Analysis: Was Big Ten disrespected with NCAA seedings?

Lets see if the league as a whole can prove the committee wrong. I agree with the one seed lower than expected. I still think our conference was weak. But cbb in general was weak this year. When you have teams like Xavier and Oregon at the top something has to give.

As far as Crean complaining, shut up. You did it to yourself with another embarrassing showing in the BTT.

As far as Crean complaining, shut up. You did it to yourself with another embarrassing showing in the BTT.

Well half-and-half. Crean put us in the position for a lower seed, the committee underseeded us. I live deep in Pac-12 country and have already heard multiple people talking about how the Pac-12 was overseeded. When the fans of the teams above you agree they should be below you, there is a problem.

Big Ten was down, but it seems like they thought the Big Ten was entirely out. Conference puts two teams in the Final Four last year and still can't get love.

I just can't figure out the committees reasoning for some of these picks. Virginia doesn't win either regular season or tourney and they get #1 over MSU. On the plus side IU plays better when they feel disrespected and you know Crean will use that as bulletin board material.

I'd be ok with the #5 seed if I didn't see that Utah and Miami got #3 seeds.  Neither won their conference.  

To expand on the Iowa State point even further (because it reallllly irks me), 6 of their 10 wins in conference were against the bottom 3 teams, who went a combined 10-44 in conference. The selection committee is a complete joke.

Absolutely Cal has 10 loses and got a 4 seed we have three 5 seeds with less losses

I just can't understand how u put the acc champs sec champs and Bigten champs in the same half of a region. That's 3/5 power conferences champs playing for one spot. I still think someone from pac12 paid off the committee. Oregon st got in how's that.

i think we were underseeded but cant really do much about it now, just go out and win every game

I'm sure this will upset a lot of people, but here goes.

 

We sucked at the Maui tournament this year

We sucked at Duke, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards

We got blown out at Michigan State, who up until that time, sure as hell didn't resemble a #1 seed

We got beat by Wisconsin, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards

We got beat by a horrendous Penn State squad

We played, by all accounts, one of the easiest Big Ten Schedules one could play.

We played in a conference that by all accounts, is having one of it's worst, top to bottom years in decades

We lost to a piss poor Michigan team in our first game in the BTT. In our back yard. With that team having had less than 24 hours to recover since their last game. And that team, having made the NCAA as a "PLAY-IN" game, which tells you what the NCAA thought about Michigan

 

The summary is thus: We're a good team, not a great one, who played in a good conference, not a great one, who played a good schedule, not a great one, and who's recent history in tournaments sucks at a biblical rate. Yeah, a #5 seeding is probably close to being spot on.

I'm sure this will upset a lot of people, but here goes.

We sucked at the Maui tournament this year
We sucked at Duke, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards
We got blown out at Michigan State, who up until that time, sure as hell didn't resemble a #1 seed
We got beat by Wisconsin, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards
We got beat by a horrendous Penn State squad
We played, by all accounts, one of the easiest Big Ten Schedules one could play.
We played in a conference that by all accounts, is having one of it's worst, top to bottom years in decades
We lost to a piss poor Michigan team in our first game in the BTT. In our back yard. With that team having had less than 24 hours to recover since their last game. And that team, having made the NCAA as a "PLAY-IN" game, which tells you what the NCAA thought about Michigan

The summary is thus: We're a good team, not a great one, who played in a good conference, not a great one, who played a good schedule, not a great one, and who's recent history in tournaments sucks at a biblical rate. Yeah, a #5 seeding is probably close to being spot on.

Ok cool, now explain why the other Big Ten teams were underseeded and why teams like Cal were better seeded. Why is MSU a 2 seed? Why is Oregon State the same seed as Iowa?

I watch a ton of Pac-12 basketball and can assure you they aren't better than the Big Ten in a relative sense.

I don't honestly know much about California, but from what one hears, they've got about as much talent as North Carolina, and play in a conference, (Pac 12), that some think is highly underestimated. The committee apparently agreed. Who knows?

