Houston’s Final Four Path

[SotaHawk87]

Not that they can do anything about it but..

15 seed
10 seed
11 seed
12 seed

This tournament involves a good chunk of luck and that’s why I love it!

 

[hawkifann]

In another thread, I looked back at Iowa‘s tourney history going back to Raveling. In 19 tournaments over 35 years Iowa has never really played above seed (if you take 7/10, 8/9 and 4/5 games as toss-ups). Part of this is that they’ve never run into a path like this. There are one or two teams that go deep every year that has a path like this.

 

[fezzador]

And how many of those double-digit seeds can Iowa reliably beat in a one-game, loser-goes-home scenario? Cleveland State probably, but Rutgers (yeah we've beaten them twice but it's still not easy beating the same team 3 times in one season), Syracuse and Oregon State, based on tournament performance, should give one pause.

And I don't think Iowa beating 11-seed Drake is a given, FWIW.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

A team in the Final Four that should have lost to Rutgers. Maddening.

 

[Fran-Con-2]

Not that they can do anything about it but..

15 seed
10 seed
11 seed
12 seed

This tournament involves a good chunk of luck and that’s why I love it!

I know finding any justification for Iowa's loss is like polishing a turd, but hear me out on this:

Iowa's loss is definitely better than Ohio State's crap-fest to Oral Roberts. Also, is Iowa's loss much worse than Alabama's to UCLA? Iowa got blown out by the Pac-12 champion in the round of 32 whereas Alabama lost to a Pac-12 team that snuck into the tournament. Of course Alabama lost in the sweet sixteen, but mostly because they got to play Maryland in the round of 32, a team that we previously destroyed on the road.

Alabama is probably seen as a success since they went to the sweet sixteen, but that could have easily been Iowa were it not for the worst draw of any 2 seed. Houston, with the easiest draw, cake-walks into the final four.

Again, no excuse for Iowa's loss. If you're going to beat your chest and talk about going to a final four all year then you have to beat a team like Oregon. But it is fair to point out the immense amount of luck some teams face.

 

[Jizzer]

And how many of those double-digit seeds can Iowa reliably beat in a one-game, loser-goes-home scenario? Cleveland State probably, but Rutgers (yeah we've beaten them twice but it's still not easy beating the same team 3 times in one season), Syracuse and Oregon State, based on tournament performance, should give one pause.

And I don't think Iowa beating 11-seed Drake is a given, FWIW.

We've beaten Rutgers twice, why would we now lose? Weird take man.

 

[Titanhawk2]

And with all the upsets and turmoil of this year, after tonight we could still get #1, #1, #1 and #2 in the final four

 

[bozotheclown]

I blame Jamie Pollard!

 

[SotaHawk87]

We've beaten Rutgers twice, why would we now lose? Weird take man.

It’s always funny that peoples rationale that you can’t beat a team a third time is because you’ve already beat them twice haha.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

Not going to look but it seems like Michigan St has had some good luck to their final fours. I could be wrong

 

[HawkRugged17]

It’s always funny that peoples rationale that you can’t beat a team a third time is because you’ve already beat them twice haha.

Just ask Wisconsin ...

 

[HawkLogic]

I know finding any justification for Iowa's loss is like polishing a turd, but hear me out on this:

Iowa's loss is definitely better than Ohio State's crap-fest to Oral Roberts. Also, is Iowa's loss much worse than Alabama's to UCLA? Iowa got blown out by the Pac-12 champion in the round of 32 whereas Alabama lost to a Pac-12 team that snuck into the tournament. Of course Alabama lost in the sweet sixteen, but mostly because they got to play Maryland in the round of 32, a team that we previously destroyed on the road.

Alabama is probably seen as a success since they went to the sweet sixteen, but that could have easily been Iowa were it not for the worst draw of any 2 seed. Houston, with the easiest draw, cake-walks into the final four.

Again, no excuse for Iowa's loss. If you're going to beat your chest and talk about going to a final four all year then you have to beat a team like Oregon. But it is fair to point out the immense amount of luck som

I don't think it is a given that Iowa would have beaten Oral Roberts. Oral Roberts two stars are both better NBA prospects than Iowa's two stars Garza and Weezy. The other 3 iowa starters look non-imposing. WE had non-factor CMAC, injured Fredrick, and smallish/slowish JBO. Those three are not clearly better than the other 3 Oral Roberts starters when you look at offense and defense.

Rutgers played Houston tough but I'm not sure Iowa would have faired as well. Houston plays defense and they have some studs.

Earlier in season it was debated whether Iowa with a highly efficient offense but terrible defense could make noise in the NCAA tourney. I think that question was answered emphatically. The Iowa offense also got exposed and turned out to be not as elite as Kenpom said, mainly because Iowa lacked guys that could score off the bounce.

 

[Jizzer]

I don't think it is a given that Iowa would have beaten Oral Roberts. Oral Roberts two stars are both better NBA prospects than Iowa's two stars Garza and Weezy. The other 3 iowa starters look non-imposing. WE had non-factor CMAC, injured Fredrick, and smallish/slowish JBO. Those three are not clearly better than the other 3 Oral Roberts starters when you look at offense and defense.

