The Fran fade

You are correct. I picked up the AP ranking off of NET which shows the AP as of 3/2. NET and Kenpom remain unchanged which is more important for seeding. I believe the committee relies more on the analytical rankings than they do on the AP.
Oh yeah I think so too. I don't think Iowa's seeding changed from last week (still around that 6-7 line), but if Iowa ends up losing to Minnesota I think that could kick them to the 7-8 line. My money's on the last 6 seed is where they'll end up but anything can happen.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CyPunch
You are correct. I picked up the AP ranking off of NET which shows the AP as of 3/2. NET and Kenpom remain unchanged which is more important for seeding. I believe the committee relies more on the analytical rankings than they do on the AP.

Coaches poll also has the hoks at #25, but hold on to that Kenpom rating.
 
Oh yeah I think so too. I don't think Iowa's seeding changed from last week (still around that 6-7 line), but if Iowa ends up losing to Minnesota I think that could kick them to the 7-8 line. My money's on the last 6 seed is where they'll end up but anything can happen.

Unless they win 2 in the BTT (lol I know) they're a 7 seed. Lose to the bottom seed team in the BTT they're on the 8/9 line
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: breck53
Oh yeah I think so too. I don't think Iowa's seeding changed from last week (still around that 6-7 line), but if Iowa ends up losing to Minnesota I think that could kick them to the 7-8 line. My money's on the last 6 seed is where they'll end up but anything can happen.
Mike Decourcy made a good point last night that may or may not hold true but he said that the selection committee in his eyes would really like to avoid putting Iowa on the 8-9 line and force a #1 seed to potentially face a player like Garza the 1st weekend. If Wieskamp and Fredrick don't play better it's not going to matter imo.
 
Unless they win 2 in the BTT (lol I know) they're a 7 seed. Lose to the bottom seed team in the BTT they're on the 8/9 line
Yeah I don't know if they'd be a 9 seed, but I don't think it matters if you get a 9 or an 8.
 

Even though the committee has basically went chalk with NET since it became the statistical tool of choice?
 
Mike Decourcy made a good point last night that may or may not hold true but he said that the selection committee in his eyes would really like to avoid putting Iowa on the 8-9 line and force a #1 seed to potentially face a player like Garza the 1st weekend. If Wieskamp and Fredrick don't play better it's not going to matter imo.
Yeah I mean if Iowa beats Minnesota, they essentially lock up a 7 seed at the worst. If they lose, the only people making a case for Iowa to not be an 8 seed are going to be the Iowa team and their fans.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CyPunch
Yeah I mean if Iowa beats Minnesota, they essentially lock up a 7 seed at the worst. If they lose, the only people making a case for Iowa to not be an 8 seed are going to be the Iowa team and their fans.

If they lose to Illinois, especially by double digits the 8 seed is still in play
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: breck53
Mike Decourcy made a good point last night that may or may not hold true but he said that the selection committee in his eyes would really like to avoid putting Iowa on the 8-9 line and force a #1 seed to potentially face a player like Garza the 1st weekend. If Wieskamp and Fredrick don't play better it's not going to matter imo.

I think I mentioned this a couple of weeks ago about Wieskamp's regression, but a certain banned troll that was on his like 6+ username refuted it. He just does not seem in the flow of the games.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JP4CY

Help Support Us

Become a patron