committee top 16 | Page 2 | The Boneyard

committee top 16

Compare this with the latest BY poll. The top 6 are identical and next 4 are the same except for order.
 
CompSci87 said:
Compare this with the latest BY poll. The top 6 are identical and next 4 are the same except for order.
Expand ...
They planned the reveal for tonight, knowing a new BY25 poll would be released earlier in the day. Saves them a lot of work.

The reason ESPN rescheduled the Oregon-Stanford game from 7:00 to 9:00 is they were expecting @Plebe to release the results a bit earlier in the day. When there was a delay, they decided to postpone the game to allow the committee adequate time to process the BY poll.
 
Ozimoto said:
I doubt these seeds hold for the remainder of the season.
Expand ...
Well, that's pretty much a given . . . :cool:

Some of those teams have upcoming games against each other. Teams will win; teams will lose. Some teams will lose to teams outside the Top 16. Some teams have no upcoming games against Top 16 teams (which could still have an indirect negative result even if they win out). And, of course, conference tournaments will result in some shuffling of seeds.

This is all point in time if the committee were to have released an official bracket last night (but, only for the Top 16 seeds).
 
Last edited:
.-.
Bear11 said:
Just as a general question, how do you fairly rank the Pac-12 teams when none of them played a real non-conference schedule? I don't think the NET and the other ranking systems can really apply to a conference that only played amongst themselves.
Expand ...

You are correct. It is a zero sum game when a conference has had no OOC games.
 
oldude said:
Michigan is still a game short of qualifying for the tournament.
Expand ...

Michigan has already qualified. It only takes 12 regular season games, since teams are allowed to count one league tournament game.
 
southie said:
Like Carolyn Peck stated, Texas A&M has more "quality wins" than a lot of teams ranked ahead of them, and they avenged their loss at LSU with a win at home against LSU; still, I think the #5 overall national seed is pretty accurate as they don't have a win over a Top 10 seeded team. But, does Louisville (I haven't checked)?
Expand ...
A&M has 5 wins against Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia and Kentucky, all of whom are in the top 16 or likely just outside of it. Louisville is 0-1 vs the top 16 and their only win over a ranked foe is against DePaul. Besides that their best wins are against Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse . I'd take A&M as the #4 overall seed ahead of Louisville since Louisville really hasn't proven anything against good teams yet.
 
Last edited:
DefenseBB said:
I think if Jose keeps winning now that they are out of Covid protocol, they will crack the top 16 next reveal. As will Michigan if they keep winning. One of the SEC teams or WV will drop out.
Expand ...
Essentially all the non-p5 teams except UConn got the shaft. Tough tacos for the Gonzagas and South Floridas and DePauls and South Dakota States and Stephen F. Austins of the world. But god forbid we don't make Georgia a 3 seed because hey, they're in a good football conference.

The only faint silver lining is that with all games on neutral courts this year, the seeding is less important.
 
.-.
MilfordHusky said:
S.C. can hang a banner: We're a #1 seed. :D
Expand ...

Yup, unlike last season when we were THE OFFICIAL number one seed at actual seeding time after the season had ended.

I guess we'll make this "temporary seeding banner" a different color. Maybe one square inch smaller.

Do we get another one for the next temporary seeding before the final official seeding?

Hot dawg, three potential seeding banners in one year!
 
I got zero complaints about the committee and their choices. The best thing that programs can do now, is just go out and play and let the results happen. Because in the end of all of this, folks are gonna complain. "Oh this team had an easy region so their run to the title was easy and should not count." Or "Oh this team had a tougher region so their run was more impactful than the other team."
 
oldude said:
What if you don’t play a tournament game due to Covid? You still need 13 games, and while MI is very likely to get there, they’re not there yet.
Expand ...

no. The NCAA says you can count one tournament game even if it never gets played. A team definitely only needs 12 regular season games, so Michigan has already qualified.
 
JellyBean said:
I got zero complaints about the committee and their choices. The best thing that programs can do now, is just go out and play and let the results happen. Because in the end of all of this, folks are gonna complain. "Oh this team had an easy region so their run to the title was easy and should not count." Or "Oh this team had a tougher region so their run was more impactful than the other team."
Expand ...
Agree 100%. Right now, it means nothing. Even when the actual seedings are released, with the amount of fans that will be allowed to attend, not sure it will matter much then either.

I doubt Geno cares. Like, at all!
 
.-.
southie said:
I really hate that the basketball committee bumps up/down teams seed-wise to avoid "potential" intra-conference matchups 3-4 rounds deep into the tournament. Neither women's volleyball nor women's softball do this (and maybe not even women's soccer); they seed teams based on their established criteria, and just let the chips fall where the may, even if that means intra-conference matchups occur in Sweet 16 or Elite 8. I believe the only thing they strictly try to avoid are round of 64 and round of 32 intra-conference matchups.
Expand ...
At the same time, it is really tough on two very good teams in the same conference to have to play two conference games and a conference tournament game and then an NCAA tournament game before the ff against the same team. Uconn and Rutgers and Uconn and ND have had to do that (against ND multiple times) and I believe there were howls when it happened fairly recently to Baylor?
 
oldude said:
Hardly neutral for teams from the Lonestar State.
Expand ...
With fan attendance probably disallowed, I doubt there will be any significant quasi-home court advantage unless teams are actually playing in their home arena, which apparently isn't the case, unless we count a potential 1st-round game for Texas at the Erwin Center ... or potential 1st- and/or 2nd-round games for UTSA.
 
