in the West are so much harder than the east or south. Georgetown as a #4 is a joke and Utah has an early exit written all over them. Almost no one is even predicting Gtown to even win the opening round game.

 

Also I am screwing it and putting Northern Iowa in the Final 4 from the west. I don't trust Virginia or Villanova enough and Oklahoma and Gtown in the 3/4 seeds have no chance of making it to Indy. Northern Iowa has as good of a shot as anyone.

[FVBrewerFan]

N Iowa is in the East, not West. But I agree, I don't trust Nova or Virginia either. That's why the East, to me, is almost as easy as the South. N Iowa seems to be one of trendy picks this year based on what I'm hearing from the talking heads. I have Mich St making it to the Final 4 from that bracket.

 

I'm usually wrong, but I just see the MW and West going way more according to the chalk than the East/South.

[CheezWizHed]

I came down to Gonzaga and IA St to upset Duke. But ultimately picked Gonzaga over IA St. and Duke. Interestingly, my wife and one daughter picked Gonzaga to the final 4 also (completely independent and having no BB background).

 

Where my 7 yo daughter picked Duke all the way. (I read the names, she picked them. She didn't even see the records or rankings).

 

But my gut tells me that Duke will not make the Final4. I think they are just too young and inexperienced.

[FVBrewerFan]

Gonzaga is the biggest consistent choker every year, so it would make sense they would somehow end up in the Final 4 this year...

[homer]

So my first bracket includes a Final 4 of Wisconsin, Kentucky, Iowa State, and Virginia. I am really struggling to pick the winner of the east regional. I don't like Villanova at all and Virginia has been less than impressive lately. I have thought about both Michigan State and Providence but I am having a hard time convincing myself that a 6 or 7 team can make it out.

 

I was also considering Gonzaga in place of Iowa St; but I think Iowa St is the better team.

 

 

That region sucks. I have a feeling some no-name will emerge. I like your other three picks though.

 

I want to pick UW over UK, but UW has such a hard road to even get to the final four that I can't justify it.

[brewcrewdue80]

Does it really matter if Kentucy will win every game by 10points or more if they feel like it? IF Kentucky doesn't win this tourney, I'd have to guess 2 Starters went down due to injury and Coach Calipari had a heart attack causing him to miss what game they didn't win.

 

Kentucky and the likes ruined College Basketball for me. I don't follow it anymore because it's going to be the same 2 (Duke/Kentucky) getting NBA ready Players to recruit 2-5 times a season every year. Just a revolving door of NBA players playing 1 maybe if you're lucky 2 years on these two teams before jumping to the NBA. And to only be replaced by better NBA prospects.

 

To show how big a joke this is recruiting, I wish one season every McDonalds All-American would commit to not playing for Duke or Kentucky, go to a pathetic no-named team(how about University of Milwaukee for instance) who had 0 shot of a winning season prior to that recruit class, only to win the NCAA tourney, not because of the coach, but because of the recruits dictating where they were taking their Elite Game at.

 

If it's going to be this way, then there should be a money structure like say 2.5million to be spent on College athletes in Basketball. And sense a team like Kentucky or Duke can't offer 2mil to every elite recruit because of the 2.5mil limit, these Elite Players will spread out over other teams who can offer them more money. It would also put a lot bigger demand on Recruiting, since Coach C or K will have to pick the correct recruit that suits their game and puts them over the top, vs choosing a recruit vs the rest who only becomes a 2nd round NBA pick 4 years later.

Meanwhile, a 1year dynasty team like Kentucky(since half or more of them will jump to the NBA) is spread out to make basketball more competitive all around.

[homer]

UK can be beat and I think UW can beat them. It would take a good game shooting from beyond the arc, but it's not like they'd have to shoot 15 of 20.

[tmwiese55]

Yes it can be done. They've almost lost several times this year, no reason to think it's impossible.

 

I went into the selection hoping we'd get Gonzaga as our 2 due to like everyone said here, AZ having such an advantage in LA. Gonzaga to LA keeps their travel not brutal and AZ is between LA and TX. Of course it's closer to LA but it's much closer to TX than Gonzaga is. Didn't get that lucky and I think we have a tough draw. UNC has it's warts but they have the talent to win any game when they don't make bonehead turnovers.

 

Other notes, it's a joke UCLA made it at all. and I thought ND should have gotten a 2 over Kansas. Kansas has 8 losses and I think will be missing two rotation players for the tournament. Heck Iowa ST could have gotten it over them, beat them twice head to head and have the same 8 losses.

[FVBrewerFan]

Kentucky and the likes ruined College Basketball for me. I don't follow it anymore because it's going to be the same 2 (Duke/Kentucky) getting NBA ready Players to recruit 2-5 times a season every year.

 

I understand where you're coming from. But it's not like Kentucky wins it every year, heck they didn't win it last year. If anything, doesn't that make it more interesting for you? A team to root against?

 

Kansas didn't even get close last year, even though they had the #1 and #2 picks in the NBA draft. UCLA has several guys go in the 1st round of the draft last year, they didn't even get close last year either.

 

So this idea that a few teams get all the "one and done" players and it's unfair really doesn't hold up. Kentucky and Duke just happen to have outstanding coaches and would be in the mix every year even if they had all guys who stayed four years.

