Will the Tournament ever be seeded correctly?

[whaler11]

I don't mean will they ever slot the teams into the S-curve correctly.

I mean will the obvious fact you'd rather get a 10 or 11 seed instead of an 8 or 9 lead them to doing the correct thing by seeding the last teams in at 8-9 instead of at 10-11.

Extra bonus for the NCAA... it actually protects the 1 seeds by giving them an easier path.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Wait so, are you penalizing 6 and 7 seeds in the process by forcing them to play tougher teams?

 

[Leebo]

I like how you'd be screwing with the S curve to satisfy his suggestion, even though he said he wasn't complaining about the current S curve situation.

 

[OkaForPrez]

@Leebo. No, if you put the 10/11 seed line in the 8/9 spot it means first round match ups of 6/9 and 7/8 in the first round. It's got nothing to do with slotting the S curve correctly.

 

[Leebo]

@Leebo. No, if you put the 10/11 seed line in the 8/9 spot it means first round match ups of 6/9 and 7/8 in the first round. It's got nothing to do with slotting the S curve correctly.

However you frame it doesn't change the fact that it's an unfair result since, as you said, the 6 and 7 seeds are getting the short end of this deal.

The S-curve is about smoothing out the fairness of the matchups, and this proposal makes the bracket less fair.

 

[OkaForPrez]

@Leebo ah okay we're saying the same thing.

 

[whaler11]

Those are fair points.

Parity has changed the sport though.

Seeds 6-12 aren't going in looking to win a game anymore - those teams can all realistically make runs.

I just find it to be a glaring flaw that being seeded 11 is better than being seeded 8. You are more likely to make a run from Dayton than from the 8 line.

 

[BoatShow]

Seems to be a lot of 11s over 6s and 12s over 5s. 11 and 12 tend to be decent P5 teams that have underperformed but are dangerous ie UCLA over SMU last year.

 

[A10 fan]

Seems to be a lot of 11s over 6s and 12s over 5s. 11 and 12 tend to be decent P5 teams that have underperformed but are dangerous ie UCLA over SMU last year.

You also tend to get underrated teams from the 6-10 conferences in those spots as well. Both VCU, and George Mason made their Final Four runs from that area.

 

[methodology]

It's also a disadvantage being one of those teams that has to play in Dayton in the opening round. That's one more game and 3 games in one week

8/9 teams had chances to do more and improve their seedings. They are usually underperformeing P5 schools. They don't deserve a mulligan from the committee

 

[OkaForPrez]

I think the play in game tends to help. VCU went to the final four the first year of the Play in game and Tennessee went to the elite 8 a few years ago.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Just went back and looked, add Lasalle to the teams that made the sweet 16 out of the play in game, and USF won a 12 5 matchup as well.

Since they started it, at least 1 of the two at larges to (i.e. not 16 seed chum) to come out of the play in game has pulled out an upset in the next game and 4/5 years has made it to the sweet 16 with the best outcome VCU's final 4 run in 2011.

 

[methodology]

I think the play in game tends to help. VCU went to the final four the first year of the Play in game and Tennessee went to the elite 8 a few years ago.

Overall after the play in games those teams are 10-9 or 52.6 winning percentage

Take out VCU it's 6-8 or 42.9 winning %
Take out VCU and Tennessee it's 4-7 or 36.4 winning %

8 seed overall has 44.1 winning %
9 seed overall has 35.7 winning %

I would assume every coach in the country would prefer not to play in Dayton.

 

[storrs15]

Except, you know, Dayton head coach Archie Miller. Last year Dayton won a tough one against Boise State by a point and then beat 6 seed Providence in Columbus.

Being from Providence and one of the biggest PC haters you will ever meet you it was great to hear the whole state complain about how unfair the seeding was.

 

[methodology]

Except, you know, Dayton head coach Archie Miller. Last year Dayton won a tough one against Boise State by a point and then beat 6 seed Providence in Columbus.

Being from Providence and one of the biggest PC haters you will ever meet you it was great to hear the whole state complain about how unfair the seeding was.

