I’m sick and tired of seeing this defense give up alley-oops!

Shot way too cold in the second half.

He’s in a hurry to get the job done and drive the getaway out of there.

Miller is absolutely murdering us.

Alabama is just really talented. Super long, very athletic, and Oats is a dynamic new-age coach.

They're better than Mizzou, but I thought the Tigers played really, really well today.

If Isaiah Mosely can get his mind right enough to play in the NCAA tournament, Mizzou could shock some folks. I hope they've played well enough to get on a 6/7 line.

Brandon Miller might be a bad dude with extremely bad judgment (or maybe just kind of an idiot with bad judgment), but he's an incredibly talented basketball player. Super complete player and a cheat code at that size.

Mizzou a 7 seed in the south, starting against Utah State. Arizona the 2 seed assuming that they beat Utah State

How does Iowa State get a 6 seed with a 19-13 season?? That's 4 less wins that Mizzou. SMH

Texas A&M is a 7 seed as well.

Glad Mizzou avoided being an 8/9 seed, but they were definately given a lower seed than they should have gotten.

What a horse shit seed. 6 was the bare god damn minimum we should have gotten.

Tennessee with a 4 seed. What a load of crap. MU had the same record and beat the twice.

Tennessee a 4 seed and Missouri a 7.

What an absolute **** job.

I haven't seen anything about Arizona. Assuming that they don't blow it against Utah State, how does our squad match up against them?

Tennessee has WAY better wins than Mizzou does.

They beat Kansas and Alabama.

They also have 3 quad 2 losses and lost to Mizzou both times they played. Missouri finished 4th in the SEC, Ten 5th. Tennessee had 1 more quad 1 win.

How is Tennessee 3 spots ahead of Missouri? Missouri should have been a 6 at bare minimum, but a 5 is what they should have been.

I do think Mizzou can actually do some damage and they can definitely beat Alabama if we made it to that point.

If we can just hit 40% from 3, then we have a chance to beat pretty much anyone. Just can't go 5-25 from 3.

The Kansas win was early in the season....The Alabama win was good but it was at home so not all that surprising.

The Committee always talks about "its how a team finished the season" when they talk about seeding along with records".

Tennessee lost 5 of their last 8 with 3 of those to Vanderbilt, Mizzou and Auburn. Then lost to Mizzou in the SEC tourney.

Tennessee should be closer to a 5 or 6 seed based on how they've played the last month but you can't just ignore beating Kansas and Alabama. They also beat Maryland.

For reference, Mizzou's best non-conference win is Illinois (and a 16 seed SEMO that won it's conference tournament).

Additionally, Tennessee's PG tore his ACL less than 2 weeks ago AND the committee basically reiterated that the conference tournament does not mean shit. I don't see how you can advocate for Mizzou to have a higher seed when A&M got ****ed way worse based on conference play and going further in the conference tournament.

Mizzou should have MAYBE been a 6 seed over Iowa St, but that's about it.

Seed aside, Utah State is a tough potential matchup. They shoot a lot of 3s and shoot them well... 39 percent from downtown on the season.

I think Mizzou did enough to get on the 6 line but was expecting the 7. I think the whole NET system has some flaws. Primarily the way it hammers teams for a team being the 300th best team instead of the 200th best. Kind of silly.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The official NCAA 1-68 seed list: <a href="https://t.co/fuiHCGbLrK">pic.twitter.com/fuiHCGbLrK</a></p>&mdash; Jeff Borzello (@jeffborzello) <a href="https://twitter.com/jeffborzello/status/1635055135310352385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 12, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

First, injuries are part of the normal part of adversity all teams face. I truly doubt the committee really does give as much weight in injuries as they say...more just smoke and mirrors.

I am not advocating Mizzou being a much higher seed, maybe a 6th. What I find hard to swallow is any explanation that TN should be a 4 seed after losing 5 of their last 8 games, and then losing to MU again in the SEC tournament. And I also don't buy that thecommittee doesn't pay attention to the league tourneys regardless if what they say. How else would you explain Michigan State making the NCAA tournament with an 18-12 record?

The committee head went on TV and excused Houston’s performance to Memphis today because one of their players was hurt.


And regarding Michigan St: because they don’t have any terrible losses and a bunch of average to above average wins as well as 2 losses to Gonzaga and Alabama in non-conference play.

