I am getting in a fight with that T3 bracketology guy
Bracketology 2024
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
Cyclonepride
Thought Police
That's a lot of basketball in a row. Would someone explain these implications to my wife?
link so i can follow?
I know it always depends on other games but if UNC wins this weekend @Duke how far would Duke have to go in the conference tournament to get back into 2 seed consideration?
The 7 seed would be placed at their closest locations.
In this scenario, Iowa State would be in Omaha, Arizona in Salt Lake, UNC in Charlotte and Marquette in Indy.
Florida would go to Charlotte with UNC.
St. Mary's would go to SLC with Arizona.
Texas Tech would go to Omaha actually (its allowed if we only play them once).
Gonzaga would go to Indy.
10 seeds would be similar.
Nebraska would go to Omaha
Michigan State to Indy
Florida Atlantic to Charlotte (FAU vs Florida would be fun)
Villanova to SLC.
If Baylor jumped Iowa State, the 3 seeds would be Iowa State and Kansas in Omaha, Duke in Charlotte and Creighton in Pitt I think.
6 seeds would be.
South Carolina to Charlotte
Wisconsin to Omaha
Utah State to Omaha
Dayton to Pittsburgh
Teams are bracketed according to the s-curve. #1 overall seed gets the worst 2 seed (#8 overall), best 3 (#9 overall) and worst 4 (#16 overall) in their region, continue through the 64 teams. The only deviations from the curve are to avoid geographic advantage for a lower seeded team (i.e. Nebraska in Omaha), and avoid conference rematches. That all stops at some point, don't remember where. Except for committee desired matchup conspiracies, those never stop.
When teams are placed into opening round sites the 1 seeds go to their closest site, then the 2s, then the 3s, then the 4s. The matchups have already been set prior to assigning opening round sites (again outside fixing geographic advantage for lower seeded teams to a point)
Does this look right?
Brooklyn = (2) Connecticut, (13) Alabama
Charlotte = (4) Tennessee, (6) North Carolina
Indianapolis = (1) Purdue, (7) Marquette
Memphis = (3) Houston, (9) Baylor
Omaha = (8) Iowa State, (10) Kansas
Pittsburgh = (11) Duke, (12) Creighton
Salt Lake City = (5) Arizona, (14) Illinois
Spokane = (15) Kentucky, (16) Auburn
You start from the top, assign each team to its closest site, cap the sites at two each, and eventually Kentucky and Auburn get dumped in Spokane because nobody else was anywhere near that?
If they won ACC and ISU/Baylor/Kansas/Marquette don't win their conference tourneys and/or bow out early, Duke could get a 2-seed for sure. What's tough about me saying that is I have no idea what their draw would be. If it's Syracuse/Clemson/UNC, that's 1 Q2 win and 2 Q1As. If it's Florida State, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, those are all Q2s. Playing around with ACC Tournament seeding generator, they should want Wake Forest to beat Clemson Saturday. I think that would create a scenario where they could play Clemson in ACC semis to pick up another Q1 win.
That's a minor pet peeve of mine when I hear TV guys or podcasters talk about "if X wins their conference tournament, they'll jump a seed line." I mean, maybe, I guess, but who they are beating on the way there plays a factor.
I would agree with you on putting Iowa State over Baylor, but I can see his point somewhat.
Fact is, Baylor and Iowa State have similar Q1/Q2 metrics. you can nitpick either way. Results based metrics are a split too. Baylor better KPI and ISU better SOR. Iowa State has better predictive metrics. BPI of 9 and POM of 11. Baylor is 13 in both.
I'd go Iowa State because of their better win % in q1a (5-4 versus 5-6), but if someone wanted to say that the Head to Head tips it to a too close to call and then give Baylor the edge due to SOS, I couldn't be that made.
If the roles were reversed, I'd think we'd all be arguing in favor of Iowa State.
Him having Marquette at a 2 seed is more egregious. Right now, they are clearly below Baylor and Iowa State, unless you account for Kolek being hurt and ignore that Ward missed games for Iowa State and Langston Love missed games for Baylor.
Heck, North Carolina doesn't really stand above Iowa State and Baylor either. 6-4 Q1, 6-2 Q2, Results metrics 2/2 and predictive metrics of 11/8. Iowa State and Baylor have just as good of a resume as UNC.
Maybe they should do it that way, but they definitely do not. Teams are placed into the bracket based on distance, avoiding conference rematches, avoiding regular season rematches in round 1, and then regional balance. Here's how they do it.
How the field of 76 DI men’s teams is picked for March Madness
The NCAA’s guide to how the 76 teams are chosen, seeded and bracketed for the Division I men's basketball tournament every season.
www.ncaa.com
That is not their bracketing principles.
Teams will remain in or as close to their areas of natural interest as possible. A team moved out of its natural area will be placed in the next closest region to the extent possible. If two teams from the same natural region are in contention for the same bracket position, the team ranked higher in the seed list shall remain in its natural region.
Not sure on Nebraska. I found this:
To recognize the demonstrated quality of such teams, the committee shall not place teams seeded on the first five lines at a potential “home-crowd disadvantage” in the second round.
I think that means the 1 seeds and top 2 seed won't get a home-crowd disadvantage in the 2nd round.
I hate that the committee accounts for injuries.
It's too squishy, difficult to remember, and impossible to make fair comparisons.
You are what your record says you are. Staying healthy is part of the game.
A great player who is hurt 70% of the time isn't a great player. Health is a skill in itself.
Sure, luck factors in, but luck also factors in if you grow up to be 5'10" or 7'2". That's life.
It's too squishy, difficult to remember, and impossible to make fair comparisons.
You are what your record says you are. Staying healthy is part of the game.
A great player who is hurt 70% of the time isn't a great player. Health is a skill in itself.
Sure, luck factors in, but luck also factors in if you grow up to be 5'10" or 7'2". That's life.
I don’t think it’s worth stressing too much on if we’re bumped to a three seed by Duke, Baylor, etc. We’ll still be in Omaha either way.
The last 2’s and 3’s are pretty interchangeable this year I think, and there are a lot of mocks where the 3-seed is in a more advantageous position than the last two seed.
I’ve said it before but I’d rather be a 3 in the MW or W as opposed to the 2 in the East region. Also some of these projected 7/10 teams are tricky (Gonzaga, St. Mary’s, Nebraska in Omaha). The projected 6 seeds seem like easier outs (South Carolina, Wisconsin, Dayton).
The last 2’s and 3’s are pretty interchangeable this year I think, and there are a lot of mocks where the 3-seed is in a more advantageous position than the last two seed.
I’ve said it before but I’d rather be a 3 in the MW or W as opposed to the 2 in the East region. Also some of these projected 7/10 teams are tricky (Gonzaga, St. Mary’s, Nebraska in Omaha). The projected 6 seeds seem like easier outs (South Carolina, Wisconsin, Dayton).
