Bracketology 3.0

[Doubleyew]

The newest Bracket is now out by Joe Lunardi, and even though UNLV is not ranked, at least not yet, they are slotted in on the bubble so far and one of the last four in, and playing VCU. Winner lined up against Cincinnati. I most definitely don't want any part of VCU at all and hope that never plays out. I think UNLV has a great shot against Cincy though.

It's very early still, but fun to finally see the Rebs up there.

Other notables
MWC teams in... SDSU somehow still at a #11 seed. And that's it. This conference season is UNLV's for the taking, or each loss will look like it's going to hurt them. Gonna have to win games and avoid pretty much any conference losses.

Teams UNLV plays(ed):
Wichita st - 12 seed and dropping fast. If we beat them tomorrow, they'll all but fade into nothingness like Indiana did, and it'll be a meh win at the end of the season.

Arizona St - #12 play-in game. This puts them nearly identical to where UNLV is in this bracket. It will be a barometer as to which team will get pused toward an 'in' and locked.

Oregon - #6 seed, which they have fallen a bit as well. What will be good to look at is when UCLA and Oregon play.

UCLA - #10 seed, with the potential for another meetup with UNLV early in this bracket.

Arizona - #4 seed. If UNLV beats UA, that's going to be an immense burst in the long run. Chances are Arizona doesn't slip too much.

Indiana - #9 seed. If IU slips any more, they're going to find themselves out of it all.


That's 6 teams in the nonconference in the tournament. Hell of a schedule, no matter which way you look at it. Cal Poly can also challenge for the Big West championship if they play strong.

Good luck in Kansas. I'll be watching!

 

[Dirty Vegas]

Predictions are fun but they are just predictions,, they become more interesting the closer we get to March and how on earth is Indiana a 9 and we are in a play in game?

 

[Vegas007]

That's it? We wouldn't even be guaranteed to make the round of 64 and would need to win 2 games just to make the round of 32. Horrifying.

I wasn't expecting much and fortunately it's still early but those seedings/matchups suck.

 

[Vegas007]

I think a 7-1 record with wins over Indiana and Oregon deserves more. Do we have to be undefeated to get any respect?

 

[rebelluver]

I think a 7-1 record with wins over Indiana and Oregon deserves more. Do we have to be undefeated to get any respect?

I don't even think that would do it. We are 3 points from being undefeated as is.

I know everybody is skeptical of us right now, but this is ridiculous.

 

[j. spilotro]

I don't even think that would do it. We are 3 points from being undefeated as is.

I know everybody is skeptical of us right now, but this is ridiculous.

A lot of people are saying that. But it's wrong.

Score 3 more vs UCLA, get dropped on your head by Kansas, especially with an absent Zimm. And who knows what happens then in the Wake/UNLV game.

 

[Dirty Vegas]

I think the result we got in Maui was the best we could hope for,, no way this early would we want any of Kansas. We show improvement every game and even though we aren't ranked our season is progressing nicely ,so far so good

 

[MonsterJam]

What Joe says.

Plus, you have to look at recent history to see why the entire nation is a little reluctant to buy in to UNLV this early in the season. UNLV tends to fade or meltdown in epic manner in conference. Do something, anything, in conference play and people might change their mind. Myself included.

 

[Vegas007]

I know there is the temptation to have low expectations because of the past, but is that a smart way to look at it? If we look at the past, Dave Rice teams made the tournament in his first two years, so that means we should have been in the last two years. So anybody using history to think we would make the tournament last year or the year before was wrong.

In 2007 we made the Sweet 16 for the first time in 16 years. Anybody using history to predict how that team would do had it blow up in their face.

Should I be pessimistic about Seagers, Zimmerman, Carter, etc. because guys like BDJ disappointed us, or Vaughn got hurt? Shouldn't the guys on this team be judged on things that they have done instead of things that other people have done?

And lets not forget the injuries which killed the team last year.

It's a different team this year with different players. How many of us are optimistic about San Diego State this year?

 

[Vegas007]

A lot of people are saying that. But it's wrong.

Score 3 more vs UCLA, get dropped on your head by Kansas, especially with an absent Zimm. And who knows what happens then in the Wake/UNLV game.

Even looking at it that way though, it looks like we needed to beat Kansas to get respect.

