Bracketology update: Still work to do for Omaha

[ClubCy]

I get the obsession for fans with Omaha, but to me it is much ado about nothing. Your draw as far as teams in your region is much more important than the location of the game.

I disagree. When you are seeded 1-3 you are expected to win regardless of the draw. You want to be closer to home with more fans to give you that extra advantage.

Seeded that high you should be looking at who you would potentially draw in the second weekend not the first.

 

[clone52]

Palm is an enigma. The last week he had us playing in Pittsburgh, after Saturday it was Omaha until today it is now Brooklyn?? Last week Baylor was Omaha then when we went to the Omaha spot the first part of the week I believe Baylor went to Spokane and today they are back in Omaha.

He's lazy. With his current seedings, Iowa State would go to Pittsburgh. For all we know, he has ISU ahead of Baylor and "chose" to make the travel "even". Same thing he's doing by putting 4 seed Creighton in Pittsburgh instead of Iowa STate.

 

[Halincandenza]

I disagree. When you are seeded 1-3 you are expected to win regardless of the draw. You want to be closer to home with more fans to give you that extra advantage.

Seeded that high you should be looking at who you would potentially draw in the second weekend not the first.

It doesn’t really give you an advantage though. If you look at numbers playing closer to home has almost zero effect.

 

[NiceMarmot]

Ugh. I wish editors wouldn't use Lundari and Palm as their sources. Just because they're the most visible doesn't mean they are good at it. Use and cite the bracket geniuses that ARE good at what they do.

@NiceMarmot please link the best ones! Know you're good at this.

Well, I will be somewhat selfish and tout my own bracketology projection. Per the Bracket Matrix rankings, I'm ranked 34th over the last 5 years. Much better than Lunardi at 98th or Palm at 142nd. Willing to volunteer to have my bracketology become the official bracketology of Cyclone Fanatic instead of just on a Google Sheet.

Outside of my projections, here are the guys with a great history of this over many years.

• Bauertology - 6th over last 5 years. Love how great his bracket looks visually.
• 1-3-1 Sports - 2nd over last 5 years. Daily bracket link you can click to open.
• Rocco Miller at The Bracketeer
• Lucas Harkins at Heat Check CBB
• Andy Bottoms at Inside the Hall
  • These three guys are on Field of 68 a lot talking brackets
• Jonathan Warriner at Making the Madness
• DRatings Bracketology

All of these guys are infinitely better than Lunardi and Palm.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

He's lazy. With his current seedings, Iowa State would go to Pittsburgh. For all we know, he has ISU ahead of Baylor and "chose" to make the travel "even". Same thing he's doing by putting 4 seed Creighton in Pittsburgh instead of Iowa STate.

Creighton can't play in Omaha, they're the host.

There's nothing in the selection criteria about travel being even. They seed the field and the computer program assigns sites down the S curve by pure mileage. The only exception would be the #1 overall seed can elect their preferred site which is going to be the closest 99% of the time anyway.

 

[clone52]

I disagree. When you are seeded 1-3 you are expected to win regardless of the draw. You want to be closer to home with more fans to give you that extra advantage.

Seeded that high you should be looking at who you would potentially draw in the second weekend not the first.

Thats not really true.

In 2023, 5 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2022, 5 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2021, 6 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2020, 12 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2019, 0 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2018, 6 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2017, 4 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.

So on average 36% of teams seeded 1-3 fail to reach the sweet 16. That means the top 3 seeds reach the sweet 16 64% of the time. Draws matter.

Your logic that team's seeded 1-3 should be looking at the potential draw in the sweet 16 would be similar to me saying that Iowa State should be focused on preparing for the BYU game.

 

[clone52]

Creighton can't play in Omaha, they're the host.

There's nothing in the selection criteria about travel being even. They seed the field and the computer program assigns sites down the S curve by pure mileage. The only exception would be the #1 overall seed can elect their preferred site which is going to be the closest 99% of the time anyway.

Yeah, but in that scenario, 3 seed Iowa State would get Pittsburgh and Creighton would get Brooklyn.

Its all in the computer. You get to a team on the seed line and they get the closest available site. Even if Iowa STate was the worst 3 seed, when they placed Iowa State, Pittsburgh would be the closest site.

I'm not even sure the #1 seed can pick their first round sites anymore.

There is no possibility that Iowa State, if seeded 1-3 would ever travel further than Pittsburgh. Given the current standings, its just not possible.

 

[clone52]

Well, I will be somewhat selfish and tout my own bracketology projection. Per the Bracket Matrix rankings, I'm ranked 34th over the last 5 years. Much better than Lunardi at 98th or Palm at 142nd. Willing to volunteer to have my bracketology become the official bracketology of Cyclone Fanatic instead of just on a Google Sheet.

Outside of my projections, here are the guys with a great history of this over many years.

• Bauertology - 6th over last 5 years. Love how great his bracket looks visually.
• 1-3-1 Sports - 2nd over last 5 years. Daily bracket link you can click to open.
• Rocco Miller at The Bracketeer
• Lucas Harkins at Heat Check CBB
• Andy Bottoms at Inside the Hall
  • These three guys are on Field of 68 a lot talking brackets
• Jonathan Warriner at Making the Madness
• DRatings Bracketology

All of these guys are infinitely better than Lunardi and Palm.

Put on your Cardinal and Gold glasses and bump Iowa State to a 2 seed.

Nice work.

