Top 144 Countdown and How our Competition Stacks Up

[Adam Stokes]

Every year one of the basketball preseason rankings I enjoy looking at is the Top 144 countdown.  They put a new team on each day and slowly count down to who they have as the #1 team going into the season.  They do a good job going through a thorough breakdown of who is leaving and coming in.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/mens-basketball/top-144-previews

A lot of the "too early to tell" rankings that came out in April and May had us as a bubble team, most as 11 and 12 seeds, but this one at least has us at least at 10 because they are now at team #40 on the countdown.  Arkansas should pop up soon so I thought I'd post it now.

Here is where they have our competition ranked coming into this year.  Nice to see only a few teams not making the 144 list, and only two SEC teams not making it.  Even a few that didn't make it had an RPI in the top 144 last year, so it was likely that many barely missed the cut.

? Kentucky
? Florida
? Iowa State
? Dayton
30 Arkansas
33 SMU
44 Texas A&M
50 Alabama
55 Georgia
80 LSU
91 Missouri State
92 South Carolina
94 Wake Forest
104 Missouri
107 Iona
116 Ole Miss
119 Clemson

Not in Top 144 (Last year's RPI)

(42)   Tennessee
(131) Wisconsin Milwaukee
(144) Utah Valley
(158) NW St
(169) Auburn - surprised they weren't listed in the top 144.  I expect their RPI to be around 100 this year.
(195) North Texas
(245) Mississippi State
(254) Alabama State
(329) Delaware State

[Razorod]

Will be interesting to see where the Hogs land.

[-Blu]

You sure Tennessee is going to be in the top 40? Maybe they missed the top 144 all together.  They are going through a complete overhaul.

[Adam Stokes]

You sure Tennessee is going to be in the top 40? Maybe they missed the top 144 all together.  They are going through a complete overhaul.

Tennessee is similar to Dayton, in that they are probably overrated coming into this year because they had a good tournament, thus everyone has Dayton in their Top 20's.  Obviously Tennessee won't be as high, but I think they surprised enough people that they figure even losing a few guys from a sweet 16 team won't drop out of the Top 40.  Could very well be the case, but if I had to choose between them being in the top 4 of the conference or bottom three, I'd still lean towards top 4.

[Adam Stokes]

SMU just came in at #33, meaning they at least have us as an #8 seed.  Tennessee still hasn't popped up, so it has become more likely that they aren't even in the Top 144.

[jry04]

SMU is much better than #33. They will be a top 20 team in most rankings.

[mbgrulz]

SMU is much better than #33. They will be a top 20 team in most rankings.

IDK...Bottom line is that they were a NIT team last year...They didn't get Mudiay...I know they will be better than last year, but their coach's name gets them in the news a lot IMO.

[Adam Stokes]

IDK...Bottom line is that they were a NIT team last year...They didn't get Mudiay...I know they will be better than last year, but their coach's name gets them in the news a lot IMO.

Something interesting that was mentioned, they didn't lose or gain a single player from this year to last.  I think they will be a #6 seed.

[mbgrulz]

Something interesting that was mentioned, they didn't lose or gain a single player from this year to last.  I think they will be a #6 seed.

They are capable of that for sure. I think that would be best case scenario for them. They are going to need to get some quality W's in the non-con...Hopefully we are one of those!

[TomBigBeeHog]

SMU just came in at #33, meaning they at least have us as an #8 seed.  Tennessee still hasn't popped up, so it has become more likely that they aren't even in the Top 144.

How can they put us ahead of SMU? They accomplished more than we did last year and they have almost everyone back this year. Not complaining but would just like to see the rationale for our placement.

[Danny J]

How can they put us ahead of SMU? They accomplished more than we did last year and they have almost everyone back this year. Not complaining but would just like to see the rationale for our placement.

We did beat them and we also return virtually our entire roster of any importance and the virtually part refers to CC.

[mbgrulz]

We are a top tier SEC team. We beat them last year. We have everybody back. Its easy math to me.

[popcornhog]

We are a top tier SEC team. We beat them last year. We have everybody back. Its easy math to me.

Coty Clark?

But yeah, I get your point -- we'll be better than last year, I agree. UK looks to be much improved too though.

We could beat them, but they're the #1 team in the country in my mind by far.

[mbgrulz]

Oh, I definitely think a lot of CC. However, I think his production will be pretty easily replaced with improvement from the returnees, and the expected improvement of guard play.

I think UK is the cream of the crop with the Hogs, UF, and maybe UGA close behind.

The SEC is for real now

[JackJohnson]

Something interesting that was mentioned, they didn't lose or gain a single player from this year to last.  I think they will be a #6 seed.

That is crazy- i don't think i have ever heard/seen anything like that before...

[jry04]

IDK...Bottom line is that they were a NIT team last year...They didn't get Mudiay...I know they will be better than last year, but their coach's name gets them in the news a lot IMO.

They deserved to make the NCAAT last year. They were screwed, and even without Mudiay they return pretty much their entire team. We saw how well the AAC did in the NCAAT, so their schedule clearly wasn't as bad as some made it out to be.

We are a top tier SEC team. We beat them last year. We have everybody back. Its easy math to me.

