Bracketology - December 17

[BRS24]

Hey gang - first, note that I've removed the region cities, as I finally figured out why my table last year was messed up. Birmingham and Spokane go with the teams that are the top 1 seeds, so this week, as UCLA moves to the top of the top, Group 1 is renamed to Spokane, where last week, UConn was the #1 seed and it was listed as Birmingham. Any 1-4 seed that moves in and out of each group but keeps the seed # is technically an up/down movement, but I'm not gonna try and track it. Get all that? LOL

UConn moves to a 2 seed, Tennessee make its top 16 debut, and UNC drops to a 7 seed. Big East picks up another bid. Our Vandy friends move up to a 5 seed.

Big Ten 12
SEC 10
ACC 9
Big 12 7
Big East 3
Atlantic 10 2

 

[The CDR-Ret]

At this snap shot, UConn would take out three #1 seeds to get to NC #12 (without upsets of #1's before UConn gets to them)):
#1 Texas, #1 UCLA, #1 USCar or #1 uNd.

"It COULD Happen!"

Go Huskies!!!

 

[luvgiraf]

Anyone notice Creme has Creighton as the automatic qualifier from the Big East?

 

[Plebe]

ND has 3 excellent wins over USC, Texas, and UConn. No other team, including South Carolina, has wins anywhere near that good. There comes a point where your quality wins outweigh your losses. The number of losses is not per se important; if it were, then Minnesota and Portland would be #1 seeds.

Creme hates us so much that he had us for several weeks as the #1 overall seed. This persecution complex is really something else.

 

[MSGRET]

I believe that Creighton is currently the top team in the Big East standings because they had the first Big East win of the season. It will change once UConn is the only team that doesn't have a loss or is on the top of the standings.

 

[Geew1992]

Everyone hates Uconn

 

[HuskyNan]

ND has 3 excellent wins over USC, Texas, and UConn. No other team, including South Carolina, has wins anywhere near that good. There comes a point where your quality wins outweigh your losses. The number of losses is not per se important; if it were, then Minnesota and Portland would be #1 seeds.

Then why does UConn have a higher NET rating?

DI Women's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Women's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com

Get NCAA women's college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today/WBCA and NCAA committee.

www.ncaa.com

And, explain to the UConn men how good wins help negate losses. The guys lost to two ranked teams, one unranked team, beat #8 Gonzaga, and two "others receiving votes" on the road and are a projected 4 seed.

 

[Plebe]

Then why does UConn have a higher NET rating?

And, explain to the UConn men how good wins help negate losses. The guys lost to two ranked teams, one unranked team, beat #8 Gonzaga, and two "others receiving votes" on the road and are a projected 4 seed.

Tournament seeding isn't determined by the NET.

The comparison to the UConn men's resume is a bit of a stretch:

The 3 best wins of the ND women are over NET #2, #3, and #7.​

The 3 best wins of the UConn men are over NET #4, #18, and #47.​

​

The ND women have losses to NET #8 and #26.​

The UConn men have losses to NET #33, #34, and #74.​

This comparison isn't even close. I'm confident that if the UConn men had 3 wins over the NET top 7, and if they didn't have any Quad 2 losses, their projected seeding would be higher than #4.

 

[Vowelguy]

Then why does UConn have a higher NET rating?

What does the NET rating have to do with anything?

The NET rating is not how the committee ranks teams. There's a lot of evidence that they use it to sort teams and then evaluate how a team does against each of the groupings. Hence the repeated discussion of quality wins/bad losses, or now Quad 1 wins and Quad 3/4 losses.

Also the NET only has 1/3 of a season's data right now.

 

[HuskyNan]

I figured out why the Bracketology has Creighton as the automatic qualifier (AQ). Creighton played its first Big East game vs Xavier on Dec 4, beating them 82-54. UConn didn't played any Big East teams until Dec 15 so until that game, Creighton was the top team in the conference. I think some of the bracketology might be AI or an intern just taking the conference leader and sticking them into the AQ spot on the bracket. I know UConn played before the bracket was released but I don't know the timing of the bracket's creation so there may be simply a timing difference. Or it could be since Creighton got to the top spot first, UConn didn't dislodge them as conference leader.

 

[Plebe]

I believe that Creighton is currently the top team in the Big East standings because they had the first Big East win of the season. It will change once UConn is the only team that doesn't have a loss or is on the top of the standings.

This is correct.

The fact that he has UConn as as 2 seed and Creighton as a 6 is proof that he doesn't actually consider Creighton to have the better team or the better resume.

 

[visitingcock]

It’s all gobbledygook.