[Funketown]

Duke has not exactly been dominant in the past few years as they've been embracing the OAD model. Since their 2011 ACCT victory, here's a list of what they've won (ACC regular season, ACCT, NCAA regional):

 

I actually think Wisconsin is a bad match-up for UNC if it comes to that, not the other way around. As has been a theme of recent years, UNC has been injury prone. Marcus Paige was playing at probably 50-75% for the first three-quarters of the season, and two of their Freshman have missed (or been limited in) a major chunk of the conference season, so their development hasn't been as strong as hoped. If either Justin Jackson or Joel Berry can hit a couple 3's they can be very good (see: win vs. Virginia), but if not it will be hard for them to beat a Wisconsin team that doesn't turn the ball over very often. They do sometimes turn to ball over way too much, but I don't think that's an issue of handling the ball poorly so much as it is a team philosophy in making a risky (60%) pass for a 95% field-goal attempt.

 

Kentucky can be beat, and given even odds I'd bet they will get beat (of course, 45% odds to win the tourney is really high). Notre Dame could be an issue in the Elite 8 if they draw fouls (and convert) like they did vs. UNC and Duke in the ACCT (I think they hit 28/32 vs. UNC). Otherwise, their bracket is a cakewalk, but both Wisconsin and Arizona probably would have a 20-25% chance of winning in the final four should they meet.

[lcbj68c]

I agree with FVBrew, this is collegiate athletics and I have zero expectation that there needs to be parity in collegiate athletics. If the "best" (as defined by prep scouts) prep athletes want to go to the same school, so be it. I think it would be a mistake to further monopolize collegiate athletics by placing dollar values restrictions on programs. I think it would be a mistake to attempt to bring parity to the sport, through monetary means. Just as John Wooden did, the great coaches will retire and new programs will take their place at the top for a few years. The best prep players are going collectively to the best coaches in the nation, not because Duke dishes out more comps than Marquette. Certainly Duke spends more costs in recruiting, but I don't begrudge the current system.

[fondybrewfan]

Really outside of Duke all the blue bloods that get the 5 Star talent will have the occasional down year as well. It wasn't to long ago that Kentucky missed the tourney altogether; hell last year they were only an 8 seed. Calipari just has an incredibly collection of talent this year and props to him for convincing all these young kids to go there knowing they won't get as many minutes and stats as somewhere else. Maybe some funny business is going on, maybe not.

[MrTPlush]

Heck Iowa ST could have gotten it over them, beat them twice head to head and have the same 8 losses.

 

Kansas actually plays a real non conference schedule including Kentucky on the road.

 

I could see an argument for Norte Dame as they had some nice wins...but Kansas was playing Top 25 teams on a daily basis which probably helped them. They never really had a break from tough opponents. Admittedly even as a Kansas fan they are overrated. The team is so inconsistent they will be lucky to scrape to the Sweet 16.

[jjkoestler]

The annual BF.net NCAA Tourney Pick'Em in now live.

 

Link to league

https://yho.com/tourney?g=219007&k=6b02c44bf607d90b

 

Password: brewerfan

[LouisEly]

The issue I have with college basketball, and it is not nearly as bad as it used to be, is certain media outlets (read: ESPN) that gush over particular coaches. Several years ago ESPN was running commercials for their college basketball games/season that featured/highlighted certain big-name coaches. They might have just as well been running free commercials for those schools.

 

The reality is, for as many McDonald's All Americans that have gone to Duke and North Carolina, those schools have drastically underperformed for the talent they have. Not in terms of national championships or even final fours, I'm even talking about Sweet 16's. For all the talent they've recruited they should at least be in the Elite 8 if not Final Four every year, but rarely make it. Look at how many times Duke and UNC have either been bounced in the first or second round in the last 10-15 years - or not made the tournament at all - and compare that to Wisconsin, who has had virtually no McDonald's All Americans.

[brwrsfan]

Some of it might boil down to taking those All Americans and fitting them into an actual team. I'm sure this isn't true of all of them, but I think most of those types of players are used to being THE man on the team. Everything runs through them, they are the absolute best player on the floor most of the time. Suddenly they have coaches that may make them work, may not let them play 40 minutes a game. Or they simply aren't used to being a team player and it takes a learning curve to try to take 3-4-5 of these types of guys together and make them mold themselves into a team - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes the kids don't pan out to be 5 start talent at the next level. Some may very well just be playing for themselves and the NBA next year.

 

Again, these are general assumptions. And certainly there is talent there, but it doesn't always work to form what is essentially all start caliber high school teams at the college level. The raw talent can usually get them some success, but it's not guaranteed, especially in the tournament.

[superfly]

As much as I hate the guy, I don't think Calipari gets the credit he deserves for how effectively he manages the egos each year.

[homer]

As much as I hate the guy, I don't think Calipari gets the credit he deserves for how effectively he manages the egos each year.

 

 

I was going to post almost that exact same thing.

[tmwiese55]

Calipari really impressed me during last year's tourney run in the way he handled the media and defending the players. Mostly just kept reminding everyone these kids are 18 and 19 yr olds, dealing with the pressures and scrutiny. Really made me believe he cares about these guys and getting them to the next level.

[FVBrewerFan]

When you think about it, these top programs would be even more dominant if the one year requirement went back to three. At least now KY and the other have to almost completely reload every year and start over. Can you imagine Kansas with Wiggins, Embiid and others for 3 years? Duke with Jabari, Okafor, etc. for 3 years? And Kentucky?? Wow. 8-9 of the best players in basketball together for an extended period. I think there would be far more domination if they extended the one year policy to 2-3 years.

[craigharmann]

Well......down goes Iowa State!

[DuWayne Steurer]

Badgers won't have to play Baylor again......

[lcbj68c]

Badgers won't have to play Baylor again......

Which is basically the only team I thought had any iota of taking out Arizona pre-Elite 8.