AP Poll - Week 17

[6xChamps]

Can someone post the spread showing where each voter put us or tell me where you find that ?

Collegepolltracker.com

 

[JohnnyJr]

I agree. I’ve done my own bracket projections every two weeks since the new year and I’ve had no trouble placing UConn in the East as a 4. Should be even easier now if we’re on that line and behind the top four XII teams instead of competing with them for regional placement (I’d think we should be well in front of IA State and TCU by now, but who knows).

The problem there is one I’ve seen mentioned a few times on the board, but one I’m frankly not sure what to think of (in either direction): would the committee risk having a top seed, let’s say Purdue, have to play a road game against 4-seed UConn in the S16? I haven’t a clue. It shouldn’t be a consideration. But I haven’t a clue what the committee will think.

I thought I saw a rule that top 4 seeds in each bracket are only protected from a road game in the first two rounds. Idk what to think of playing a team like Purdue. I think we could beat them but Clingan would have to play a lot more then he’s used to

 

[UConNick]

I thought I saw a rule that top 4 seeds in each bracket are only protected from a road game in the first two rounds. Idk what to think of playing a team like Purdue. I think we could beat them but Clingan would have to play a lot more then he’s used to

It’s all very complicated.

In theory, the top four seeds aren’t even “protected” from other teams in the first two rounds. There’s a famous case from several years ago when a 3-seed in Milwaukee, because that was their geographic preference (can’t remember who), had to play 6-seed Wisconsin in the second round because the bracket principles landed them there, as well.

I believe that shouldn’t matter - at least for the regionals. Geography and then conference break-ups before everything else. I’m just not sure if the committee will do it (shove 4-seed UConn somewhere else) purposefully to protect whatever power conference team, again, Purdue the highest chance, is the 1 in NYC.

E: it was more than several years ago. 2004, 3-seed Pitt got Milwaukee as their first weekend site with the Badgers as the accompanying 6. Pitt won a close one.

 

[EROCK CONN]

It’s all very complicated.

In theory, the top four seeds aren’t even “protected” from other teams in the first two rounds. There’s a famous case from several years ago when a 3-seed in Milwaukee, because that was their geographic preference (can’t remember who), had to play 6-seed Wisconsin in the second round because the bracket principles landed them there, as well.

I believe that shouldn’t matter - at least for the regionals. Geography and then conference break-ups before everything else. I’m just not sure if the committee will do it (shove 4-seed UConn somewhere else) purposefully to protect whatever power conference team, again, Purdue the highest chance, is the 1 in NYC.

E: it was more than several years ago. 2004, 3-seed Pitt got Milwaukee as their first weekend site with the Badgers as the accompanying 6. Pitt won a close one.

There was also a case, I think it was 2014, where a team got a 7 seed and the regional semis and finals were at a venue that was only about 2.5 hours from the schools campus. Said venue has also been called that schools home away from home and Storrs South.

 

[tzznandrew]

Right. I think for getting MSG our main goal should be finishing above Virginia (or finishing a full seed behind). It was a good week in that regard. But Bracket Matrix has us right next to each other currently.

I genuinely don't understand how. UVa has far worse advanced metrics (including NET), fewer road/neutral wins, fewer Q1 wins, and fewer strong resume wins. They're feasting on that N-Baylor win...which is a good win, to be fair.

 

[tzznandrew]

Miami's loss was an absolute collapse but they were without Pack

FSU is a sub-200 NET team. It's like losing do Delaware. Worse than losing to Bryant by about 40 spots, not that we know a Canadian team that lost to such trash.

Regardless, really doesn't matter who you are missing when you are playing sub-200 teams...