NC State should not have been a #1 seed

[Boreifs]

NC State and Texas A&M were boosted by the "strength" of their leagues compared to Baylor and Maryland. I think the Big 10 proved it was a better league than the committee gave them credit for and the SEC and ACC were not a step above the Big 10 as the committee and some media members implied. Totally understand the committee has a system, but I don't think it was right this year with where they placed teams #3 - 7. I think they got Stanford and UConn right (and Louisville as the 8th best team), but didn't take the "eye test" into account when looking at the rest of the 1 and 2 seeds.

There was much more than the eye test. The Sabermetricians rated Baylor and Maryland very highly. They should have been number one seeds, but SC, AM and State all benefited from more national exposure.

 

[jaydee602]

NC State and Texas A&M were boosted by the "strength" of their leagues compared to Baylor and Maryland. I think the Big 10 proved it was a better league than the committee gave them credit for and the SEC and ACC were not a step above the Big 10 as the committee and some media members implied. Totally understand the committee has a system, but I don't think it was right this year with where they placed teams #3 - 7. I think they got Stanford and UConn right (and Louisville as the 8th best team), but didn't take the "eye test" into account when looking at the rest of the 1 and 2 seeds.

Good analysis! Well stated.

 

[UcMiami]

NC St had a good resume and was playing well. Then they lost their second leading rebounder and third leading scorer to an injury in round 1 of the NCAA tournament (patella tendon) and they lost to a decent Arizona team tonight by three points after being out rebounded on the offensive glass 8-3. Cut them some slack. Injuries suck, we know that from experience.
People were worried that Uconn might struggle losing their #5 starter, 5th in assists and 7th in scoring. I think NC St probably missed their starter more than we did.

TA&M - no argument, they played the 3 games like crap. But ... their resume looked pretty decent in a year where conference strength was very hard to analyze - the committee and most everyone else missed the boat on how much the teams in the Big10 below MD had improved from a year ago - but it wasn't very obvious from their resumes either. Iowa with five questionable losses and no signature wins doesn't exactly scream S16.

 

[Boreifs]

Massey had the Big 10 as the second most powerful conference before today’s games. Big 12 third, SEC fourth, ACC fifth. Maryland, IU, Michigan and Iowa were all in the Top 14. Seeding Michigan sixth was a travesty; Iowa should have been a four and IU a three.

 

[ucbart]

Poor showing. Baylor or even Maryland was more deserving.

ESPN talked them into that seeding. It’s almost criminal how much Mowins, Antonelli, Peck, and Lyle talked the committee into those brackets.

 

[huskeynut]

The debate of who was seeded #1 and so forth is part of the big dance. Always has been and always will be. There is no perfect system or analytics or whatever you call it to evaluate teams for seeding. Someone is always going to be under seeded or over seeded.

Maybe next year will give a better picture for seeding. But this year's schedules did not allow for a normal schedule. COVID wiped out almost all the out of conference games that pit top teams against one another. Too many teams had stoppages that lasted 2 to 4 weeks. So any system was skewed to conference scheduling. And conference scheduling was off when you had teams playing 5 games in ten or eleven days.

Preconceived opinions as to what conferences were strongest was definitely off. All season we heard of the vaunted SEC as the best. We not so. Look like only 1 SEC team will make the Elite 8. The Big 10 was undervalued. One has advanced to the 8. There could be 2 after tomorrow.

 

[Zanzman]

If Uconn happens to lose Monday night.... I expect a Baylor should have never been a #2 seed Thread to pop up at around 9:05pm EST.

That's a big hunk of cheese I posted earlier... enough for a few more people to get a slice.

905 will be more than a little late for that thread

 

[mbr33ct]

If UCONN beats Baylor to advance to the final four, they play the winner of Arizona/ Indiana. A much easier path to the finals than the other side of the bracket with Louisville, South Carolina, Maryland, & Stanford fighting it out.

Not unless Charlie Creme "reseeds" teams.

 

[mbr33ct]

If Uconn happens to lose Monday night.... I expect a Baylor should have never been a #2 seed Thread to pop up at around 9:05pm EST.

