Has any team ever been a number 1 seed w/o winning a conf or tourney championship?

[seaborneq]

Why play a conference schedule or tourney if it doesn't matter if you win or not? Duke is unfreaking real. This is now wrestling.

[mintpicks79]

Yes

[seaborneq]

Yes

Who else other than 2015 Duke?

[MoMoneyMoVaughn]

Technically 2012 Michigan State.

I guess they were regular season champs sort of. 3 teams tied at 13-5

[DrunkHorseplayer]

Conference tourneys should all be eliminated.

[seaborneq]

Conference tourneys should all be eliminated.

What does the regular season mean then? Duke didn't win that either.

[ChiLLx]

Apparently the "eye test" is all that matters with Duke every year.

[seaborneq]

Apparently the "eye test" is all that matters with Duke every year.

They don't look like a championship team.

[cbiscuit]

Sorry to say but Duke has upside going into this. Starters keep getting better as season goes along. Just question their depth.

Without googleing or researching I think Big East has had a few #1 seeds that did not win their tourney. Gtown?Syr? St Johns maybe? I'm sure their were more in other conferences.

[seaborneq]

Sorry to say but Duke has upside going into this. Starters keep getting better as season goes along. Just question their depth.

Without googleing or researching I think Big East has had a few #1 seeds that did not win their tourney. Gtown?Syr? St Johns maybe? I'm sure their were more in other conferences.

How can you justify a number 1 seed if you didn't win anything? Doesn't number 1 mean you are the best in something? Your conference? Your tourney? Something? Or is it just subjective, and I think you are number 1 even though you are not? If it is there, please show me, but I don't ever remember a team being a top seed without winning a regular season or tourney championship.

[krk1030]

Because being 2nd best in the best conference is better than being the best in a crap ass conference.

[seaborneq]

Because being 2nd best in the best conference is better than being the best in a crap ass conference.

Which crap ass conference are you referring? The SEC, Big Ten, Pac 12, Big East, Big 12? Which one. Because Virginia won the conference and they are not the number 1 seed. If Duke is so good, wouldn't the team that ACTUALLY won their conference be worthy of a 1 seed too?

[cbiscuit]

How can you justify a number 1 seed if you didn't win anything? Doesn't number 1 mean you are the best in something? Your conference? Your tourney? Something? Or is it just subjective, and I think you are number 1 even though you are not? If it is there, please show me, but I don't ever remember a team being a top seed without winning a regular season or tourney championship.

LOL - I'm way too lazy tonight to do that research but I am 99% sure it has been done and I think several times at that. Teams have like 2 losses going into conference tourn and get bounced but retain #1 seed cuz like they were 28-2 or something.
Anyway, yes, keyword is subjective. I go along with that whole body-of-work theory. Conf tourney? every year some team rises up out of midpack and wins their conf tourn, so by winning 3 or 4 in a row I don't know if they should automatically go in but they do anyway. what teams get into this tourney is the biggest discussion every year in sports and many have good opinions but in the end it is "Subjective". There is no exact science here and I doubt if there will ever be a formula which can clearly confirm which teams should be in. Let the top 32 or whatever get in and then let some of these little conference players in to change things up year to year. Not sure if OkSt and Texas should have a crack at winning it all... no more so than Murray St or even say a URI imho.

[2daBank]

How can you justify a number 1 seed if you didn't win anything? Doesn't number 1 mean you are the best in something? Your conference? Your tourney? Something? Or is it just subjective, and I think you are number 1 even though you are not? If it is there, please show me, but I don't ever remember a team being a top seed without winning a regular season or tourney championship.

you are absolutely right so i will copy and paste this in another thread since i guess we gonna get 12 of them with this terrible logic and go on and on.. here let me try and see if this makes sense..

your telling me that duke wouldnt have won the pac-12 season and tourney half those last 12 years since zona or whoever did it. obviously im saying put zona in acc with pukes out of conf and you telling me duke couldnt have ran the pac-12 this season and others zona didnt do it most likely..

lets also not forget

puke beat wiscy @ wiscy and did it in damn near wire to wire impressive fashion after the 1st couple minutes of the gm where wiscy took a small lead..from there go down the list and look at pukes road and neutral site wins over 1 quality team after another. find me one team that has a resume that comes close. i dont like duke and really dont care, there no doubt they prob more likely to lose early than the other teams being mentioned but at same time if they make it to a gm against any of them other than uk and id like their chances..

maybe im wrong i dunno. but you look at who duke played and beat all over the country then beating ville @yum center, before the suspension and they were playing really well. then they beat uva @uva when uva was the clear cut 2 to uk (think that gm anderson got hurt but wasnt a huge deal in the outcome if i recall correctly). there no comparing what they did all year to the best teams. but instead you think winning a 4 day tourney against who did zona play? ucla and ducks i know, please agree duke wins that tourney if they even remotely feel like it (zona fukking stopped ducks again). puke waxed a ncst team that kinda resembling ducks, then they faced a offensive team in nd that zona hasnt seen the likes of just for the opportunity to slug it out with unc again, remember we talking about a team that already has the best wins all over all season lets not forget. so a nd team that is basically a smarter version of isu caught them and this means they should be bumped for zona who had to beat what number rpi/bpi/kp ranking compared to the teams duke played all year?

yep but they have the best post player in the country, and got a beautiful draw (that we agree they earned), it aint like zona isnt headed for a collision course with wiscy as their roads not exactly scary. id argue zags will be every bit as tough if not more for duke. only difference is duke wouldnt see uk till final (not at all after falling to zags who i feel even tho the resume doesnt warrant it they are a 1 imo)where zona/wiscy face uk in the final 4, nothing wrong with that, after winner of that gm loses to uk then zags have their shot to prob lose but who knows, i think if they can get there it be a incredible gm. what a final four right?

so what is the problem with any of that.. please god dont let me see another post about how duke isnt a 1 because even tho they have the best wins in the country all season but lost to a red hot ND team that was really really focused on getting a place at the table in the conf tourney that somehow zona who's got like 2 great wins and 1 was against a zags team who dominated them on their court leading for the majority before choking on the road and losing in ot. yet they more deserving cause they play a bunch of 40 something and much worse teams most the time..

[Pill Gates]

They want Kentucky vs Duke

[seaborneq]

They want Kentucky vs Duke

Duke can't get to Indy as a 2 seed?

[jjgold]

They will never get rid of conference tournaments because they bring in a tremendous amount of money and they are much better than the entire regular-season

[EaglesPhan36]

Why do you care? #1, #2 there isn't much difference. The only people who care about the #s next to the names seem to be the public. Teams only care about the next name in their bracket whether it's 16, 15, 6, 7, 8, 8 who the F cares.

[2daBank]

Why do you care? #1, #2 there isn't much difference. The only people who care about the #s next to the names seem to be the public. Teams only care about the next name in their bracket whether it's 16, 15, 6, 7, 8, 8 who the F cares.

bingo.. i think the general consensus is there uk and 5 teams or so that will narrow themselves down to the 2 they will have to beat in the final 4 to make history.. i really dont get what the big deal is here??

[jjgold]

Seeds do not really mean much in the NCAA tournament

[seaborneq]

Why do you care? #1, #2 there isn't much difference. The only people who care about the #s next to the names seem to be the public. Teams only care about the next name in their bracket whether it's 16, 15, 6, 7, 8, 8 who the F cares.

If seedlings don't mean anything then let Duke play Kentucky in the first round and get it over with. no number one seed has ever lost a game. Number two seeds have lost quite a few times. In horse racing your chances to win diminish tremendously in the outside lanes. At least lane assignments are supposedly random. A committee CHOSE to make Duke a number one seed without winning the conference or tourney championship, and number one seeds make the final four the most of any seed. And you still don't think seedings make a difference? Get over yourself

[swordsandtequila]

Why play a conference schedule or tourney if it doesn't matter if you win or not? Duke is unfreaking real. This is now wrestling.

Best resume' of any team in the tournament. Beat Wisconsin, Virginia, Louisville, N.C., all on the road. ACC is 3rd ranked conference (RPI), behind Big 12 and Big East. Virginia would have been the #1 had they won the conference tourney, possibly even making the final. Losing Justin Anderson to injury didn't help. None of the other #2 seeds has any claim to a #1 over Duke. And I'm a Carolina fan, fwiw.

[frogsrangers]

Big East had 3 #1 seeds in 2009, meaning one of those teams couldn't have been the regular season champ and tourney champ

[meader99]

Why play a conference schedule or tourney if it doesn't matter if you win or not? Duke is unfreaking real. This is now wrestling.

Show me a team with better road wins than Duke. I'll be waiting......

[ZetaPsi808]

sounds like seaborneq is a duke hater here

[seaborneq]

Big East had 3 #1 seeds in 2009, meaning one of those teams couldn't have been the regular season champ and tourney champ

Something is wrong with that selection too. I don't necessarily remember the year, but no conference is worthy of 3 of the top 4 seeds in any year. Sounds like some of the SEC West bullshit the media tried to pull over the public's eyes this year.

[MoMoneyMoVaughn]

Big East had 3 #1 seeds in 2009, meaning one of those teams couldn't have been the regular season champ and tourney champ

Louisville was both the tourney winner and the regular season champ. Both UConn and Pitt lost in the first round of the BE tourney and were still number one seeds. Weird...

The old Big East was such a fukkin stacked conference though. Its insane. That year they had 12 teams in the top 100

FUKKIN TWELVE

[seaborneq]

Why do you care? #1, #2 there isn't much difference. The only people who care about the #s next to the names seem to be the public. Teams only care about the next name in their bracket whether it's 16, 15, 6, 7, 8, 8 who the F cares.

Number 1 seed Duke gets SDSU and Steve Fisher, Number 2 seed Virginia gets Izzo and Mich St. Yes seeding does make a difference.

[meader99]

Number 1 seed Duke gets SDSU and Steve Fisher, Number 2 seed Virginia gets Izzo and Mich St. Yes seeding does make a difference.

And Virginia went home. Guess who else went home early.....the great Villanova who lost to the 6th place team in that conference Duke plays in.

[ChiLLx]

Oh seeding matters for sure. Duke will find that out the hard way when they have to play the strongest 5 seed by far this weekend.

[swordsandtequila]

Number 1 seed Duke gets SDSU and Steve Fisher, Number 2 seed Virginia gets Izzo and Mich St. Yes seeding does make a difference.

Not because Duke or Virginia were overseeded. Michigan State was drastically underseeded. Period.

[seaborneq]

Not because Duke or Virginia were overseeded. Michigan State was drastically underseeded. Period.

So were Kentucky and uconn last year

[LT Profits]

The answer to the original question is yes, and probably more times than some people think. The reality is that the selection committee is not as concerned with conference championships and tournament championships as it is with a team's full body of work. And it is impossible not to argue that Duke had the best collection of road wins of any team in the country this season.

[ZetaPsi808]

The answer to the original question is yes, and probably more times than some people think. The reality is that the selection committee is not as concerned with conference championships and tournament championships as it is with a team's full body of work. And it is impossible not to argue that Duke had the best collection of road wins of any team in the country this season.

definitely

at wisky, at VA, at ville, at UNC. its pretty clear why they got the #1 seed

[DrunkHorseplayer]

Duke will beat Utah easily; got down early at -4.5.