VG's seedings + Creme Bracketology 1/3/17 | The Boneyard

VG's seedings + Creme Bracketology 1/3/17

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vowelguy

Vowelguy

Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
26,062
Reaction Score
70,716
I enjoy the seeding exercise bc it's a bit of jigsaw puzzle, trying to keep teams from the same conference apart and also teams closer to home. Here's my first crack:


upload_2017-1-3_13-12-34.png
 
vowelguy said:
I enjoy the seeding exercise bc it's a bit of jigsaw puzzle, trying to keep teams from the same conference apart and also teams closer to home. Here's my first crack:


View attachment 18207
Expand ...

I'mm'a keep on saying this in whatever forum I see these discussions happen: imo, whatever team wins the Pac-12 (and/or is granted the highest tourney seed in the Pac-12) deserves to be placed in the CA regional. In your draft above, the best team in the Northeast (1-seed UConn) stays in the Northeast (CT). The best team in the Southeast (1-seed South Carolina) stays in the Southeast (KY). The best team in the Southwest (1-seed Baylor) stays in the Southwest (OK). But the best team on the West Coast (2-seed UCLA) gets shipped to the Northeast (CT). Meanwhile, the 3rd-best team on the West Coast (3-seed Stanford) gets placed in the CA regional. UCLA, in effect, gets punished for winning the Pac-12, while Stanford gets rewarded for coming in 3rd in the Pac-12. That's backwards, imo, and I really hope the seeding committee doesn't do that to whoever wins the conference.
 
patsweetpat said:
I'mm'a keep on saying this in whatever forum I see these discussions happen: imo, whatever team wins the Pac-12 (and/or is granted the highest tourney seed in the Pac-12) deserves to be placed in the CA regional. In your draft above, the best team in the Northeast (1-seed UConn) stays in the Northeast (CT). The best team in the Southeast (1-seed South Carolina) stays in the Southeast (KY). The best team in the Southwest (1-seed Baylor) stays in the Southwest (OK). But the best team on the West Coast (2-seed UCLA) gets shipped to the Northeast (CT). Meanwhile, the 3rd-best team on the West Coast (3-seed Stanford) gets placed in the CA regional. UCLA, in effect, gets punished for winning the Pac-12, while Stanford gets rewarded for coming in 3rd in the Pac-12. That's backwards, imo, and I really hope the seeding committee doesn't do that to whoever wins the conference.
Expand ...

So you consider it better to be a #3 seed than a #2 seed?

The difficulty here is that I have MD as the overall #4 team - thus explaining why it gets shipped the West - and UCLA as the overall #8. Putting the #4 & #8 in the same region makes it much weaker than the other 3 regions, which isn't fair to the other teams.

A long way to go.
 
rvwsleep said:
Even though I doubt it will happen, can you put Tennessee in UCONN'S bracket ?
It makes me feel warm all over.
Expand ...

Would be easy to flip Tenn and DePaul, and in fact I probably should've done that since TN is close enough to Durham to have an impact on attendance.
 
Massey has UCLA losing six more games, although to be fair, many of those could be close call so it could be as few as zero. If they do lose six more and have eight losses they won't be a 2 seed, Which means the Pac 12 could be the best overall conference in the country and have nobody in the first or second seeding line. My guess is someone, whether Washington or Stanford or Oregon State or even Cal will win a couple games they shouldn't of one and end up with a two-seed.
 
.-.
Interesting. I posted before that I think it is entirely possible for the Pac12 to get 8 or 9 teams into the dance without getting a single team on the first or second seeding line. He has 9 with only UCLA being a two seed. I suspect no one in the Pac12 gets through conference and tournament without at least two losses and it could be 3.
 
He has Kentucky not in Lexington which I didn't think was possible?
 
I'll take Baylor's bracket. But quite frankly, I would like to have Notre Dame as the #2 see in the OKC region. It would bring me great joy to knock them out of a FF appearance.
 
.-.
vowelguy said:
So you consider it better to be a #3 seed than a #2 seed?

The difficulty here is that I have MD as the overall #4 team - thus explaining why it gets shipped the West - and UCLA as the overall #8. Putting the #4 & #8 in the same region makes it much weaker than the other 3 regions, which isn't fair to the other teams.

A long way to go.
Expand ...

I concur; the committee will take geography (among other factors) into consideration but not at the expense of competitive balance between regions. I highly doubt that the overall #4 and #8 seeds would be paired together.

I understand that placement in the Stockton regional may seem like an appropriate "reward" for whichever team is considered best in the Pac-12, but because the committee starts with the #1 seeds and then works its way down a modified S-curve—juggling a whole slew of factors and limitations, of which geography is only one—there's no way to guarantee which Pac-12 team(s) will get assigned to Stockton.
 
vowelguy said:
So you consider it better to be a #3 seed than a #2 seed?
Expand ...

Yes, as a UCLA fan, I would much much much rather see my team be a 3-seed in Stockton than a 2-seed in Bridgeport. It's not even close. It's not even close to close.

