MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: BM1090 on December 06, 2018, 01:56:34 PM
-
https://twitter.com/ESPNLunardi
Lunardi has us 33rd,or the best 9 seed. That seems fair enough. I'd have us higher with 2 good wins and 2 A losses.
-
Lot of game left. Get 1 of Buffalo/Wisconsin and get 12 BE wins and we're a top 6 seed.
-
I'll be the first to say the annual phrase. The bubble is really weak this year.
I know it ended up being a very strong bubble last year. But lord, last four in of Butler, TCU, Arkansas and UCF?
WVU, ND, MINN, and LSU as first out
-
Bracketology! here we go.....
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi's update for today. Won't post where we are because that would ruin the fun!
-
Hmm. We beat Bucky and they move up? Have to say, that opponent and location wouldn't be as bad as South Carolina in Greenville, but it wouldn't be much better.
-
Hmm. We beat Bucky and they move up? Have to say, that opponent and location wouldn't be as bad as South Carolina in Greenville, but it wouldn't be much better.
Actually, it is Columbia, SC. Nice new(er) arena.
-
I'm sure Brew was referring to the effective home game SC got vs MU in 2017. When we got smoked.
-
Losing to SC didn’t piss me off in the long run knowing they made it to the Final 4
-
I'm sure Brew was referring to the effective home game SC got vs MU in 2017. When we got smoked.
Yup. We ended up playing a road game in a 7/10 matchup. At least that was as the 10, this would be pretty close to a road game as the favored seed.
-
Losing to SC didn’t piss me off in the long run knowing they made it to the Final 4
And that we were actually in that game until about the 8 minute mark. That was a close game for 32 minutes then they just ran us out of the gym to close it.
-
Hmm. We beat Bucky and they move up? Have to say, that opponent and location wouldn't be as bad as South Carolina in Greenville, but it wouldn't be much better.
This Zona team is pretty rancid tho
Not sure they even make the tourney
-
Boy, those first round sites are a real who's who of great American basketball arenas/cities!
Des Moines
Hartford
Jacksonville
Columbia, SC
San Jose
Tulsa
Columbus
Salt Lake City
The ideal site for us is probably Des Moines. Kansas is probably a lock for one of the protected seeds there, but if we can make the top 4 seed line and remain ahead of Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa St, we could see ourselves getting a minor location advantage.
-
SaveO, what really only matters is how many are within reasonable driving distance. An NCAA weekend is truly a special event, especially if the good guys can manage to win both. I promise you Des Moines will be a helluva time if we're kicking some arse there.
-
I'm sure Brew was referring to the effective home game SC got vs MU in 2017. When we got smoked.
Sorry, I have no recollection of that ever happening. :D
-
Boy, those first round sites are a real who's who of great American basketball arenas/cities!
Des Moines
Hartford
Jacksonville
Columbia, SC
San Jose
Tulsa
Columbus
Salt Lake City
The ideal site for us is probably Des Moines. Kansas is probably a lock for one of the protected seeds there, but if we can make the top 4 seed line and remain ahead of Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa St, we could see ourselves getting a minor location advantage.
Doesn't help that they removed Seattle from the list.
Yeah, friends and I go to first round games every year. We looked at this list and had a definitive yawn. Columbia is a good but basic arena. Nice college town. The rest? ho-hum.
-
Doesn't help that they removed Seattle from the list.
Seattle removed themselves from the list by electing to draw in a NHL team, and electing to gut Key Arena for a 2 year ($700MM!) renovation.
That number should please MKE residents who think they got fleeced. Hell, Key Arena isn't even getting a new roof! But they are pretty much digging out everything under the roof. If you think I'm joking, whatch the video at this link
https://seattle.curbed.com/2018/8/1/17637972/key-arena-renovation-technique-video
-
American stadiums in general cost much more than necessary. New soccer stadium in Madrid only cost 240 mil.
http://stadiumdb.com/constructions/esp/estadio_la_peineta
Yea it took 6 years to build and it doesn't have a full roof that basketball/hockey stadiums need, but even taking into account the euro to dollar exchange, you're getting an almost 70,000 seat stadium for about half as much as the forum.
-
Boy, those first round sites are a real who's who of great American basketball arenas/cities!
Des Moines
Hartford
Jacksonville
Columbia, SC
San Jose
Tulsa
Columbus
Salt Lake City
The ideal site for us is probably Des Moines. Kansas is probably a lock for one of the protected seeds there, but if we can make the top 4 seed line and remain ahead of Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa St, we could see ourselves getting a minor location advantage.
First hope is that we go something like 15-3 in conference and draw a 2-seed in one of the Midwest cities. Because that means we're effen great.
If that doesn't happen, I'm selfishly rooting for Columbia or Jacksonville; the former is right down the road from me and the latter is a pretty easy drive.
My first thought when I saw the list was the exact same as brewski's ... I hope this time we're not playing what amounts to be a true road game.
-
Have u been in european soccer stadiums?
Much different. They are sumilar to what anerican stadiums were built like 30-40 years ago. That is athetic viewing structures.
I dont know the figures but i would lije to know the cost of the “frills” that go into american stadiums today. From the tvs, kiosks, restaurants, sofa like seating , paintings, hall of fames, and all the technology and other bells n whistles.
Dont get those in europe, they are there fir the game. Concrete structures with bench n plastic type seating fir the most part. Think of going to a football or baseball game before 2000.
Im guessing 1/3 to half the cost of these new venues is wasted on items that honestly in my opinion do nothing, for me at least, to better the game viewing experience.
-
Have u been in european soccer stadiums?
Much different. They are sumilar to what anerican stadiums were built like 30-40 years ago. That is athetic viewing structures.
I dont know the figures but i would lije to know the cost of the “frills” that go into american stadiums today. From the tvs, kiosks, restaurants, sofa like seating , paintings, hall of fames, and all the technology and other bells n whistles.
Dont get those in europe, they are there fir the game. Concrete structures with bench n plastic type seating fir the most part. Think of going to a football or baseball game before 2000.
Im guessing 1/3 to half the cost of these new venues is wasted on items that honestly in my opinion do nothing, for me at least, to better the game viewing experience.
This is largely because they get almost no public funding in Europe. As a Wisconsin taxpayer, I could gladly live without all the restaurants in the concourse, the atrium entrance, and the entertainment district for cutting the price in half. Just comes down to cultural differences. In Europe, it's all about getting as many people as possible at the game for as cheap as possible, in America, we generally pull for all the bells and whistles.
Edit: and yes I have been in European stadiums. Was there for a game, enjoyed the game the same as I would have it if were played in the US at a fancier stadium.
-
This is largely because they get almost no public funding in Europe. As a Wisconsin taxpayer, I could gladly live without all the restaurants in the concourse, the atrium entrance, and the entertainment district for cutting the price in half. Just comes down to cultural differences. In Europe, it's all about getting as many people as possible at the game for as cheap as possible, in America, we generally pull for all the bells and whistles.
Edit: and yes I have been in European stadiums. Was there for a game, enjoyed the game the same as I would have it if were played in the US at a fancier stadium.
In reality, if the stadium was half the price the taxes coming from you individually wouldn't be noticeable at all.
-
In reality, if the stadium was half the price the taxes coming from you individually wouldn't be noticeable at all.
This is true, however, it is still a little discouraging knowing that a significant percentage of the total bill is due to amenities that I neither want nor use. We've almost finished paying for Miller Park now.
-
This is largely because they get almost no public funding in Europe. As a Wisconsin taxpayer, I could gladly live without all the restaurants in the concourse, the atrium entrance, and the entertainment district for cutting the price in half. Just comes down to cultural differences. In Europe, it's all about getting as many people as possible at the game for as cheap as possible, in America, we generally pull for all the bells and whistles.
Edit: and yes I have been in European stadiums. Was there for a game, enjoyed the game the same as I would have it if were played in the US at a fancier stadium.
The reasoning behind this is because the cost of construction is generally borne by the taxpayer while the revenue generated is generally captured by an organization controlled by the team. So for instance, while the Wisconsin Center District built the Forum, it is operated by the Bucks and their owners end up capturing most of the revenue.
That is a decidedly different model from what you see in Europe. I'm not an expert, but my guess is that such an arrangement is usually illegal. Probably not a bad idea.
-
The reasoning behind this is because the cost of construction is generally borne by the taxpayer while the revenue generated is generally captured by an organization controlled by the team. So for instance, while the Wisconsin Center District built the Forum, it is operated by the Bucks and their owners end up capturing most of the revenue.
That is a decidedly different model from what you see in Europe. I'm not an expert, but my guess is that such an arrangement is usually illegal. Probably not a bad idea.
Agree on all fronts. The threat of relocating is also laughable in Europe. That threat is almost always used to get public money in America.
-
My fault, I didn't mean to turn this into a stadium thread, just clarify why Seattle wasn't on the NCAA list anymore!
-
My fault, I didn't mean to turn this into a stadium thread, just clarify why Seattle wasn't on the NCAA list anymore!
Off all the topics that I thought could take this thread off the rails, stadium costs was not one that I had considered.
