Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="nelsonmuntz, post: 5225125, member: 833"] Digging in a little deeper, I think leaning so heavily on metrics alone for seeding was a mistake by the Committee. There was some serious over-seeding, especially at the 5 and 6 lines (Michigan, Oregon, Missouri, Mississippi, Illinois), while under seeding teams like Creighton/Louisville and UConn. A case could be made that Purdue and Texas A&M are over seeded too. The metrics have a tendency to reward teams for quality losses while punishing teams for non-quality wins. I am not anti-metrics, but it feels like it is a massive driver in seedings whne it should just be a factor. Does anyone really think Mississippi or Oregon is a threat to go to the Final 8? While this may seem like fun for the SEC and Big 10 conferences to get more teams with big seeds, 1 seed’s like Florida and Auburn now potentially have really tough second round matchups. [/QUOTE]