 

[Vegas007]

Also one reason we struggled in conference play recently is we weren't the best team, or in some cases weren't even the second or third best team in conference, and we didn't always realize it until the team got into conference play. We didn't really fade or choke (at least the last two years anyway). We just got exposed because we weren't that good.

 

[j. spilotro]

I know there is the temptation to have low expectations because of the past, but is that a smart way to look at it? If we look at the past, Dave Rice teams made the tournament in his first two years, so that means we should have been in the last two years. So anybody using history to think we would make the tournament last year or the year before was wrong.

In 2007 we made the Sweet 16 for the first time in 16 years. Anybody using history to predict how that team would do had it blow up in their face.

Should I be pessimistic about Seagers, Zimmerman, Carter, etc. because guys like BDJ disappointed us, or Vaughn got hurt? Shouldn't the guys on this team be judged on things that they have done instead of things that other people have done?

And lets not forget the injuries which killed the team last year.

It's a different team this year with different players. How many of us are optimistic about San Diego State this year?

I'm not disagreeing with you. My expectations aren't low. I picked UNLV to win conference and make the NCAA's while everything else I read said 4th/5th in MWC and NIT. Who knows what'll happen ultimately. What I see, right now, is a good, solid, deep squad with good chemistry and a much higher ceiling. But so much is to be determined. How do they play on the road? When they lose, is the chemistry still good afterwards? Can they remain healthy at the critical spots? Can they remain focused? Will the take the middle of the pack and lower MWC lightly?

It's never been just one thing that has stopped former Rebel teams from performing well. It's always at least a couple of things listed above.

Sorry, tangent.

I don't by the history thing either. It may show a tendency, even a strong tendency, but rarely does it hold completely true otherwise just can a coach at the first sign of poor play. That's silly.

Personally, I don't care much about rankings. Whether you are respected or disrespected, I don't really care. We won an NCAA championship and we were disrespected, so what does what a bunch of other people think really matter? I couldn't care less, personally. It's nice, makes for good convo and debate, it's nice recognition for the guys and staff, etc. But what's most prevalent to me is whether the team is showing progress from week to week, month to month. If you're going to tell me that the Rebels will get incrementally better from month to month, I'll be happy with where we are in February/March in spite of any number in front of the name.

 

[rebelluver]

A lot of people are saying that. But it's wrong.

Score 3 more vs UCLA, get dropped on your head by Kansas, especially with an absent Zimm. And who knows what happens then in the Wake/UNLV game.

I understand that. Thing is you can't do what ifs. All we can do is play the games in front of us.

Based on the games we have played, the fact that STDSU is still a higher seed than us is absolutely comical.

I don't care what world you live in, that doesn't make any sense.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

A lot of people are saying that. But it's wrong.

Score 3 more vs UCLA, get dropped on your head by Kansas, especially with an absent Zimm. And who knows what happens then in the Wake/UNLV game.

Thank you!

And indignation over some bozo's bracket guesses is sorely misdirected.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

In 2007 we made the Sweet 16 for the first time in 16 years. Anybody using history to predict how that team would do had it blow up in their face.

They also got an insulting 7 seed in that tournament, if you will recall. prior lack of success may have played a large part in that.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

I understand that. Thing is you can't do what ifs. All we can do is play the games in front of us.

His precise point is that you can't do what ifs. His comment was in response to, "what if we scored 3 more points against UCLA?"

 

[rebelluver]

His precise point is that you can't do what ifs. His comment was in response to, "what if we scored 3 more points against UCLA?"

Except I didn't say that. Reread it again then go ahead and comment. If you are going to put quotation marks on what I said, I would suggest getting it right in the future.

I was not saying what if we did beat UCLA. I was saying we only have one loss by three points so its comical the seed he gave us.

And before somebody else chimes in with who cares what he seeded us, that is what the thread is about.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

Except I didn't say that. Reread it again then go ahead and comment. If you are going to put quotation marks on what I said, I would suggest getting it right in the future.

I was not saying what if we did beat UCLA. I was saying we only have one loss by three points so its comical the seed he gave us.

And before somebody else chimes in with who cares what he seeded us, that is what the thread is about.

Sure:

"We are 3 points from being undefeated as is"

This is not only a what if, but a what if that assumed we beat a Top 5 team after edging UCLA.

 

[rebelluver]

Sure:

"We are 3 points from being undefeated as is"

This is not only a what if, but a what if that assumed we beat a Top 5 team after edging UCLA.