-
I'll take my share of the blame as well. Just to get us back, Bracket Matrix has us as the last 9, although 3 of the 4 that have us out haven't been updated since before UW, and the other one has us as the first team out (laughable).
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
-
I'll take my share of the blame as well. Just to get us back, Bracket Matrix has us as the last 9, although 3 of the 4 that have us out haven't been updated since before UW, and the other one has us as the first team out (laughable).
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Yeah. Great website but none of those have been updated for UTEP/UW.
I'd expect to move onto the 7 line or so during the next update.
-
I know nothing about Furman other than they're ranked 23 and not in Lunardi's bracketology. Can anyone shed light onto this?
-
I know nothing about Furman other than they're ranked 23 and not in Lunardi's bracketology. Can anyone shed light onto this?
They are ranked because they are undefeated and beat Nova.
They are not in Lunardi's bracket because they have not racked up enough good wins to earn at at large bid, and for whatever reason Lunardi has the Southern Conference's auto qualifier as Wofford
-
I know nothing about Furman other than they're ranked 23 and not in Lunardi's bracketology. Can anyone shed light onto this?
Either UNC-Greensboro or Wofford are projected to win the Southern Conference and the SoCon is a 1-bid league. The Villanova upset is nice for Furman, but the Loyola-Chicago win doesn't look nearly as good as it did a month ago. If they beat LSU on the road, win their league, and lose in the final, they might be able to sneak an at-large, but right now they look like the third best team in a 1-bid league, and they likely won't have the resume to offset that reality if they don't get the autobid.
-
I know nothing about Furman other than they're ranked 23 and not in Lunardi's bracketology. Can anyone shed light onto this?
They are an undefeated low major. They have a very impressive win at Villanova and an impressive but overrated win at Loyola (IL). A lot of voters bought into the narrative of "Furman beat half of last year's Final Four" and put them in.
They may make an interesting case. They only play one more high major, a road game at LSU. If they lose that game but but rip through the rest of their non-conference and the Southern Conference, how do you treat them? If they finish with 3 or less losses I think you almost need to give them an at-large bid.
-
They are ranked because they are undefeated and beat Nova.
They are not in Lunardi's bracket because they have not racked up enough good wins to earn at at large bid, and for whatever reason Lunardi has the Southern Conference's auto qualifier as Wofford
Could be because Lunardi prolly receives a pretty decent salary from ESPN yet works approx. one month a year. Kudos to him btw
-
They are an undefeated low major. They have a very impressive win at Villanova and an impressive but overrated win at Loyola (IL). A lot of voters bought into the narrative of "Furman beat half of last year's Final Four" and put them in.
They may make an interesting case. They only play one more high major, a road game at LSU. If they lose that game but but rip through the rest of their non-conference and the Southern Conference, how do you treat them? If they finish with 3 or less losses I think you almost need to give them an at-large bid.
A three-loss Furman is not an NCAA tournament team, even with a win over Nova. Two losses (LSU and conference tourney) maybe. One loss (conference tourney) they're in.
-
A three-loss Furman is not an NCAA tournament team, even with a win over Nova. Two losses (LSU and conference tourney) maybe. One loss (conference tourney) they're in.
Prolly wrong on that. There will be bubble teams with zero good wins. See Mu last year
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
This guy has been historically the most accurate predictor. Good spot for MU
-
A three-loss Furman is not an NCAA tournament team, even with a win over Nova. Two losses (LSU and conference tourney) maybe. One loss (conference tourney) they're in.
Eh, only 3 losses and a road win over Nova? Throw in a top 100 road win against Loyola (IL) and at least 4 games against top 100 UNC Greensboro and Wofford. Plus at least 2 games from top 130 ETSU? I think that's a pretty solid resume. Now I agree that they aren't actually worth of an at large bid but I think they would have put together a resume that could get them there.
Probably all academic anyway. I don't see them finishing the regular season 18-2.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
This guy has been historically the most accurate predictor. Good spot for MU
A 5 seed. I like this guy.
-
Thanks guys, I appreciate the insights on Furman
-
Eh, only 3 losses and a road win over Nova? Throw in a top 100 road win against Loyola (IL) and at least 4 games against top 100 UNC Greensboro and Wofford. Plus at least 2 games from top 130 ETSU? I think that's a pretty solid resume. Now I agree that they aren't actually worth of an at large bid but I think they would have put together a resume that could get them there.
Probably all academic anyway. I don't see them finishing the regular season 18-2.
The killer will be opportunity. Nova will be a Q1 win. Wofford is currently 71 & Greensboro 84 in NET. Furman plays them back to back in January. If the Paladins get to Jan 20 with 2 losses, they would potentially be looking at 2-2 in Q1 games, and probably a neutral site Q2 loss, but 7-1 in Q2 games. Though if Furman wins all those games, it seems likely they'll push Wofford & UNCG out of Q1, and possibly home games against ETSU & The Citadel out of Q2.
I agree it will likely be all academic. The SoCon is really strong this year for a low-major. Half the league is in that 70-150 range where they're tough outs but won't be resume makers. Hard to see any team getting 17-18 wins in that league.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi's update for today. Won't post where we are because that would ruin the fun!
That's an Elite-8 draw for MU.
-
That's an Elite-8 draw for MU.
Nevada is very, very good.
Otherwise yes.
-
Nevada is very, very good.
Otherwise yes.
I think they are, but I also think we would be 10-0 playing their schedule so far. Unfortunately, with their schedule, we won't really have much of an idea of how good they are until the second weekend in March. Unless they aren't very good. They certainly have the roster to be very good, but that roster shouldn't really be tested until the Sweet 16.
-
I think they are, but I also think we would be 10-0 playing their schedule so far. Unfortunately, with their schedule, we won't really have much of an idea of how good they are until the second weekend in March. Unless they aren't very good. They certainly have the roster to be very good, but that roster shouldn't really be tested until the Sweet 16.
Geez, the Mountain West has fallen. I didn't believe this post when I first read it, but they have probably played three of the five most difficult games on their schedule already: #43 (per KenPom) Arizona State on a neutral court, at #88 USC, and at #93 Loyola (IL). They have 0 current top 50 games left on the schedule and only 6 against current top 100 opponents: H/A vs #57 Utah State, H/A vs #66 Fresno State, and H/A vs #97 San Diego State.
If we were to see them in the Round of 32, we legitimately may be the best team they have seen all season.
-
That is a tough one to answer. Nevada has played some solid teams so far this year, as this board would praise if MU went and won them all.
-
That is a tough one to answer. Nevada has played some solid teams so far this year, as this board would praise if MU went and won them all.
Not the MUScoop I know.
-
Not the MUScoop I know.
"I can't believe Wojo didn't go 12-0 during the first 10 games of that schedule!"
-
Nevada is very, very good.
Otherwise yes.
Where you seeing Nevada against us??
His bracket I’m seeing is MU a 5 seed and Nevada a 2.
Nvm it was lunardis bracket on that one that was quoted
My bad
-
That's an Elite-8 draw for MU.
We would be big long shots to beat Arizona, Nevada and Auburn back to back to back.
-
We would be big long shots to beat Arizona, Nevada and Auburn back to back to back.
Unless you're a 1, 2 or maybe 3 seed, getting to the E8 is always something of a long shot. Even the favorites typically have to dodge bullets here and there.
-
Unless you're a 1, 2 or maybe 3 seed, getting to the E8 is always something of a long shot. Even the favorites typically have to dodge bullets here and there.
This.
We didn't exactly waltz effort-free to the E8 in 1977, 2003 or 2013.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi's update for today. Won't post where we are because that would ruin the fun!
Not very good team Wisconsin with a 3 seed? Not very good Big East conference with 5 teams? What is going on? ;)
-
WarriorDad
Is MU a very good team this year?
-
Not very good team Wisconsin with a 3 seed? Not very good Big East conference with 5 teams? What is going on? ;)
Congrats Chicos, you've achieved the "Wisconsin Fluffer Award" yet again. Here's your badge.
(https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/5891633/il_fullxfull.149335545.jpg)
-
WarriorDad
Is MU a very good team this year?
Right now, we are a good team in my opinion. We certainly would not be categorized as NOT VERY GOOD, the description you have been using to describe Wisconsin.
-
TSmith
I always liked Chico's, actually a lot, but not a big fan of the new Chico's.
-
Congrats Chicos, you've achieved the "Wisconsin Fluffer Award" yet again. Here's your badge.
(https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/5891633/il_fullxfull.149335545.jpg)
OK Chicos. No idea what this even means, but I'm so thankful. The reason I made my comment is Goose is telling us here that Wisconsin is not a very good team. If they are not a very good team, why are they ranked so highly and a 3 seed? I've also read here how bad the Big East is, with some members here saying 2 teams, 3 teams maximum. For now, prognostications say 5 teams.
My sarcasm apparently wasn't strong, but the badge is an honor.
