And now it has happened two years in a row. Gotta say pretty boring dance. First round 1-4 in each bracket made it through. Closest thing to any drama was #10 Arkansas getting to Sweet 16. MSU had a shot but poor officiating (was that High Knees officiating that game)and inability to hit layups and the 4th #1 go into Final Four
So prior to last year there had not been a season where the final four consisted of all 4 #1s
- Thread starter hdhntr1
- Start date
...no it hasn't. Last year had 2 #1 seeds plus 4 seed Alabama and 11 seed NC State. The other time all 4 top seeds made it was 2008, 17 years ago.
The cinderella stories in NCAA tourney are going to be disappearing with transfers from smaller schools grabbing the cash. The entire starting five for Robert Morris who made its first NCAAs since 2015 and showed very well are all in the portal.
its time to reduce the field. Make it actually mean something to get into the tournament.
Nobody with a losing record in their conference should be allowed in - I guess thats just too logical.
Unless they win their conference tournament.
"Yes, we have a losing record in our conference, but we're really the best team in the country?"
Give me a break.
Make the NIT a tournament for the midpack Power 5 teams and good mid-majors.
This had to be the chalkiest tournament ever, with 7 of the top 8 seeds making the Elite 8 - and the single "cinderella" being a (gasp) 3 seed.
Thanks for the correction.,. Sorry they put it on the graphics on the broadcast during the game. I was at the health club at the time and it looked like it was showing last year. But the point is that this was pretty boring tourney. I mean the elite 8 was four #1s, three #2s and one 3. Even the sweet 16 had a couples 5's get in over 3s and Ark getting in by beating St Johns. Most boring tourney I can remember
Last edited:
Like I said, pretty boring tourney. It still mean something to get in but with the superconferences grabbing as many spots as they do....
Thanks for the correction. Thought I saw a graphic during the MSU Auburn game that indicated it, I was at the Health Club at the time and no sound and a somewhat fuzzy picture. Point is still same., Boring tourney. Normally I would be a junkie but this year no point
At this rate, I suspect the cinderella story will be when a single sub ten seed makes it to the second weekend.
I think there's an unnecessary (at this point) amount of hand-wringing being done about four 1-seeds making the Final Four. For that outcome to happen twice in 40 years doesn't seem excessive. I know people have their theories about why it's happening now but unless it becomes a pattern it's just as likely that this year is an anomaly rather than an indication of something else. The top seeds are the top seeds for a reason, so this outcome should happen at least some of the time.
Historically mid-major underdogs win with guard play, mostly by shooting the ball well from outside. I can't find the tweet, but I read something about mid-major underdogs shooting a historically low percentage from 3 in this tournament despite being collectively as good at shooting in the regular season as past mid-major crops. Sometimes variance swings to the favorites.
There's also the nugget that all 4 teams left are in the top 10 all-time (since 1997) in the KenPom ratings, which makes it even more likely they'd all get this far. Should also be noted that 3 of the 4 teams returned between 69-82% of their minutes from last year, with Duke being the exception, and their best guys are 3 freshmen and a junior who's been with them the whole time.
Historically mid-major underdogs win with guard play, mostly by shooting the ball well from outside. I can't find the tweet, but I read something about mid-major underdogs shooting a historically low percentage from 3 in this tournament despite being collectively as good at shooting in the regular season as past mid-major crops. Sometimes variance swings to the favorites.
There's also the nugget that all 4 teams left are in the top 10 all-time (since 1997) in the KenPom ratings, which makes it even more likely they'd all get this far. Should also be noted that 3 of the 4 teams returned between 69-82% of their minutes from last year, with Duke being the exception, and their best guys are 3 freshmen and a junior who's been with them the whole time.
Don't confuse loss of interest with hand-wringing.
I really don't care who wins, so I'm not watching.
That's it. I am not yelling at clouds, just not very interested. Instead I'll go see the entire final four of the NIT, with pretty good tickets, for $25.
I was just wondering because usually such a mass exodus is because of a HC moving on. Even more disturbing that that is not the case
How many years will it take to be a recognizable pattern?
Does it have to only be all four 1 seeds in the final four to count, or can it just be only 1 thru 4 seeds make it to the elite 8?
These two statements might actually be seen as supporting evidence of what some folks find concerning, when you think about it.
Was talking with somebody from a traditionally strong mid major conference with a history until very recently of multiple annual bids and many notable Cinderella runs over many decades. He believed that within a few days of the portal opening only 4 of the 40 guys on the various all conference lists were returning to the league the following year. Many were graduating, but the rest were all transferring to seek NIL bucks in the power 5.
I'm a big supporter of guys getting the opportunity to get paid, but that's devastating and sort of a bummer for these leagues. They get absolutely picked clean every single year.
On the other hand, all these dominant top teams do mean that the games are largely very good. Upsets early are fun, but the Cinderella runs often result in clunkers eventually when you get a lower seed running into a dominant team or two Cinderellas against each other. The Butler UConn championship was a game that stands out in my mind as a genuinely gross game between two CInderellas playing like pumpkins. Next weekend should be a real slugfest promising some extremely good basketball.
