NCAA tournament seeding - facts and myths

[oldude]

You didn't just suggest that head to head competition has "a bearing" (which of course it does). You stated emphatically that it trumps everything else. Where do you see that in the Selection Committee's criteria?

Please show me where I supposedly said, “emphatically that it trumps everything else?” I actually sited 4 Selection Committee criteria that all supported UConn’s position ahead of SC. Again, you’re getting creative in your argument.

Honestly, I have no problem going back and forth with you on this. But let’s stick to the facts.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Gosh, I miss Sue Donohoe.
Remember when she opened up the election committee vault?

 

[Gus Mahler]

I saw today where oddsmakers (who? where?) now have UConn as the favorite to win the tournament, replacing SCar. Maybe the committee should take that into account.

 

[fomalhaut]

Calling some of the criteria squishy is putting it mildly.

 

[Glenn]

I note that the AP rankings--which are subject to much scorn here--are a better predictor of the Committee's ranknigs this year, than is the NET. So while the rankings are not part of the criteria--they appear to summarize the criteria better than the NET does.
1. I say AP is better because the AP rankings are more correlated with the selection committee, with a correclation coefficient of 0.89, compared to 0.69 for the NET--both are useful, but the AP rankings more so.
2. Last week's AP ranknigs had two teams, NC State and Kentucky in their top ten and they were not in the NET top 16--both are in the selection committee reveal, close to where AP had them ranked.
3. the NET loves UConnm because we win big. The NET heavily relies on offensive and defensive efficiency, which is a fancy pants way of doing margin of victory adjusted for quality of opponent. That is why we have been consistently high in the NET, now #1 and last week #2. But the Committee seeded us close to the AP ranking and below LSU (#10 in the NET).

	Committee	AP week 15	net
1. UCLA	1	1	5
2. South Carolina	2	4	1
3. Texas	3	3	3
4. Notre Dame	4	2	4
5. Southern California	5	6	6
6. LSU	6	5	10
7. UConn	7	7	2
8. NC State	8	10	19
9. TCU	9	11	9
10. Duke	10	13	8
11. North Carolina	11	12	14
12. Kansas State	12	14	7
13. Kentucky	13	8	21
14. Ohio State	14	9	15
15. Oklahoma	15	16	16
16. Tennessee	16	15	11
Ole miss		28	12
WVA		15	13
correlation		0.88	0.69

 

[snowkot]

It's all pretty much a swag, considering how critical the health of certain players is. For me, UConn with Azzi Fudd healthy, feeling her best, is a clear #1 seed, if not the overall #1 seed. Her presence has a geometric effect on all aspects of the game, and her team. If she's unable to to play, UConn's a #2 at best, for me, as per the losses this campaign.

It's all just click-bait, until the final in-season version determines the brackets.

 

[Plebe]

You’re bouncing back and force. First it was UConn’s resume is “clearly inferior.” Now we have to use a “holistic assessment” of quality wins. So again I suggest that rather than bouncing back and forth on this, let’s see what happens between now and the end of the season.

No, I'm not. My use of the word "resume" clearly implies a holistic assessment—as opposed to focusing solely on one game, which is what you insist on doing—and to suggest I've contradicted myself only exposes a lack of comprehension.

You keep wanting to shelve the discussion but only if you can get in the last word with yet another spurious take.

 

[Vowelguy]

As I understand it. The NET is the actual starting point. The most perfectly fair placement for every team in the

No the NET is not the starting point. It is just one more piece of information.

 

[Vowelguy]

We'll never know what the committee does behind closed doors,

Though They have held mock sessions with reporters to show them how the process works.

 

[packwrap]

So you’re suggesting that UConn could still be a #1 seed even if they lost to SC yesterday?

There's too many elements favoring teams like SC, UCLA, USC to ND and TX right now. Mostly strength of schedule and quality wins.

Head to head is important, but that also yields crazy inputs. Utah will have to be ahead of ND. Tenn will have to be ahead of UConn. Also margin of victory generally is insignificant. If it's included, it encourages 4th q beatdowns, instead of gentlemanly tradition.

UConn does have 2 huge advantages though now for seeding. 1- Somehow we are #1 in NET already and SC #2. and 2- At current #6 seed, we can watch teams above us still play each other. With plenty of games left, reasonable chance someone above us stumbles. USC and UCLA almost went down yesterday!

 

[Vowelguy]

Quad 1 Record (undefeated against Q2-Q4 unless noted)

Texas 11-2
SoCar 10-3
UCLA 9-1
USC 8-2

ND 5-2
LSU 5-2
TCU 5-3
UConn 4-3

UNC 4-2 -- Also has 2 Q2 losses
Kentucky 4-3 -- Also has a Q3 loss
OklaSt 4-2 -- Also has a Q2, Q3, and Q4 loss

 

[cordarone]

Charlie obviously doesn't read the 'yard:

While UConn's stunning win over South Carolina doesn't change the seed for either team,...

ESPN Latest Bracket Projection

 

[Crossover]

Please show me where I supposedly said, “emphatically that it trumps everything else?” I actually sited 4 Selection Committee criteria that all supported UConn’s position ahead of SC. Again, you’re getting creative in your argument.

Honestly, I have no problem going back and forth with you on this. But let’s stick to the facts.

I'm not deeply invested in this conversation, and will happily bow out. However, I will pay you the respect of answering your question.

In post #6 in this thread you said: "At an absolute minimum, UConn's statement win yesterday in Columbia vaults the Huskies ahead of SC in the overall seeding determination for the Big Dance."

The italicized phrase is what I take to be your claim that the Huskies head to head victory is a trump card. That said, it may be that you view the UConn's demolition of SC as giving the Huskies an edge on all four of the criteria you cite -- early performance vs. late, head to head outcomes, observable component, and significant wins. However, at an absolute minimum, that is double counting, if not triple or quadruple. While the win is both a head to head victory and a significant win, the former necessarily entails the latter whenever the opponent is worth talking about.

As for the "observable component" criterion, it is vague and nebulous, and not something that anyone can make an "absolute" judgment about. One of my non-absolute "observable" judgments is that SC got caught up in the Game Day madness, the fan adoration, and the media-reinforced belief that the Huskies are on the decline, and forgot that it needed to play basketball. The teams spent hours before the game being distracted by nonsense. That will not happen again. Re early performance versus late, that can't be determined until the completion of the regular season plus conference tournaments. I don't believe that a single game, even if it is the most recent, reveals much about trajectory.

For what it is worth, I agree with you that UConn's victory should, and probably will, account for more than "little to nothing" in the seedings. However, I disagree that it will "at an absolute minimum" vault the Huskies past the Roosters in the overall seeding. My quarrel is less with your overstated analysis than it is with your dismissiveness and sarcasm, which borders on the puerile. However, you do you. Peace. Out.

 

[Plebe]

Hypothetically, suppose that South Carolina loses its upcoming regular season game to #8 Kentucky, but then wins everything else including the SEC Tournament. Would two "bad losses" (to UConn because of the MOV and to Kentucky as a lower-NET team) knock it off the #1 seeding line in the tournament?

I would think so, provided that none of the other contenders for a #1 seed stumble along the way. And that is despite the quality wins earlier in the SEC season.

There are any number of scenarios and hypotheticals that are fun to contemplate, and if SC's performance yesterday was any indication, they very well might be vulnerable to a team of Kentucky's or Vandy's or Ole Miss's caliber (their 3 opponents to end the regular season). That would at least make the decision interesting for the committee. It would still only be a loss roughly comparable to UConn's loss to Tennessee.

 

[Plebe]

Quad 1 Record (undefeated against Q2-Q4 unless noted)

Texas 11-2
SoCar 10-3
UCLA 9-1
USC 8-2

ND 5-2
LSU 5-2
TCU 5-3
UConn 4-3

Seeing these Quad 1 records really drives home why the committee ranked Texas as highly as they did (at #3 overall). And after yesterday's results, they're sitting even better.

UNC 4-2 -- Also has 2 Q2 losses
Kentucky 4-3 -- Also has a Q3 loss
OklaSt 4-2 -- Also has a Q2, Q3, and Q4 loss

So nice of you to use red to honor my Coogs!

 

[icednct]

UConn should be a #1 seed period.
They are #1 in the net
They beat #2 in the net (also #14,30,36)
They have no bad loses, 3 loses (#4,6&11 NET)
If they don't get a #1 seed you are punishing them for scheduling hard.
Most importantly as OP stated INJURIES Factor.
They are finally playing healthy. Look what AZZI did against the #2 NET team in the nation!!

 

[Skeets]

Guys, read the NCAA item I linked above. This is how the seeding is done. We can’t make up our own methodology.