-
Not very good team Wisconsin with a 3 seed? Not very good Big East conference with 5 teams? What is going on? ;)
Wisconsin as a 3 is hysterical. Their best wins are an average X team, a NC St who has beaten nobody, and an Iowa team whose best win no longer looks good and has lost to the other 2 good teams they played.
I’ll take the resume win. But I don’t think UW is a top 20 team, much less a top 3 seed. But Lunardi is notoriously lazy early in the season, especially with seeds.
-
Wisconsin as a 3 is hysterical. Their best wins are an average X team, a NC St who has beaten nobody, and an Iowa team whose best win no longer looks good and has lost to the other 2 good teams they played.
I’ll take the resume win. But I don’t think UW is a top 20 team, much less a top 3 seed. But Lunardi is notoriously lazy early in the season, especially with seeds.
Compare that to those below them and see who deserves to be ranked higher. I think you'll struggle to find any. They also beat an Oklahoma team that is 8-1 and #32 on Kenpom.
-
I don't think Wisconsin is a top 15 team or a 3 seed by the end of the season. I think they are more top 40 and will end up in the 7 to 10 seed range.
I also don't think K State is a top 15 team by the end of the season. I think they are more top 25 and will be in the 4 to 8 seed range.
They are both still quality wins at home. All these things can be true.
Similarly the Big East is still one of the top 5 conferences in the nation. But it is down this season. The top 3 teams look more like 4 - 8 seeds then top 4 seeds. There are 5 teams in but the 5th one is holding on by a thread and I'm not sure if any of the other 5 are close to breaking in. It will be a rough year ink the BEast. Fortunately, it's should be short lived. Most of the leagues stars will return next season and there are some nice players coming in next year.
-
I don't think Wisconsin is a top 15 team or a 3 seed by the end of the season. I think they are more top 40 and will end up in the 7 to 10 seed range.
I also don't think K State is a top 15 team by the end of the season. I think they are more top 25 and will be in the 4 to 8 seed range.
They are both still quality wins at home. All these things can be true.
Similarly the Big East is still one of the top 5 conferences in the nation. But it is down this season. The top 3 teams look more like 4 - 8 seeds then top 4 seeds. There are 5 teams in but the 5th one is holding on by a thread and I'm not sure if any of the other 5 are close to breaking in. It will be a rough year ink the BEast. Fortunately, it's should be short lived. Most of the leagues stars will return next season and there are some nice players coming in next year.
Agree with your last two statements. Both are good wins and the Big East is down.
I think Wisconsin is better than KSU and that's not a knock on KSU. I'd say KSU is probably 8 seed caliber while Wisconsin will end up in the 4-7 seed range.
-
TAMU
I agree both of the wins are quality wins. In addition, agree on predicted landing pace for KState and UW. Regardless, I am much more optimistic MU can fare better than I expected this season.
-
I don't think Wisconsin is a top 15 team or a 3 seed by the end of the season. I think they are more top 40 and will end up in the 7 to 10 seed range.
I also don't think K State is a top 15 team by the end of the season. I think they are more top 25 and will be in the 4 to 8 seed range.
They are both still quality wins at home. All these things can be true.
Similarly the Big East is still one of the top 5 conferences in the nation. But it is down this season. The top 3 teams look more like 4 - 8 seeds then top 4 seeds. There are 5 teams in but the 5th one is holding on by a thread and I'm not sure if any of the other 5 are close to breaking in. It will be a rough year ink the BEast. Fortunately, it's should be short lived. Most of the leagues stars will return next season and there are some nice players coming in next year.
Give this man a cigar.
-
I think Wisconsin is better than KSU and that's not a knock on KSU. I'd say KSU is probably 8 seed caliber while Wisconsin will end up in the 4-7 seed range.
That's fair. Wisconsin definitely played us a lot better than K-State did. Personally, I think K-State has been slightly underachieving to date and Wisconsin has been significantly overachieving. I think both regress (or progress) towards the mean and K-State ends up the better of the two. Could absolutely be wrong though.
-
TSmith
I always liked Chico's, actually a lot, but not a big fan of the new Chico's.
Maybe because we are not the same people as I have said.
Love you too Goose. Hope all is good with your travels to the Far East. How is your brother in law’s family doing since his tragedy? Prayers!! Hopefully they have coped, cannot imagine.
-
Congrats Chicos, you've achieved the "Wisconsin Fluffer Award" yet again. Here's your badge.
(https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/5891633/il_fullxfull.149335545.jpg)
Since you are referencing me, I’ll answer...I respect Bucky a lot. They win, they seem to do it right, and they generally play solid basketball. May not be the most attractive, but many ways to skin the cat. However, to suggest I cheer for them or want them to win is ridiculous. I respect their program and what they have accomplished.
-
Lunardi brought us all the way up to 20: https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1073702552225660928?s=21 (https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1073702552225660928?s=21)
Weekend seed list (CAPS=AQ): 01-KU, 02-DUKE, 03-MICH, 04-ZAGA, 05-NEV, 06-Tenn, 07-UVa, 08-MichSt, 09-AUB, 10-Wisc, 11-OhioSt, 12-Unc, 13-FlaSt, 14-TTech, 15-VaTech, 16-BUFF, 17-Okla, 18-Neb, 19-Ind, 20-Marq, 21-NOVA, 22-Hou, 23-Purd, 24-CINCY...
-
Lunardi brought us all the way up to 20: https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1073702552225660928?s=21 (https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1073702552225660928?s=21)
I just don’t get how Wisconsin is a 3 seed. Nothing about that teams screams top-10 to me.
Besides Happ they’re not very good.
-
Bracketmatrix.com
Mubb a 6 seed.
-
Jerry Palm with a 5-12 against Dayton. And a 2nd round matchup against Bucky. I like it.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/ (https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/)
-
Jerry Palm with a 5-12 against Dayton. And a 2nd round matchup against Bucky. I like it.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/ (https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/)
I irrationally hate Dayton and would love to see them get beat down. Aren't they like the 4th or 5th best in a weak A10 though?
-
I irrationally hate Dayton and would love to see them get beat down. Aren't they like the 4th or 5th best in a weak A10 though?
Jerry Palm is bad at his job
-
Jerry Palm is bad at his job
It's brutal. I know the NCAA is more lenient with rematches now too, but he could have just switched Wisconsin and Oklahoma to avoid the potential rematch and both pods are in Des Moines.
-
That's fair. Wisconsin definitely played us a lot better than K-State did. Personally, I think K-State has been slightly underachieving to date and Wisconsin has been significantly overachieving. I think both regress (or progress) towards the mean and K-State ends up the better of the two. Could absolutely be wrong though.
https://twitter.com/kcstar/status/1075142164907286528?s=21
-
https://twitter.com/kcstar/status/1075142164907286528?s=21
That'll help my chances of being wrong
-
https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1076522950826840065?s=21
Saturday seed list (Friday results included): 01-KU, 02-DUKE, 03-MICH, 04-UVa, 05-TENN, 06-ZAGS, 07-NEV, 08-MichSt, 09-Wisc, 10-Unc, 11-TTech, 12-Aub, 13-Okla, 14-Neb, 15-VaTech, 16-MissSt, 17-FlaSt, 18-Marq, 19-BUFF, 20-OhioSt, 21-Ind, 22-Hou, 23-CINCY, 24-NOVA...
-
https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1076522950826840065?s=21
I don't follow all of those well enough to know 'em all, but No. 9 seems awfully high for F%cky to me. I'm not even saying we should be seeded higher than they are (but we should), I'm just saying, "Really? They are one of the 9 best teams in the entire country?"
-
I don't follow all of those well enough to know 'em all, but No. 9 seems awfully high for F%cky to me. I'm not even saying we should be seeded higher than they are (but we should), I'm just saying, "Really? They are one of the 9 best teams in the entire country?"
They absolutely have one of the top 10 resumes.
I think he is underselling us at 18, though.
-
https://twitter.com/espnlunardi/status/1076522950826840065?s=21
Saturday seed list (Friday results included): 01-KU, 02-DUKE, 03-MICH, 04-UVa, 05-TENN, 06-ZAGS, 07-NEV, 08-MichSt, 09-Wisc, 10-Unc, 11-TTech, 12-Aub, 13-Okla, 14-Neb, 15-VaTech, 16-MissSt, 17-FlaSt, 18-Marq, 19-BUFF, 20-OhioSt, 21-Ind, 22-Hou, 23-CINCY, 24-NOVA...
NOVA being caps for winning the BEast and not us is questionable at the moment
-
Up to 13 in net rankings.
Lots of teams we’ve already played in top 35 or so.
-
They absolutely have one of the top 10 resumes.
I
Oklahoma, NC State and @ Iowa are good looking wins for Wisconsin. Stanford and @Xavier to toss in as well.
-
Lunardi has us at 5 currently
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Updated today.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Updated today.
That would be a great bracket for MU
-
5 BE teams and Butler 1st 4 out. I'll take that in a down year.
-
Going to assume Bucky's nap against Minnesota came in after the website went to print
-
That would be a great bracket for MU
I don't know about Florida State. Length all over the floor and great at forcing turnovers. I'm not sold they're great, but that's a tough matchup for MU.
