- Joined
- Apr 4, 2019
- Messages
- 975
- Reaction Score
- 4,435
Come Monday you will see #1 UCLA; #2 Notre Dame; #3 Texas; #4 Southern California; #5 UConn; #6 South Carolina; #7 LSU and #8 TCU
Bracketology - Week 15
- Thread starter BRS24
- Start date
bballnut90
LV Adherent. Topic Crafter
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2011
- Messages
- 8,354
- Reaction Score
- 39,360
It's not just about best win though. With that logic UCONN would be the #1 overall seed then which is obviously not the case.
LSU's only losses are road games at SC/Texas and they've stockpiled wins against NC State, Tennessee (2x) and Oklahoma. UCONN has losses to USC, Tennessee and Notre Dame, and their notable wins are over South Carolina/UNC.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 25,990
- Reaction Score
- 70,141
My point was that it in games against the likely #1 & #2 seeds, LSU has 0 wins. Just like 300 other teams.
In my book, the way to earn a top seeding is by showing you can beat other top teams. Otherwise, you're no better than any other team.
bballnut90
LV Adherent. Topic Crafter
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2011
- Messages
- 8,354
- Reaction Score
- 39,360
That's not the framework the committee uses though, that's a specific criteria that suits your opinion. It also conveniently overlooks UCONN's loss to Tennessee and LSU's two wins over Tennessee.
Here's the criteria used by the committee:
- Bad losses
- Common opponents
- Competitive in losses
- Early performance versus late performance
- Head-to-head outcomes
- NET ranking
- Observable component
- Overall record
- Regional rankings
- Significant wins
- Strength of schedule
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 25,990
- Reaction Score
- 70,141
First of all, where have you been?
I have a pretty long, consistent pattern of being the opposite of a homer. So the idea that I’m cherry picking to support UConn is beyond laughable. I would, and have, said the exact same thing against UConn — eg when folks on this board had said UConn had a shot at a 1 if it beat Tenn but lost to SC.
Second, the committee has made comments about wanting to see teams beat other top teams. And has referred to wins against the rest of the top 16 for example. And the “significant wins” bullet is a very vague, open to interruption criteria.