We don’t know what Charlie uses for rankings - which are all over the place.

I’m doing a composite ranking for fun (big Friday night, huh?) Baylor is ranked in the coaches poll 21; Massey 19; Net 19 and received no votes in the AP. None out of 36!

Does Charlie use the ESPN “house” power rankings? Apparently not. UConn is ranked 4th by his own company. ( third in the composite I’m working on). Why do y’all give it ANY attention?

Gobbledegook!

 

[Vowelguy]

It’s all gobbledygook.

We don’t know what Charlie uses for rankings - which are all over the place.

His goal is to mimic what the committee does. So he looks at NET, quad wins, etc.

 

[visitingcock]

His goal is to mimic what the committee does. So he looks at NET, quad wins, etc.

And yet . . . He comes up with gobbledygook.

But then again the committee came up with the same gobbledegook last year when NET quad wins etc should have had UConn as a 1/2 seed rather than 3.

 

[Plebe]

But then again the committee came up with the same gobbledegook last year when NET quad wins etc should have had UConn as a 1/2 seed rather than 3.

???

These were the records of the 1/2 seeds vs. NET top 25 teams last year (the women's committee didn't adopt the quad system until this season):

South Carolina 6-0​

Iowa 7-4​

USC 8-4​

Texas 5-2​

Stanford 7-4​

UCLA 8-5​

Ohio State 5-3​

Notre Dame 7-3​

UConn was 3-5.

 

[Vowelguy]

And yet . . . He comes up with gobbledygook.

in your opinion.

But then again the committee came up with the same gobbledegook last year when NET quad wins etc should have had UConn as a 1/2 seed rather than 3.

The committee didnt use quad wins in their criteria last year.
I think UConn was fairly seeded last year. It definitely did not deserve a 1 seed.

 

[HuskyNan]

I believe that Creighton is currently the top team in the Big East standings because they had the first Big East win of the season. It will change once UConn is the only team that doesn't have a loss or is on the top of the standings.

Sorry I didn’t see your post before I made mine

 

[visitingcock]

???

These were the records of the 1/2 seeds vs. NET top 25 teams last year (the women's committee didn't adopt the quad system until this season):

South Carolina 6-0​

Iowa 7-4​

USC 8-4​

Texas 5-2​

Stanford 7-4​

UCLA 8-5​

Ohio State 5-3​

Notre Dame 7-3​

UConn was 3-5.

???

These were the records of the 1/2 seeds vs. NET top 25 teams last year (the women's committee didn't adopt the quad system until this season):

South Carolina 6-0​

Iowa 7-4​

USC 8-4​

Texas 5-2​

Stanford 7-4​

UCLA 8-5​

Ohio State 5-3​

Notre Dame 7-3​

UConn was 3-5.

No. They didn’t use quads last year. Supposedly they used the NET. Who had the #1 NET SOS last year? UConn.

UConn was ranked number 2 in the NET Last Year. What they came up with looked more like the AP than the NET.

And the pudding? No #2 seeds made the FF. Two #3 seeds were better.

 

[Plebe]

No. They didn’t use quads last year. Supposedly they used the NET. Who had the #1 NET SOS last year? UConn.

Lots to dispel here. I already said they didn't use quads last year. They certainly did use NET top 25, top 50, etc. as categories to help evaluate quality of wins and losses. This explanation is helpful:

How will using the quads be different?​

This is just a slightly different way of looking at a win or a loss. The quads present as an easier way to identify that winning on the road is more difficult and is rewarded more substantially. The quadrant ranges essentially replace top-25, top-50 and top-100 records.​

​

The terminology used by commentators, writers and, especially, bracketologists will change from "South Carolina is 6-0 against the NET top 25 and 17-0 versus the NET top 50" to "South Carolina's record against Quad 1 opponents is 12-0."​

​

Also, not that it would have any bearing, but what's your source for claiming that UConn was #1 in NET strength of schedule? The NCAA site showed UConn as #31 in NET SOS and #1 in nonconference SOS.

UConn was ranked number 2 in the NET Last Year. What they came up with looked more like the AP than the NET.

I'm unclear as to why you feel the committee was obligated to seed teams in strict adherence to the NET. They have never said the NET (or the RPI before it) was the determining factor.

And the pudding? No #2 seeds made the FF. Two #3 seeds were better.

Upsets happen in every tournament and do not prove that teams were mis-seeded. The other such #3 seed was NC State -- whose NET ranking was #13 on selection day. So should they have been a #4 seed based on NET ranking, or a #1 seed because they reached the Final Four? Which is it?