-
5 BE teams and Butler 1st 4 out. I'll take that in a down year.
yep, I think 5 is fine but a bit concerned about 6,7,8,9,9 - makes sweet-16 a bit difficult...need at least one in there. 8,9 face a 1 (or the second 16 in history to beat a 1). 6,7 require a decent draw.
BE rep needs to be maintained.
-
That would be a great bracket for MU
That was my first thought upon seeing the bracket.
Going to assume Bucky's nap against Minnesota came in after the website went to print
And that was my second.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Updated today.
Nitpicky, but SHU as an 8 seed and SJU a 9 are a bit high, IMO.
-
Going to assume Bucky's nap against Minnesota came in after the website went to print
Pretty sure Wisconsin was #9 is his seed list last weekend, so it probably does include Gopher game.
-
Going to assume Bucky's nap against Minnesota came in after the website went to print
speaking of that, got a chuckle out of this analysis of Happ's FT form from beckyville:
Stand on your tippy toes
Bend your right arm to a right degree angle
Bend your wrist backwards, totally flat
Left hand on top of the ball
Left arm bent at a 90 degree right angle
Elbow pointed at upper deck left corner scoreboard
Ball directly in front of your nose
Left thumb in line with your eyebrows
Bend your knees at a 30 degree angle. Wait. Make it 32 degrees...
(http://binaryapi.ap.org/3fc3cc5cd6124d9d9aad3c4a1e7a7b65/preview.jpg)
-
THE SCHWAB'S FIRST BRACKET OF THE YEAR
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1082309463841792000
-
Schwab was so bad last year. But he could improve as I think he's pretty new to it unlike Palm who has been awful forever.
The link below is the guy who does Yahoo/NBC Sports and he's usually very good. 5 seed as of today.
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
-
Andy Katz's latest has MU as a 6 seed.
Also in his field are St. John's (4), Seton Hall (6) and Nova (8).
No love for Creighton or Butler (KenPom #34 and #39, respectively, ahead of the Hall and St. John's.)
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2019-01-08/march-madness-field-predicted-68-days-selection-sunday
-
Bracketville/NBC Sports update through last night. Seed list and bracket.
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
-
Bracketville/NBC Sports update through last night. Seed list and bracket.
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
That has S16 written all over it.
-
That has S16 written all over it.
Probably Elite 8 since Rider will take care of UVA in the first round.
-
6-seed (unchanged) in today's Lunardi. http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology. Other Big East: 7-Nova, 11-Creighton, 8-Hall, 8-SJU, first four out-Butler.
First 6-seed in the Matrix: http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
-
I do not get all the Cincinnati love. Consensus 9-seed and as high as 4 & 5 in brackets updated in the past 48 hours.
11 of their 12 wins are Q3/4, they have a bad Q3 loss to offset their Q1 win over Ole Miss, there's just nothing to hang their hats on. Compare their resume to Furman, who has better wins, fewer losses (and none outside Q1), and is better in the road and I don't see how anyone could have Cincy in and Furman out.
-
Lunardi must have some fantasy about a Marquette-VPI matchup. Seems like every year he has them paired somewhere in the bracket.
-
Bracketville/NBC Sports update through last night. Seed list and bracket.
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
Marquette as a 5 seed in Des Moines is a scary matchup for whoever gets a top 4 "protected" seed there. We'd definitely have more fans in the house than Houston.
Same would be true if Wisconsin played in Des Moines. And its not too unreasonable to think that MU and Wisconsin could BOTH be protected top 4 seeds in Des Moines.
-
Michigan and Michigan St both #1 seeds playing in Columbus. I wonder how that will go over?
-
Also it is worth noting on bracketmatrix, we are the first 6 seed but have a better average than every single 5 seed in brackets released after the Creighton game. So when other brackets update we will be moving up quickly
-
Looking at brackets this time of year, so much is still built on rankings and expectations rather than resumes. I look at my own ranking of Marquette at #12 on the S-Curve & the last 3 seed. No one else in Bracket Matrix has MU on the 3-line.
My first thought is that must make me a biased homer. But of the next 8 teams I have on the 4/5 lines, MU has more Quadrant 1 wins than any of them and Marquette's worst loss (at 27 St John's) is better than any other teams worst loss, except Buffalo (we have double the Q1 wins of Buffalo). Those teams are Indiana, Buffalo, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Kentucky, Wisconsin, St John's, Maryland.
It's like Nevada. People still have them as a 3, but they haven't played a single Q1 game, only have one top-50 win (49 Utah State at home), and have a terrible Q3 loss. Yet all but 2 other brackets from the past 48 hours have Nevada ahead of Marquette. The only justification is because they went to the S16 last year. It's certainly not because of what they've done this year.
-
I do not get all the Cincinnati love. Consensus 9-seed and as high as 4 & 5 in brackets updated in the past 48 hours.
11 of their 12 wins are Q3/4, they have a bad Q3 loss to offset their Q1 win over Ole Miss, there's just nothing to hang their hats on. Compare their resume to Furman, who has better wins, fewer losses (and none outside Q1), and is better in the road and I don't see how anyone could have Cincy in and Furman out.
I do wonder if the NET rankings have something to do with it. Fair or not, NET puts Cincy at #37 which is right about where a 9-seed should be.
-
Palm updated his bracket for the first time in months today
We are a 6
Louisville is a 5?
Ok
-
6-seed (unchanged) in today's Lunardi. http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology. Other Big East: 7-Nova, 11-Creighton, 8-Hall, 8-SJU, first four out-Butler.
First 6-seed in the Matrix: http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
I’m baffled as to how Wisconsin is a consensus 5 seed. I imagine it’s their wins over Iowa and OU? OU being a 3 is wild too as their resume isn’t that impressive. They beat 5/6 loss Florida, ND, and NW teams and lost to UW, Kansas and TT? Ok then.
Kansas St stumbling has to have hurt our computer numbers mightily.
-
I’m baffled as to how Wisconsin is a consensus 5 seed. I imagine it’s their wins over Iowa and OU? OU being a 3 is wild too as their resume isn’t that impressive. They beat 5/6 loss Florida, ND, and NW teams and lost to UW, Kansas and TT? Ok then.
Kansas St stumbling has to have hurt our computer numbers mightily.
Wisconsin has 3 Q1 wins and the Oklahoma & NC State wins are aging really well. 5-3 record in road/neutral games is also solid. No losses outside Q2.
Oklahoma has 3 losses, but all away from home against top-15 teams. That won't hurt you. And they have 8 Q1/2 wins, a number only matched by Michigan State.
K-State is disappointing, but they should stay Q2, and Buffalo sticking in the top-20 after finishing non-con is a decent indicator that they should remain a Q1 home win, which will make up for KSU's decline.
-
Wisconsin has 3 Q1 wins and the Oklahoma & NC State wins are aging really well. 5-3 record in road/neutral games is also solid. No losses outside Q2.
Oklahoma has 3 losses, but all away from home against top-15 teams. That won't hurt you. And they have 8 Q1/2 wins, a number only matched by Michigan State.
K-State is disappointing, but they should stay Q2, and Buffalo sticking in the top-20 after finishing non-con is a decent indicator that they should remain a Q1 home win, which will make up for KSU's decline.
I personally think the NET rankings are trash, and a lot of coaches seem to agree. For example, the best think you can say about OU’s resume is their losses aren’t bad. Their best win is Wofford who is below all 3 of MU’s best wins (Ville, UW, Buffalo) and their second best, UF is well below. And all of MU’s losses are to top 25 NET teams on road or neutral floors. And OU is COMFORTABLY ahead of us. It’s dumb.
Hell Wofford’s best win is 58th NET ETSU. The formula WAY overranks road wins against mediocre teams IMO.
-
I’m baffled as to how Wisconsin is a consensus 5 seed. I imagine it’s their wins over Iowa and OU? OU being a 3 is wild too as their resume isn’t that impressive. They beat 5/6 loss Florida, ND, and NW teams and lost to UW, Kansas and TT? Ok then.
Kansas St stumbling has to have hurt our computer numbers mightily.
It's a shame Dean Wade is injured.
-
I personally think the NET rankings are trash, and a lot of coaches seem to agree. For example, the best think you can say about OU’s resume is their losses aren’t bad. Their best win is Wofford who is below all 3 of MU’s best wins (Ville, UW, Buffalo) and their second best, UF is well below. And all of MU’s losses are to top 25 NET teams on road or neutral floors. And OU is COMFORTABLY ahead of us. It’s dumb.
Hell Wofford’s best win is 58th NET ETSU. The formula WAY overranks road wins against mediocre teams IMO.
Then you must really hate Pomeroy, his formula has Oklahoma 14 spots ahead of us (significantly more than NET).
-
Then you must really hate Pomeroy, his formula has Oklahoma 14 spots ahead of us (significantly more than NET).
He also has Nevada at 13, basically a 3 seed. And has everyone you list other than St. John’s ranked higher than Marquette, most of them pretty significantly.
