Bracketology

[Plebe]

If Oregon is in the Portland regional, Stanford must be sent elsewhere.

 

[ConnecticutBB]

Albany UCONN/ND/MARYLAND/Iowa
Greensboro/Baylor/MissSt/Miami/OregonState
Portland/Oregon/NCSTATE/Marquette/Gonzaga
Chicago/Louisville/STANFORD/Iowa/South Carolin
Any thoughts

 

[Plebe]

Unfortunately the committee continues to use the RPI as their criteria for seeding and selections which has inherent flaws, most of which does not take into account the BY perspective! How dare they!

A fair question might be though, is the RPI more skewed in favor of the P5 schools than either Massey or WarrenNolan? Or is the flaw universally applied?

The committee is well aware of the flaws and limitations of the RPI.

Notre Dame was #1 in the RPI but #6 in the committee's "reveal."
Oregon State was about #30 last week in the RPI but was #12 in the reveal.

 

[Plebe]

Albany UCONN/ND/MARYLAND/Iowa
Greensboro/Baylor/MissSt/Miami/OregonState
Portland/Oregon/NCSTATE/Marquette/Gonzaga
Chicago/Louisville/STANFORD/Iowa/South Carolin
Any thoughts

You have Iowa twice.
Good strategy to make UConn's Sweet 16 opponent play in two different regions

 

[Plebe]

From the committee's manual:

"Each of the first four teams selected from a conference shall be placed in different regions if they are seeded on the first four lines."

So the only way Oregon and Stanford can be sent to the same region is if (a) one of them is seeded 5 or below, or (b) the committee selects 4 other Pac-12 teams ahead of one of them.

Neither is likely.

 

[Bear11]

Albany UCONN/ND/MARYLAND/Iowa
Greensboro/Baylor/MissSt/Miami/OregonState
Portland/Oregon/NCSTATE/Marquette/Gonzaga
Chicago/Louisville/STANFORD/Iowa/South Carolin
Any thoughts

NC State is not a 2 seed, and if they were I sure hope they get sent to the overall number one's region. As a Baylor fan, I'd be really mad if we got stuck with Mississippi State while a lower team got NC State.

 

[bbballfan23]

NC State is not a 2 seed, and if they were I sure hope they get sent to the overall number one's region. As a Baylor fan, I'd be really mad if we got stuck with Mississippi State while a lower team got NC State.

I agree, give me NC State or Stanford all day long as a 2 seed.

 

[Plebe]

ESPN just posted Creme's latest projection:
Bracketology with Charlie Creme

Highlights:

• He has UConn as the #4 overall and ND as #5.
• NC State is still the last #2 seed.
• Miami and Oregon State move up to #3 seeds.
• Marquette drops to a #4 seed.
• UCF is still in the field ... barely.
• Utah drops to "first four out."

 

[Bear11]

I agree, give me NC State or Stanford all day long as a 2 seed.

And then Creme says that Mississippi State is going to Greensboro. I don't get it. Why is the overall number 1 being punished? I don't care if its a "home" game for NC State, they aren't even close to Mississippi State. I'm not even sure why NC State is still a 2 seed. I hope Creme is slipping. If Baylor wins out and gets that bracket, Kim Mulkey and all Baylor fans would be livid.

 

[Orangutan]

ESPN just posted Creme's latest projection:
Bracketology with Charlie Creme

Highlights:

• He has UConn as the #4 overall and ND as #5.
• NC State is still the last #2 seed.
• Miami and Oregon State move up to #3 seeds.
• Marquette drops to a #4 seed.
• UCF is still in the field ... barely.
• Utah drops to "first four out."

This is what he wrote on Sunday: "But keep an eye on Notre Dame. Should the Fighting Irish beat NC State on Monday (ESPN2, 7 p.m. ET), that would give Notre Dame four RPI top-10 wins. The Huskies and Cardinals have combined for just one. And UConn also has significantly fewer top-50 wins than the other two, and not as strong a schedule."

Warren Nolan is showing NC State as 11 in RPI right now. Maybe that's why ND is still a 2. His rationale for L'ville over ND at this point is "dropping the Cardinals to No. 5 overall seems too much", which isn't exactly an ironclad statement.

Anyway, ACC tourney still to come, lot of games to be played, etc. etc. I still want to see ND as a #1 in these projections even though they don't matter one bit at this point.

 

[bbballfan23]

ESPN just posted Creme's latest projection:
Bracketology with Charlie Creme

Highlights:

• He has UConn as the #4 overall and ND as #5.
• NC State is still the last #2 seed.
• Miami and Oregon State move up to #3 seeds.
• Marquette drops to a #4 seed.
• UCF is still in the field ... barely.
• Utah drops to "first four out."

I stopped listening to Creme a long time ago. This just won’t be the case. No chance they put ND & UConn together. Committee is smarter than that.