Where has the selection committee said that conference tournaments don't matter? They clearly do. KU would have been the #1 overall seed if they either win the Big 12 tourney or if Alabama loses the SEC tournament.

Beating a top 25 team in your conference tournament doesn't increase your resume because it's a win in a conference tournament? That makes no sense. So no tournaments matter for seeding or just the conference one?

Iowa State shouldn't have a higher seed than MU. Say all you want about Ten, but they should not be 3 seeds higher than Missouri. Also Missouri beat Tennessee when they had their PG and they beat Tennessee when they didn't have their PG.

Your saying Texas AM can gripe about there seed because of the way they played in the conf tournament, but the conference tournament doesn't matter. Those ****s had 2 Quad 4 losses. Missouri has much more to complain about than Texas A&M. They lost to Murray State, a team that finished 7th in the MVC and Wofford a team that finished 5th in the Southern. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Go the 50 second mark for the committee head's decision to put Houston over Kansas:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">NCAA Selection Committee Chair Chris Reynolds explains why Houston was kept at No. 2 over Kansas. <a href="https://t.co/YrmUXOFzba">pic.twitter.com/YrmUXOFzba</a></p>&mdash; CBS Sports College Basketball �� (@CBSSportsCBB) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSSportsCBB/status/1635049723575894019?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 12, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

A&M went 12-6 vs Quad 1 and 2 teams. Mizzou went 10-9.

A&M (deservedly) was punished for their non-conference schedule even though they had more impressive wins in the SEC and beat the best team in the nation.

Mizzou has some nice wins but no great wins if you're going to argue beating Tennessee doesn't mean shit since Tennessee, per your words, should have had a lower seed than Mizzou.

Yeah I heard his silly explanation....more rationalization than anything else.

And giving kudos to someone who didn't have any terrible losses and average wins is like awarding Participation Trophies/Ribbons.

The italicized is what happens when you have a tournament that has 68 teams with 32 spots sealed by automatic qualifiers.

Same shit as it ever was. Mizzou goes 4-0 against Kentucky, Tennessee, and Iowa State, has no Q3 or Q4 losses, and ends up seeded lower than all of them because the committee and the metrics always work backwards from a predetermined conclusion.

Quad 1 wins are all that matter, except when they don't

Quad 3 and 4 losses matter, except when they don't.

It's better to lose a bunch of noncon games against teams with high preseason rankings than to beat tournament teams.

Kenpom has Ohio State ranked higher than Mizzou. NET thinks 13 loss Iowa and 14 loss Rutgers are above Mizzou when Mizzou beat their #4 team twice, including on the road and a neutral site.

These metrics flatly do not work and they've never worked.

Always like being the dog
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Spreads for the local schools <a href="https://twitter.com/FDSportsbook?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@FDSportsbook</a> <br><br>K-State (-8.5) Montana St.<br>KU (-21.5) Howard<br>Utah State (-2.5) Mizzou<a href="https://twitter.com/610SportsKC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@610SportsKC</a> <a href="https://t.co/zEWF5VLlV0">pic.twitter.com/zEWF5VLlV0</a></p>&mdash; Alex Gold (@AlexGold) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlexGold/status/1635086250234503170?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 13, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Mizzou lucky to get in the big dance as high as they did, better stay happy for what they got and maybe they get lucky and win a game maybe 2. Anybody upset over where it shook out is delusional.

That's the dumbest shit I've ever read. There was nothing lucky about them making the tourney and what an absolutely disrespectful little bitch thing to say. Gates worked his ass off recruiting and coaching and these kids worked there asses off to be as good as they are.

Go **** yourself with that better be happy and lucky bullshit.

I would put some coin down on MU on this one. If only the state would get with the program and allow betting.

I'll take "Things a Beaker Would Say" for $1,000 Alex.

NET is a complete pile of shit system and anyone who suggests otherwise is selling something.

He's a former MU guy that despises the university since that Concerned Student 1950 fiasco.

Overvalues road wins against mediocre to bad teams. See #1 Houston this year, whose entire season and schedule basically consisted of that.

Itd be much better if they didn't arbitrarily decide that certain quad 4 wins were more valuable than other quad 4 wins. If you are going to break down wins into "quads", then all of the wins or losses in that certain quad should be the same value. Break the first 2 quads into more groups so that beating number 1 isn't the same as number 50.

Looking up Utah State NCAA tournament history, they are 6-24 overall.

In 1970 made the elite eight and lost to UCLA in regional final.

Starting with that game, Utah State is 1-19 in NCAA tournament in their last 20 games with only win being in 2001 when they won #12 v. #5 over Ohio State in OT. Then lost to UCLA in round of 32.

And a total butt ****ing moron. Don't forget that part.

Utah State: Good at shooting 3s, plays pretty well.

Utah State: turns the ball over a bit, not great at rebounding, not very deep.

This is ridiculous

Teams with 6+ Quad 1 wins and ZERO Quad 2, 3, or 4 losses this season:

Alabama - 1 seed
kansas - 1 seed
Texas - 2 seed
UCLA - 2 seed
Baylor - 3 seed
Missouri - 7 seed

I included the quad 1 records

Mizzou played a dog shit out of conference schedule and their best win was Tennessee. Kansas and Alabama boat raced them at Mizzou Arena. Mizzou had no bad losses but they didn't have any really good wins either.

For example:
Tennessee beat Kansas, Alabama, and Texas
Iowa State beat Kansas and Texas

You make a case for Mizzou over Kentucky, but Kentucky did play a better OOC schedule and did finish higher in SEC standings 3 vs 4.

Mizzou looks to be seeded about right. They maybe could have been a sixth seed but seventh seems right.

They beat the shit out of Iowa St
They beat Tennessee twice
They beat 6 top 25 teams
They finished 4th in the SEC
They finished the season 24-9
No bad losses

They should have been a 5.

San Diego St got a 5 seed. Justify them over MU.

Q1 5-5 (3 wins against Utah St.)
Q2 6-1
Q3 13-0
Q4 2-0


St. Marys got a 5 seed justify them over Mizzou.

Q1 2-3
Q2 7-2
Q3 11-2
Q4 5-0

The fact St. Marys was seeded higher is an absolute joke.

Miami got a 5 and look at that. Mizzou had a better resume.

Q1 5-5
Q2 6-0
Q3 7-1
Q4 7-1

Duke even got a 5 with a worse resume than MU.

Q1 - 5-6
Q2 - 7-2
Q3 - 4-0
Q4 - 10-0

Every single 5 seed had a significantly worse resume than Mizzou. Come on explain how those teams deserved that ranking.

Prison Bitch?
Rams Fan?

Y'all wanna take a shot at bumbling through this explanation?

San Diego State - Mountain West champion
Duke - ACC Tournament Champion plus 3rd place in ACC
Miami - tied for first place ACC
Saint Mary's played a better non-conference schedule and finished second in WCC.

Well, I guess that MU will work out a better nonconference schedule next year that won't screw them so badly next year. I don't blame them for such a weak schedule. Martin would have been lucky to be above .509. and nobody expected Gates to turn the team around so quickly that the nonconference schedule would come back to bite them in tournament seeding.

Lol, so you got nothing and are talking out of your ass like you usually do in here.

Prison Bitch?
Rams Fan?

Wanna give this the old college try?

Chiefs Country and the honest chiefs guy whatever his name is. They put a weird amount of effort into commenting on Mizzou when they aren’t even fans. Not even ku fans do that. Obviously one of them is butthurt that smsu is irrelevant. The honest chiefs guy or whatever his name is pissed that we aren’t running the wing-t with a bunch of Missouri farm hands.

HonestChiefsFan is a hater and it's 100% politically driven. He's a DC guy through and through.

Already did. There’s a straight line between your quad 1 record & seeding. Since that’s what the tourney is, quad 1 matchups. There are no more gimmes:



https://y.yarn.co/c3dd2566-cc0c-47e7...ddc0c_text.gif

Missouri played in more and won more quad 1 matches than every single 5 seed. Mizzou had 0 losses outside of Q1 and all the 5s had at least 1 loss outside of Q1.

SMU - 2 in Q2 and 2 in Q3 while going 2-3 in Q1
Duke - 2 in Q2
SDSU - 1 in Q2
Miami - 1 in Q3 and 1 in Q4

So nope. That's not the reason.

I'm kind of getting tired of this arguing about seeding. We probably should have been seeded at least one spot higher, but we weren't. Time to move on.

It’s SMC by the way. So to compare Q1 and Pomeroy Rating

SMC 2-3 (11)
SDSU 2-5 (14)
Dook 1-4 (21)
Miami 0-2 (40)
Mizzou 2-6 (51)


I’m not seeing any reason for outrage here

I could give a more thorough answer, but whenever someone tries to present something that contradicts your thought process on this subject, it won't change your mind. So why bother?