How the field of 68 DI women’s teams is picked for March Madness

The NCAA’s guide to how the 68 teams are chosen, seeded and bracketed for the Division I women's basketball tournament.

www.ncaa.com

View attachment 107072

Nan, please consider that you are the victim of NCAA propaganda. Basically they can do what they want and they have done some bizarre things in the past. All the "soft" criteria are for CYA purposes. License to do what they want. Often they can't explain what they did or their explanations ring very hollow. Remember several years ago after explaining their (very weak) rational for a particular seeding it was pointed out that UConn had beaten the other team. The chairperson was speechless. So much for science. Nice.

 

[Skeets]

You have to compare the entire resume, not one game. So Carolina has more good wins than UConn. Head to head helps but it’s not THE determining factor

View attachment 107077

That is not 100% UConn's fault. It says more about the rest of the BE than what it says about the strength of UConn's team. Is it fair and righteous to punish UConn because the rest of the BE sucks and can't get into Quad 1? What is also telling are the lack of Quad 2/3/4 losses. But everyone has very few of those.

 

[Husky fanatic]

For me, I just want them to be in the Birmingham bracket. That’s where I have tickets and I would like to see them there regardless of where they’re seeded.

 

[Skeets]

For me, I just want them to be in the Birmingham bracket. That’s where I have tickets and I would like to see them there regardless of where they’re seeded.

Last year I had Albany tickets, but I was able to sell them at a nice profit. If I recall correctly CC was in Albany which probably helped the resale price.

 

[Zarathustra]

Well that may be your opinion but I can most certainly assure you it's not the committee's.

The committee is going to look at the resumes holistically. The committee is not made up of 9 UConn homers who post daily on the team's fan forum. Which means they're not going to cherry pick a single data point while disregarding the rest.

There is something called "THE EYE TEST". What I saw on SUNDAY
was a visual "EYE TEST". I believe that among the elite teams that
"On any given day". etc. But "ON" Sunday, and UCONN was "ON", and
the "EYE" test is (IMHO) "ON" UCONN's side. Of course, like a
jury, the opinion of the NCAA "committees" is "OUT" until selection
Sunday. Their OPINION is still "IN" the future... remains to be determined
by them. Most of the BONEYARD's "opinion" is well recorded on the
Blog. I'm happy that "Plebe" has confidence in the committee's
guidelines. But for myself, I'm VERY happy about 87 - 58, MOV 29. GO HUSKIES!

 

[PacoSwede]

intriguing discussion ... very entertaining/funny at times

in the end, the seeding won't count for much. no team will reach the final goal unless it's victorious in the final six games and winning vs. losing in each depends on how well the team plays that day regardless of its opponent. the huskies can win any WCBB game -- or lose -- depending on their own performance. i think their chances are good against all comers. we shall see. that's what makes the tourney exciting/nerve wracking for all.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

For those young pups that don't know about the NCAA WBB Division I Committee in 2001, here's the facts!
UConn lost to ND during the season and ND entered the Big East Tournament as the #1 seed.
UConn was the #2 seed'
With the score tied 76 all with just seconds left in the BE Finals Sue Bird goes the length of the court hitting the game winner!UConn wins the BE Tournament!
The next week the Division I WBB Seeding Committee, chaired by Sue Donohoe, meets and makes ND the #1 overall seed with UConn the #2 seed!
In the TV interview presenting the brackets on Selection Monday the Committee Chairwoman Sue Donohoe tells how they reached their seeding and was asked, "How was ND picked as the #1 seed over UConn?" Sue replied "Because they beat UConn twice, one during the season and in the BE Finals!" The reporter says, "No, UConn beat ND on Sue Birds buzzer beater!"
Sue replies (with a shocked look on her face), oh did they?

 

[Vowelguy]

What is also telling are the lack of Quad 2/3/4 losses. But everyone has very few of those.

None of the top 8 have quad 2-4 losses.

 

[Vowelguy]

For those young pups that don't know about the NCAA WBB Division I Committee in 2001, here's the facts!
UConn lost to ND during the season and ND entered the Big East Tournament as the #1 seed.
UConn was the #2 seed'
With the score tied 76 all with just seconds left in the BE Finals Sue Bird goes the length of the court hitting the game winner!UConn wins the BE Tournament!
The next week the Division I WBB Seeding Committee, chaired by Sue Donohoe, meets and makes ND the #1 overall seed with UConn the #2 seed!
In the TV interview presenting the brackets on Selection Monday the Committee Chairwoman Sue Donohoe tells how they reached their seeding and was asked, "How was ND picked as the #1 seed over UConn?" Sue replied "Because they beat UConn twice, one during the season and in the BE Finals!" The reporter says, "No, UConn beat ND on Sue Birds buzzer beater!"
Sue replies (with a shocked look on her face), oh did they?

That is not what happened.