Looking at brackets this time of year, so much is still built on rankings and expectations rather than resumes. I look at my own ranking of Marquette at #12 on the S-Curve & the last 3 seed. No one else in Bracket Matrix has MU on the 3-line.
My first thought is that must make me a biased homer. But of the next 8 teams I have on the 4/5 lines, MU has more Quadrant 1 wins than any of them and Marquette's worst loss (at 27 St John's) is better than any other teams worst loss, except Buffalo (we have double the Q1 wins of Buffalo). Those teams are Indiana, Buffalo, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Kentucky, Wisconsin, St John's, Maryland.
It's like Nevada. People still have them as a 3, but they haven't played a single Q1 game, only have one top-50 win (49 Utah State at home), and have a terrible Q3 loss. Yet all but 2 other brackets from the past 48 hours have Nevada ahead of Marquette. The only justification is because they went to the S16 last year. It's certainly not because of what they've done this year.
-
Wonder how much the fact that 3 of our wins against good teams went to OT. Kstate and buffalo were strong wins in terms of point spread, but IU and SJU were just as wide margins.
I think as long as we stay the course and keep racking up wins, especially on the road, we will finally see the respect the team deserves.
-
He also has Nevada at 13, basically a 3 seed. And has everyone you list other than St. John’s ranked higher than Marquette, most of them pretty significantly.
Which is why I look at the resume and what the committee historically values. In the past, results have trumped metrics, even their own metrics. Nevada at the moment looks a ton like St Mary's in the past few years. Great record & metrics, but might need to win their conference tourney to get in. If they end up at 15-3 in conference with losses at Fresno State (tomorrow) and Utah State and don't win the MWC tourney, it's entirely possible they could be a 30 win team and NCAA snub.
-
Schwab was so bad last year. But he could improve as I think he's pretty new to it unlike Palm who has been awful forever.
The link below is the guy who does Yahoo/NBC Sports and he's usually very good. 5 seed as of today.
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Went through this last year, that guy is bad with seeds but excellent at picking who makes it. Second best in last five years picking who makes it, while Lunardi not in the top 40 in picking teams.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=55946.msg1005018#msg1005018
-
I am sure wiscy moved up with their loss and MU dropped with their win
-
I am sure wiscy moved up with their loss and MU dropped with their win
UW lost in overtime and MU didn’t cover the spread at home. Clear advantage to UW, simple math
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Joe has us up to a 5, playing arch-rivals Kostas University
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Bracket Matrix has us as the top 5
-
Went through this last year, that guy is bad with seeds but excellent at picking who makes it. Second best in last five years picking who makes it, while Lunardi not in the top 40 in picking teams.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=55946.msg1005018#msg1005018
New Chicos old Cheeks strikes again! Loves his buddy Jerry.
-
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Bracket Matrix has us as the top 5
Highest anyone has us is #3, lowest is #9. Several brackets have us as a 3 and only 1 bracket has us as 9 (and 0 have us as an 8 and 4 as a 7) so most brackets have us between a 3-6 seed. I like it.
-
New Chicos old Cheeks strikes again! Loves his buddy Jerry.
So pathetic! Yet so, so funny! (to laugh at, not with)
-
Locations are a crap shoot with these but saw Lunardi had us in San Jose with Maryland as the possible second round matchup. At least we wouldn’t be facing a Pac12 team.
He somehow put 7 seed Iowa State in Des Moines which I don’t think would ever happen.
When does the committee release their top 16? That will give a lot of insight into how they view conference strength. It will be interesting what they think of the Big 10.
-
He somehow put 7 seed Iowa State in Des Moines which I don’t think would ever happen.
When does the committee release their top 16? That will give a lot of insight into how they view conference strength. It will be interesting what they think of the Big 10.
They put South Carolina in Columbia as a 7. I believe the top-16 comes out early February. It's something like a month before Selection Sunday.
-
Locations are a crap shoot with these but saw Lunardi had us in San Jose with Maryland as the possible second round matchup. At least we wouldn’t be facing a Pac12 team.
He somehow put 7 seed Iowa State in Des Moines which I don’t think would ever happen.
When does the committee release their top 16? That will give a lot of insight into how they view conference strength. It will be interesting what they think of the Big 10.
Last year they had it about a month out from the selection show. I would imagine that to be the case this year too so roughly Feb 16th
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Joe has us up to a 5, playing arch-rivals Kostas University
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Bracket Matrix has us as the top 5
Just 4 Big East teams in Lunardi's latest, with Butler and Creighton the first 2 teams out.
I think we're much more likely to have 6 than 4, but 5 will be the number. I imagine PC could get into the mix as well if they turn it around soon. I expected them to be better this season.
-
I imagine PC could get into the mix as well if they turn it around soon. I expected them to be better this season.
PC likely would have been, but they have been without a very good frosh, A.J. Reeves for the past few weeks with a foot injury. I believe the original timeframe was 4-6 weeks, and he went down in mid-December. He was their second leading scorer (14 ppg) and best three point shooter early on. He would certainly make a big difference for them. I don't think he'll be back this weekend.
-
My personal hopes for this season was:
top 3 in BEast
Top 6 seed NCAA.
I’m happy with how it looks right now. However having said that. I think if selection committee picks today, we could be a 4 seed.
-
I’ll play Dayton and Maryland all day.
Maryland’s two big men would be a pain in the ass but we got guys who can be physical with them.
Cowan can be great but he’s small. So that helps Markus.
Sam and Joey will force one of their big men to leave the paint.
They don’t have elite shooting either.
-
Locations are a crap shoot with these but saw Lunardi had us in San Jose with Maryland as the possible second round matchup. At least we wouldn’t be facing a Pac12 team.
He somehow put 7 seed Iowa State in Des Moines which I don’t think would ever happen.
When does the committee release their top 16? That will give a lot of insight into how they view conference strength. It will be interesting what they think of the Big 10.
*taps temple*
Can't play PAC12 teams if there is just one in the tournament
-
How about a shout out for the women's team - #3 seed in Bracketology!
-
How about a shout out for the women's team - #3 seed in Bracketology!
Both mens and womens ranked top 15
-
Both mens and womens ranked top 15
Definitely cool.
We are Basketball U!
-
MU Women climb again to a new program-best @No. 13 ranking in the Coaches' Poll! Also the highest ranking for a BIG EAST squad since the realignment!
-
Both mens and womens ranked top 15
Maybe I should pose this in a different thread, but who do we think has a higher ceiling?
I'm leaning towards the men, because I can foresee a scenario where Markus gets hot and we knock off a Kansas or a Virginia and get to the Final Four. I dont see that for the women, who will probably play up to their seed but lose against one of the elite 1 or 2 seeds who have more size.
-
Maybe I should pose this in a different thread, but who do we think has a higher ceiling?
I'm leaning towards the men, because I can foresee a scenario where Markus gets hot and we knock off a Kansas or a Virginia and get to the Final Four. I dont see that for the women, who will probably play up to their seed but lose against one of the elite 1 or 2 seeds who have more size.
Men for sure. Women are great, but I feel like the top of the women's tier is head and shoulders above the rest.
-
Bowie Schwab, FS1s Bracket guru last night had MU a 4 seed before the game, and see their ceiling as a 3, which I think sounds right.
While of course, if and when MU wins out, and the BET, we get a 1, I won’t be totally surprised 8-)
-
Bowie Schwab, FS1s Bracket guru last night had MU a 4 seed before the game, and see their ceiling as a 3, which I think sounds right.
While of course, if and when MU wins out, and the BET, we get a 1, I won’t be totally surprised 8-)
The Schwab lost some weight and hit up Tommy’s tanning booth.
-
The Schwab lost some weight and hit up Tommy’s tanning booth.
He looks way better than last year. Always loved Stump the Schwab. Not sure how he is as a bracketologist though. I’d take a 3/4 seed all day.
Last year the committee really valued marquee wins, especially on the road. I’m worried that will limit our ceiling as we don’t have as many opportunities this year. Although, the BE still offers us the opportunity to get a lot of nice wins.
-
Men for sure. Women are great, but I feel like the top of the women's tier is head and shoulders above the rest.
Agreed. There are typically only about five or six women's teams that have a realistic shot at winning it all...and only two programs (UConn and Tennessee) have ever won more than two titles. On the men's side, it isn't unheard of for a team further down the list to win it all (i.e., 7-seed UConn in '14).
-
Men for sure. Women are great, but I feel like the top of the women's tier is head and shoulders above the rest.
See: Notre Dame 87- Marquette 63 from just a few weeks ago.
-
https://www.insidethehall.com/2019/01/16/bracketology-ncaa-tournament-projection-as-of-january-16-2019/ (https://www.insidethehall.com/2019/01/16/bracketology-ncaa-tournament-projection-as-of-january-16-2019/)
I would absolutely LOVE this bracket if it was to occur. That feels like an elite 8 draw.
-
what is the easiest way to get BE tourney ticks without season ticket holder.
Been a while since ive gone, are they readily available on stubhub etc , or better off scalping around MSG?
any suggestions?
-
what is the easiest way to get BE tourney ticks without season ticket holder.