Goalposts keep moving.

Some folks say it was our non-con and Q4 caliber wins. Others say it was Q1 overall record.

Ultimately they're just gonna keep shifting baselines to justify it. Mizzou should've been a 5 or 6 seed but spent the entire season fighting uphill.

I watch a ton of college basketball. I follow MVC, SEC and Big 12. Watch all of Missouri State, most of Mizzou and quite a few of KU games. I can't help it you can't take honest criticism.

Pomeroy 51
Sagarin 52


That’s not a 5 seed.

Oh so now it's Pomeroy rankings? Plus where is your Q1 record from?

Who gives a shit what Pomeroy says?

Rutgers was 35th in Pomeroy, Ok State was 38th, Oregon was 41. They didn't even make the tournament. The committee doesn't give a shit about Pomeroy or Sagarin rankings.

You'll have a high as shit Pomeroy if your in a shit conference, play a cupcake non-con and beat the shit out of teams.

Missouri has a SOS in the mid 30s to low 40s, so they played a good enough schedule even though the non con was relatively easy.

I don't care what some advanced stats says about the D, because that shouldn't have any bearing in seeding.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

You guys aren't changing each other's mind. Give it a rest. Please.

No one else is talking about anything else and it's not bleeding out into any other thread. Do you get thread notifications from this thread or something.

No, I just like to read any new comments when I see they have been posted. The last couple of days have been nothing but rehashing the same points over and over...and over.

My comments are as a Mizzou fan, not a mod, in case that's where you were going.

“Honest criticism.” Lol just like you were “honest” when you repeated ad nauseam that “Mizzou reneged on Mosley’s NIL deal!!!!111!” Even though everyone knew that wasn’t the case and Mizzou can’t make NIL deals anyway. You wanted so badly for that to be the case, as if it would somehow make SMSU more relevant. Lol.

My information came straight from a source with MoKan AAU program who is nails on information.

Except for that bit, where he was dead wrong.

Which is a good thing for Mizzou, given they’d be in the last 4 in via either system.

They use Q1 as their top criteria. If a team doesn’t distinguish itself there - and Mizzou 2-6 record didnt - they have to move to other metrics. SOS was in the 50s as well via both systems.


TLDR: there’s no data point that would suggest a 5 seed.

I don't get the head-to-head argument, either, since the committee put in a NC St. team that went 0-3 vs Clemson. All 3 losses were by double digits. Not saying Clemson deserved to be in (they had 2 bad Q4 losses and a shitty non-conference schedule), but point is that H2H doesn't mean much.

Granted, I think the selection process needs to be more subjective. Kansas being the #2 overall seed over Houston because they had more Q1 opportunities and Oklahoma St. missing because they didn't have as many Q1 wins relative to how many Q1 games they played is stupid logic.

You don't get the H2H argument when resumes are similar?

Really need Kobe in there. That big white dude is kicking the shit out of us in the post now that Brown is in foul trouble.

That mother ****er traveled before he passed it.

If you can't trust AAU sources, who can you trust?


The AAU is well know as being bastions of morality and truth.

Wtf? That wasn't a foul.

That guy was nails!!!! Never gave him a bad report, which I find hard to believe considering how completely idiotic this info was

I really don't like Sean East. I was expecting him to shoot that and brick it.

3-21 collectively from 3PT

Dude Dennis Gates out of a time out is ****ing money and Kobe Brown is just a ****ing stud with those passes.

Man. Utah State got a lot of whistles in that half because... they have awkward white dudes who flailed after regular contact.

The offensive foul on Kobe Brown was particularly bad to the eye, but I have no idea on the "correct" interpretation of that rule these days. To me, if you have a foot in the air and are moving, you are not capable of being in a legal guarding position while sliding with a driving offensive player, but... still

They also are clearly bothered by Mizzou's quickness and length advantages, despite what Seth Davis keeps saying.

Is Seth Davis doing the game or was he in the booth with Bilas? Bilas said the same thing about how Mizzou is the reason why Utah St isnt making 3s and some dude on the end said that all Utah St has to do is start making a few 3s and they'll win. Bilas told him he's such a media guy and Mizzou is the reason why they're missing those 3s.

Utah St only had 5 ****ing fouls. That's such horse shit.

And how about a ****ing over the back. Those mother****ers are constantly doing it.

Can’t make a shot.