"Exposed for our Schedule"

[Remember'70]

Wasn't sure where to put this, so I thought I would really gum up the page by starting a new thread. Thread Police...do your worst if need be.

I'm pretty much done with all of the naysayers. I've stopped following most on Twitter, I don't search for Wichita State anymore on Twitter to see what folks are talking about like I did earlier in the year and I've stopped trying to figure out why ******* and Gottlieb have a hard on for busting up the Shockers.

I do constantly hear about the weak schedule and how we'll get exposed by a higher seed from a better conference in the tourney because of it. Who knows? Maybe we will...maybe we won't. If we do lose before the Elite 8 (still don't think our tough MF'ers will allow that to happen), this will be the narrative of the G's mentioned above and many others.

So, I took a quick peek at last year's bracket to see what other teams were exposed for their schedules and found the following schools that obviously suffered from weak ass conference schedules.

Missouri-1st Round (SEC)
Oklahoma State-1st Round (B12)
Cincinnati-1st Round (BE)
Villanova-1st Round (BE)
UCLA-1st Round (P12)
Oklahoma-1st Round (B12)
Georgetown- 1st Round (BE)
NC State-1st Round (ACC)
Pitt-1st Round (BE)
Wisconsin-1st Round (B10)
KSU-1st Round (B12)
Notre Dame -1st Round (BE)

Soooo...there's that. Obviously, these teams all were probably just worn down by how tough conference play was.

Spin...spin...spin...

[RoyalShock]

I see what you're saying (and I'm close to punting my "Wichita State" search on twitter, too). But I think the main reason we're getting all the schedule haters is that we're ranked so high and getting talked about as a #1 seed (which I believe we deserve, in spades). If we were ranked around 10th and looking at a 3/4 seed, there wouldn't be nearly as much chirping.

As I scanned down your list of teams from last year's tournament I don't see any that I recognize as high seeds, which I consider to be 4 or higher. If I had the time I'd go see what their seeds were and what seed they lost to, in order to put it in context and see if any of those schools truly were exposed/overrated.

Still, the thing to keep in mind is that due to the nature of a one-and-done format, it's difficult to prove whether a team was truly exposed/overrated or not. I don't think you can make such a sweeping determination based on one game. Maybe that's your point? That there's a double-standard? If so, I agree.

I also agree that we have one tough, poised team that I don't see bowing out before the Sweet 16. Once it's down to 16 (even 32 for that matter) anyone can beat anyone.

[Cdizzle]

Most of those teams are in the 7-10 seed range. Georgetown is the outlier with a 2 seed. And they did get called out a little bit as being exposed by Dunk City. Though they have a bit of a history of early exits as a high seed as well, which didn't help them.

[Remember'70]

Still, the thing to keep in mind is that due to the nature of a one-and-done format, it's difficult to prove whether a team was truly exposed/overrated or not. I don't think you can make such a sweeping determination based on one game. Maybe that's your point? That there's a double-standard? If so, I agree.

I also agree that we have one tough, poised team that I don't see bowing out before the Sweet 16. Once it's down to 16 (even 32 for that matter) anyone can beat anyone.

Yes...my point was regarding the double standard. Some seem to think that an 8/9 from a power conference will expose us.

[im4wsu]

Yes...my point was regarding the double standard. Some seem to think that an 8/9 from a power conference will expose us.

Since 2001, the MVC is 7-5 when the favorite playing a 8-9 seed.