 

[Alydar]

Oregon has 11 quadrant 1 wins (top 50 RPI), to UConn's 6. 5 of those wins for Oregon are over top 25 RPI teams. UConn has 4 RPI top 25 wins, but 2 of those are over UCF, who I don't think anyone truly believes to be a top 25 team. UConn has the better losses, but Oregon makes up for it with more strong wins. I don't think UConn can pass Oregon in the eyes of the committee unless Oregon takes another loss.

The "top 50 wins" is a fine stat when you have 7 teams all about the same and only 3 slots left on the board. but not of much use as a measure of quality wins for a team looking for a 1 seed. The 20-50 teams slide up and down those rankings all season and any team looking for a 1 seed should "easily" beat any of them. It's just a function of the limited elite talent that ends up concentrated in about 20 teams. When giving out 1 and 2 seeds the question should be "can this team beat a top 5 team on a neutral court?" One seeds win against other top 5 teams. And if you compare the contenders UConn has the best win, a road win against then No 1 by 18 pts. Baylor has beaten no one of note on the road but then Baylor rarely plays any OOC games at that level and there isn't another team close to that level this year in the B12. But they did beat UConn, not badly but decisively. Louisville had probably their best game beating UConn since the Irish Massacre last season. So UConn lost 2 of handful of top level games. But very few had even 2 road games against 1/2 seed type teams. UConn had 3.

But why care at all? You want to be the champ? Then don't act like you need an easy path.

 

[willtalk]

Creme seems to change his criteria as the mood strikes him.

 

[DallasBUFan]

The "top 50 wins" is a fine stat when you have 7 teams all about the same and only 3 slots left on the board. but not of much use as a measure of quality wins for a team looking for a 1 seed. The 20-50 teams slide up and down those rankings all season and any team looking for a 1 seed should "easily" beat any of them. It's just a function of the limited elite talent that ends up concentrated in about 20 teams. When giving out 1 and 2 seeds the question should be "can this team beat a top 5 team on a neutral court?" One seeds win against other top 5 teams. And if you compare the contenders UConn has the best win, a road win against then No 1 by 18 pts. Baylor has beaten no one of note on the road but then Baylor rarely plays any OOC games at that level and there isn't another team close to that level this year in the B12. But they did beat UConn, not badly but decisively. Louisville had probably their best game beating UConn since the Irish Massacre last season. So UConn lost 2 of handful of top level games. But very few had even 2 road games against 1/2 seed type teams. UConn had 3.

But why care at all? You want to be the champ? Then don't act like you need an easy path.

It's called earning it. Baylor's OOC was just as good as anyone's in the top this year. Part earning overall number 1 seed is earning the easiest route to the championship.

 

[Alydar]

I stopped listening to Creme a long time ago. This just won’t be the case. No chance they put ND & UConn together. Committee is smarter than that.

I think that in the last 3 years a deal was made between Charlie and the NCAA where they float various scenarios to the public under his name. In the end they avoid a lot of the complaints and in return Charlie looks like a genius. Win-win.
I say this because up to maybe 3 years ago his projections were filled with procedural errors and never looked like the final seeds. Then, all of a sudden he wrote about how he attended an NCAA training session and suddenly his charts matched up, a little too close.

 

[Bear11]

The "top 50 wins" is a fine stat when you have 7 teams all about the same and only 3 slots left on the board. but not of much use as a measure of quality wins for a team looking for a 1 seed. The 20-50 teams slide up and down those rankings all season and any team looking for a 1 seed should "easily" beat any of them. It's just a function of the limited elite talent that ends up concentrated in about 20 teams. When giving out 1 and 2 seeds the question should be "can this team beat a top 5 team on a neutral court?" One seeds win against other top 5 teams. And if you compare the contenders UConn has the best win, a road win against then No 1 by 18 pts. Baylor has beaten no one of note on the road but then Baylor rarely plays any OOC games at that level and there isn't another team close to that level this year in the B12. But they did beat UConn, not badly but decisively. Louisville had probably their best game beating UConn since the Irish Massacre last season. So UConn lost 2 of handful of top level games. But very few had even 2 road games against 1/2 seed type teams. UConn had 3.

But why care at all? You want to be the champ? Then don't act like you need an easy path.

Baylor beat Arizona State and South Carolina on the road. Those are certainly wins of note.

I did not invent these criteria to somehow benefit my own team. These are the criteria that the committee uses, and we have seen many times over the years that they value a high volume of good wins over all other criteria, even if a team takes more losses. I have my opinions about the top teams, but that isn't what I'm listing here. These are the facts that will be used by the committee when the ranking is made.