Plebe said:
With fan attendance probably disallowed, I doubt there will be any significant quasi-home court advantage unless teams are actually playing in their home arena, which apparently isn't the case, unless we count a potential 1st-round game for Texas at the Erwin Center ... or potential 1st- and/or 2nd-round games for UTSA.
Expand ...
TX currently allows attendance, albeit limited, for college basketball games. I would expect similar attendance policies to be in effect for the NCAA tournament.
 
Plebe said:
With fan attendance probably disallowed, I doubt there will be any significant quasi-home court advantage unless teams are actually playing in their home arena, which apparently isn't the case, unless we count a potential 1st-round game for Texas at the Erwin Center ... or potential 1st- and/or 2nd-round games for UTSA.
Expand ...
I am sure they will put TX at one of the other sites.
 
Vowelguy said:
I am sure they will put TX at one of the other sites.
Expand ...
Perhaps, but it’s still drivable for TX fans. To the extent that fans are allowed, I would expect supporters of TX, Baylor & A&M to buy up a majority of available tickets.
 
Plebe said:
With fan attendance probably disallowed,..
oldude said:
TX currently allows attendance, albeit limited, for college basketball games. I would expect similar attendance policies to be in effect for the NCAA tournament.
Expand ...
I read there will be 6 tickets per player & Tier 1 program staffer, for friends & family, with attendance limited to max 408 fans per game.
Expand ...
Edit: Here's the article. After re-reading (see last paragraph) I'm not sure the 408 isn't just the Friends and Family policy and not the total attendance limit...

2021 DI Women’s Basketball Championship health and safety protocols announced

Following the recent announcement that San Antonio and the surrounding region would play host to the entire 2021 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship,
www.ncaa.org www.ncaa.org

"The protocols also address game attendance, with up to six guests per Tier 1 participant (up to 408 guests total) allowed in each venue per game. Those admitted will follow the established county and venue guidelines for attendance. The guests will be prohibited from interacting in person with any of the Tier 1 participants during the entire tournament. They will be seated in physically distanced family clusters. The final attendance policy will be announced before the championship."
 
Last edited:
.-.
That’s a horse of a different color. In the words of Emily Littela, “Never mind.”
 
oldude said:
TX currently allows attendance, albeit limited, for college basketball games. I would expect similar attendance policies to be in effect for the NCAA tournament.
Expand ...
Early in the season, I tried hard to get tickets to some of UT's home games and it was impossible. What I was told then was that season ticket holders were the only members of the general public allowed to attend. Perhaps that's changed in the 2-3 months since, but not judging from the attendance numbers.
 
oldude said:
Hardly neutral for teams from the Lonestar State.
Expand ...
I guess it depends on if fans will be allowed to attend. Of course, for the "local" teams in Texas, it for sure makes their travel much easier. I'm sure there are some other advantages, as well.

With some first round games being held in Austin at Texas' arena, I'll be curious if they allow Texas (assuming we make the tournament) to play on its homecourt. Or, do they incur additional travel (hotel, etc.) costs by busing them to San Antonio? Even if they bused Baylor and Texas A&M to Austin instead of San Antonio for the first round games, I'm not sure how much of a homecourt advantage it would be for them.

Of course, all men's tourney games are being played in and around Indianapolis. So, there will be some advantages for local teams like Indiana, Purdue, etc.
 
bballnut90 said:
A&M has 5 wins against Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia and Kentucky, all of whom are in the top 16 or likely outside of it. Louisville is 0-1 vs the top 16 and their only win over a ranked foe is against DePaul. Besides that their best wins are against Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse . I'd take A&M as the #4 overall seed ahead of Louisville since Louisville really hasn't proven anything against good teams yet.
Expand ...
I definitely would put A@M as a 1 seed instead of L'ville..they could win it all..bigs inside and pretty good shooting guards..good defense and a terrific coach...guess we'll see the last day of the regular season when they play SC
 
oldude said:
What if you don’t play a tournament game due to Covid? You still need 13 games, and while MI is very likely to get there, they’re not there yet.
Expand ...
The NCAA put out a couple of weeks ago that teams that don't reach the magic number can have the Conference submit a request for consideration to be eligible for the Tournament. I believe the deadline was the Monday before the selection committee meets.
 
MSGRET said:
The NCAA put out a couple of weeks ago that teams that don't reach the magic number can have the Conference submit a request for consideration to be eligible for the Tournament. I believe the deadline was the Monday before the selection committee meets.
Expand ...
That sounds like what the Big10 did to leapfrog tOSU football, when the Buckeyes didn’t have enough games to qualify for the Big10 championship, and a chance to play for the national championship.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,497
Messages
4,578,586
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom