They are assuming all other principles are satisfied.
That's how Auburn got Birmingham. Saves money on travel for the NCAA and keeps teams from losing time traveling if possible.
Bracketology 2024
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
That's how Auburn got Birmingham. Saves money on travel for the NCAA and keeps teams from losing time traveling if possible.
The coward side of me don’t want #1 seed as I want to avoid potential embarrassing loss against #16 seed or #8/9 seed. But this is a loser’s mentality. To be an elite, one has to take potential risks as well.
Correct. But such instances are the exceptions rather than the norm. I was correcting someone trying to say teams seeded 5-16 are placed at regional sites based on their proximity.
It doesn't seem like they dwell on such things but the KSU game would be a good reminder to what happens if the ball isn't shared or managed.
He was pissed in the post game that day but I wonder if he also loved having that kind of pivot point for reference.
I guess we will see today, what I have read from the NCAA site and from bracketologists is it can absolutely happen. I think it will be moot in regards to Nebby though, I think they will be a 8 seed and we will be a 2. The only reason I've seen to keep them on the 7 is the bid stealers are pushing the bubble down.
I don’t know, if Indiana St doesn’t get in it’s going to pushing a decade with one multi-bid year. In the early 2000s it was a 2-4 bid league. Even leading it up to the current lineup it was more often than not a 2 bid league.
It is still ranked similarly but the ceiling for the league in terms of bids and seeds those bids get is significantly lower. I do think it can and should be a pretty consistent 2 bid league, it had a good stretch of being really damn good.
I think they meant it was UNC, Tennessee (because of SEC hard on) and Arizona.
This is actually a very overlooked point, the NCAA charters flights (sun country I believe or at least they have had the contract the last few years) for all of the teams.
Yes most years this is true as things aren't too out of the norm. Yesterday we had a team (UNC) who recently moved to the 1 line lose to a team who wasn't going to even make the tournament. Then we had a solid 2 seed (ISU) beat the ever living **** out of the #1 team in the country for the largest loss by a #1 team in decades.
You think none of this won't matter? Maybe ISU continues to be a 2, but I can guarantee there will at least be discussion.
Seems many of the updated projections are still sending us to Boston. I can live with UNC getting the final 1 seed but how are we not getting our geographically favored region. Only way that should happen is if Tennessee or Marquette are still ahead of us.
The game changed, the league didn't.
The A10 and AAC should have been 1 bid leagues as well. We'll see what the inevitable expansion and reforming of autobids does.
Interesting NET details with ISU-UNC comparison. Both teams have same combined record in Q1/Q2 (16-7) and Q3/Q4 (11-0).
NC has better win% vs. Q1, ISU better vs Q2; NC has more wins in Q3, fewer Q4 games (both are unbeaten in Q3 & Q4).
I don't know specifically how much factor some of that is, just found it intriguing.
NC has better win% vs. Q1, ISU better vs Q2; NC has more wins in Q3, fewer Q4 games (both are unbeaten in Q3 & Q4).
I don't know specifically how much factor some of that is, just found it intriguing.
The other factor that most don't think about. Instead of being the Big 8 with 8 teams, it's now the Big XII with 14 (soon to be 16) teams. SEC, B1G, ACC and BigEast have similarly grown. Some of that is major conference musical chairs, but also quite a bit of promoting from MidMajors. With a larger pool of P6 teams vying for spots there are fewer spots for the Mid majors. The conference may still be 9 or 10 in strength, but there are now a lot more teams in those conferences above them.
Shorts Travel in Waterloo actually schedules all travel. It's an insane task to get 134 teams to sites in 2 days.
- Jan 26, 2019
- 1,150
- 1,756
- 113
- 34
While you could be right I refuse to believe it was Arizona. Losses to Stanford, Oregon State, and USC has to mean something
Linardi and Palm are bad at placing teams on seed lines, they usually get all teams in the field though. But most everyone who's dialed into this process can field 68. Seeding them separates men from boys
I agree it doesn’t make a lot of sense when you consider the tourney results going into yesterday and these losses you mention. But it does fit the “conference tournament doesn’t matter that much” narrative that you hear a lot. Meaning these teams were in that 4-7 territory.
