Bracketology 2024

I bit the bullet and this morning bought an all-session ticket in Omaha. That ticket for 3 games cost just a little more than my Big12 Tournament ticket for 11 games.
Six games, not three (three sessions, two games per session). I also got the all session tickets. I purchased them between the WV and OU games at the end of February. Should be fun!
 
I don't think he said that. He just said teams seeded 1-7 are locks and can't fall out of the tourney. I don't think he meant the top overall 7 seeds were locks not to drop.
No. I think he means locked into the top 7. The top 30 are locks to make the tournament at this point.

Also. It’s just some dudes opinion so it doesn’t really matter.
 
You literally said the committee weighs the non-con above the full body of work. There is simply zero evidence that they have ever done that.
No, the non con essentially gets counted twice and yes this absolutely happens.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: GotHops32
No. I think he means locked into the top 7. The top 30 are locks to make the tournament at this point.

Also. It’s just some dudes opinion so it doesn’t really matter.
Context clues. Why would he talk about teams 1-7 (7 teams) being safe, teams 8, 9 and 10 (3 teams) needing one more win to feel safe and then every other comment is about a team trying to just get in.

He was saying all 1-7 seeds (28 teams) are safe and that all 8-10 seeds (12 teams) need one more win.

your right about one man's opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FerShizzle
No, the non con essentially gets counted twice and yes this absolutely happens.

Find me 1 example where a team with a clearly better overall resume got seeded lower because of a bad non-con SOS. Not a case where 2 equal teams got seeded based on non-con SOS, but a case where non-con SOS was valued more than overall resume.

If its so common, it shouldn't be hard for you to find an example.
 
Purdue at the top, some things never change lol
I'm actually interpreting this that Purdue is likely overseeded and more ripe for an "upset", than say Houston, UConn, and that teams like Arizona or Iowa State are more likely to "exceed their seed" and you'd rather not face them.

I interpreted this to mean they rate Houston as correctly seeded and most likely to back it up.
 
SOS is stupid, we might as well go back to RPI if that is a relevant statistic.

SOR and WAB are what actually matters. Winning games > Losing games
Exactly; who cares if you played a hard a schedule if (hypothetically) you lost to all those good teams? Other metrics already reward you for losing to a good team by less than the metrics expected.

SOR >>> SOS

We're currently #5 in SOR vs. Marquette's #9.
 
I'm actually interpreting this that Purdue is likely overseeded and more ripe for an "upset", than say Houston, UConn, and that teams like Arizona or Iowa State are more likely to "exceed their seed" and you'd rather not face them.

I interpreted this to mean they rate Houston as correctly seeded and most likely to back it up.
I think that’s what he meant by things never change.

I will go on record without seeing a bracket that Purdue will make the Final Four this year. I said it yesterday, I think people are underestimating them.
 
lets re-word it

the committee will look at KU beating UCONN and Tennessee as better than Iowa State beating Green Bay and Lindenwood.
And we beat Kansas and Houston and were a half second away from getting Baylor on the road. That's pretty parallel to Kansas and they did that in November, what have they done lately?
 
Had some time this afternoon to put out an updated bracket after last night's games. Usually, I wait for Thursday games but it's mostly Pac-12 tonight so shouldn't affect things too much.

1709846323089.png

  • I moved ISU up to #7, Baylor up to #8, and Kansas up to #9 over Marquette. Maybe I'm overreacting and perhaps the committee will place less weight on last two Marquette losses without Kolek, but their computer metrics have dipped a bit. 17th in KPI, 9th in SOR. 14th in both BPI and Kenpom.
  • ISU rooting interests for the weekend should be Texas Tech to beat Baylor, Villanova to beat Creighton, Xavier to beat Marquette, and then whomever wins Duke/UNC, we want the other one (or someone else entirely) to win the ACC Tourney. If Duke beats UNC and wins ACC Tourney, I could see them passing us. If UNC wins both, no chance of us catching them (I'm not sure there is anyway to be honest). If we had to pick one to win both, it's UNC.
    • I won't tell anyone how to root in KU vs. Houston as far as weighing seeding vs. conference title share. That's a "to each their own" situation.
  • Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and TCU are all hovering around that 7-8-9-10 seed line. Might create for some complicated bracketing if Big 12 has one 1-seed in Houston and two 2-seeds.
  • Sunday could very well decide if state of Iowa gets 3 teams into the field or just 1 with MVC final and Iowa hosting Illinois. I don't know how Big 10 tournament bracket is looking as far as opening round matchups, but if I'm Iowa, I'd want a challenging first game (think Michigan State, Nebraska, Northwestern). Chance to get a good win or no chance for a bad loss.
Related to some of the chatter in here about NCSOS, I've built a simple little regression model to help me in seeding teams when I build my bracket. So I've looked at one-to-one simple correlation for metrics on the committee teamsheets to what the final seed list was for the 2022 and 2023 tournaments. NCSOS typically doesn't correlate to a team's spot on the seed list. Not saying that couldn't change this year with new committee members, but in the past, I think it has factored in more for deciding who those final at-large spots are moreso than it does for seeding teams safely in the field.

1709847168242.png