Been a while since ive gone, are they readily available on stubhub etc , or better off scalping around MSG?
any suggestions?
You going to certain games, all MU games, every game? Care about where you sit? Care about getting a good deal? Value peace of mind from having them in advance?
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
All updated through the weekend.
-
What seed do you think we would need to be to have the first round in either Des Moines or Columbus?
-
What seed do you think we would need to be to have the first round in either Des Moines or Columbus?
Not sure we can get Des Moines.
Michigan and Kansas have that pretty fast tracked. Sparty too.
-
What seed do you think we would need to be to have the first round in either Des Moines or Columbus?
Seed doesn't matter as much. We'd likely have to pass one of Michigan, Michigan St, Kansas, and Tennessee (whose closest location Columbia SC but Duke and Virginia are probably going to SC).
-
WE would probably have to be a 2 seed to even get consideration for either side. Michigan/Michigan/Tennessee St will take up the Columbus spots. If Tennessee remains higher than both one will get send to Iowa and most likely Kansas will be there. If we want to get to Iowa we will need to beat out Kansas.
-
Not sure we can get Des Moines.
Michigan and Kansas have that pretty fast tracked. Sparty too.
I think the Michigan schools would be heading to Columbus
-
WE would probably have to be a 2 seed to even get consideration for either side. Michigan/Michigan/Tennessee St will take up the Columbus spots. If Tennessee remains higher than both one will get send to Iowa and most likely Kansas will be there. If we want to get to Iowa we will need to beat out Kansas.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Tennessee head to Columbia though...depending on UNC and Duke.
Kentucky might get the nod for Columbus as well
-
Ideally, get Michigan and Michigan State both to the 1-line ahead of Tennessee. They go to Columbus, then the Vols go to Columbia along with Duke. Kansas will most likely be in Tulsa. I actually think a 2/3 gives us a decent shot at Des Moines.
-
Ideally, get Michigan and Michigan State both to the 1-line ahead of Tennessee. They go to Columbus, then the Vols go to Columbia along with Duke. Kansas will most likely be in Tulsa. I actually think a 2/3 gives us a decent shot at Des Moines.
Kansas will be the interesting case
Des Moines is technically like half hour closer to Kansas than Tulsa is.
-
Ideally, get Michigan and Michigan State both to the 1-line ahead of Tennessee. They go to Columbus, then the Vols go to Columbia along with Duke. Kansas will most likely be in Tulsa. I actually think a 2/3 gives us a decent shot at Des Moines.
Virginia is also in play for Columbia, Sc. I think Columbus, OH is 2nd closest for both Virginia and Tennessee.
-
If MU is a top 4 seed, they are SUPPOSED to be protected...which means, if that happens, they should be in either Des Moines or Columbus at worst. That being said, they of all teams would get the shaft and be a #3 seed and have to go to Salt Lake City.
-
If MU is a top 4 seed, they are SUPPOSED to be protected...which means, if that happens, they should be in either Des Moines or Columbus at worst. That being said, they of all teams would get the shaft and be a #3 seed and have to go to Salt Lake City.
I think this is incorrect. Protected seeds just mean that you wouldn't play a game where the opposing team has a much better home court advantage. For example, if we get shipped out to San Jose, we wouldn't be matched up against San Francisco.
-
If MU is a top 4 seed, they are SUPPOSED to be protected...which means, if that happens, they should be in either Des Moines or Columbus at worst. That being said, they of all teams would get the shaft and be a #3 seed and have to go to Salt Lake City.
But you also have to look at what other teams are competing for those cities.
Columbus has both Michigan and Michigan State to compete with, plus likely one of Tennessee or Virginia being considered. Marquette is well behind all of those teams.
Kansas could be either Des Moines or Tulsa since the difference is neglible. So Kansas and both Michigan schools have to be placed. Then is there a spot in Des Moines left?
A lot depends on the S-curve and what teams are ahead of Marquette.
-
If MU is a top 4 seed, they are SUPPOSED to be protected...which means, if that happens, they should be in either Des Moines or Columbus at worst. That being said, they of all teams would get the shaft and be a #3 seed and have to go to Salt Lake City.
There's 16 protected seeds for 8 locations. I'm sure they try to match it up as well as possible, but if there are three teams for one spot, someone's getting left out.
-
There's 16 protected seeds for 8 locations. I'm sure they try to match it up as well as possible, but if there are three teams for one spot, someone's getting left out.
Would they ever consider trying to squeeze us into Des Moines over say Michigan and putting them somewhere simply because we are like 3.5 hours closer and might have an even bigger fan draw?
-
Would they ever consider trying to squeeze us into Des Moines over say Michigan and putting them somewhere simply because we are like 3.5 hours closer and might have an even bigger fan draw?
They could put us in the Fiserv and Michigan would have the bigger fan draw. Okay hyperbole...but not by that much
-
They could put us in the Fiserv and Michigan would have the bigger fan draw. Okay hyperbole...but not by that much
I guess I’ve never paid attention to Michigan NCAA games.
But I don’t see much of a fan base for normal road games. The barn for example isn’t filled with them. Michigan football on the other hand....yeah, they got fans all around here.
But that’s also part my point. Wouldn’t a better team like Michigan draw better at any of their semi close locations? So putting us in a good spot might only help generate fan bases to proper locations.
-
I guess I’ve never paid attention to Michigan NCAA games.
But I don’t see much of a fan base for normal road games. The barn for example isn’t filled with them. Michigan football on the other hand....yeah, they got fans all around here.
But that’s also part my point. Wouldn’t a better team like Michigan draw better at any of their semi close locations? So putting us in a good spot might only help generate fan bases to proper locations.
Ah I understand now. Misunderstood your original post.
Michigan fans don't care much about regular season basketball. But they do care about the postseason a lot, preseason tournaments as well. When we were both in Orlando for the Old Spice a few years ago it seemed like over half the gym was Michigan fans.
-
Ah I understand now. Misunderstood your original post.
Michigan fans don't care much about regular season basketball. But they do care about the postseason a lot, preseason tournaments as well. When we were both in Orlando for the Old Spice a few years ago it seemed like over half the gym was Michigan fans.
Yeah no worries. I don’t involve myself in the logistics part of bracketology some I’m pretty ignorant to it that’s why I was curious if us being a potential top seed and closer to Des Moines might help us more.
But yeah, I could see Michigan fans showing up when it matters.
-
Did anyone see Lunardi this week? I think he has a sick sense of humor!
Us against Loyola would be hilarious. Sister Jean et all gets rolled by a soaring Eagle. That would garner a lot of attention and, if we do as we would expect, mmmmm!
P.S. -- Us Snowbird Warriors are kinda pulling for Jacksonville for our team! About a 2.5 hour drive from here!
-
Well,
Michigan sure doesn’t draw fans for a mid January Wednesday home game vs the gophers.
There might be 100 people here.
-
Arena looks pretty filled up to me. ?-(
-
Arena looks pretty filled up to me. ?-(
They’ve started to file in. But at tip off. There was basically just the students in the lower bowl.
Minimal noise either.
I was joking since we talked about it today so I found it funny. But this isn’t the usual environment I see in Ann Arbor
-
If they really use the NET rankings for seeding we may not have a protected seed anyway!
-
If they really use the NET rankings for seeding we may not have a protected seed anyway!
We will know more that first bracket reveal.
But I doubt they go just down the line.
-
Michigan survives Sam Hauser style
Man that woulda been nice for us
-
Did anyone see Lunardi this week? I think he has a sick sense of humor!
Us against Loyola would be hilarious. Sister Jean et all gets rolled by a soaring Eagle. That would garner a lot of attention and, if we do as we would expect, mmmmm!
P.S. -- Us Snowbird Warriors are kinda pulling for Jacksonville for our team! About a 2.5 hour drive from here!
I'm with you dgies! Jax would be great. 15 min drive in from the beach for me, and two breweries walking distance from the arena. Not a big alum presence here, however. If the opening rounds coincide with Spring Break we might get more students than normal...
-
Did anyone see Lunardi this week? I think he has a sick sense of humor!
Us against Loyola would be hilarious. Sister Jean et all gets rolled by a soaring Eagle. That would garner a lot of attention and, if we do as we would expect, mmmmm!
P.S. -- Us Snowbird Warriors are kinda pulling for Jacksonville for our team! About a 2.5 hour drive from here!
Would definitely enjoy that match up. Last year I took a gander at their message boards and they really really hate us over there for some reason. Also not too fond of Georgetown.
-
Would definitely enjoy that match up. Last year I took a gander at their message boards and they really really hate us over there for some reason. Also not too fond of Georgetown.
LUC has message boards? You sure it's not just a group text with like 6 guys?
-
If we go to salt lake maybe the Mormons will come out in droves to support BB!!!!!! so at least we got that going for us there.
-
The men's volleyball team plays in the same arena as the men's basketball team at LUC and men's volleyball sold more tickets/game for men's volleyball than they did men's basketball in the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 seasons.
-
LUC has message boards? You sure it's not just a group text with like 6 guys?
Surprisingly active considering the school has had like three good years in their history. This thread has a bit of MU hate but a quick search of Marquette or Big "Least" shows they definitely are not our biggest fans
http://www.ramblermania.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2591
-
Remember when people wanted Porter Moser instead of Wojo?
LOL
-
Surprisingly active considering the school has had like three good years in their history. This thread has a bit of MU hate but a quick search of Marquette or Big "Least" shows they definitely are not our biggest fans
http://www.ramblermania.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2591
Just jealous they're not in the Big East. If they want to be mad at anyone, be mad at DePaul for not improving. Completely eliminated the need for the BE to invite a new team to be the punching bag.
-
Surprisingly active considering the school has had like three good years in their history. This thread has a bit of MU hate but a quick search of Marquette or Big "Least" shows they definitely are not our biggest fans
http://www.ramblermania.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2591
Interesting. Seems like it's a few people mad at us for either not scheduling them or for leaving them in the MCC way back when.
-
Speaking of LUC, they got doubled up on the road by a sub 500 Missouri State.
-
Speaking of LUC, they got doubled up on the road by a sub 500 Missouri State.
Sub 500? That’s bad.
-
Sub 500? That’s bad.
161 on kenpom. So not the worst. But still not great. Especially when its 70-35 at the buzzer.
-
161 on kenpom. So not the worst. But still not great. Especially when its 70-35 at the buzzer.
Oh got it, .500. Thought you had a typo and meant sub 300 of something.
-
161 on kenpom. So not the worst. But still not great. Especially when its 70-35 at the buzzer.
28-9 rebounds
40-11 second half score
-
28-9 rebounds
40-11 second half score
NINE rebounds!
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology/_/iteration/209
Updated.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology/_/iteration/209
Updated.
I like it! Markus vs. Tremont, Theo vs. Naz, with a chance at San Jose redemption for 'Zar/Mo/Cuby
-
Interesting. Seems like it's a few people mad at us for either not scheduling them or for leaving them in the MCC way back when.
If they only knew how emotionally invested I got in them last March. Can't we all just get along. Except Dayton, nobody needs them. ABD.
-
I'm with you dgies! Jax would be great. 15 min drive in from the beach for me, and two breweries walking distance from the arena. Not a big alum presence here, however. If the opening rounds coincide with Spring Break we might get more students than normal...
I'm down on the Treasure Coast and a few years ahead of you, alumni-wise.
Good starting place for our second NatChamp.
Also, I'm betting that there's enough MU alums in Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas that might make the trip (not far from any of those places). GO WARRIORS!!!!
-
Remember when people wanted Porter Moser instead of Wojo?
If Moser had any chance to go to a real program and didn't take it, wow.
He's probably more likely to get fired by LUC than to get that chance again.
-
If Moser had any chance to go to a real program and didn't take it, wow.
He's probably more likely to get fired by LUC than to get that chance again.
He's won himself a life time at LUC now, there's next to zero expectations at that school. Barring the BE coming in and saying "if you win for the next four years we'll invite you" he's basically only got to have occasional NIT maybe NCAAs to stick there.
-
Interesting. Seems like it's a few people mad at us for either not scheduling them or for leaving them in the MCC way back when.
Yeah, there's a couple guys who are mad at Marquette for leaving the MCC for greener pastures, insinuating that we left them in the lurch. That's funny because I think Marquette may actually have one of the shortest tenures in the MCC/Horizon League - we were only in it for 3 seasons.
-
Remember when people wanted Porter Moser instead of Wojo?
LOL
Fans are frequently irrational. The ultimate toddlers.
-
Remember when people wanted Porter Moser instead of Wojo?
LOL
LUC had an awesome run last year, but that was one of the biggest anomalies in a coach's career in recent memory. In 12 previous seasons, Porter Moser had never gone to the tournament and never had a top-75 team per Pomeroy. 9 of his previous 12 teams had been sub-100 teams.
It was a great run and awesome story, but it was wholly improbable and there has been nothing in his coaching career to indicate that would happen. Worth noting, they are back to being a sub-100 team this year. He did a great job last year, but doesn't really seem to be all that great of a coach if you look at the balance of his career and not just March of 2018.
-
LUC had an awesome run last year, but that was one of the biggest anomalies in a coach's career in recent memory. In 12 previous seasons, Porter Moser had never gone to the tournament and never had a top-75 team per Pomeroy. 9 of his previous 12 teams had been sub-100 teams.
It was a great run and awesome story, but it was wholly improbable and there has been nothing in his coaching career to indicate that would happen. Worth noting, they are back to being a sub-100 team this year. He did a great job last year, but doesn't really seem to be all that great of a coach if you look at the balance of his career and not just March of 2018.
Agreed on all points. Fun story last year, and he seems like a genuinely good guy, but if Wojo had Moser's same track record at MU (even adjusted for our level), he would have been fired already.
-
Yeah, there's a couple guys who are mad at Marquette for leaving the MCC for greener pastures, insinuating that we left them in the lurch. That's funny because I think Marquette may actually have one of the shortest tenures in the MCC/Horizon League - we were only in it for 3 seasons.
I like to check in on schools that have been considered Big East expansion candidates. SLU fans are still super salty over us leaving them in CUSA, like there was ever a chance we would have turned down the Big East.
-
SB Nation's updated bracket. MU is a 3 seed, # 9 in the s-curve, playing in Jacksonville. Highest I've seen so far.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2019/1/25/18197214/bracketology-2019-college-basketball-bubble-bids
Sorry if already posted.
-
Palm had them at a 3 as well.
-
Don't think Palm had as as high on the s-curve, tho? I saw us slotted at 12 in a bracket, but don't recall anyone slotting us as the top 3 seed.
Maybe I missed it somewhere in.
-
Remember when people wanted Porter Moser instead of Wojo?
LOL
Yup, about 7 weeks ago
-
I'm down on the Treasure Coast and a few years ahead of you, alumni-wise.
Good starting place for our second NatChamp.
Also, I'm betting that there's enough MU alums in Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas that might make the trip (not far from any of those places). GO WARRIORS!!!!
We will have 7 MU alums at Jax for the tournament regardless of who is there. There is a decent amount of alums in Florida. If we got seeded there, I bet it would be a decent turnout.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Would be nice to beat charles matthews but I don't wanna face michigan.
-
Not likely to happen but would love to see Nova play duke in the S16 and knock them out. I feel someone is going to get majorly screwed by having to play nova in the s16. either as a 1 or a 2 seed. The losses against Penn and Furmen will most likely cost them a seed line or two but the way they are playing recently I would not want to face them before the elite 8. I would bet they get a 4 seed and a nightmare match up for any of the 1 seeds.
-
We will have 7 MU alums at Jax for the tournament regardless of who is there. There is a decent amount of alums in Florida. If we got seeded there, I bet it would be a decent turnout.
I'm in NE Florida and will be there as well.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
This bracket pretty much flips off the notion of "protected seeds."
Milwaukee (#3) to Tulsa = 766 miles
Denton, TX (#14) to Tulsa - 269 miles
Meanwhile, Bricky (#7) would play in Des Moines = 293 miles from Madison.
-
At this time in the season, the most relevant discussions regarding bracketology are: In, out, or on the bubble? If out or on the bubble, what do you have to do to get in? If in, how high a seed can you get? Speculating on location is just that, speculation. So go ahead a speculate away but I’m currently not going to lose sleep over whether some bracketologist puts us in Des Moines or San Jose.
-
Yeah, a bracketologist's location prediction is not worth thinking about, I guarantee the bracketologist hasn't.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/ (https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/)
At least puts us in Des Moines. I would totally take this bracket.
-
I’m excited for the Committee to release their top 16. Nice to actually be on the lookout for our team.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/ (https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/)
At least puts us in Des Moines. I would totally take this bracket.
FSU would be a challenging match-up with a lot of big wingspans but I would love another crack at Kansas in the Sweet 16, especially without Doke.
-
FSU would be a challenging match-up with a lot of big wingspans but I would love another crack at Kansas in the Sweet 16, especially without Doke.
They are also a team that’s known to literally just not show up for games about 50% of the time under Hamilton.
Considering they made a nice run last year, I like the odds of them straight up losing that first game
-
Though it's nice to see that Lunardi finally acknowledges we're having a good season, I prefer the CBS bracket.
Not that either means a hill of beans in January.
-
Though it's nice to see that Lunardi finally acknowledges we're having a good season, I prefer the CBS bracket.
Not that either means a hill of beans in January.
Yeah I’d rather get Kansas than Michigan.
Depends on who wins the first game. I think we’d handle Miss State. Minny could be a potential interesting match up. But like FSU, they may not even show up.
-
Yeah, a bracketologist's location prediction is not worth thinking about, I guarantee the bracketologist hasn't.
I can't speak to Lunardi, but one reason I prefer doing S-Curves is because I do think about location predictions. Doing a bracket is a lot more work if you care to do it right. Things I take into account...
- Proximity of protected seed to home.
- Proximity of protected seeds potential first weekend opponents to home.
