Comments on: We Are The Campions; Big East Tourney Edition

By: Pitt Blather — The Rantings Continue Permalink » A Lost Regular

Pitt Blather — The Rantings Continue Permalink » A Lost Regular — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:07:10 +0000

[...] Delta Phi on the passing of Jared Beiswenger. A recent Pitt grad, passionate Pitt fan and a regular reader of this site. “He was a die-hard Philly fan,” Placone said. “He went to probably more than 20 [...]

By: Stuart

Stuart — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:47:45 +0000

I’d rather beat those other teams first, and beat the top teams later, instead of the other way around. Cause there’s a better chance we’ll lose to a great seed early. It just seems to make more sense to me that way…

By: The Prowler

The Prowler — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:57:40 +0000

“We were a four seed” wasn’t an argument I said we should make. I said that a higher seed is better looking for the team, but primarily that beating good teams is what helps with recruiting.

Under your scenario, we get to add Xavier to our list of teams we beat this year. That doesn’t help recruiting either. Don’t shy away from the big teams because beating THEM is what is going to make the impression on potential recruits.

“Man that team beat Duke and UNC in the same year and they aren’t in the ACC!!” sounds better than “They beat Xavier (or Stanford)”. Not to mention, if we are a six seed we can potentially play Texas A&M, Baylor, or Arizona in the first round (according to Lunardi’s early projections of course). Neither of those three teams is even remotely a gimme win. A loss in the first round, even to a decent team, would be worse for this team than losing to UNC or UCLA in the Sweet 16.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:49:25 +0000

Dennis - obviously there is no bracket out, so of course i had to use a bracket of predictions to show what i was talking about. I guess we first could have argued about what we all thought the seeds should be, where everyone was playing, etc. We all know that there is 0% chance that those EXACT scenarios will play out - but on the other hand, we can be pretty sure those will be the one seeds, those other teams are relatively around the seeds shown, etc. I was using those as “examples” - they’re not cast in stone.

Still no one has told me why we should want to play a one seed in the sweet 16 over a 2 or 3 seed…don’t quite understand…

I think getting to an elite 8 or beyond would be better for recruiting than “we were a FOUR seed!”

And i don’t want to “shy away” from playing anyone - i’d just rather play them in the elite 8 to go to the final four, then in the sweet 16, trying to get past it for the first time.

So, who here thinks its easier to beat UNC, UCLA, Memphis, or Kansas over Wisc, GU, Ten, or Texas?

By: Dan 72

Dan 72 — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:34:55 +0000

Does anyone else think Fields is a step faster than before he got hurt? Watched him go coast to coast 2x last night and looked quick as lightning.

By: The Prowler

The Prowler — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:12:40 +0000

There is another huge difference between getting a 3 or 4 seed vs. getting a 5 or 6 seed. We want the highest seeding possible because it looks better for recruiting. Not to mention, the better teams we play, if we beat them, also looks better for recruiting.

Imagine going to some kid, an absolute stud, and saying, “We need you at Pitt. And you know we are a good team. Last year we beat Duke, G’Town twice, and UNC. How many other teams can say that?”

So why shy away from playing the best. In order to be the best you have to beat the best.

By: MelbaPlace

MelbaPlace — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:01:42 +0000

Let’s put this elite 8 business to rest for a little bit. Let’s enjoy the moment now and get past that first game no matter what seed we get.

By: Neil

Neil — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:43:34 +0000

Stuart…don’t tell me you’re going by Bracketology on ESPN or something. Comment by Dennis 03.16.08 @ 2:16 pm

…well, if you chose to do so, you’ll find Pitt — at this instant anyway — a 3 seed.

Consider the change in fortune — provided a 3 seed finds us — from years past where no matter what the regulr season & BET accomplishments — i.e., 30+ wins; reaching the conference championship, etc. — we inevitably drew nothing higher than a 6. I don’t ever want to see another GD 6 again. (I’d rather get screwed into a 7 at this juncture.)

By: kamesh

kamesh — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:25:57 +0000

our ultimate goal should be getting as far as possible so there is definitely a difference between dropping in the 2nd round vs sweet 16. but point taken about having to beat great teams regardless of where you are seeded. i just think its better to face them later rather than earlier.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:16:52 +0000

Stuart where are you getting this list of teams we’d have to play? Please don’t tell me you’re going by Bracketology on ESPN or something.

And if the goal is to get past the Sweet 16 and to the Elite Eight and eventually the Final Four, we’re going to have to beat great teams anyways.