Help Me Understand This Seeding: Florida State and MD in CT's Bracket?

[Plebe]

As the #1 #1 seed, UConn should draw the weakest #3 seed.

It doesn't work like that. On a perfect S-curve, UConn would draw the overall #8, #9, and #16 teams. The #9 overall team would be the highest 3-seed.

 

[Vowelguy]

But with Washington losing to Oregon, I'm guessing that they might substitute for Duke in our bracket. Plum is individually excellent, and Osahor pulls down rebounds, but as a team they're highly vulnerable. They lost to an Oregon team led by a freshman guard. UCLA might be better qualified (i.e., weaker) than Kentucky to go in UConn's bracket as well.
?

Washington and Stanford cannot be in the same region.
Ucla is not weaker than Kentucky

 

[oldude]

As the #1 #1 seed, UConn should draw the weakest #3 seed. I see Washington as weaker than Duke, and UCLA weaker than Kentucky.

Not exactly how it works. You have to think in terms of 1 to 16 seeds. UConn being the #1 overall seed would draw the weakest #2 (8th overall seed). The weakest #2 in turn draws the strongest #3 (9th overall seed). On UConn's side of the bracket they would play the weakest #4 (16th overall seed).

So UConn's bracket would have the 1, 8, 9 & 16 seeds.

 

[iamcbs]

How is it that the top #1 seed in the nation gets put together with the two teams that played the toughest games against it the entire season? How does Connecticut get put in a bracket with Maryland and Florida State?

Seems to me that the weakest #2 and #3 and #4 seeds would be Mississippi State, Oregon State, Louisville, and the like. Seems to me that UConn is getting shafted (assuming Creme is correct) by being put in with such tough opponents.

What am I missing here?

The first problem with your scenario is the assumption that ESPiN's Charlies Creme is correct. The Committee hasn't seeded anyone yet, because the conference tournaments are still being played. If you remember earlier this week there was a big

How is it that the top #1 seed in the nation gets put together with the two teams that played the toughest games against it the entire season? How does Connecticut get put in a bracket with Maryland and Florida State?

Seems to me that the weakest #2 and #3 and #4 seeds would be Mississippi State, Oregon State, Louisville, and the like. Seems to me that UConn is getting shafted (assuming Creme is correct) by being put in with such tough opponents.

What am I missing here?

Why are you assuming Charlie Creme is correct? He's not a Committee member, he's an ESPiN guy, like Kiper and McShay and their Mock Drafts or their NBA Insider reports.....

 

[Fairfield Fan]

It doesn't work like that. On a perfect S-curve, UConn would draw the overall #8, #9, and #16 teams. The #9 overall team would be the highest 3-seed.

Why should the top seed draw the weakest #2 seed and the weakest #4 seed, but the strongest #3 seed? I'm sure you understand this far better than I. Just trying to get my head around it. Shouldn't the top seed get all the weakest other high seeds in its region? Isn't that the reason for winning the top seed?

Again, I'm sure that you and other people here have a far better handle on this than I.

 

[willingtonfan]

Why should the top seed draw the weakest #2 seed and the weakest #4 seed, but the strongest #3 seed? I'm sure you understand this far better than I. Just trying to get my head around it. Shouldn't the top seed get all the weakest other high seeds in its region? Isn't that the reason for winning the top seed?

Again, I'm sure that you and other people here have a far better handle on this than I.

Fair question So I shall endeavor to provide an answer.

The idea is to create a bracket where at any given point assuming all seeds hold the number one team is playing the weakest team still in the bracket. So they play number 16 first round, if eight beats nine they play eight in the second round, if four beats five in the third round they play four, and then play number two in the fourth round for the right to go to the final four. So that is where the concept of the S-curve comes from. You match the highest number one seed with the lowest number two seed as that team is the overall number eight seed if it was a straight up bracket of all the teams not splitting into four brackets. You also match the highest number one seed with the lowest number four seed. Then when you fit in the other number one seeds the two seeds and the three seeds The lowest number two seed is in essence the number eight overall seed so just as eight and nine play each other in each bracket in the first round the overall eight and nine seeds should play each other in the third round. In order to do that you match the lowest number two (think the eighth overall seed) with the highest number three (think the ninth overall seed).

And that is why our bracket should have the lowest #2, highest 3 lowest four highest five etc.

Hope this helps!

 

[BobbyJ]

How is it that the top #1 seed in the nation gets put together with the two teams that played the toughest games against it the entire season? How does Connecticut get put in a bracket with Maryland and Florida State?

Seems to me that the weakest #2 and #3 and #4 seeds would be Mississippi State, Oregon State, Louisville, and the like. Seems to me that UConn is getting shafted (assuming Creme is correct) by being put in with such tough opponents.

What am I missing here?

A #1 team with guts doesn't worry about who's in their bracket. Their attitude is "line 'em up."

 

[triaddukefan]

Right now I could see

UConn, Stanford, Duke, Kentucky
Nd, Texas, Maryland, ucla
Baylor, miss st, Washington, Louisville
So car, ore st, fla st, Ohio st

I could see Duke and Stanford being flip flopped.. Depending on today and tomorrows results. Not that there is much of a difference.