Forgot Dayton had that home cooking. I think they almost lost that game. I would be real pissed if I was an opposing coach having to play Dayton on their home court

 

[storrs15]

Forgot Dayton had that home cooking. I think they almost lost that game. I would be real pissed if I was an opposing coach having to play Dayton on their home court

Yeah if that game against Boise St. was neutral it would have probably been a different outcome. The PC game was an hour up the road in Columbus and they argued they should have had Ole Miss instead. When you havent won a tournament game since 1997 I guess you always have to have excuses ready

 

[OkaForPrez]

@methodology My point was an 11 seed coming out of the play in game is advantaged to an 11 seed coming out cold. To analyze that you'd have to compare with the traditional 11/12 seed win rates which are in the low 30s, so the fact that historically the play in game 11/12's (albeit in a small sample size) have a greater than 50% win rate is supporting what I'm saying. You can't compare those win rates against 8/9's.

 

[methodology]

@methodology My point was an 11 seed coming out of the play in game is advantaged to an 11 seed coming out cold. To analyze that you'd have to compare with the traditional 11/12 seed win rates which are in the low 30s, so the fact that historically the play in game 11/12's (albeit in a small sample size) have a greater than 50% win rate is supporting what I'm saying. You can't compare those win rates against 8/9's.

Small sample size. You can't take a sample size of 10 games and extrapolate it to be the norm especially when comparing it to sample size of 2-400 games where the win percentage is in the low 30s

 

[OkaForPrez]

@methodology Go ahead and pick the play in winners out of your bracket then I know what I'm doing.

Anyway, if I can't say it helps, you certainly can't say it hurts.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I don't mean will they ever slot the teams into the S-curve correctly.

I mean will the obvious fact you'd rather get a 10 or 11 seed instead of an 8 or 9 lead them to doing the correct thing by seeding the last teams in at 8-9 instead of at 10-11.

Extra bonus for the NCAA... it actually protects the 1 seeds by giving them an easier path.

Reading Berry Tramel's article the other day, from the mock seeding he was invited to in Indianapolis, it sounds like the coaches have convinced the NCAA to make a change. He indicated that previously the NCAA had some latitude to move a team up or down a slot to preserve other things like avoiding repeat match-ups, or conference opponents etc. It seems the coaches asked them to stop and just go with the seeds. So we may see fewer "WTF?" seeds this year.

 

[pepband99]

...
Extra bonus for the NCAA... it actually protects the 1 seeds by giving them an easier path.

The 1 seeds already get a geographical advantage (albeit not unique just for them, but probably unique compared to the 5 or 6 seed you compare them to), as well as the only "gimme" as a first round game. Isn't that enough?

I just wish they would make the "play in" against all at-large teams, and not make 16s battle it out. Otherwise, I wouldn't change a thing.

 

[A10 fan]

Forgot Dayton had that home cooking. I think they almost lost that game. I would be real pissed if I was an opposing coach having to play Dayton on their home court

What you have to remember about that, is that Dayton should have been a 9 or 10 seed. They moved Dayton down in order to slot other teams more comfortably, and then made up for screwing Dayton by giving them fan friendly locations for their games. The problem with dropping teams below where they belong is not just that it screws them, but that it also screws the team they have to play. The committee does this stuff all the time. I can remember in 2003, Dayton was overseeded as a 4, but the committee knew this, and they matched them up against Tulsa, who was an underseeded 13. This actually should have been a 6/11 game, and Tulsa actually won the game. They do this stuff because they often find themselves constricted by the need to avoid giving unprotected seeds a home advantage, and the need to avoid matching up teams from the same conference during the first week of the tournament.

 

[Uconn93]

I don't mean will they ever slot the teams into the S-curve correctly.

I mean will the obvious fact you'd rather get a 10 or 11 seed instead of an 8 or 9 lead them to doing the correct thing by seeding the last teams in at 8-9 instead of at 10-11.

Extra bonus for the NCAA... it actually protects the 1 seeds by giving them an easier path.

Not until one of us 'Yarders is put on the selection committee