A seeding thought

[Vowelguy]

Just putting together some bracketing.

@ND : ND [@Pur]..., SC [@Ia]..., PnSt* ......, OkSt [@Ky]
@Lou: Duke* ......, Lou [@Wash], WV [@Tole].., AzSt [@TxAM]
@Neb: UConn* ....., Tenn* ....., NCSt [@IaSt], UNC*
@Stn: Stan [@UCLA], Bay* ......, Md* ........, LSU*

 

[baggerbob]

Duke without gray is going to lose more games, Louisville stands a good chance of being the 4th number 1 seed.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Looks reasonable, as bb noted though that Duke's situation is volatile at this point, though I think the Blue Devils will pull things back together pretty well in the next few weeks.

One big discrepancy between your list and the just released AP poll is WV, which is ranked only #17, but it does seem that Sagarin is much more accurate at putting the Eers at #10.

 

[Vowelguy]

Duke without gray is going to lose more games, Louisville stands a good chance of being the 4th number 1 seed.

I think SC has a better chance than Lou. The Cards have few quality wins.

 

[ASweet3781]

I would hope after the way last years tournament played out the committee would show more preference to an eye test more than anything else. It would avoid some situations like last year where you had a JV game going on in the semi finals and the other semi final was the real final. You can't predict some upsets (Louisville over Baylor) but you can predict some (Stanford was very vulnerable yet that bracket was still very soft).

UConn, ND, and Stanford will all be 1 seeds. Whoever gets the last one I would put Louisville and Duke in the same region and let them settle it out.

But after that which teams have passed the "eye test"? I would say the 2 teams that gave the 2 best teams their toughest battles so far- Maryland and Baylor. I would put both of those teams are in either Stanford's or Duke-Louisville's region should one of those teams fall. If there's an upset, you want a worthy team in the Final 4.

I really haven't seen enough of South Carolina to know if they pass the eye test. But a loss to UNC isn't too encouraging.