 

[mctallerton]

Yeah, but in that scenario, 3 seed Iowa State would get Pittsburgh and Creighton would get Brooklyn.

Its all in the computer. You get to a team on the seed line and they get the closest available site. Even if Iowa STate was the worst 3 seed, when they placed Iowa State, Pittsburgh would be the closest site.

I'm not even sure the #1 seed can pick their first round sites anymore.

There is no possibility that Iowa State, if seeded 1-3 would ever travel further than Pittsburgh. Given the current standings, its just not possible.

I don't disagree with you that Palm is lazy, was Pittsburgh open for both and Creighton still goes to Brooklyn? I feel like Palm still tries to put together a bracket as if it were 1998. I really like the guys that give insight to their bracket. I don't want to say defend them but will explain the process.

 

[NorthCyd]

It doesn’t really give you an advantage though. If you look at numbers playing closer to home has almost zero effect.

You have some data to show this out of curiosity?

 

[Clonefan32]

I'm just assuming the delay in Lunardi's update is due to him working diligently overnight to come up with a justification to not move Kansas. Little fella is in his bunker going all "Beautiful Mind" to try and figure out an answer.

 

[madguy30]

I get the obsession for fans with Omaha, but to me it is much ado about nothing. Your draw as far as teams in your region is much more important than the location of the game.

I think I put time of day under match up but it's still far down the line and location is way down there

 

[clone52]

I don't disagree with you that Palm is lazy, was Pittsburgh open for both and Creighton still goes to Brooklyn? I feel like Palm still tries to put together a bracket as if it were 1998. I really like the guys that give insight to their bracket. I don't want to say defend them but will explain the process.

In his bracket, he has Creighton and Duke as 4 seeds in Pittsburgh. Both spots in Pittsburgh are open for a 3 seed Iowa State.

If Creighton jumped Iowa STate and Iowa State was still a 3 seed, then Iowa State would get Pittsburgh ahead of 4 seed Duke.

If both Creighton and Duke were 3 seeds higher than a 3 seed ISU, then ISU gets Omaha, because that would mean Baylor goes to a 4 seed, or Alabama would go to a 4 seed, moving Baylor to Memphis.

The only way to get Iowa State to Brooklyn as a 3 seed would be if Arizona dropped to a 4 seed. I think a top 12 like this would knock Iowa State to Brooklyn.

Houston
UConn
Purdue
UNC
Tennessee
Kansas
Marquette
Alabama
Baylor
Creighton
Duke
Iowa State

Iowa State should get Omaha, with Pittsburgh. Honestly, a those are the only 2 possibilities for a 3 seed Iowa State.

 

[ClubCy]

Thats not really true.

In 2023, 5 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2022, 5 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2021, 6 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2020, 12 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2019, 0 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2018, 6 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.
In 2017, 4 out of 12 teams failed to make the sweet 16.

So on average 36% of teams seeded 1-3 fail to reach the sweet 16. That means the top 3 seeds reach the sweet 16 64% of the time. Draws matter.

Your logic that team's seeded 1-3 should be looking at the potential draw in the sweet 16 would be similar to me saying that Iowa State should be focused on preparing for the BYU game.

What constitutes as a good draw? It’s subjective to each team. If Baylor and Iowa State are both 3 seeds Baylor’s draw could be great for them due to matchups but could be bad for Iowa State if they got the same draw.

Also, teams seeded on the 1-3 line are typically (not always) put closer to home if possible.

 

[clone52]

I think I put time of day under match up but it's still far down the line and location is way down there

I'd be curious what the coaches/players think. Having more of a crowd behind you would certainly help.

Ideally, we'd get Omaha and the other high seed would be further away.

If its us and Kansas, that limits how my Cyclones will be there.
If its us and Marquette (unlikely), that might be a few more Cyclone fans.
If its us and Baylor, that likely means more Cyclone fans.

Those are really the only 3 realistic options.

 

[dahliaclone]

For the record @Connor_Ferguson I'm not mad there are articles like this! I love it...I just don't think Palm and Lunardi are the ones to be citing. @NiceMarmot laid out many better bracketologists including themself in a post in this thread. Keep up the good work!

 

[CychiatricWard]

I get the obsession for fans with Omaha, but to me it is much ado about nothing. Your draw as far as teams in your region is much more important than the location of the game.

Well of course it is. But the combination of a good draw in Omaha potentially, and how close it is would be a dream scenario.

 

[madguy30]

I'd be curious what the coaches/players think. Having more of a crowd behind you would certainly help.

Ideally, we'd get Omaha and the other high seed would be further away.

If its us and Kansas, that limits how my Cyclones will be there.
If its us and Marquette (unlikely), that might be a few more Cyclone fans.
If its us and Baylor, that likely means more Cyclone fans.

Those are really the only 3 realistic options.

I've wondered if teams/coaches like getting further away spots to play to get out of Dodge and not feel that pressure of 'having' to win because they're close.

 

[Connor_Ferguson]

For the record @Connor_Ferguson I'm not mad there are articles like this! I love it...I just don't think Palm and Lunardi are the ones to be citing. @NiceMarmot laid out many better bracketologists including themself in a post in this thread. Keep up the good work!

You're all good! I just need to know where we should be looking, and thanks for reading!

 

[Jayshellberg]

Looking forward to your analysis as you are very informed. However, if you still have KU in Omaha as a “3” seed, I am going to puke and question whether you’re a KU apologist