Page 1 of 2
SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:48 pm
by Harry0569
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/colleg ... ?eref=sihpLast Four In
Virginia: RPI may not be a perfect measure, but the Cavaliers are 2-2 against the RPI top 50 and 6-4 against the top 100.
Saint Mary's: One of the strongest factors in favor of the Gaels is their win over Boise State, a team that is also squarely on the bubble.
California: The Golden Bears' win over Oregon last week is sufficient for now to get them into the dance, albeit in a play-in game. They'll need to fatten up on the state of Washington and USC before a four-game stretch in which they play UCLA, Arizona State, Arizona and Stanford.
SMU: While the Mustangs have struggled against the better competition they've played this season, their win over Connecticut and close losses to Virginia, Cincinnati and Louisville are enough to qualify.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 1:20 pm
by ojaipony
We need to go on a 6-0 run here. Then, I think it gets closer to a reality. Can't afford to drop more than 1 game to a "nobody" IMHO (USF, UCF, Rutgers) . . . those road games against those teams are going to be critical (won't be easy wins by any stretch).
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 2:03 pm
by smusportspage
Agree got to get some wins. Stay strong on those rebounds. That will keep us in games. Then, got to make some threes which will open up the under the basket shots. If we make the tourney this year that would really, really be awesome.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 2:46 pm
by mathman
ojaipony wrote:We need to go on a 6-0 run here. Then, I think it gets closer to a reality. Can't afford to drop more than 1 game to a "nobody" IMHO (USF, UCF, Rutgers) . . . those road games against those teams are going to be critical (won't be easy wins by any stretch).
I think this is spot on. I was looking at our schedule this morning and was thinking we needed to win the next six games if we want to stay in the conversation. I really believe we have a shot at home wins against Cincinnati, Memphis, and Lville. Need to get Frazier on track and have him be in double figures in most games.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:01 pm
by USF04
Does anyone else think he over rates the Big 12? He puts 4 of the 10 teams as top 4 seeds!
Shouldn't we have a couple more?
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:51 pm
by Mustangs_Maroons
I'm still upset about the Virginia loss. Still largely the refs for the ticky-tack calls against us that I believe cost us that game in a neural sight. Losing close games to cincy and lousiville can be made up by beating cincy and potentially UL at home. I don't think either of those 2 teams showed they were clearly better.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:54 pm
by SMU 86
USF04 wrote:Does anyone else think he over rates the Big 12? He puts 4 of the 10 teams as top 4 seeds!
Shouldn't we have a couple more?
What can we expect from USF tomorrow?
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:56 pm
by Rebel10
USF04, could you give us a scouting report on your USF hoops team?
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 5:12 pm
by gostangs
One at a time obviously, but Houston away could be as hard as Memphis here. Lets start with knocking off the next three - and see how we go. If we get Yannick back healthy by Memphis at home, then that would obviously REALLY help - but until he is back I think we are on the edge on every game. Not that he is that dominant - we just need the depth there to give us more options when playing anyone of value.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 5:38 pm
by USF04
In my opinion, we can win if we make you turn the ball over and keep the rebounding margin close.
That said, I'm thinking we lose in Dallas but beat you here
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 6:13 pm
by Mustangs_Maroons
USF has no chance against us at home. If we lose to them, we're screwed. They don't have a single decent victory yet.
per game:
pts- #240
rebounds: #109
assists: #173
fg %: #146
pts- #165
rebounds: #39
assists: #37
fg %: #13
Guess which team is which? We will beat them. If we limit the turnovers, it will easily be by double digits.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:01 pm
by mustang1992
Mustangs_Maroons wrote:I'm still upset about the Virginia loss. Still largely the refs for the ticky-tack calls against us that I believe cost us that game in a neural sight. Losing close games to cincy and lousiville can be made up by beating cincy and potentially UL at home. I don't think either of those 2 teams showed they were clearly better.
Definitely agree with this here. None of these teams, in the end, showed they were clearly better.
I've also appreciated Russell's attitude, he's been working hard I think.
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:43 pm
by SMU 86
USF04 wrote:In my opinion, we can win if we make you turn the ball over and keep the rebounding margin close.
That said, I'm thinking we lose in Dallas but beat you here
Is Collins going to be ready for the SMU game?
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:22 pm
by PonyFan
USF04 wrote:In my opinion, we can win if we make you turn the ball over and keep the rebounding margin close.
That said, I'm thinking we lose in Dallas but beat you here
Thanks. Glad to have you on PonyFans .
Any chance you're making the trip to Dallas?
Re: SI Bracketology: 1.14.14 - SMU IN

Posted:
Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:03 am
by CoxMustangFan
USF04 wrote:Does anyone else think he over rates the Big 12? He puts 4 of the 10 teams as top 4 seeds!
Shouldn't we have a couple more?
That's too high for Big 12. Should be two top fours (KU and OSU), a five (Baylor), two sixes (Oklahoma and ISU), and a seven (KSU). Haven't seen Texas enough to guess where they stack. Oklahoma is that team you're glad to have behind you.