BYU Basketball 24-25-Bring out the Jelly!

[beefytee]

While the first round matchup is a tough one, and they showed the graphic that the 6-11 games are a 50/50 proposition the last few years, I would still pick BYU to win it.

And looking at the rest of the region, I think that side of the bracket is better than any to give BYU a shot at the elite 8.

Here’s hoping for a first round win, then some lucky bounces and some hot shooting this tournament.

[byufan4ever]

Just saying, everyone who said BYU was a lock at a 5 seed. You need to add +1.

[beefytee]

Having played Iowa state twice and Houston should help us going into this game. VCU is one of the top defensive teams in the countries in several areas.

[Joe Public]

Feed Fous on Thursday!

[BigFatMeanie]

From Wrubell:

VCU's best win: Colorado State on a neutral floor in Henderson, Nevada back on Dec. 14.

That was one of only two Quad 1 wins for VCU; the other was at Dayton on Feb. 7.

VCU played three Quad 1 games; BYU played 15.

VCU in Quads 1 and 2: 7-5
BYU in Quads 1 and 2: 14-9

[BigFatMeanie]

BYU will get no respect until they demonstrate they can beat the VCUs of the world. It’s as good an opportunity as any to prove that they belong.

[beefytee]

Tough first round matchup for BYU.

VCU IS #30 in kenpom. BYU is 24. Certainly not a first round gimme.

[beefytee]

That would be great. Some fun matchups there.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Fun bracket projection from the Athletic:

Screenshot_20250316_094744_The Athletic.jpg

I watched about 10 seconds of game time of Yale this season, which qualifies me to say that would be a very winnable game. Or rather, Yale doesn't scare me as much as an uber-athletic defense-first style of team that has so often been BYU's tournament kryptonite.

A round of 32 matchup against Mark Pope and Kentucky would be very interesting.

Duke is obviously the most likely to come out of their pod, but there's potential for going retro, WCC style, facing off against the Gonzaga Bulldogs.

Pretty unlikely that the committee will come out with these exact games, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or two of those storylines are on the table.

I'd love that seeding, as long as the stench left behind on that court in December has been eliminated.

[Pelado]

Fun bracket projection from the Athletic:

Screenshot_20250316_094744_The Athletic.jpg

I watched about 10 seconds of game time of Yale this season, which qualifies me to say that would be a very winnable game. Or rather, Yale doesn't scare me as much as an uber-athletic defense-first style of team that has so often been BYU's tournament kryptonite.

A round of 32 matchup against Mark Pope and Kentucky would be very interesting.

Duke is obviously the most likely to come out of their pod, but there's potential for going retro, WCC style, facing off against the Gonzaga Bulldogs.

Pretty unlikely that the committee will come out with these exact games, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or two of those storylines are on the table.

[BlueK]

I saw the NCAA's VP for basketball interviewed on CBS just before the Maryland/Michigan game. He said the committee is ahead of schedule and working now on selecting the last four at large teams and that the teams seeded 1 to 8 are already all placed with some contingency plans based on a few more tournaments to finish. So there you go. BYU is already placed.

[Omaha 680]

Because that isn't a thing for the committee. I know, no one believes me when I say that. But I've followed the committee and selection process pretty darn close for over a couple of decades. It's just not.

Last year because of the Sunday no play issue unfortunately they didn't have an option for giving us a 5 seed that we earned and they actually said that. That wasn't some huge slight.

I would say there are only two times in history the committee's treatment of BYU was inexplicably bad. It was in 2003 and again in 2004 with those crazy 12 seeds. With every other seeding before and since there's not a credible argument that the committee was ever way off. You can try to argue a seed line one way or the other any year with almost any team, but that's not bias. Also I can't even think of a single time we didn't make the tournament but had a resume that deserved to.

But this year no benefit of doubts is needed with this team anyway. That's something for bubble teams with lots of holes in their resume or for teams with late injuries to key players or who stumbled down the stretch with bonehead late losses or losing to a bad team in the first round of the conference tournament. This team is pretty much the opposite of that and took care of business down the stretch. It's not easy to win at Arizona or at Iowa State. Those are #3-4 seed teams. Byu historically doesn't win games like that very often. They won 8 in a row in a very respectable league when it mattered most. The committee rewards that stuff. Last year's team didn't have that nearly as much.

Agree with all of this. I really think a 5 was locked in with the second Iowa State win. I suppose I won't be terribly shocked if we drop to a 6 but I would be disappointed. 7 would be a slight.

Edut: Lunardi's change this morning to account for yesterday's games was to move BYU from a 5 in Providence to a 5 in Denver.

[BlueK]

I suggest this site as a good one for comparing teams.

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2025/net-nitty

Also http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ gives the consensus from over 100 bracket projections. What the committee comes up with has historically been close to it. I consider within one seed line to be a good projection. It's like a margin of error. Historically, something like 90% of the teams end up seeded within one line of where the final bracket matrix has them. It also tracks the accuracy of each individual bracketologist and shows where they rank for accuracy

The matrix didn't yet exist in 2003 or 2004 when those committees did a lot of crazy stuff besides the hose job of BYU. It's well enough known and cited now that I believe it serves as kind of a backstop for the committee. The committee and process is also far more transparent now than it was 20 years ago. Everyone knows what the quadrants are and can see the NET now. Even the comments from TV guys has gotten better. I don't pay that much attention to Joe Lunardi's own bracket for getting a sense of where BYU or other teams stand currently. I use the matrix for that. But I will read what he says. The most important thing I think he does is help media and fans understand what the committee cares about and also what they don't care about.

[byufan4ever]

Well, last time BYU lost to Houston by 31 and this time by just 20...so progress? Houston is a really good team so there's no shame in losing to them, but we just weren't competitive from tipoff. We weren't winning 50/50 balls and hustling like Houston was. They just wanted it more. Demin's recent play is really worrying. He and the team need to figure out how to beat the press. Beating ISU twice made me feel like we were contenders, but now...I feel like there's a huge gap between BYU and the elites and a very obvious kink in our armor. But hey, we hit 100% of our FTs!!

Keba Keita gets the Player of the Game. He was actually pretty bad in the first half, but really showed up to play in the second half. He had the best PER, GSc, and TS%. He had a nice double-double and two awesome blocks. Baker was nice off the bench, but no one else really showed up at all.

Trevin Knell gets the Struggled to Perform award. He made 1 shot, and the rest of his box score is all zeros with 1 TO. What was he doing for 19 minutes? With a negative PER and GSc, he was hurting our team being out there. Mag had the worst TS% missing all 3 FGs.

The season summary average PER has been updated for the two games this week. The top 5 did not change: Saunders / Keita / Demin / Traore / Hall.

Now we wait and see what kind of seed we get. Whatever you think we should get, add at least 1 to it. It's the BYU tax.

33 Houston.png

PER Summary 2025-03-14.png

[BlueK]

Why would/should the committee give BYU any benefit of the doubt until they show they can do something in the tournament.

Because that isn't a thing for the committee. I know, no one believes me when I say that. But I've followed the committee and selection process pretty darn close for over a couple of decades. It's just not.

Last year because of the Sunday no play issue unfortunately they didn't have an option for giving us a 5 seed that we earned and they actually said that. That wasn't some huge slight.

I would say there are only two times in history the committee's treatment of BYU was inexplicably bad. It was in 2003 and again in 2004 with those crazy 12 seeds. With every other seeding before and since there's not a credible argument that the committee was ever way off. You can try to argue a seed line one way or the other any year with almost any team, but that's not bias. Also I can't even think of a single time we didn't make the tournament but had a resume that deserved to.

But this year no benefit of doubts is needed with this team anyway. That's something for bubble teams with lots of holes in their resume or for teams with late injuries to key players or who stumbled down the stretch with bonehead late losses or losing to a bad team in the first round of the conference tournament. This team is pretty much the opposite of that and took care of business down the stretch. It's not easy to win at Arizona or at Iowa State. Those are #3-4 seed teams. Byu historically doesn't win games like that very often. They won 8 in a row in a very respectable league when it mattered most. The committee rewards that stuff. Last year's team didn't have that nearly as much.