It is true once you realize that the committee had Iowa St 8th, so they chose last.It's not true for Iowa St. Iowa St. isn't closer to Brooklyn than Tennessee.
It is true once you realize that the committee had Iowa St 8th, so they chose last.It's not true for Iowa St. Iowa St. isn't closer to Brooklyn than Tennessee.
Yup, this is exactly what I said when Houston's region was revealed.Because we were #3 when they did it. They're calling us #1 but didn't change anything
Sometimes those terms are used interchangeably, but yeah they don't truly go with a strict s-curve, it's true seed by geography. Those numbers I used are the actual true seeds for our bracket. Here's the top 4 seedlines. Numbers on the right are the committee's ranking of each team.so the S curve is a fiction? it's this seed list that matters?
But that can't be how they do it because if that was how they actually did it, the teams would be different.They make a "true seedlist". Basically a ranking of the teams in this set of 4 seeds (1 seeds - 4 seeds).
Then they slot the teams into regions based on geography (and avoiding conference duplicates in each region where able for the first few teams from each conference within top 4 seedlines so no Marquette or Creighton in UConn's bracket for example) going in order of the seedlist. So #1 team "picks" their region, then #2 "picks" etc. On though #16.
Then they re-check how the regions fare by adding up the "true seedlist" of the top 4 seeds. So we have #1 + #8 + #12 + #15. = 36.
All the other regions have to be within 5 of 36 for them to consider it fair.
Sometimes those terms are used interchangeably, but yeah they don't truly go with a strict s-curve, it's true seed by geography. Those numbers I used are the actual true seeds for our bracket. Here's the top 4 seedlines. Numbers on the right are the committee's ranking of each team.
I haven’t checked but I’m guessing Iowa st is probably closer to MW site, same for Ill and Auburn to South. While Duke closer to Boston, and Tenn closer to Boston as wellIt's about mileage, lolz.
Sometimes those terms are used interchangeably, but yeah they don't truly go with a strict s-curve, it's true seed by geography. Those numbers I used are the actual true seeds for our bracket. Here's the top 4 seedlines. Numbers on the right are the committee's ranking of each team.
Sometimes those terms are used interchangeably, but yeah they don't truly go with a strict s-curve, it's true seed by geography. Those numbers I used are the actual true seeds for our bracket. Here's the top 4 seedlines. Numbers on the right are the committee's ranking of each team.
I haven’t checked but I’m guessing Iowa st is probably closer to MW site, same for Ill and Auburn to South. While Duke closer to Boston, and Tenn closer to Boston as well
But maybe the Committee for all their access to data does not have Google maps
Dude, better hurry you’re gonna miss the CBI selection show!!second toughest? looks more like 7th to me.
Was at MSG for the Michigan State game, in a seas of MSU folks. Couldn't find them at the end of the game.And additionally for them to play UConn in Boston, which will be pretty much a home game for the Huskies. Reversing the perspective here doesn't do those schools any favors in the bracket either. Hopefully in the end it's they who will feel screwed just like Michigan State vs the 2014 Husky champions at MSG did afterwards.
Its starting. The Pearlmans.
This is your way of acknowledging that counting bids says more about bid stealers than the quality of the league. The Big East should have had a minimum of 5 bids or 45% of the conference while the ACC, e.g., should have had 3 or 20% of the conference. UVA did not belong and NC State had no business. The fact that NC State won its tournament says more about UNC and dook than it does about the strength of the conference. Now the Big 12 only getting 8 instead of 9 hurts, but even if it got 10 bids, the reality is that the bearcats would still be stray cats. Chin up.second toughest? looks more like 7th to me.