As for the rest of the Big Ten, they suffer from the same issue as IU in the respect that the league simply isn't as good as is used to be.

 

A normal Big Ten year and MSU is a #1 seed. Still, the committee kept them in the Midwest which isn't a bad consolation prize.

Purdue lost the conference schedule AND the tournament, but played MSU reasonably close and got a fair seed at #5

Iowa might have been a #1 or #2, had they not faltered down the stretch. Now they're a #7. That was on them.

Michigan would not have even made the tournament, had they not beaten IU in the BTT

Wisconsin might have been higher, had they not stunk earlier in the year. As it is, their stock rose to the point they matched Iowa's seed; two teams going in opposite directions.

Just my opinion.

I'm sure this will upset a lot of people, but here goes.

We sucked at the Maui tournament this year
We sucked at Duke, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards
We got blown out at Michigan State, who up until that time, sure as hell didn't resemble a #1 seed
We got beat by Wisconsin, who's having an unusually bad year by their standards
We got beat by a horrendous Penn State squad
We played, by all accounts, one of the easiest Big Ten Schedules one could play.
We played in a conference that by all accounts, is having one of it's worst, top to bottom years in decades
We lost to a piss poor Michigan team in our first game in the BTT. In our back yard. With that team having had less than 24 hours to recover since their last game. And that team, having made the NCAA as a "PLAY-IN" game, which tells you what the NCAA thought about Michigan

The summary is thus: We're a good team, not a great one, who played in a good conference, not a great one, who played a good schedule, not a great one, and who's recent history in tournaments sucks at a biblical rate. Yeah, a #5 seeding is probably close to being spot on.

When we played Duke they had Amile Jefferson. They collapsed this season without him. Also, Michigan State has certainly looked the part all season, less the games they played without Valentine. Not disagreeing completely with your overall point, but your Duke and Michigan State points seem off-base.

Yeah, MSU was ranked #1 for quite a few weeks leading up to Denzel Valentine's injury.  They are now playing like they were pre-injury.  Duke was a top 10 team when we played them and they got decimated by injury.  Wisconsin was crap until they went on their run a quarter of the way through B1G.  Plus, as for the "easier" B1G comment, every year that is who wins.  Look at conference SOS for the winner of conference.  Over the last 15 years, only our 12-13 Hoosiers won with a conference SOS in the top 10.  The rest I agree with.

When we played Duke they had Amile Jefferson. They collapsed this season without him. Also, Michigan State has certainly looked the part all season, less the games they played without Valentine. Not disagreeing completely with your overall point, but your Duke and Michigan State points seem off-base.

I thought MSU looked quite beatable until we played them. From then on, they started looking like they always do, as they ramp up to tournament time. You may be right about Duke and Amile Jefferson, but even with him, I don't think they end up beating NC for the conference title. And with or without him, there's no excuse for us looking that bad.

Not at all. The Big Ten just wasn't that good this year. Michigan shouldn't even be in the tourney. We were seeded right being that the B1G was about the 4th best conference.

Not at all. The Big Ten just wasn't that good this year. Michigan shouldn't even be in the tourney. We were seeded right being that the B1G was about the 4th best conference.

We'll see how it plays out in the tournament. ACC strongest, in my opinion, but every year in March the Big 12 and PAC-12 flop.

Fun fact I saw on Twitter: Since the formation (1997) of the Big 12, Kansas is the only team to have won a National Championship, doing so only once in 2008.

That's one of the ones I didn't get for sure. They got a 4 over Purdue, too, and could meet them in the second game so maybe we'll find out pretty quickly if the Big Ten had a beef.

 

Absolutely. When Iowa state gets a 4 seed over IU, I just have to laugh. The 6th best team in the Big 12 got a better seed then us at 10-8 in their conference and 21-11 overall. Let that sink in

For some reason, the committee appears to have really liked the Pac-12. I don't get that one either.

 

Absolutely Cal has 10 loses and got a 4 seed we have three 5 seeds with less losses