I am not saying we won't be better than them, but they went farther in the NIT than us, they return everyone, and we play them in Moody this year so it won't be an easy W.

[HawgAdvocate]

We saw how well the AAC did in the NCAAT, so their schedule clearly wasn't as bad as some made it out to be.

Wait, what? The success of UCONN and Louisville somehow means that SMU's overall SOS (ranked 129th nationally, heavily bloated by a 300+ NCSoS ranking) was wrong?  SMU played seven (7) teams in non-conference alone that had an RPI of 200+.

Explain that one to me, please.

[jry04]

Wait, what? The success of UCONN and Louisville somehow means that SMU's overall SOS (ranked 129th nationally, heavily bloated by a 300+ NCSoS ranking) was wrong?  SMU played seven (7) teams in non-conference alone that had an RPI of 200+.

Explain that one to me, please.

Not that hard to understand. One of the knocks on SMU was they played in a "weak" conference. The AAC only got a few teams in, and they were severely under-seeded. SMU did not get much respect because they were said to have played in a soft conference.

Be condescending all you want, but you were also the one who laughed at me when I said SMU would be in and out of the top 25 all year last year. Looks like I called that one...

[mbgrulz]

They deserved to make the NCAAT last year. They were screwed, and even without Mudiay they return pretty much their entire team. We saw how well the AAC did in the NCAAT, so their schedule clearly wasn't as bad as some made it out to be. I am not saying we won't be better than them, but they went farther in the NIT than us, they return everyone, and we play them in Moody this year so it won't be an easy W.

Nowhere have I said that SMU is sorry!

My whole argument is that we have a legit argument to ranked ahead of them to start the year for a few reasons:
1. We beat them last year...not that telling as far as this year's rankings but somewhat relevant.
2. We bring back virtually our whole team.
3. We are one of the best teams in the SEC...which, as you mentioned about the AAC, appears to have been severely under rated and under seeded in last year's tourney.

SMU will be a good...not great...non con W if we are lucky enough to beat them.

[jry04]

Nowhere have I said that SMU is sorry!

My whole argument is that we have a legit argument to ranked ahead of them to start the year for a few reasons:
1. We beat them last year...not that telling as far as this year's rankings but somewhat relevant.
2. We bring back virtually our whole team.
3. We are one of the best teams in the SEC...which, as you mentioned about the AAC, appears to have been severely under rated and under seeded in last year's tourney.

SMU will be a good...not great...non con W if we are lucky enough to beat them.

I never said you thought they were sorry. Just pointing out that many in the national media have already said that SMU will be the favorite to win the AAC this year, even without Muiday. They will be a top 25 team for most of the season, and will be a very good road win. Especially since it is pretty tough to play in Moody now.

[HawgAdvocate]

Not that hard to understand. One of the knocks on SMU was they played in a "weak" conference. The AAC only got a few teams in, and they were severely under-seeded. SMU did not get much respect because they were said to have played in a soft conference.

You are so clearly misinformed. 40% of the AAC consisted of really bad teams (Rutgers, Temple, CFU, USF). Most of the remaining 60% had good to great seasons. Just because the best teams did well in the tournament doesn't have anything to do with reasoning that SMU's SoS should be somehow reconsidered, as you initially claimed. They dug their own grave with bad NCSos scheduling. It was awful. Straight from the NCAA Selection Chairman himself:

"NCAA Chairman Ron Wellman explained why SMU was left out during an interview on CBS' selection show.

"SMU had an outstanding resume, but their non-conference strength of schedule was in the 300s, which was not very good obviously," said Wellman. "Their overall strength of schedule is 129. The next lowest overall strength of schedule in the field is 91. So there's quite a bit of difference between their strength of schedule and the other teams in the field. - http://larrybrownsports.com/college-basketball/ncaa-chairman-ron-wellman-smu/222985

Comprende? Now on to part two of this entertaining but wreckless tall tale....

Be condescending all you want, but you were also the one who laughed at me when I said SMU would be in and out of the top 25 all year last year. Looks like I called that one...

Balderdash. You are 0 for 2 tonight. Your thinker isn't working too good. Here's your exact post you made about SMU being a top 25 team. Check the thread again. You were arguing with Swinesong1, not me. I said nothing disparaging about SMU.

http://www.hogville.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=545770.msg8382086#msg8382086

[010HogFan]

Well we are least #31. That's cool.

[Johnboy]

Well we are least #30. That's cool.

Updated.   

[Adam Stokes]

And we do indeed fall at #30.  Playing Okie State in the first round as an 8 seed.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/9878

It's not letting me edit the OP anymore, but Dayton came in at 27 and Iowa State at 21.

[HamIAm]

And we do indeed fall at #30.  Playing Okie State in the first round as an 8 seed.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/9878

It's not letting me edit the OP anymore, but Dayton came in at 27 and Iowa State at 2.

I think you meant Iowa State at 21.

[Adam Stokes]

I think you meant Iowa State at 21.

Good catch.

[-Blu]

Good catch.

Not trying to step on your toes or anything.  But I noticed a couple of things after looking at the list again.

1. We don't play Missouri State, we play Southeast Missouri State.
2. Alabama State actually made the top 144, they came in at #142.