That's a big hunk of cheese I posted earlier... enough for a few more people to get a slice.

 

[mbr33ct]

The selection committee thoroughly examines each team's whole season & their seedings reflected that. By the start of the tournament, Baylor & Maryland were two of the best teams in the country. But their whole body of work wasn't enough for the committee to have them leapfrog over Texas AM & NC State.

You give the selection committee more credit than I do, I have doubts they "thoroughly examine" each team, you just stated Baylor and Maryland were two of the best teams in the country...no need to go any further.

 

[jaydee602]

You give the selection committee more credit than I do, I have doubts they "thoroughly examine" each team, you just stated Baylor and Maryland were two of the best teams in the country...no need to go any further.

LOL... I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt. But I think they did a subpar job. Charlie Creme's braketology was right on the money. He changed it to match the committees first reveal. His reseedings after the 1st round should have been the tournament seedings!

 

[bbsamjj]

1. As others have stated, NC State was not playing at full strength.
2. It's the NCAA tournament...upsets happen. Just because you have upsets does not mean the seedings were incorrect. Did the men's committee err in giving Illinois a #1 seed just. because they lost in the second round?

 

[triaddukefan]

ESPN talked them into that seeding. It’s almost criminal how much Mowins, Antonelli, Peck, and Lyle talked the committee into those brackets.

poppycock

 

[JordyG]

poppycock

I would add "balderdash" and "hogwash". Some people just can't live without their unfounded, poorly thought our conspiracies.

 

[Rixxx]

Horsefeathers...

 

[mbr33ct]

I'll play along....malarkey

 

[MooseJaw]

If UCONN beats Baylor to advance to the final four, they play the winner of Arizona/ Indiana. A much easier path to the finals than the other side of the bracket with Louisville, South Carolina, Maryland, & Stanford fighting it out.

So it would seem, however funny things happen on the way to the forum, ask a few of the favorites who have lost.

 

[UcMiami]

Massey had the Big 10 as the second most powerful conference before today’s games. Big 12 third, SEC fourth, ACC fifth. Maryland, IU, Michigan and Iowa were all in the Top 14. Seeding Michigan sixth was a travesty; Iowa should have been a four and IU a three.

But that includes the first two rounds full of surprising positive performances by the Big10 and surprisingly weak performances by the SEC. Do you have the data after the conference championships and before the first round?

And Massey was as starved as everyone else was with little OOC data to work with so most people had serious questions about some of rankings of teams all season long.

 

[jaydee602]

"Supposedly we were the number two No. 1 [seed], you mean to tell me Baylor's number seven? Somebody got that wrong" - Geno Auriemma on UConn facing Baylor in the Elite 8

 

[triaddukefan]

Man

 

[Boreifs]

But that includes the first two rounds full of surprising positive performances by the Big10 and surprisingly weak performances by the SEC. Do you have the data after the conference championships and before the first round?

And Massey was as starved as everyone else was with little OOC data to work with so most people had serious questions about some of rankings of teams all season long.

Before the tournament, the SEC was second, Big 12 third and Big 10 fourth. Your point is well taken

 

[lenbo]

Go complain to the NCAA committee... and here is something to snack on

View attachment 66330

PAC Man!! Waka waka.

 

[Wbbfan1]

Considering NC State's Record and league they played in they deserve the #1 Seed they got. However were they the most talented team of the teams that were competing for a #1 Seed, no they weren't. Baylor obviously has the better athletes/players and IMO is a significantly better team. However the Big 12 was rated below the ACC and thus Baylor got the #2 Seed instead of a deserved #1 Seed. IMO Maryland was also a better team and despite last night's loss to Texas, I think they would have blown out NC State even if they were completely healthy.

 

[Vowelguy]

Poor showing. Baylor or even Maryland was more deserving.

This aged well

 

[Vowelguy]

Poor showing. Baylor or even Maryland was more deserving.

Baylor’s resume sucked. Giving them a 1 seed would’ve been 100% eye test; 0% results. I would hope the committee would be more balanced in its decisions.