Reading comprehension problem? Read my reply to Joe and see if you can follow along. My point is that of the games we played, we deserve more respect. Period. That's it.

Again, if you are going to be a wise a$$, make sure you know what you are replying to.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

Reading comprehension problem? Read my reply to Joe and see if you can follow along. My point is that of the games we played, we deserve more respect. Period. That's it.

Again, if you are going to be a wise a$$, make sure you know what you are replying to.

Wow. If you are failing in a debate, just attack your opponent's intelligence. Works every time, right? I know what the hell I'm replying to. You said we are 3 points from undefeated, which, frankly, was a stupid thing to say. Sorry, I left "being" and "as is" out of your quote this time.

My reading comprehension is fine. I have 5 years of postgraduate education.

 

[TarkisGod]

What I see, right now, is a good, solid, deep squad with good chemistry and a much higher ceiling. .

One slight issue with this:

Everyone, including the head coach, keep citing the Rebel's outstanding depth as being a major factor in our success. What I've seen in the games we've played vs opponents with comparable talent at the D1-level is actually a rather thin bench.

With the departure of Okonoboh, and the dwindling minutes for an ineffectual Jordan Cornish, the bench comes down to Ben Carter, who could reasonably be considered a starter, as his minutes always exceed Morgan's, and Derrick Jones Jr. While DJ provides great highlights, and some very impressive games, they have all been against seriously out-matched opponents. While he shines when facing Chaminade and Southern Utah, in both the Indiana and Oregon games, he was a non-factor.

Who else? Poyser had a nice few minutes in the Oregon game, but I don't think he can be relied on for any extended consistency. And Green had a few decent minutes against Prairie View, but like his fellow bench-mates, his contribution vs Oregon was insignificant. In the Oregon game, if you switch Carter's 28 minutes and Morgan's 17, the entire bench contribution was 9 points and 4 boards, vs the Ducks 25/6.

So the myth of the "10-deep" Rebels is, in actuality 7 contributors. Sure, Cornish will hopefully find his shot, but we're 8 games into the season, and he actually looks less-confident in each game. Should we, God forbid, suffer any serious injury to any of the seven, and I fear we would be in deep trouble.

I know this is off-topic to this Bracketology thread, but Mr. Spilotro mentioned depth, and it's been a concern of mine recently.

 

[rebelluver]

Wow. If you are failing in a debate, just attack your opponent's intelligence. Works every time, right? I know what the hell I'm replying to. You said we are 3 points from undefeated, which, frankly, was a stupid thing to say. Sorry, I left "being" and "as is" out of your quote this time.

My reading comprehension is fine. I have 5 years of postgraduate education.

Explain why it is stupid. It is a fact. Judging by that fact we should get more respect. You are the one that is trying to read into my statement accusing me of saying something I didn't say. You assumed I was trying to make a point that didn't exist.

This conversation never would have happened if you didn't do that.

I will say it again. We have lost one game, by 2 points, beat two top 15 teams, we should be rated higher than that, especially over sdsu.

 

[rebelluver]

Wow. If you are failing in a debate.

This is just awesome here. Which debate was that exactly? The one where you were arguing against something I didn't say?

Just have the class to admit you were wrong and be done with it.

 

[Vegas007]

Someone needs to tell Cornish to step up and be a man.

 

[Vegas007]

The reason I care about rankings/respect is it leads to more media coverage and better seedings in the tournament. Recruiting is easier if we don't get treated by the media like we're another version of Reno. It would be nice if top players in other parts of the country know we exist.

Also if you're a top recruit, wouldn't you want to go to a school where you get to be on ESPN a lot? Players that get a lot of hype have a better chance to get drafted, and they can also get drafted higher.

 

[rebelluver]

The reason I care about rankings/respect is it leads to more media coverage and better seedings in the tournament. Recruiting is easier if we don't get treated by the media like we're another version of Reno. It would be nice if top players in other parts of the country know we exist.

Also if you're a top recruit, wouldn't you want to go to a school where you get to be on ESPN a lot? Players that get a lot of hype have a better chance to get drafted, and they can also get drafted higher.

All of those things are true. I am not sure why so many people say it doesn't matter.

Rice was even quoted in the paper saying how important it is.

 

[1Tripoda]

We are all a little pissed off about the ranking and such. I am more so than most. But the key word here is "sustainability". Can UNLV prove that our team can sustain this momentum as we get near our conference play or do we fade again? We got a game tonight against a preseason 10 team that sustained key injuries. Now that they are all back, can UNLV beat or at the very least display a respectable showing in front of a prime time national audience? Forget about the ranking or what Lunardi says, beating WSU on their floor in front of hostile crowd with millions watching at home will meant a lot more.

 

[WeMissYouShark]

Explain why it is stupid. It is a fact. Judging by that fact we should get more respect. You are the one that is trying to read into my statement accusing me of saying something I didn't say. You assumed I was trying to make a point that didn't exist.

This conversation never would have happened if you didn't do that.

I will say it again. We have lost one game, by 2 points, beat two top 15 teams, we should be rated higher than that, especially over sdsu.

It is not a fact. As Joe tried to explain, if we beat UCLA, we play Kansas, and Kansas ain't no Indiana. To that, you accused him of what-ifs, to which I pointed out that your entire fallacious "undefeated" premise is a what-if.

 

[Doubleyew]

This thread is about the recent bracketology, not about ad hominem attacks. If you're off topic, please start a new thread.

Tonight is a big game. WSU hasn't lost at home in 34 games. That's not going to be easy for any team.

 

[j. spilotro]

The reason I care about rankings/respect is it leads to more media coverage and better seedings in the tournament. Recruiting is easier if we don't get treated by the media like we're another version of Reno. It would be nice if top players in other parts of the country know we exist.

Also if you're a top recruit, wouldn't you want to go to a school where you get to be on ESPN a lot? Players that get a lot of hype have a better chance to get drafted, and they can also get drafted higher.

I agree that it makes recruiting easier, but we are getting fantastic classes without the rankings. I do realize that it won't last forever, though. You have to have some substance.

As far as being on national TV, that has more to do with UNLV's aggressive scheduling. UNLV will play top notch teams away from the Mack. Most of these other MWC schools won't. Or if they do, they make sure there's only one of them. Rice will stack the schedule and make it very tough. That's a big part of our recruiting success, IMO. Recruits want to play where they fit, but they want to be on TV, too.

For MWC, most could recruit much better if they'd schedule aggressively and get ESPN games. But I'm guessing they don't want to invite losses when they really don't have to. You're seeing two completely different philosophies at work.

 

[bcvegaspt]

This thread is about the recent bracketology, not about ad hominem attacks. If you're off topic, please start a new thread.

Thank you. It's been addressed.

If you want to "attack" each other on here there's the direct email feature.

Conversely, if you want to ignore someone on here you have that option as well.

 

[Poster17]

I think a 7-1 record with wins over Indiana and Oregon deserves more. Do we have to be undefeated to get any respect?

Listen, the media and Lundardi have been burned by the Rebels in the past. Coming off two embarrassing seasons, a couple of wins vs. mediocre name teams is not going to suddenly change everyone's perception. They just need to win, take care of business, and the rest will work itself out.

 

[MonsterJam]

Listen, the media and Lundardi have been burned by the Rebels in the past. Coming off two embarrassing seasons, a couple of wins vs. mediocre name teams is not going to suddenly change everyone's perception. They just need to win, take care of business, and the rest will work itself out.

This.

 

[rebelluver]

It is not a fact. As Joe tried to explain, if we beat UCLA, we play Kansas, and Kansas ain't no Indiana. To that, you accused him of what-ifs, to which I pointed out that your entire fallacious "undefeated" premise is a what-if.

There is no what if. Not in my post.

 

[rebelluver]

Listen, the media and Lundardi have been burned by the Rebels in the past. Coming off two embarrassing seasons, a couple of wins vs. mediocre name teams is not going to suddenly change everyone's perception. They just need to win, take care of business, and the rest will work itself out.

None of that should have any bearing on what the braecketology means. They don't pick teams based off of how they did in the past. They pick them based on the current season, and in this current season, based off of what happened so far, we should no doubt have been rated higher. And SDSU would most certainly not be in the tournament so it makes no sense.

 

[RebtillDeath]

Jesus everyones got their panties in a wad over brolacketology and rankings and yada yada in DECEMBER. Lmao u guys kill me

 

[rebelluver]

Or how about this. Next time somebody posts a thread about one in the future, nobody should comment on it. Because if you do, you show that you care about it when you shouldn't.

It is a message board. People discuss things. It is kind of the entire point. If you dont want to, or think it is meaningless, why are you here?