Rutgers played Houston tough but I'm not sure Iowa would have faired as well. Houston plays defense and they have some studs.

Earlier in season it was debated whether Iowa with a highly efficient offense but terrible defense could make noise in the NCAA tourney. I think that question was answered emphatically. The Iowa offense also got exposed and turned out to be not as elite as Kenpom said, mainly because Iowa lacked guys that could score off the bounce.

You're not even arguing what he was arguing. He was simply stating losing first round to a 15 was worse than losing to Oregon. Whether we could beat Oral Roberts or not, has nothing to do with it. The rest, I blame on your day drinking.

 

[Hawkeye Marching Band]

I don't think it is a given that Iowa would have beaten Oral Roberts. Oral Roberts two stars are both better NBA prospects than Iowa's two stars Garza and Weezy. The other 3 iowa starters look non-imposing. WE had non-factor CMAC, injured Fredrick, and smallish/slowish JBO. Those three are not clearly better than the other 3 Oral Roberts starters when you look at offense and defense.

Rutgers played Houston tough but I'm not sure Iowa would have faired as well. Houston plays defense and they have some studs.

Earlier in season it was debated whether Iowa with a highly efficient offense but terrible defense could make noise in the NCAA tourney. I think that question was answered emphatically. The Iowa offense also got exposed and turned out to be not as elite as Kenpom said, mainly because Iowa lacked guys that could score off the bounce.

If Ohio State had shot better than 50% from the line, then ORU goes down in round one and nobody is talking about them. For the season OSU shot 76.3%.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

I don't think it is a given that Iowa would have beaten Oral Roberts. Oral Roberts two stars are both better NBA prospects than Iowa's two stars Garza and Weezy. The other 3 iowa starters look non-imposing. WE had non-factor CMAC, injured Fredrick, and smallish/slowish JBO. Those three are not clearly better than the other 3 Oral Roberts starters when you look at offense and defense.

Rutgers played Houston tough but I'm not sure Iowa would have faired as well. Houston plays defense and they have some studs.

Earlier in season it was debated whether Iowa with a highly efficient offense but terrible defense could make noise in the NCAA tourney. I think that question was answered emphatically. The Iowa offense also got exposed and turned out to be not as elite as Kenpom said, mainly because Iowa lacked guys that could score off the bounce.

Oral Roberts had no one that could guard Garza. I watched them multiple times this year.

If f***ing Oregon, even being undersized, barely kept Garza from getting 40, then Oral Roberts wasn't gonna do any better.

 

[fezzador]

Oral Roberts had no one that could guard Garza. I watched them multiple times this year.

If f***ing Oregon, even being undersized, barely kept Garza from getting 40, then Oral Roberts wasn't gonna do any better.

That's the thing, Oregon's rationale was "let Garza do his thing, but try to make the rest of the team try and beat us".

That worked to perfection.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

That's the thing, Oregon's rationale was "let Garza do his thing, but try to make the rest of the team try and beat us".

That worked to perfection.

They also started doing a much better job in the 2nd half of not only denying Garza the ball inside, but also putting much more pressure on our guards/wings to deny the post feed as well.

 

[kceasthawk]

It’s always funny that peoples rationale that you can’t beat a team a third time is because you’ve already beat them twice haha.

Ask Bucky badger about that.......

 

[Fran-Con-2]

That's the thing, Oregon's rationale was "let Garza do his thing, but try to make the rest of the team try and beat us".

That worked to perfection.

If by "worked to perfection" you mean give up 80 points, then yea that gameplan was out of this world.

I am a little perplexed why people are still acting like Iowa's offense lost that game.

 

[Rambler Hawk]

I know finding any justification for Iowa's loss is like polishing a turd, but hear me out on this:

Iowa's loss is definitely better than Ohio State's crap-fest to Oral Roberts. Also, is Iowa's loss much worse than Alabama's to UCLA? Iowa got blown out by the Pac-12 champion in the round of 32 whereas Alabama lost to a Pac-12 team that snuck into the tournament. Of course Alabama lost in the sweet sixteen, but mostly because they got to play Maryland in the round of 32, a team that we previously destroyed on the road.

Alabama is probably seen as a success since they went to the sweet sixteen, but that could have easily been Iowa were it not for the worst draw of any 2 seed. Houston, with the easiest draw, cake-walks into the final four.

Again, no excuse for Iowa's loss. If you're going to beat your chest and talk about going to a final four all year then you have to beat a team like Oregon. But it is fair to point out the immense amount of luck some teams face.

not sure about the UCLA compare, they sure looked the part of a possible #2 (or #1?!?) seed!!! haha - jk

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

If by "worked to perfection" you mean give up 80 points, then yea that gameplan was out of this world.

I am a little perplexed why people are still acting like Iowa's offense lost that game.

Pretty much the Michigan gameplay when Garza put up 44 in Ann Arbor.