Honestly i think Wisconsin is in a brackt with a very beatable Knsas. I'm not disappointed.
eric | 03.16.08 - 11:28 pm | #

I'd rather get USC or K-State in the 2nd round than Davidson who I think will beat Gonzaga. Bo is right ... its more about matchups you get than it is about the actual seed you get. That having been said, giving Wisconsin a #3 instead of a #2 makes no logical sense to me. And I don't want to hear its because Duke beat Wisconsin straight up at their place. Arizona State beat Arizona twice ... and is on the outside looking in at Arizona. Wisconsin beat Texas down there and is looking up at Texas.
TD | 03.17.08 - 8:21 am | #

Other schools have bigger complaints. Tenth ranked Butler is a 7 seed? someone wants Bruce Pearl out of the tournament.
eric | 03.17.08 - 9:01 am | #

Gonzaga's ranked No. 20. USC is unranked. I'd want the Badgers' path.
Tracker | 03.17.08 - 9:06 am | #

I also don't think it's too bad. Wisconsin matches up well with teams with "one star guard." Think about how the Badgers have handled Misters Neitzel and Gordon this year. Michael Flowers makes life miserable for those guys. If your team relies on a start shooting guard for offense, you do not want to play Wisconsin.

Also, the teams that beat Wisconsin this year are all very deep at guard/perimeter player. The formula for beating Wisconsin is to go small and force Bo to take butch out for more perimeter defense. It negates their awesome interior defense and eliminates their rebound advantage. Marquette, Purdue, and Duke all have this in common. A team like Drake would ahve been worse to run into than a star-heavy team like USC. I'll admit that I've only seen them play a few times, but when I did, they struck me as "Indiana minus D.J. White."
PaulNoonan | Homepage | 03.17.08 - 9:33 am | #

Not being a Wisconsin fan, I agree that Wisconsin got screwed big time. Duke got a #2 just based on their name. And Wisconsin should be ahead of Texas also.
Al Michaels | 03.17.08 - 9:49 am | #

I hope your right I feel Wisconsin could beat USC I just think their path is tougher than it should be for a team that won it conference and only lost 4 times.
Chris | 03.17.08 - 10:06 am | #

Last time I checked, the Big10/ACC challenge was not an exhibition. Non-conference games in November and December still count. Losing by 20+ points (and it wasn't even that close) doesn't help, either.

Oh, and the Big 10 is awful. That Illinois made it to the final takes a little bit of the shine off the Big 10 tourney title.
ving | 03.17.08 - 10:47 am | #

But if the Big 10 is so awful how can you give Texas the 2 seed over Wisconsin they lost 2 times to Big Ten schools
Chris | 03.17.08 - 11:31 am | #

The Big 10 is awful, except but Texas's two losses were to its two best teams. Also, Texas beat UCLA, Tennessee,and Kansas. Other than Texas, which was a great win, Wisconsin doesn't have any wins over elite teams.

Had the Big 10 overall been a stronger conference, that would have helped Wisconsin's case.
ving | 03.17.08 - 2:05 pm | #

sorry MSU is not second best team in big 10 3rd or 4th at best.

I am sorry Texas should have been 3 not Wisconsin
chris | 03.17.08 - 2:16 pm | #

Maybe so, but neither Purdue nor Indiana looked much better down the stretch.

Texas beat UCLA, Kansas, and Tennessee. Wisconsin's best wins are Texas (a great win), Michigan State, and Indiana. On that alone, Texas looks better to me.

Whatever case Wisconsin has for a higher seed is hardly open and shut. Reasonable minds can differ, but the notion that Wisconsin got fucked is silly.
ving | 03.17.08 - 2:24 pm | #

Marquette and Purdue are two of the other sixes. Wisconsin have to take care of business against Fullerton and a proxy for two teams that had beaten them.
Stephen Karlson | Homepage | 03.17.08 - 9:46 pm | #

What I'm really pissed about it the fact they have to play Thursday. Friday would have made me much happier.

Of course, the Big10 could have their tourney end on a Saturday, but that's just to sensible for anyone.
The Asian Badger | Homepage | 03.18.08 - 11:45 am | #