Seeing your bracket and Charlie's bracket (both of which send the Pac-12 champ to Bridgeport and the Pac-12's #3 team to Stockton) makes me hope my team loses just the right number of games a Pac-12 team has to lose in order to be seeded in the Stockton regional... a perverse distortion of the normal impulse that teams ought to have: to win absolutely every regular season (and conference tourney) game that they possibly can, in order to maximize their seeding/placement advantage in the NCAA tourney.
 
In the Stockton Regional the only teams, from the Pac12, Creme has making it are OSU and USC. I dont think USC even makes it to the Dance. Hard to believe that one of UCLA, Cal or Stanford isnt in that region.
 
patsweetpat said:
Yes, as a UCLA fan, I would much much much rather see my team be a 3-seed in Stockton than a 2-seed in Bridgeport. It's not even close. It's not even close to close.

Seeing your bracket and Charlie's bracket (both of which send the Pac-12 champ to Bridgeport and the Pac-12's #3 team to Stockton) makes me hope my team loses just the right number of games a Pac-12 team has to lose in order to be seeded in the Stockton regional... a perverse distortion of the normal impulse that teams ought to have: to win absolutely every regular season (and conference tourney) game that they possibly can, in order to maximize their seeding/placement advantage in the NCAA tourney.
Expand ...

It's really a mistake to put much stock into bracketology predictions—especially this early in the season, and especially when it comes to geographic placement. To assume that your favorite team would benefit from losing rather than winning would be to compound the mistake.

What you ought to do is hope that UCLA dominates the Pac-12 to such an extent that they are given a high #2 seed, thus improving their chances of being granted geographic priority.
 
.-.
cockhrnleghrn said:
If they sent us to Stockton after sending us to Sioux Falls last year, the NCAA is garbage.
Expand ...

Unless a Pac-12 school somehow lands a #1 seed, it'll be the lowest #1 seed (overall #4) that gets shipped to Stockton.
 
cockhrnleghrn said:
If they sent us to Stockton after sending us to Sioux Falls last year, the NCAA is garbage.
Expand ...

Finish the regular season with just one SEC loss.. and win the sec tournament..... cant see yall being behind Maryland. Oh yeah... root for Ohio State and Duke the rest of the season :cool:
 
patsweetpat said:
Yes, as a UCLA fan, I would much much much rather see my team be a 3-seed in Stockton than a 2-seed in Bridgeport. It's not even close. It's not even close to close.
Expand ...

Ok, though that's not exactly what I asked. Yes you'd rather not be in UConn's bracket, I get that. But I was talking more generically: would you rather be a #3 seed close to home than a 2-seed elsewhere?
 
.-.
MilfordHusky said:
I'll take that bracket in a heartbeat!
Expand ...
I agree. But honestly, at this point, I don't see a team that could stop us from getting to the final 4. As long as UCONN remains the top #1 seed, or perhaps the 2nd #1 seed, they won't have to face the 5th, 6th, or maybe even 7th best team in the nation. Having said that, I'd prefer to NOT see Maryland, Notre Dame, or FSU in our elite 8 bracket...
 
vowelguy said:
One of the epicenter's of the housing crash isn't exciting enough for you?
Expand ...

Let's see; would I rather go to SF or Stockton? Tough choice. Sioux Falls ended up being a nice little city, but tough and expensive to get to.
 
vowelguy said:
Ok, though that's not exactly what I asked. Yes you'd rather not be in UConn's bracket, I get that. But I was talking more generically: would you rather be a #3 seed close to home than a 2-seed elsewhere?
Expand ...

Yes, even generically: given the choice between being a 3-seed close to home or a 2-seed elsewhere, I'd prefer my team be the 3-seed close to home. That generic preference is, of course, only heightened when the "elsewhere" in question happens to be a short drive from the campus of the nation's best team, and in the same tourney bracket as said best team.

But yes, even in the absence of the UConn factor, I consider the close-to-home 3-seed to be a more advantageous tourney placement than the far-away 2-seed.
 
ericsandiego said:
I agree. But honestly, at this point, I don't see a team that could stop us from getting to the final 4. As long as UCONN remains the top #1 seed, or perhaps the 2nd #1 seed, they won't have to face the 5th, 6th, or maybe even 7th best team in the nation. Having said that, I'd prefer to NOT see Maryland, Notre Dame, or FSU in our elite 8 bracket...
Expand ...

Don't be too sure. The "committee" has changed it's "policies & proceedures" often enough to make almost any scenario possible. It was either 2008 or 2009 when UConn was the 1st overall seed and the 4th and 5th best team were fairly inseparable. One of them was Rutgers and guess where the committee sent them?

I would not be in the least bit surprised to see Notre Dame in Bridgeport. But I still expect McGraw to get her team organized and be the 1 seed in either OKC, Stockton or Lexington.
 
Alydar said:
Don't be too sure. The "committee" has changed it's "policies & proceedures" often enough to make almost any scenario possible. It was either 2008 or 2009 when UConn was the 1st overall seed and the 4th and 5th best team were fairly inseparable. One of them was Rutgers and guess where the committee sent them?

I would not be in the least bit surprised to see Notre Dame in Bridgeport. But I still expect McGraw to get her team organized and be the 1 seed in either OKC, Stockton or Lexington.
Expand ...

2008 here in Greensboro
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,359
Messages
4,567,651
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom