Chris Dobbertean Has Georgia Headed for Play-In Game
According to SB Nation's latest bracket projection, yesterday's outcome in the Georgia Dome changed the fortunes of both contestants, as Alabama worked its way up to a play-in game against Richmond and Georgia dropped down to a play-in game against St. Mary's. The winner of the latter contest is projected to head to Chicago to face five seed Arizona.
Interestingly enough, Georgia is scheduled to play St. Mary's in baseball tomorrow.
Go 'Dawgs!
about 1 year ago
T Kyle King
23 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I'm absolutely fine with this...
…as long as we don’t build a large 2nd-half lead/hitsheadwithhammer.
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
Yeah, this seems reasonable.
Georgia and Alabama both have flawed resumes, and both have arguments for getting in over the other, so put them both in play-in games and give them both the opportunity to prove it, vel non.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Mar 12, 2011 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Oddly enough
that doesn’t really bother me. I’m not thrilled about being in a play-in game, but if Alabama suffers the same fate then I’m not completely upset. In fact, it might be the fairest way to do it.
Besides, being in the NCAAs period without either some force taking it away or a natural force giving it to us hasn’t happened since 2001. I’ll take it pretty much any way I can get it.
by RDRR on Mar 12, 2011 11:08 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I think that's a good way of looking at it, RDRR.
I don’t think there’s any question that, as a program, Georgia is headed in the right direction under Mark Fox; it’s just maddening that the team isn’t quite there yet. The Bulldogs have been consistent all season long, which is preferable to being a late fader like Texas or Villanova (or Alabama, except when playing Georgia), but it’s aggravating, in light of the marked improvement we have seen from other teams.
I don’t mind seeing Georgia relegated to a play-in game, because (i) it’s hard to say the Bulldogs deserve any better, (ii) at least that puts the Bulldogs in the tournament, and (iii) it heightens the likelihood of a win in the Bulldogs’ first game. Since no one expects this team to go on a run to the Final Four, or even the Sweet 16, it’s better for the long run if Georgia gets in and wins at least a game, in order to begin building a track record of making the field and winning for the future.
I have family obligations this afternoon and evening, so I won’t be where I can watch any hoops, and, frankly, after yesterday, I’m not up for that today, anyway, but, for those of you who are, Seth Emerson has your rooting guide.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Mar 12, 2011 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
the only way i am not ok with a play in game situation...
is if they pair us together.
if we have to play them again i will cry or throw large heavy objects or rip apart phone books
"Sure I steal bases. I just like to do it 4 at a time." -Konerko-
I hate to be the proverbial bucket of cold water amidst all this speculation...
… but if I recall correctly, the NCAA selection committee has consistently made decisions in the past that confuse and frustrate even the best pundits.
Also, if I recall correctly, in the past they have tended to more heavily weight a team’s form in their last 5-10 regular season games more heavily than their performance in the one-off conference tournament. (Not necessarily when determining seeds, mind you… just when determining if a team is in or out.)
I think Georgia has proven that it belongs in the NCAA tournament by virtue of its RPI ranking that is significantly superior (at least right now) to Alabama’s. I suspect, however, that if it comes down to a decision of “Dawgs or Elephants,” the committee would decide in Georgia’s favor, even though the Dawgs have lost twice to the tide in the last couple of weeks.
Ultimately, though, all of the prognosticators that we’re quoting have one disadvantage: they can’t see the room in which the NCAA selection committee is meeting and can’t hear the actual discussion by the humans in the room. The “human factor” will tilt in Georgia’s favor, I think.
I still think we should bring up
That we’re undefeated in regulation in the SEC tournament.
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone, Easy A
by RedCrake on Mar 12, 2011 2:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Little fight from Bama today.
Hmm.
by D.N. Nation on Mar 12, 2011 2:55 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Dang
if they were going to fold, why couldn’t it have been on Friday?
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
We're better...
if we can be the team that builds those leads (with Trey on the blocks and Travis and Gerald not making stupid attempts at driving a clogged lane).
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
Because
The only SEC school that consistently gets more calls on the hardwood than Alabama is Kentucky.
/stillfuriousaboutthenongoaltending
by Hobnail_Boot on Mar 12, 2011 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
Obviously...
I get it. Our team is much improved. I am still not happy with how they routinely blew big leads in key games, especially yesterday’s loss.
I am not thrilled about having to be in a play-in game (if we’re even in at all) when we should have been safely in the tourney. Other than beat UK and Tennessee, what did this team really do? Lose a bunch of close games to tourney teams? Meh.
I am sure I’ll come around—and I will root my butt off for this team in their next game (NIT or otherwise)—but I’m not over the loss yesterday. Horrible.
I am bi-winning. I win not only here but also there.
I think both bubbles
popped today. I see Alabama and Georgia with another home game this year.
Stupid Llamas!.
by otisnixon'sparty on Mar 12, 2011 6:34 PM EST reply actions
I (unfortunately) agree
and, well, I’m not totally upset with that. We had some good wins but, when push came down to shove, I don’t think we’re really all THAT NCAA-worthy. Perhaps I’m in the minority, but I’d rather us have a good run in the NIT (and I’m one of those who calls it the "Nobody’s Interested Tournament) than be an also-ran in the Dance.
I thought we were coming into our own towards the end of the season, but the Bama game proved me incorrect. I think our putting away opponents in the second half had a whole lot more to do with the opponent than the team we had on the floor. I think we’d be a solidly high-seeded team in the NIT and , all things considered, I think baby steps are in order here. And maybe, just MAYBE, that would persuade Thompkins or Leslie to hang around just one more year to help shepherd in the new kids. I’d rather us make a deep run in the NIT and lose one (or maybe both) of them than make a one- or two-and-done in the NCAAs, only to regress next year with a crop of younger players.
My 1/50th of a buck……
by Just Some Dawg on Mar 12, 2011 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
I love your optimism
but as weak as this years draft is and possible labor unrest coming, talking Thompkins into staying seems improbable.
Stupid Llamas!.
by otisnixon'sparty on Mar 12, 2011 9:04 PM EST up reply actions
hate to break it to ya....
but this is the last of both Leslie and Thompkins. I can all but guarantee that. If i could bet money on it i would
"Sure I steal bases. I just like to do it 4 at a time." -Konerko-
by oneloyaldawg on Mar 13, 2011 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions
So long as they test the waters before "hiring" an agent...
I’d like them to at least get some feedback before making an irreversible decision. And if the NBA labor stuff is as bad as it seems, a lockout a week into their careers is not a good idea imo.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Mar 13, 2011 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions
That is an interesting question...
would it be better for us to make the tourney, but be bounced in round 1, or make the NIT, and have a run to MSG? I’m still holding out hope that Leslie or Thompkins feel unfinished business to take care of and want one more year to accomplish the goal of a possible SEC title and NCAA run.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Mar 13, 2011 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Given our track record...
… of beating the teams we’re supposed to beat and losing to teams we’re not supposed to beat, it stands to reason that we’d have a longer postseason run in the NIT than the NCAA tourney.
Of course, everyone would rather make the NCAA because it’s a more prestigious tournament.
Do you think South Carolina would rather have won the NIT two years in a row or made the NCAA tournament twice, only to lose in the first round?
by vineyarddawg on Mar 13, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Considering I was at that school at the time...
I’d say the first NIT, they liked because it was at least winning something, which as we all know isn’t a common occurrence over there. The second one though, they’d have rather been in the NCAAs.
Also, Tre Kelley was a beast. Just sayin.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Mar 13, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
