No #16 seed ever beat a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament, but one team came close (took it into overti

Estil

I just found this out a few days ago. Okay, all of you know that no #16 seed has ever beat a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament, right? Well, one came very close. So close in fact the game went into OT and the top seed had to pull off a mere four point squeaker to avoid the biggest embarrassment possible in college basketball. Another hint is that the #16 is a university from Kentucky (but not THE Kentucky obviously) and both teams involved had "State" in their name. The first one that can find the right answer gets a cookie.

And in case anyone is curious, only four 15 seeds ever beat a two seed. They are:
* Richmond over Syracuse 73-69 in 1991
* Santa Clara over Arizona 64-61 in 1993
* Coppin State over South Carolina 78-65 in 1997
* Hampton over Iowa State 58-57 in 2001

css23

Murray State in 1990 or 1991.

Chocolate chip please!

StevenJackson39

Purdue 73, Western Carolina 71 (1996).
Michigan State 75, Murray State 71 OT (1990)
. Oklahoma 72, East Tennessee State 71 (1989).
Georgetown 50, Princeton 49 (1989). - If anyone remembers that game- Mourning blocked a shot near the end which could/should have been a foul

SanctionII

A few years ago San Jose State (#16) played Kentucky (#1) and lead at the half. Kentucky regrouped, took the lead and won the game. I do not remember the final score but I think it was more than 4 points and the game did not go into overtime.

Estil

<< <i>A few years ago San Jose State (#16) played Kentucky (#1) and lead at the half. Kentucky regrouped, took the lead and won the game. I do not remember the final score but I think it was more than 4 points and the game did not go into overtime. >>



We played them in 1996 and beat them by twenty ponts. I find it hard to believe the Untouchables (we blew out nearly all opponents, even ranked ones that year, lost only two games the entire year (and "ran the table" in the SEC regular season) and won the national championship for the first time in eighteen years) could let some small fry like San Jose State get that far.

Estil

<< <i>Murray State in 1990 or 1991.

Chocolate chip please! >>



It was 1990 against Michigan State. Close enough; *hands cookie*

ziggy29

<< <i>A few years ago San Jose State (#16) played Kentucky (#1) and lead at the half. Kentucky regrouped, took the lead and won the game. I do not remember the final score but I think it was more than 4 points and the game did not go into overtime. >>

110-72, I believe. As an SJSU alum it was the most exciting half of basketball in my life. It was unreal. In the end, though, we still knew UK would pour it on. They used their depth to stay fresh while the Spartans, with no bench, ran their starters until they were on fumes and UK started to thump 'em.

frankhardy

<< <i>

<< <i>A few years ago San Jose State (#16) played Kentucky (#1) and lead at the half. Kentucky regrouped, took the lead and won the game. I do not remember the final score but I think it was more than 4 points and the game did not go into overtime. >>



We played them in 1996 and beat them by twenty ponts. I find it hard to believe the Untouchables (we blew out nearly all opponents, even ranked ones that year, lost only two games the entire year and won the championship) could let some small fry like San Jose State get that far. >>




That 1996 team was awesome. I think the only thing keeping them from being regarded as one of the all time great teams is the fact that many consider the championship game to be lacking

ziggy29

<< <i>We played them in 1996 and beat them by twenty ponts. I find it hard to believe the Untouchables (we blew out nearly all opponents, even ranked ones that year, lost only two games the entire year and won the championship) could let some small fry like San Jose State get that far. >>

In SJSU's defense, they just got hot at the right time and were playing better than 16-seed ball at the time. For sure, their overall 13-16 record going into the tournament earned them the worst draw of the tourney -- no argument -- but they had won something like seven straight including the conference tournament going into that game with UK. So at the time of that game, they were a bit more than just a 13-16 team seeded #16. Kentucky saw that in the first half before their superior depth and athleticism took the game over in the second.

SanctionII

Speaking of Kentucky, a guy who played high school basketball for a cross town rival when I was a senior (I played center at 6'6") eventually went to Kentucky. My senior year was 73-74. The guy was a sophmore when I was a senior thus he graduated high school in 76 and played at Kentucky from 76/77 through 79/80. He was 6'7" as a sophmore in high school and was a phenomenal player. His name was LaVon Williams. He was all everything in high school and was recruited heavily by the D-1 top flight schools out of high school.

Funny thing is that when he got to Kentucky, he played, but never became the star of the team. Just goes to show how many studs play for Kentucky year in and year out.

calaban7

Back in the late 80's a local very small college team ( Coppin State ) from the People Repuplic of Maryland almost stunned #1 seed Oklahoma. The game was very very close won in the last few seconds and actually made me a Coppin State fan for a few years.

joestalin

The NCAA makes it that way. They make sure the #16 teams are flukes and winners of weak conferences. They shun other teams capable
of upsets and put them into the NIT. Bubble teams from the ACC and SEC are much more equipped to upset these "#1" seeds then are
South Dakota State or Tennessse Southern..winners of the Big Crap Conference!


JS

ziggy29

<< <i>The NCAA makes it that way. They make sure the #16 teams are flukes and winners of weak conferences. They shun other teams capable of upsets and put them into the NIT. Bubble teams from the ACC and SEC are much more equipped to upset these "#1" seeds then are South Dakota State or Tennessse Southern..winners of the Big Crap Conference! >>

This year's tournament seems to be evidence to the contrary. There's a very low number of at-large mid-majors this year, and there have been fewer upsets than ever.

LWMM

You're kidding me, right? Don't you all know of #16 over #1 Stanford, 1998?