It is commonly said in March that you just have to "beat the one in front of you" and not care about seeding. This is true in the literal sense, and the appropriate attitude once the real bracket is revealed. But in reality, it is a series of games, each one with a chance of losing and winning. Increasing your odds by even a little bit in each individual game is important. A beneficial bracket can have a significant effect on a team's chances, even if they are the favorite going in. It is not unreasonable for the number one overall seed to expect to be given the benefit of the bracket.

For instance, Creme currently has Mississippi State in Baylor's region. That would be a terrible bracket. Massey currently says that Baylor would beat MSU 56% of the time. It also says Baylor beats NC State 87% of the time. It is only reasonable to want to face the lesser team. If anyone has questions about the benefits of a good bracket, ask the 2017 South Carolina team.

 

[Alydar]

It's called earning it. Baylor's OOC was just as good as anyone's in the top this year. Part earning overall number 1 seed is earning the easiest route to the championship.

Baylor has had 2 top 10 (Massey) games this year, one home one road. They were 1-1. UConn had 3 top 10's (maybe 4 if SC can beat Miss St) all 3 on the road and went 1-2. If SC sneaks in they would have 2 top 10 wins.

Stats are all about how you look at them.

 

[Monte]

Bracketology with Charlie Creme

 

[Alydar]

Baylor beat Arizona State and South Carolina on the road. Those are certainly wins of note.

I did not invent these criteria to somehow benefit my own team. These are the criteria that the committee uses, and we have seen many times over the years that they value a high volume of good wins over all other criteria, even if a team takes more losses. I have my opinions about the top teams, but that isn't what I'm listing here. These are the facts that will be used by the committee when the ranking is made.

Bull. I've lived through 25 years of these selection shows and the committee picks and chooses through their impossibly complex "policies & procedures" every year. One year "they were bound by geography" Next year it was the "sanctity of the S curve". Or it was "maintaining balance within the bracket". Very little consistency.

It is commonly said in March that you just have to "beat the one in front of you" and not care about seeding. This is true in the literal sense

, and the appropriate attitude once the real bracket is revealed. But in reality, it is a series of games, each one with a chance of losing and winning. Increasing your odds by even a little bit in each individual game is important. A beneficial bracket can have a significant effect on a team's chances, even if they are the favorite going in.

You should have stopped at the bolded part. You never know who will raise their game and who will play badly.

It is not unreasonable for the number one overall seed to expect to be given the benefit of the bracket.

Yeah, like 2008, when UConn was the overall 1 seed and the committee sent overall 5 seed Rutgers to UConn's region. The 4th 1 seed was between Rutgers and some other team. UConn was playing Rutgers for the 3rd time and won in a battle. Five days later they lost to Stanford in the famous Montgunnery meltdown. The reasoning that year was that the committee was bound by geography. There is the value the committee places on the S curve when it doesn't suit their desires.

For instance, Creme currently has Mississippi State in Baylor's region. That would be a terrible bracket. Massey currently says that Baylor would beat MSU 56% of the time. It also says Baylor beats NC State 87% of the time. It is only reasonable to want to face the lesser team.

There you go again trying to associate "reasonable" to the committee. I would be very happy to just select all 32 at large teams using Massey and then seed them using Massey.


If anyone has questions about the benefits of a good bracket, ask the 2017 South Carolina team.

 

[oldude]

Bracketology with Charlie Creme

So if this bracket actually comes to pass, do UConn fans root for the Lady Vols over the Lady Bears?

 

[EricLA]

So if this bracket actually comes to pass, do UConn fans root for the Lady Vols over the Lady Bears?

Not in a million years...

Side note - ND is the 2 seed I'd least like to see.

 

[oldude]

Not in a million years...

Side note - ND is the 2 seed I'd least like to see.

Your missing a great scenario here. The Lady Vols pull off a stunning upset vs the #1 team in the nation only to lose their very next game vs mid-major Gonzaga.

 

[mbr33ct]

So if this bracket actually comes to pass, do UConn fans root for the Lady Vols over the Lady Bears?

Provided they get by North Carolina.

 

[Plebe]

I think that in the last 3 years a deal was made between Charlie and the NCAA where they float various scenarios to the public under his name. In the end they avoid a lot of the complaints and in return Charlie looks like a genius. Win-win.
I say this because up to maybe 3 years ago his projections were filled with procedural errors and never looked like the final seeds. Then, all of a sudden he wrote about how he attended an NCAA training session and suddenly his charts matched up, a little too close.

So all the times when he has publicly disagreed with the committee's decisions ... those were just staged to make it *look* like they aren't in cahoots?

 

[DallasBUFan]

Baylor has had 2 top 10 (Massey) games this year, one home one road. They were 1-1. UConn had 3 top 10's (maybe 4 if SC can beat Miss St) all 3 on the road and went 1-2. If SC sneaks in they would have 2 top 10 wins.

Stats are all about how you look at them.

Baylor also beat SC
Also has more top 50 wins
Also still have the potential for 2-3 more top 25 matchups.