 

[LO TRADER]

After watching the SEC Tournament games, I can't see how SEC deserves 8 teams in the NCAA Tournament. Past South Carolina and Miss. St., I can't see any other SEC team better than University of Oregon team in PAC-12 & UO finished 6th. Their quality of play is not up to PAC-12 & ACC. California could beat any of the SEC Teams that finished 3rd or higher. This is a weak conference. I know others disagree, and I may eat my words come tournament time, but I'm putting it out there for debate.

 

[Plebe]

Why should the top seed draw the weakest #2 seed and the weakest #4 seed, but the strongest #3 seed? I'm sure you understand this far better than I. Just trying to get my head around it. Shouldn't the top seed get all the weakest other high seeds in its region? Isn't that the reason for winning the top seed?

Again, I'm sure that you and other people here have a far better handle on this than I.

I thought Oldude above explained it very well. This is the concept of the S-curve.

In terms of the overall top 16 seeds, the expected semifinal matchups are 1-4 and 2-3. The expected "quarterfinal" (Elite 8) matchups are 1-8, 4-5, 3-6, and 2-7. The expected "round of 16" (Sweet 16) matchups in the top half of the bracket are 1-16, 8-9, 5-12, and 4-13. That 8-9 matchup corresponds in the NCAA basketball tournament to the lowest #2 seed and the highest #3 seed.

Don't think of it as UConn drawing the highest #3 seed. As Oldude explains, it's really the lowest #2 seed (overall #8) who draws the highest #3 (overall #9) in its projected Sweet 16 game.

 

[Los24]

Call me old fashioned, but why bother with projected brackets? They have no meaning. Time enough to discuss the real brackets.

You know how ironic that sounds when most of the threads on BY are hypothetical...?

 

[Los24]

Coach Auriemma has said repeatedly that UConn has weaknesses that get hidden, not eliminated, by the team's strengths. At this point in the season, every coach that has to play UConn knows what those weaknesses are and is game-planning to exploit them. So any quality team UConn plays is ready with some strategies. In the case of the better teams and coaches, they still believe this is the year UConn is vulnerable, and they believe they are the ones who can do it. They have seen the FSU, Baylor, MD, ND, S. Car, Tulane games. Although UConn won all those, there were lessons to be used against the Huskies. So beyond maybe the first round of the NCAA, it wont matter which teams the Huskies play against. They all will be bringing their A games.

You can say the samething for UConn in regards to game planning for their opponent.... Except we have the best coach and players.

But I understand (using a football term,) any given Sunday! Look at Dayton last year.

 

[tkaes]

Coach Auriemma has said repeatedly that UConn has weaknesses that get hidden, not eliminated, by the team's strengths. At this point in the season, every coach that has to play UConn knows what those weaknesses are and is game-planning to exploit them. So any quality team UConn plays is ready with some strategies. In the case of the better teams and coaches, they still believe this is the year UConn is vulnerable, and they believe they are the ones who can do it. They have seen the FSU, Baylor, MD, ND, S. Car, Tulane games. Although UConn won all those, there were lessons to be used against the Huskies. So beyond maybe the first round of the NCAA, it wont matter which teams the Huskies play against. They all will be bringing their A games.

Well, they will all certainly be intending to bring their A games and will all believe they will be bringing their A games. The proof is always in the pudding.

 

[cohenzone]

You know how ironic that sounds when most of the threads on BY are hypothetical...?

They usually don't have a million permutations.

 

[Vowelguy]

After watching the SEC Tournament games, I can't see how SEC deserves 8 teams in the NCAA Tournament. Past South Carolina and Miss. St., I can't see any other SEC team better than University of Oregon team in PAC-12 & UO finished 6th. Their quality of play is not up to PAC-12 & ACC. California could beat any of the SEC Teams that finished 3rd or higher. This is a weak conference. I know others disagree, and I may eat my words come tournament time, but I'm putting it out there for debate.

Again, it's a team-by-team evaluation. 7 SEC teams is a sure thing. Auburn is really the only bubble team. If you want to make a case for Cal over Auburn, that could be done. But no one else in the PAC has a shot, and there are nowhere near enough bubble teams to knock out LSU.

 

[nwhoopfan]

The Pac 12's problem is that the top 4 hardly lost any games to anyone outside the top 4 and the bottom 6 are all too closely lumped together. Two teams went 6-12 and four went 5-13. If there could've been a bit more separation and one or two teams won 7-9 games instead of 5 or 6, there would probably be a couple more bubble contenders. Utah, Colorado and Cal all won 10 or more in OOC but just didn't win enough in conference and didn't beat the good teams.

 

[Plebe]

The Pac 12's problem is that the top 4 hardly lost any games to anyone outside the top 4 and the bottom 6 are all too closely lumped together. Two teams went 6-12 and four went 5-13. If there could've been a bit more separation and one or two teams won 7-9 games instead of 5 or 6, there would probably be a couple more bubble contenders. Utah, Colorado and Cal all won 10 or more in OOC but just didn't win enough in conference and didn't beat the good teams.

The thing that absolutely killed Cal was losing at home to both Utah and Colorado in February. Before that they were looking like a potential #9 seed. They have quality wins over Oklahoma, UCLA and Oregon. But those two losses at home just buried them. They finished 6-12 in conference, and when they really needed another quality win against the top 4 down the stretch, they just couldn't get it despite multiple opportunities.