Online Now 543

Autzen Audibles

Loudest board in the nation, per capita

On this Board 328
Record: 5214 (1/16/2013)

Online now 549
Record: 5583 (1/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Autzen Audibles

Loudest board in the nation, per capita

Quacks Open Off-Topic Board

The Ticket Exchange

Buy and sell your Duck tickets here.

Reply

Bubble Watch breakdown by SportsIllustrated

  • Gives you a good look into how big of a game Cal vs Oregon is tomorrow.

    Bubble Watch: Four games with tournament repercussions - Video - SI.com

    With four weeks to go until Selection Sunday, Sports Illustrated writer Andy Glockner focuses on four match-ups with postseason implications in week's edition of Bubble Watch. - Video - SI.com

    sportsillustrated.cnn.com
    signature image

    Follow me on twitter, www.twitter.com/prehmmr

    MattPrehm

  • I keep hearing only 2 from the Pac. Do you think if these "professionals" continue to say it, it will influence the conventional wisdom of the selection committe, or are they a true representation of the process?

    Canaduck

  • Canaduck said...

    I keep hearing only 2 from the Pac. Do you think if these "professionals" continue to say it, it will influence the conventional wisdom of the selection committe, or are they a true representation of the process?

    Why put professionals in quotes? They really are professionals. Don't discount their opinion just because they say something you don't want to hear. Guys like Lunardi don't project brackets based on their own opinion, they do it by trying to anticipate what the selection committee will look at. If they're still saying 2 teams, it probably means that there will be 2 teams unless something unexpected happens. If the Ducks beat Cal, that would be pretty unexpected and may result in a 3rd team (us). Just because the experts aren't projecting that doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about.

    Moozh ●

  • Moozh said...

    Why put professionals in quotes? They really are professionals. Don't discount their opinion just because they say something you don't want to hear. Guys like Lunardi don't project brackets based on their own opinion, they do it by trying to anticipate what the selection committee will look at. If they're still saying 2 teams, it probably means that there will be 2 teams unless something unexpected happens. If the Ducks beat Cal, that would be pretty unexpected and may result in a 3rd team (us). Just because the experts aren't projecting that doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about.

    I put "professionals" in quotes because he isn't on the selection committee - pure and simple. He doesn't have a vote. Yes, he is intelligent, yes I value his opinion, and yes he could be right. However, I also know that people who are sports analysts by profession, also have a large amount of power to influence popular opinion. Half the country is convinced that Oregon has an offensive and defensive line made up of midgets because of the way the sports announcers went on and on and on about how big the SEC lineman are, and how much it was the men against the boys. There is sometimes a connection... and that was my question... do the opinions of analysts gather enough steam to make something a reality or does he truly already have an inside track. I don't know. However I was not trying to cut the guy down or question him. Sorry if it came across that way.

    Canaduck

  • Moozh said...

    Why put professionals in quotes? They really are professionals. Don't discount their opinion just because they say something you don't want to hear. Guys like Lunardi don't project brackets based on their own opinion, they do it by trying to anticipate what the selection committee will look at. If they're still saying 2 teams, it probably means that there will be 2 teams unless something unexpected happens. If the Ducks beat Cal, that would be pretty unexpected and may result in a 3rd team (us). Just because the experts aren't projecting that doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about.

    Lunardi is about the best in the business at this. On the Saturday before Selection Sunday his bracket will only miss on 2-3 teams that make the tournament, if that.

    But don't get too caught up in that, because that's a significant difference between his bracket being accurate today. He's good at projecting what the committee will do, when all the season's data is complete. These experts aren't really that great and don't really have too much incredible insight when it comes to projecting a month away, or even a few weeks away.

    Bracket projections are always done assuming the season ends today. But it doesn't, and they aren't even trying to project what is going to happen over the next couple weeks.

    The Pac-12 will get 3+ bids.

    This post was edited by JayDuck1247928 on 2/15/2012 at 3:07 PM

    JayDuck1247928

  • If our season rides on beating Cal we may be in trouble. Montgomery is a good coach and his team plays defense. They are a veteran team and beating them will be difficult but not impossible. More than likely we go 3-2 in the last five games but I would love 4-1. Need to do well in the PAC-12 tourney.

    tutu

  • tutu said...

    If our season rides on beating Cal we may be in trouble.

    It doesn't.

    A win at Cal would make us a lock for the tournament. But a loss doesn't mean we can't make the tournament. The Cal game is a huge opportunity, but not our last one.

    This post was edited by JayDuck1247928 on 2/16/2012 at 11:16 AM

    JayDuck1247928

  • Nothing wrong with a little bit of off tropic discussion in the threads. For instance, why am I being offered a chance to buy an LSU Tigers Thong on my Duck recruiting site? I would not look good in a thong, take my word for it.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Duck Nasty ●

  • Canaduck said...

    I keep hearing only 2 from the Pac. Do you think if these "professionals" continue to say it, it will influence the conventional wisdom of the selection committee, or are they a true representation of the process?

    I disagree with some of the 'professionals' they usually have clear bias. The selection committee is usually more objective.

    There is still a lot more basketball to be played. If, for example, Oregon finishes 5-0 (23-7), Arizona 5-0 (23-8), Washington 4-1 (21-9) and Cal 4-1 (24-7), then it will depend on the tourney. Four teams with 20+ wins (none at all being signature wins)... then I could see a scenario where the regular season champ (Cal) and the two PAC 12 tourney finalists (say Oregon and Arizona) could squeak in...

    It will certainly be a statement if only two were placed in with the scenario above.

    USC is like a german car, every piece that breaks is of the highest quality.

    AvroDuck

  • AvroDuck said...

    I disagree with some of the 'professionals' they usually have clear bias. The selection committee is usually more objective.

    There is still a lot more basketball to be played. If, for example, Oregon finishes 5-0 (23-7), Arizona 5-0 (23-8), Washington 4-1 (21-9) and Cal 4-1 (24-7), then it will depend on the tourney. Four teams with 20+ wins (none at all being signature wins)... then I could see a scenario where the regular season champ (Cal) and the two PAC 12 tourney finalists (say Oregon and Arizona) could squeak in...

    It will certainly be a statement if only two were placed in with the scenario above.

    There would be 4 Pac-12 teams in for certain in that scenario. Except that you have the regular champ wrong

    That would make a 4 way tie at 14-4 at the top of the league. And we would actually get the #1 seed with the tiebreakers in that scenario

    First tie breaker is overall record against the tied teams
    UO- 3-2
    Arizona- 2-2
    Cal- 2-2
    UW-2-3

    This post was edited by JayDuck1247928 on 2/16/2012 at 2:43 PM

    JayDuck1247928

Oregon
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports