Do we even work on FTs in practice?

we missed 2 today. Pathetic. An Eddie Sutton team would have never missed 2 FTs.

Yea we should suspend Hannahs for missing one. Shame on him.

Don’t know the stats, but I remember Eddie’s teams having several losses that made FTs would have cured. Drove me crazy at the time. Still does.

Eddie’s teams lost quite a few over the years thanks to bricked FTs. This was before the double bonus and it was 1 and 1 all the way to the final horn. I remember our '78 Final Four team bricked its way out of the SWCT against Houston and we wondered if we’d still get at an large bid because the SWC had been a one-bid league. Fortunately we got in and got to St. Louis.

Yea that was a different era for getting into the tournament. No conference could have more than 2 teams, so the ACC and Big Ten always had 4 or 5 teams not make it that might be ranked. We were a top 5 team pretty much all year, but the loss to Houston clouded things. What made it really iffy was that Houston got the automatic bid for winning the tournament, but Texas was actually the number one seed in the SWC Classic. We tied them for first, but they had the tie breaker and got a bye all the way to the finals, the last year they did it that way. Lots of campaigning by Texas that should get the at large bid because they were the actual “conference champions”. Abe Lemons was very upset they didn’t get the bid over us. That was when the NCAA tournament only had 32 teams.

It’s entirely possible that if Texas had beaten Houston in the SWCT final, we would have been left out. As it was, Texas went on to win the NIT. Maybe we would have done the same thing. But Houston won, we got the at-large. Maybe we were safe anyway; seedings were done with automatic qualifiers separate from at-large, and we were the #2 at-large seed in the West bracket.

Swine, you are a great poster, and contribute far more to this board than I do, but back in those days they absolutely did not have seeding for teams. Conference champions, for all conferences, were plugged into certain positions in the bracket. Each conference had a specific regional they were placed in. The Big 8 and SWC were in the Midwest, the SEC and Big Ten in the Mideast, etc. At large teams, including the independents like Marquette and Notre Dame, filled the rest of the bracket up. Top 5 Marquette was livid that they were going to be matched with number 1 Kentucky in the 2nd round, but that never happened because Marquette got upset. Kansas was a top 20 team and had to play top 10 UCLA in the first round, and we played UCLA in the second round. This had gone on for several years, but after the criticism that year they began seeding teams the following season. The only semi seeding they did then was make sure the bigger conferences were on opposite sides of their regional bracket. Correction on Midwest bracket placement, the SWC had been poor in basketball for so long that the Missouri Valley was the other conference that was separated from the Big 8, still were an automatic qualifier, and had a reserved spot but they were paired with Big 8. Didn’t matter, because Houston got blasted by Notre Dame.

1978 was the only year with this rudimentary seeding procedure:

<LINK_TEXT text=“https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NCAA … Tournament”>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NCAA_Men’s_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament</LINK_TEXT>

[quote]The process of seeding the bracket was first used in this tournament. Sixteen conference winners with automatic bids were seeded 1 through 4 in each region. At-large teams were seeded 1 through 4 in each region separately. There were in fact only 11 true at-large teams in the field, as the remaining 5 teams were conference winners with automatic bids who were seeded as “at-large.”[1] The practice of distinguishing between automatic and at-large teams was ended after the tournament, and the expanded field of 40 was simply seeded from 1 to 10 in the 1979 tournament.
[/quote]