Bill Raftery says GU a sleeper in NYTimes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • lothar98zag
    PostPadder General
    • Feb 2007
    • 12370

    Bill Raftery says GU a sleeper in NYTimes

    Looks like GU is being "overlooked" by fewer an fewer experts this week...




    Hopefully the players don't revert back to how they were thinking after Orlando, the last time they were getting praise like this - speaking publicly about going undefeated, etc...
    .
    youtube - "The Runner"



    Foo Fantasy Football Champ 2013

    Dumbing down the internet, one post at a time

    Foo Fantasy Football Champ 2011
  • UberZagFan
    Zag for Life
    • Feb 2007
    • 8205

    #2
    Can a potential 4 seed be a "sleeper"? Hmm...maybe so. But it's not that rare that a 4 or below makes the final four....is it?
    If you can't handle the confusion, stay out of the Foo!

    Uber on GuBoards: "Pathetic. We've got posters just sleepwalking through threads."

    No Foo for You!

    Comment

    • Zag4Hire
      Zag for Life
      • Nov 2007
      • 3484

      #3
      Originally posted by UberZagFan View Post
      Can a potential 4 seed be a "sleeper"? Hmm...maybe so. But it's not that rare that a 4 or below makes the final four....is it?
      Lots of great info and history here: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...ayhem/history/

      Interesting note: The success of 10 seeds reaching the regional finals including Gonzaga in 1999 is pretty impressive.

      Seeds in the Final Four
      Year Seeds Teams
      2008 1, 1, 1, 1 Kansas, Memphis, North Carolina, UCLA
      2007 1, 1, 2, 2 Florida, Ohio State, Georgetown, UCLA
      2006 2, 3, 4, 11 UCLA, Florida, LSU, George Mason
      2005 1, 1, 4, 5 North Carolina, Illinois, Louisville, Michigan State
      2004 1, 2, 2, 3 Duke, Connecticut, Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech
      2003 1, 2, 3, 3 Texas, Kansas, Marquette, Syracuse
      2002 1, 1, 2, 5 Maryland, Kansas, Oklahoma, Indiana
      2001 1, 1, 2, 3 Duke, Michigan State, Arizona, Maryland
      2000 1, 5, 8, 8 Michigan State, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin
      1999 1, 1, 1, 4 Connecticut, Duke, Michigan State, Ohio State
      1998 1, 2, 3, 3 North Carolina, Kentucky, Stanford, Utah
      1997 1, 1, 1, 4 Kentucky, Minnesota, North Carolina, Arizona
      1996 1, 1, 4, 5 Kentucky, Massachusetts, Syracuse, Mississippi State
      1995 1, 2, 2, 4 UCLA, Arkansas, North Carolina, Oklahoma State
      1994 1, 2, 2, 3 Arkansas, Arizona, Duke, Florida
      1993 1, 1, 1, 2 North Carolina, Kentucky, Michigan, Kansas
      1992 1, 2, 4, 6 Duke, Indiana, Cincinnati, Michigan
      1991 1, 1, 2, 3 UNLV, North Carolin, Duke, Kansas
      1990 1, 3, 4, 4 UNLV, Duke, Georgia Tech, Arkansas
      1989 1, 2, 3, 3 Illinois, Duke, Seton Hall, Michigan
      1988 1, 1, 2, 6 Arizona, Oklahoma, Duke, Kansas
      1987 1, 1, 2, 6 UNLV, Indiana, Syracuse, Providence
      1986 1, 1, 2, 11 Duke, Kansas, Louisville, LSU
      1985 1, 1, 2, 8 St. John's, Georgetown, Memphis, Villanova
      1984 1, 1, 2, 7 Kentucky, Georgetown, Houston, Virginia
      1983 1, 1, 4, 6 Houston, Louisville, Georgia, N.C. State
      1982 1, 1, 3, 6 North Carolina, Georgetown, Louisville, Houston
      1981 1, 1, 2, 3 Virginia, LSU, North Carolina, Indiana
      1980 2, 5, 6, 8 Louisville, Iowa, Purdue, UCLA
      1979 1, 2, 2, 9 Indiana State, Michigan State, DePaul, Pennsylvania
      IF YOU WANT A THING DONE WELL, DO IT YOURSELF. -NAPOLEON BONAPARTE

      Comment

      • UberZagFan
        Zag for Life
        • Feb 2007
        • 8205

        #4
        So in the last 10 years, 9 out of 40 FF teams were seeded 4 or lower and that includes the fluke year of 2000 where a 5 and 2 8s made it. Doing the quick math, that's about a 1 in 4 chance, or in other words 25%. That's not too bad. Unless you look at it the other way: 1-3 seeds have a 75% chance of making it.
        If you can't handle the confusion, stay out of the Foo!