It is not just that the final 4 are all number 1s, It is that basically none of the lower seeds won anything. Seeds in through 4 all made it through first game, Two 5/12 upsets. And Arkansas making it to the Sweet 16 was basically all there was.
Yes the mid majors win with guard play but has been stated earlier the guys that would do it are more Sr level and majority of them transferred out And Frosh and Sophs don't have the package to be able to get it done
Last edited:
And this would seem to be a big reason why none of the lower conferences was able to show much of anything. Guys that would do it had all departed at the end of last season, Likely to be even worse going forward
Yeah I think the ideal tournament for most people is one in which there is unpredictability early on but the better teams emerge from the pack to give us the best games. I get that this is uninspiring for those who crave the chaos/upsets, and the speculation for why it's happened this way may in fact be correct. All I'm saying is we need to see more than one tournament come out this way to make grand declarations about the mid majors being dead and only power teams will win games from now on. This tournament has extremely high variance and it's to be expected that it comes out boring and chalky every so often. If it's the same thing next year and the year after, then OK we have evidence that there's a problem.
I don't know how instructive this is (it may be useless noise), but these are the 20 most experienced teams in this year's NCAA tournament (which is based on average years of D1 basketball per player on the full roster, not raw age):
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
Tennessee
Norfolk St
Lipscomb
Auburn
Louisville
UNC Wilmington
Kansas
Xavier
McNeese
Gonzaga
Clemson
Memphis
Bryant
Grand Canyon
Oregon
High Point
UC San Diego
Nebraska Omaha
The 10 least experienced:
Duke
Illinois
St. Francis
Arkansas
Georgia
Purdue
San Diego St
North Carolina
Maryland
UConn
Of the teams that made the tourney the last two years, teams have moved up in conference level a ton:
Houston and BYU once in 10, twice in 20
Louisville and FAU once in 10, thrice in 20
Marquette, Creighton, Xavier, Memphis, VCU, Boise St., Utah St., Nevada, Charleston, Troy, Samford, and Oakland all once in 20
UConn, Robert Morris, Bryant, Mt. St. Mary's, James Madison, UAB and Western Kentucky all once in 10
Liberty twice in 10
TCU twice in 20
It's a mix of things, but still TBD on whether it's permanent or not.
Houston and BYU once in 10, twice in 20
Louisville and FAU once in 10, thrice in 20
Marquette, Creighton, Xavier, Memphis, VCU, Boise St., Utah St., Nevada, Charleston, Troy, Samford, and Oakland all once in 20
UConn, Robert Morris, Bryant, Mt. St. Mary's, James Madison, UAB and Western Kentucky all once in 10
Liberty twice in 10
TCU twice in 20
It's a mix of things, but still TBD on whether it's permanent or not.
Definitely more than one. Maybe less than four?
Totally agree with this. But if next year's Final Four is a 1 seed, a 3 seed, a 5 seed and a 10 seed, then what's the explanation for that?
Secho99:
The thing is, you can look at the rules for the portal and the revenue and the NIL capabilities and predict with confidence that the mid-majors are dead. This year's tournament supports the logical prediction.
Its like playing roulette, except they've added about 10 more zeros to the wheel.
Sure, you might have one short run of success, but there is no way you're going to win overall.
And the way the NCAA selects its field, rewarding mediocre Power 5 teams for losing to better teams and punishing the top mid-majors for beating mediocre teams in their conferences, it gives 5 tournament berths to useless teams like Oklahoma and Georgia at the direct expense of top level mid majors. The best way to prevent the mid-majors from making noise is to leave them out entirely. Or give them an 8 seed when they deserve a 4.
The thing is, you can look at the rules for the portal and the revenue and the NIL capabilities and predict with confidence that the mid-majors are dead. This year's tournament supports the logical prediction.
Its like playing roulette, except they've added about 10 more zeros to the wheel.
Sure, you might have one short run of success, but there is no way you're going to win overall.
And the way the NCAA selects its field, rewarding mediocre Power 5 teams for losing to better teams and punishing the top mid-majors for beating mediocre teams in their conferences, it gives 5 tournament berths to useless teams like Oklahoma and Georgia at the direct expense of top level mid majors. The best way to prevent the mid-majors from making noise is to leave them out entirely. Or give them an 8 seed when they deserve a 4.
Is this a bad April Fool's Joke? NC State made it from the First Four last year. Only time there was four No. 1 seeds was 2008.
Sometimes, the better team actually wins.
Especially when the Top 4 are clearly the best 4.
If you had read further, I acknowledged my mistake which was based on the seeing the graphic when I was at the health club with no voice and an issue with the picture which was fuzzy. My point was that this was an indication the something had changed and it maid this years tourney one of the most boring and that overall probably not good for the sport if it continues
