Bracketology | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Bracketology

Ooh. Discovered some hoop fans archived the 11/8 page on wayback machine!
1669128652463.png
 
Stanford has out of conference home games in December against Gonzaga, Tennessee and Creighton. I will be interested in seeing whether Creighton can hang with them. Difficult, since Creighton is giving up so much height, but let`s see what happens. Also a good measuring stick since UConn plays Creighton about a week later (at Creighton).

Stanford has no difficult out of conference opponents this season where Stanford is on the road. SC game was at Stanford.

One significant story line this season is how will solid but under the radar Division One programs with veteran fourth and fifth (Covid) year players who have played together fare against higher profile Division One programs that have dipped heavily into the portal and may have chemistry issues.
 
.-.
Are there really 9 ACC teams that belong in the tournament at this point?
 
Bone Dog said:
Are there really 9 ACC teams that belong in the tournament at this point?
Expand ...
This is why there should be a law against "bracketology" before mid-January.

Almost no one "belongs" in the tournament in (checks calendar) November. What they're passing off as "bracketology" is still mostly a preseason projection since only a handful of teams have even played meaningful games.
 
The 'Sport Experts" have to do something, or they won't have a job.....so, they PREDICT until the end of the season.
 
If there are only 4 teams projected from the Big East why does 2 of them have to be in one bracket. Both UConn and Creighton are in the same Greenville bracket, since two different brackets are going to play in Greenville shouldn't Creighton be in the same bracket as South Carolina? That way you have 4 teams in 4 different brackets.
 
Plebe said:
This is why there should be a law against "bracketology" before mid-January.

Almost no one "belongs" in the tournament in (checks calendar) November. What they're passing off as "bracketology" is still mostly a preseason projection since only a handful of teams have even played meaningful games.
Expand ...
Sure, prediction = bad. But even granting this, is the thinking somehow, “Let’s expand the field to 68 so we can shoehorn even more Power 5 teams in”? And on top of this ”Hey, let’s give the lion’s share to the ACC of all conferences.” This is supposed to be the greatest of the greatest conferences? Seriously? In November, when only our imagination constricts us, this is the best we can imagine?

I’d have thought someone at ESPN would have pointed out this absurd result to Charlie and suggested he might want to rethink his operating assumptions.
 
MSGRET said:
If there are only 4 teams projected from the Big East why does 2 of them have to be in one bracket. Both UConn and Creighton are in the same Greenville bracket, since two different brackets are going to play in Greenville shouldn't Creighton be in the same bracket as South Carolina? That way you have 4 teams in 4 different brackets.
Expand ...
I pronounce you guilty - of logical thought.
 
.-.
It's my guess that Charlie knows the rules but doesn't think it's worth the effort to try to enforce them at this early date. I treat the early bracket held these as his general view of what the committee thinks about the relative seed lines, but I bet there is not a lot of emphasis on keeping traveling at a minimum, making sure matchups don't involve means that if Matt tournament multiple times recently, and other subtle written and unwritten rules but are important in March but not so important today.
 
Bone Dog said:
Sure, prediction = bad. But even granting this, is the thinking somehow, “Let’s expand the field to 68 so we can shoehorn even more Power 5 teams in”? And on top of this ”Hey, let’s give the lion’s share to the ACC of all conferences.” This is supposed to be the greatest of the greatest conferences? Seriously? In November, when only our imagination constricts us, this is the best we can imagine?

I’d have thought someone at ESPN would have pointed out this absurd result to Charlie and suggested he might want to rethink his operating assumptions.
Expand ...
ESPN owns the rights to the ACC and the SEC, so I'm positive they love the fact that so many teams from these two conferences are listed, whether they deserve to or not.
 
Bone Dog said:
Sure, prediction = bad. But even granting this, is the thinking somehow, “Let’s expand the field to 68 so we can shoehorn even more Power 5 teams in”? And on top of this ”Hey, let’s give the lion’s share to the ACC of all conferences.” This is supposed to be the greatest of the greatest conferences? Seriously? In November, when only our imagination constricts us, this is the best we can imagine?
Expand ...
"Which conference should get the most bids" is not a consideration at any time of the selection process. Teams are evaluated on an individual basis. Conference totals are not predetermined.
 
Plebe said:
"Which conference should get the most bids" is not a consideration at any time of the selection process. Teams are evaluated on an individual basis. Conference totals are not predetermined.
Expand ...
That's clear from looking at this. More fool I for thinking the goal of expanding the tournament might have been to benefit the women's game. Sigh.
 
Bone Dog said:
That's clear from looking at this. More fool I for thinking the goal of expanding the tournament might have been to benefit the women's game. Sigh.
Expand ...
I'm not sure whether the "benefit" should be evaluated solely on the basis of whether the benefiting teams are in power 5 or non-p5 conferences.

FWIW, the last 4 teams selected last season were Dayton, DePaul, Florida State and Missouri State. In the end, I'm not sure how much "benefit" was gained in DePaul's embarrassing shellacking in the First Four round.
 
Plebe said:
I'm not sure whether the "benefit" should be evaluated solely on the basis of whether the benefiting teams are in power 5 or non-p5 conferences.

FWIW, the last 4 teams selected last season were Dayton, DePaul, Florida State and Missouri State. In the end, I'm not sure how much "benefit" was gained in DePaul's embarrassing shellacking in the First Four round.
Expand ...
I'm mainly thinking the benefit might be to have more conferences represented. If the tournament is gonna be just the Power 5 + a couple others, no wonder everyone wants to switch conferences. That's where all the money, exposure, and glory is.
 
.-.
Bone Dog said:
I'm mainly thinking the benefit might be to have more conferences represented. If the tournament is gonna be just the Power 5 + a couple others, no wonder everyone wants to switch conferences. That's where all the money, exposure, and glory is.
Expand ...
All 32 conferences have at least one representative in the tournament. That's not an issue.

It's funny I don't recall many UConn fans complaining back when the old Big East routinely got 8 or 9 bids per year.
 
Post turkey tourney update - MD out, AZ back in.

1669732407301.png
 
Seattle B looks interesting. I'd like to see how Stanford manages Iowa State's guard play and Shares at the C.
 
Bone Dog said:
Seattle B looks interesting. I'd like to see how Stanford manages Iowa State's guard play and Shares at the C.
Expand ...
Iowa States defense absolutely face planted against NC, so I like Stanford's chances here.
 
Urshurak said:
Iowa States defense absolutely face planted against NC, so I like Stanford's chances here.
Expand ...
They sure did. But I suspect come tournament time they'll have upped their game.
 
.-.
Urshurak said:
True.
Expand ...
But you’re right that Stanford is probably going to roll over them in the tournament anyway. I just think there could be interesting matchups there — Soares vs Brink et al, Jones vs Joens.

It would he a heckuva upset for Iowa St. to win that one.
 
What I find strange about the most recent Bracketology is that Creighton is listed as the automatic qualifier, not UConn. Intentional or misstep, this is ESPN, so who knows. At least they are out of our bracket.
 
Bald Huskie said:
What I find strange about the most recent Bracketology is that Creighton is listed as the automatic qualifier, not UConn. Intentional or misstep, this is ESPN, so who knows. At least they are out of our bracket.
Expand ...
He has them as the "AQ", because they are technically #1 in the current Big East standings, just like he has Virginia as the "AQ" due to the same reason.
 
If this Bracketology were to hold, I think UConn has the weakest 2, 3, and 4 seeds.... and the ones I'd most like to see them face out of all the possible options out there. No complains on my end.... except I think UMass deserves like an 8 or 9 seed rather than an 11..... shrug. just saying
 
Two up, two down seed, welcome back Michigan, and a whole lotta region changes, most to date.
1670337097036.png
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,285
Messages
4,561,408
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom