Charlie Creme’s Bracketology (2019-2020)

[triaddukefan]

Based on what evidence?

Well... based on Conference RPI... the Southern Conference is #26 out of #32.... Seems more inline with a #15 seed

Plus.. they past the my eye test

 

[Plebe]

Well... based on Conference RPI... the Southern Conference is #26 out of #32.... Seems more inline with a #15 seed

Plus.. they past the my eye test

Is there really an important difference between a 15 and a 16 seed?

 

[triaddukefan]

Is there really an important difference between a 15 and a 16 seed?

More prestige

 

[nwhoopfan]

Is there really an important difference between a 15 and a 16 seed?

Avoiding Oregon, South Carolina or Baylor?

 

[Plebe]

Avoiding Oregon, South Carolina or Baylor?

It's UNC-G. I don't think playing NC State is a big reward for them.

 

[triaddukefan]

It's UNC-G. I don't think playing NC State or Maryland is a big reward for them.

I just want them to get on a plane.... them and Campbell

 

[Sifaka]

I just want them to get on a plane...

15 or 16. It's a tossup.

 

[Alydar]

I think I am confused by Creme's logic.

By RPI, Louisville has 1 more quadrant 1 win, but by RPI, Stanford is ranked 4th and Louisville is *7th*. So if we care about RPI for quadrant calculations, why don't we care about RPI overall? Louisville's second best win per Q1 analysis is Central Michigan (RPI 18). Does anyone think they're the 18th best team in the country? If not, why do we care about that win? (Massey ranks Stanford 5 and Louisville 8.)

"Cards better in SOS"? Per WarrenNolan RPI, Louisville is 26th, Stanford is 27th. Okaaaay. (Massey has Stanford at 10th and Louisville at 18th.)

And yes, Louisville beat Oregon, which beat Stanford. But Stanford beat OSU, which beat Lousiville, as Creme admits.

Might as well just come out and say it: it's more convenient for everyone involved if the PAC-12 only gets one #1 seed, and *someone* from the ACC should get one...

It's all academic right now, and Stanford still needs to take care of business vs. UCLA and U$C first, but I kind of don't think there's a world where the PAC-12 can get two #1 seeds no matter who else loses unless they're really really bad losses. And I am confident that if Stanford loses to UCLA, they will drop by much more than Louisville non-dropped losing to a (worse) FSU team.

Your problem is with your initial presumption. Creme, whom I consider a front man for the committee, has a rationale for every seeding but no consistency in those rationales. Each is logical only in isolation with each other.

Yeah, I'm just gonna say right now that his reasoning is highly debatable.

The difference between #26 and #27 SOS is as negligible as can be. And I *guarantee* that Stanford's SOS will be significantly better than Louisville's before all is said and done. Stanford finishes the season against the Oregon and Arizona schools. Louisville has only one top-50 opponent in its remaining 7 games.

I suppose one major advantage Louisville has is the win over Oregon, which is better than Stanford's best wins over Oregon State and Gonzaga.

I wouldn't give up on the idea of Stanford getting a #1 seed. A win over Oregon at home would for sure put them on the 1 line, and probably wouldn't drop Oregon. Even without a win over Oregon, Stanford has more chances than Louisville to enhance its resume over the next month.

But Louisville would have to stumble, and even if they do it's likely that Maryland would just swap seeds with them. If Stanford were to beat Oregon twice it's far more likely they too would simply swap positions in the brackets.
If any team has a weak case for a 1 seed it's Baylor, who has the weakest RPI of Creme's 1 seeds & a horrid SOS and is 1-1 against top 10 teams. Their claim to a 1 seed is mostly the eyeball test since Cox returned. And the committee has penalized Baylor in the past for their weak OOC schedule in years when the B12 was a lot stronger. If UConn had beaten Baylor they would have a stronger case for a 1 seed than the Bears.

 

[WestCoast]

Based on what evidence?

I saw that UNC-G has a realtimerpi.com rating of #132 today. Are there four other teams in Creme's bracketology today that are worse than 132?

 

[triaddukefan]

I saw that UNC-G has a realtimerpi.com rating of #132 today. Are there four other teams in Creme's bracketology today that are worse than 132?

Sam Houston, Grand Canyon, UC Davis, Jackson State. Robert Morris is 128

 

[WestCoast]

Sam Houston, Grand Canyon, UC Davis, Jackson State. Robert Morris is 128

There you go.. UNC-G is indeed worthy of a #15 seed. Point proven....

 

[Plebe]

There you go.. UNC-G is indeed worthy of a #15 seed. Point proven....

Eh; not so fast. RPI isn’t the sole determinant of seeding.

Perhaps the committee has figured out that the teams from North Carolina are usually overrated

 

[Wbbfan1]

UConn Now in Greenville because of NC State's loss last night. Much better match up for UConn.

Women's Bracketology: LSU, Iowa open on top line, but UConn is No. 1 overall

LSU and Iowa open as top seeds along with UConn and Utah. The Huskies are No. 1 overall in our first projection for 2023-24.

www.espn.com

 

[DefenseBB]

Has anyone ever done a comparison of Charlie's final bracket to the committee's for seeding correctness (as well as teams?) To me, I see a significant number of bad seeding across the board #8 LSU vs. #9 tOSU? tOSU is has a much better resume and LSU is now missing their top player. I thought that was supposed to be considered in seeding? I guess, the real intent for doing this is to create dialogue and long those ends, it is, I just wish the freakin ESPN announcers wouldn't tout this so much or at least ask logical questions for his response...