• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Seeding

Gaeilge1 said:
It appears that the Committee was so intent on a rematch with Michigan that once they decided on Michigan as a number 2, our fate was sealed!

It wasn't going to matter whether we deserved a better seed. If Michigan had been a 3, we would have been a 14!

I think this is false.
 
grizindabox said:
Gaeilge1 said:
It appears that the Committee was so intent on a rematch with Michigan that once they decided on Michigan as a number 2, our fate was sealed!

It wasn't going to matter whether we deserved a better seed. If Michigan had been a 3, we would have been a 14!

I think this is false.

No, I’m sure they based the whole tournament on this rematch. :roll:
 
rocklobster said:
grizindabox said:
Gaeilge1 said:
It appears that the Committee was so intent on a rematch with Michigan that once they decided on Michigan as a number 2, our fate was sealed!

It wasn't going to matter whether we deserved a better seed. If Michigan had been a 3, we would have been a 14!

I think this is false.

No, I’m sure they based the whole tournament on this rematch. :roll:

:lol: :lol:
 
A 15 seed just further shows me that the Big Sky “should” move the tournament back to the regular season champs to host to help give the top seed the best chance to make it to the dance.

If anyone else who isn’t the #1 Big Sky seed ends up winning the tournament, there’s no way they get anything but the #16 seed.
 
get'em_griz said:
A 15 seed just further shows me that the Big Sky “should” move the tournament back to the regular season champs to host to help give the top seed the best chance to make it to the dance.

If anyone else who isn’t the #1 Big Sky seed ends up winning the tournament, there’s no way they get anything but the #16 seed.

It shows me that the BSC has to get better at basketball. Actually win some OOC games against teams that matter.
 
grizindabox said:
get'em_griz said:
A 15 seed just further shows me that the Big Sky “should” move the tournament back to the regular season champs to host to help give the top seed the best chance to make it to the dance.

If anyone else who isn’t the #1 Big Sky seed ends up winning the tournament, there’s no way they get anything but the #16 seed.
It shows me that the BSC has to get better at basketball. Actually win some OOC games against teams that matter.
Exactly.
 
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
Stay in the Big Sky, get use to 15 seedings!

Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?
Box, of course, no guarantee. Yes, the Mountain West would get more respect than the Big Sky. I know, I know UM is broke and we can’t make a change. Also there isn’t a future in a conference that seems to be touted by Payton.
 
Spanky2 said:
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
Stay in the Big Sky, get use to 15 seedings!

Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?
Box, of course, no guarantee. Yes, the Mountain West would get more respect than the Big Sky. I know, I know UM is broke and we can’t make a change. Also there isn’t a future in a conference that seems to be touted by Payton.

PAC12 would be great also, and probably just as likely as the MWC. Apparently there is something cooking with "The Summit" though
 
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
Stay in the Big Sky, get use to 15 seedings!

Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?

I would have 20 years ago. That would have been, when we surely could have, to join the WAC, which then pretty much became the Mountain West, which is where we should be. But that ship sailed long ago. So what was great for football has become not so great for basketball.
 
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
Stay in the Big Sky, get use to 15 seedings!

Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?
Box, of course, no guarantee. Yes, the Mountain West would get more respect than the Big Sky. I know, I know UM is broke and we can’t make a change. Also there isn’t a future in a conference that seems to be touted by Payton.

PAC12 would be great also, and probably just as likely as the MWC. Apparently there is something cooking with "The Summit" though
Summit would be the kiss of death.
 
Spanky2 said:
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
grizindabox said:
Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?
Box, of course, no guarantee. Yes, the Mountain West would get more respect than the Big Sky. I know, I know UM is broke and we can’t make a change. Also there isn’t a future in a conference that seems to be touted by Payton.

PAC12 would be great also, and probably just as likely as the MWC. Apparently there is something cooking with "The Summit" though
Summit would be the kiss of death.

UNDfan would disagree.
 
citay said:
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
Stay in the Big Sky, get use to 15 seedings!

Do you have a conference suggestion that will guarantee better than 15 seeds?

I would have 20 years ago. That would have been, when we surely could have, to join the WAC, which then pretty much became the Mountain West, which is where we should be. But that ship sailed long ago. So what was great for football has become not so great for basketball.
They say you are judged by the company you keep. UM is judged by keeping the company of other Big Sky schools. Some look at UM as a small college school or perhaps division2 by virtue of our FCS membership in football. Does this influence the way we are regarded in basketball? I believe the answer is yes.
 
grizindabox said:
get'em_griz said:
A 15 seed just further shows me that the Big Sky “should” move the tournament back to the regular season champs to host to help give the top seed the best chance to make it to the dance.

If anyone else who isn’t the #1 Big Sky seed ends up winning the tournament, there’s no way they get anything but the #16 seed.

It shows me that the BSC has to get better at basketball. Actually win some OOC games against teams that matter.

Yep. And in the Griz’s case, more than one.
 
I thought for sure, the GRIZ would be a 14 seed. Had we even split with PSU, beaten Irvine or GA Southern, the GRIZ would have been a 13 or 14 seed. Had they not lost to PSU at all, and beat both Irvine and GSU, a 12 seed would have been likely. I didn't expect the GRIZ to beat Creighton, but it sure would have helped immensely. I don't agree with a 15 seed.
 
grizindabox said:
get'em_griz said:
A 15 seed just further shows me that the Big Sky “should” move the tournament back to the regular season champs to host to help give the top seed the best chance to make it to the dance.

If anyone else who isn’t the #1 Big Sky seed ends up winning the tournament, there’s no way they get anything but the #16 seed.

It shows me that the BSC has to get better at basketball. Actually win some OOC games against teams that matter.

No comment more accurate than this one!!! Well said.

Fans that mentioned 13 or truly believed a 14 would happen should follow suite and improve their abilities on being a realist. Although it would have been nice sneaking in as a 14 and meeting Purdue for our best chance at an upset, drawing Michigan is our next best opportunity between the eight 2 and 3 seeds. Past the X's & 0's, at no point did Michigan want this matchup. Not having a player with the game changing ability like Wagner from last year along with not being the hottest team in the NCAA riding a 9 game win streak in to the game makes last years scare that much more concerning than it already was to them.
 
Back
Top