OK, here's this year's RPI lowdown - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

UteStar · 03-12-2007, 07:56 PM

The committee would not consider Utah State a quality win though because they had no chance of getting into the tourney even though it had a decent RPI. BYU had only a couple of chances to do something to prove themselves this year and they understandably lost to UCLA, lost to an average Michigan State team and lost a couple of games that there was ZERO reason to lose. If they didn't lose those games against MSU and Lamar, etc., BYU's seed would have been better.

Hey, Ute fans know all too well about being seeded too low over the years. Utah got a lot of very nice seeds during their runs in the 90s but they also got some suspect ones including the committees fetish with lining up against Kentucky.

RockyBalboa · 03-12-2007, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You do know that Dr. Hill is not allowed to talk about teams in his conference, no?

BYU may have been seeded lower than you thought it would, but that isn't the fault of Dr. Hill.

It seems your dislike of all things Utah is showing through. Again.

As in any big corporate setting when the main person of bias topic comes up and he (wink, wink) is supposed to leave the room.....lol...right.

For the record I don't think Hill had much, if anything, to do with BYU or UNLV's seeding, but I find those who buy into the "They always leave the room schtick" highly guillable.

jay santos · 03-12-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

As in any big corporate setting when the main person of bias topic comes up and he (wink, wink) is supposed to leave the room.....lol...right.

For the record I don't think Hill had much, if anything, to do with BYU or UNLV's seeding, but I find those who buy into the "They always leave the room schtick" highly guillable.

I don't think Hill is to blame for BYU's seed. But I think Hill would sooner die than pull his weight on his committee to give BYU a better seed. When Samuelson say BYU and Utah are a partnership when it comes to sticking up for each other within and outside the conferrence, he's up in the night.

ute4ever · 03-12-2007, 09:32 PM

What was BYU's record against teams in the tournament? I note that in this thread, some fans points to USU and AFA as their marquee wins, but neither of those teams are dancing.

jay santos · 03-12-2007, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever

What was BYU's record against teams in the tournament? I note that in this thread, some fans points to USU and AFA as their marquee wins, but neither of those teams are dancing.

against tourney teams: 3-4

1-4 away
2-0 home

against top 50 RPI: 4-5

1-5 away
3-0 home

ute4ever · 03-12-2007, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay santos

against tourney teams: 3-4

1-4 away
2-0 home

What were those wins and losses? 1-2 vs. UNLV, right? What about the other four games?

jay santos · 03-12-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever

What were those wins and losses? 1-2 vs. UNLV, right? What about the other four games?

UCLA, Mich State, Weber, Oral Roberts

ute4ever · 03-12-2007, 10:38 PM

Ah, found it:

Wed, Nov 15 at (6) UCLA L 69-82
Sat, Dec 9 at Michigan St. L 61-76
Sat, Dec 2 at Weber St. W 73-69
Fri, Dec 29 Oral Roberts W 72-62
Sat, Jan 13 at UNLV L 75-83
Sat, Feb 3 UNLV W 90-63
Sat, Mar 10 vs (25) UNLV L 70-78

Detroitdad · 03-12-2007, 10:41 PM

The point I am trying to make is not that BYU's resume is great, but rather that the resume of others who are seeded higher are very, very suspect. I expect a bunch of those that are overseeded to go down. I am think of Louisville, Vandy, Virginia, Maryland, USC, Duke, Stanford (overseeded as an 11). Seeds way out of wack really bother me. A lot.

il Padrino Ute · 03-13-2007, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

As in any big corporate setting when the main person of bias topic comes up and he (wink, wink) is supposed to leave the room.....lol...right.

For the record I don't think Hill had much, if anything, to do with BYU or UNLV's seeding, but I find those who buy into the "They always leave the room schtick" highly guillable.

Where did I say that Dr. Hill left the room?

03-12-2007, 07:56 PM	#11
UteStar Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,817	The committee would not consider Utah State a quality win though because they had no chance of getting into the tourney even though it had a decent RPI. BYU had only a couple of chances to do something to prove themselves this year and they understandably lost to UCLA, lost to an average Michigan State team and lost a couple of games that there was ZERO reason to lose. If they didn't lose those games against MSU and Lamar, etc., BYU's seed would have been better. Hey, Ute fans know all too well about being seeded too low over the years. Utah got a lot of very nice seeds during their runs in the 90s but they also got some suspect ones including the committees fetish with lining up against Kentucky.

03-12-2007, 09:32 PM	#14
ute4ever I must not tell lies Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,103	What was BYU's record against teams in the tournament? I note that in this thread, some fans points to USU and AFA as their marquee wins, but neither of those teams are dancing.

03-12-2007, 10:38 PM	#18
ute4ever I must not tell lies Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,103	Ah, found it: Wed, Nov 15 at (6) UCLA L 69-82 Sat, Dec 9 at Michigan St. L 61-76 Sat, Dec 2 at Weber St. W 73-69 Fri, Dec 29 Oral Roberts W 72-62 Sat, Jan 13 at UNLV L 75-83 Sat, Feb 3 UNLV W 90-63 Sat, Mar 10 vs (25) UNLV L 70-78

03-12-2007, 10:41 PM	#19
Detroitdad Resident Jackass Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Roswell, New Mexico Posts: 1,846	The point I am trying to make is not that BYU's resume is great, but rather that the resume of others who are seeded higher are very, very suspect. I expect a bunch of those that are overseeded to go down. I am think of Louisville, Vandy, Virginia, Maryland, USC, Duke, Stanford (overseeded as an 11). Seeds way out of wack really bother me. A lot.