        Uber on GuBoards: "Pathetic. We've got posters just sleepwalking through threads."

        No Foo for You!

        Comment

        • MDABE80
          Zag for Life
          • Feb 2007
          • 11555

          #5
          Great list. Thanx for posting it. Sorta puts thingsin perspective regarding how amazing the 99 team was. Just 1 possession and a few ticks and we woul dhave beenin the FF. This present team should get there with a bit of luck. Looks to me like they've finally grown a heart. Looks like they believe they should win. This matters. Get tough guys.....

          Comment

          • krozman
            Zag for Life
            • Feb 2008
            • 2076

            #6
            Any team projected by seeding to make the sweet 16 can't be a sleeper IMO.

            KROZMAN'S RANKINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED IN ALL FUTURE DISCUSSIONS!

            Seeds 1-4: Non Sleeper. Competitor for National Champion.
            5 seed: "Sleeper" to lose to a 12 seed.
            6-9: Traditional "Sleeper" to make a deep run to final 4.
            10-13: Cinderella definition applies post sweet 16.
            14-16: Cinderella definition applies with any win.
            Krozman
            GU student 1996-2000
            Law Student 2000-2003

            Comment

            • MotoZag
              Kennel Club Material
              • Feb 2009
              • 113

              #7
              Rafferty also likes Oklahoma, which incidentally makes me disregard anything he could say. Oklahoma is an overhyped BCS school that is in a conference a little better than the Big 12. There are several individually talented players in the the Big 10, but not one of the teams will make the Elite 8 imo. I know it's a stern opinion, but I've watched 20-25 games involving the these schools and am not impressed really. Kansas has the best shot to go deep.
              Last edited by MotoZag; 03-13-2009, 09:15 PM.

              Comment

              • JohnOGU
                Professional Zag Fan
                • Feb 2008
                • 639

                #8
                Originally posted by MotoZag View Post
                Rafferty also likes Oklahoma, which incidentally makes me disregard anything he could say. Oklahoma is an overhyped BCS school that is in a conference a little better than the Big 10. There are several individually talented players in the the Big 10, but not one of the teams will make the Elite 8 imo. I know it's a stern opinion, but I've watched 20-25 games involving the these schools and am not impressed really. Kansas has the best shot to go deep.
                I agree with you on the Big12, however i do think Missouri is the team that has the best chance of doing something. Oklahoma and Kansas have been over-rated all year in my opinion. I feel that rankings and such have been determined off of teams that have one really good player. St. Mary's being the prime example.

                Comment

                • MotoZag
                  Kennel Club Material
                  • Feb 2009
                  • 113

                  #9
                  Originally posted by JohnOGU View Post
                  I agree with you on the Big12, however i do think Missouri is the team that has the best chance of doing something. Oklahoma and Kansas have been over-rated all year in my opinion. I feel that rankings and such have been determined off of teams that have one really good player. St. Mary's being the prime example.
                  I seem to have had a memory lapse, because I agree with you about Missouri. I only go for a team like Kansas because they remind me of our guys, which I'm not sure why of yet. With St. Mary's, another agreement, but I think Simpson could be a starter with solid minutes at any school. Samhan is just opportunistic and feeds off of Simpson's play with rebounds and dishes. Put him alone in the paint and he looks like a lost puppy.

                  Also, I followed the link and Raftery toned down his Gonzaga prediction quite a bit by simply saying that we have potential, more or less. After all of the comments he had earlier today with people denouncing him as any kind of analyst and that he should "stick to football", they took all of the comments off.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X