- Proximity of non-protected favored seeds to home compared to first round opponents.
- Overall protected seed pod S-Curve balance (the strongest 4-team pod had total seed power of 130, the weakest was 134.5).
- Overall region strength S-Curve balance (strongest region was Midwest at 524, weakest was East at 532.5, but 3 regions were within 1.5 points).
- Avoiding in season rematches in the first round, & ideally the first weekend.
- Balancing conferences between the regions.
- Preventing conference opponents from meeting in the first weekend as much as possible.
Again, I can't speak to anyone else, but there are people projecting brackets that do take all that into account, and I'm sure there are people more particular about it than I am.
-
Given that this is the first year of the NET ranking , I wonder how accurate the bracketologists are going to be this year. I care less about the seeding and locations and more about who is actually in the field or on the bubble. One of the interesting thing last year was the committee identified who was on the bubble that didn't make it and then those teams got seeded high in the NIT.
-
Isn't the first four out always the #1 seeds in the NIT?
IMO, some bracketologists get caught in "dream matchups," where they are just dying to see a bracket where Kansas plays Mizzou or MU plays VPI , or maybe a Duke-Kentucky rematch in a regional final. I believe this drives some placements more than anything.
-
Given that this is the first year of the NET ranking , I wonder how accurate the bacteriologists are going to be this year. I care less about the seeding and locations and more about who is actually in the field or on the bubble. One of the interesting thing last year was the committee identified who was on the bubble that didn't make it and then those teams got seeded high in the NIT.
Was unaware of the connection of NET and bacteria.
-
Was unaware of the connection of NET and bacteria.
It's tied together by the non-confidence schedule. ;D
-
We will have 7 MU alums at Jax for the tournament regardless of who is there. There is a decent amount of alums in Florida. If we got seeded there, I bet it would be a decent turnout.
PBI flyer? Did you used to live in the Palm Beaches?
Will likely be where our Warriors go this year. Hopefully it is JAX.
-
Given that this is the first year of the NET ranking , I wonder how accurate the bacteriologists are going to be this year. I care less about the seeding and locations and more about who is actually in the field or on the bubble. One of the interesting thing last year was the committee identified who was on the bubble that didn't make it and then those teams got seeded high in the NIT.
Bacteriologists aside, I wonder a lot about this. Take the current #39 & 40 in NET, Utah State & Lipscomb. If bids went strictly on those rankings, both would be safely in regardless of conference tourney results. But at any time in the past, Utah State likely just doesn't have the resume and Lipscomb is in too small a conference to get serious at-large consideration.
As I look at other projectionists, most seem to use the NET as a guide, one more tool in the toolbox. Similar to the RPI. I think the first good indicator we get will be on February 17 when they release the first top-16 seeds. Right now, the top seeds on NET would be Duke, Gonzaga, Virginia, Michigan. On bracketmatrix, the consensus takes Gonzaga & Michigan off the one line and puts Tennessee & MSU there. Marquette will be another good indicator. Bracketmatrix has us as a 3, the NET would have us as a 5.
-
Bacteriologists aside, I wonder a lot about this. Take the current #39 & 40 in NET, Utah State & Lipscomb. If bids went strictly on those rankings, both would be safely in regardless of conference tourney results. But at any time in the past, Utah State likely just doesn't have the resume and Lipscomb is in too small a conference to get serious at-large consideration.
As I look at other projectionists, most seem to use the NET as a guide, one more tool in the toolbox. Similar to the RPI. I think the first good indicator we get will be on February 17 when they release the first top-16 seeds. Right now, the top seeds on NET would be Duke, Gonzaga, Virginia, Michigan. On bracketmatrix, the consensus takes Gonzaga & Michigan off the one line and puts Tennessee & MSU there. Marquette will be another good indicator. Bracketmatrix has us as a 3, the NET would have us as a 5.
But aren't the NET rankings being used like the RPI was in the past - as a general guide, and not as an absolute determinant of in/out and seeding? If so, teams on the edge would still need to sweat Selection Sunday, and the teams clearly in would still be juggled around a seed or three.
-
But aren't the NET rankings being used like the RPI was in the past - as a general guide, and not as an absolute determinant of in/out and seeding? If so, teams on the edge would still need to sweat Selection Sunday, and the teams clearly in would still be juggled around a seed or three.
That's my assumption as well, but until we see what the committee actual does with NET we don't know for sure. I can't imagine they would have a selection committee if they were going to let NET do all the work.
-
But aren't the NET rankings being used like the RPI was in the past - as a general guide, and not as an absolute determinant of in/out and seeding? If so, teams on the edge would still need to sweat Selection Sunday, and the teams clearly in would still be juggled around a seed or three.
I expect they will be, but until we actually see the results we won't know how closely they stick to them, both in terms of inclusion and seeding. That's why February 17 will be interesting as it likely answers both questions.
-
Bracketmatrix has us as a 3, the NET would have us as a 5.
So how do we improve our NET score? Do we just need a couple blowouts to boost efficiency numbers? Would beating Nova help a lot?
-
So how do we improve our NET score? Do we just need a couple blowouts to boost efficiency numbers? Would beating Nova help a lot?
Road wins by double digits, most likely.
-
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1090049217232392192
-
So how do we improve our NET score? Do we just need a couple blowouts to boost efficiency numbers? Would beating Nova help a lot?
As far as in our control, beating teams by more than we're expected to. I think following the Pomeroy spreads and looking to see if we exceed them is our best hope. NET isn't the same as kenpom, but it's probably a good guide.
At this point, though, the needle likely moves less as more data is already baked in. Beating Butler tomorrow by 20? That would move the needle, but a narrow win or loss probably wouldn't do much.
The other big factor will be the conference tournament. Winning that would be huge because you'll get more credit for neutral court than you would at home and currently the 18 teams ahead of us come from 7 conferences. Winning neutral court games on Friday & Saturday while teams that get eliminated early are idle will help.
-
As far as in our control, beating teams by more than we're expected to. I think following the Pomeroy spreads and looking to see if we exceed them is our best hope. NET isn't the same as kenpom, but it's probably a good guide.
At this point, though, the needle likely moves less as more data is already baked in. Beating Butler tomorrow by 20? That would move the needle, but a narrow win or loss probably wouldn't do much.
The other big factor will be the conference tournament. Winning that would be huge because you'll get more credit for neutral court than you would at home and currently the 18 teams ahead of us come from 7 conferences. Winning neutral court games on Friday & Saturday while teams that get eliminated early are idle will help.
Beating Nova is really the only way to improve out Net Ranking without counting on other teams ahead losing. The job by Wisconsin by beating Michigan was almost 15. Beating teams ranking 50-100 doesn't do much. Thats why I have said numerous times that without teams beating Marquette or Nova the big east doesnt get much bids. Losing to the bottom of the big east are bad losses while wins dont move the needle enough.
-
Beating Nova is really the only way to improve out Net Ranking without counting on other teams ahead losing. The job by Wisconsin by beating Michigan was almost 15. Beating teams ranking 50-100 doesn't do much. Thats why I have said numerous times that without teams beating Marquette or Nova the big east doesnt get much bids. Losing to the bottom of the big east are bad losses while wins dont move the needle enough.
That's not how the efficiency based portion of the metric works, that's not how any efficiency based metric works, and at this point that's all the team can control.
-
That's not how the efficiency based portion of the metric works, that's not how any efficiency based metric works, and at this point that's all the team can control.
Do you think we would be ranked higher if we ran up the score in non conference?
-
Do you think we would be ranked higher if we ran up the score in non conference?
Absolutely. That and minimizing the deficits of our losses.
-
Absolutely. That and minimizing the deficits of our losses.
Virginia Tech is a great example......they ran up big scores against a terrible non conference schedule.....they did beat a decent Washington team by 12 and Purdue by 6.....but other then that their best win is Syracuse......lost to Penn State and got blown out by Virginia and NC
10th in both NET and Pomeroy
-
Do you think we would be ranked higher if we ran up the score in non conference?
In the polls? No. In the metrics? Yes. This is how metrics like KenPom and NET work. One of the biggest drags on our rankings this season is the 7 point win over UTEP. We won the game, and it was never truly in doubt, but metrics punish teams for close games against bad opponents.
If we start blowing out other Big East teams, you will see our metrics rise. Keep in mind that the closer you get to the top, the harder it is to rise in the rankings thanks to good old standard deviation. If we keep winning games by single digits, we will likely stay in the same neighborhood.
-
PBI flyer? Did you used to live in the Palm Beaches?
Will likely be where our Warriors go this year. Hopefully it is JAX.
I did and back there now. Hopefully we are in Jax.
-
Was unaware of the connection of NET and bacteria.
Correction noted and amended.
-
Absolutely. That and minimizing the deficits of our losses. not losing ever again
Edited for the Scoop gameday thread audience
-
Virginia Tech is a great example......they ran up big scores against a terrible non conference schedule.....they did beat a decent Washington team by 12 and Purdue by 6.....but other then that their best win is Syracuse......lost to Penn State and got blown out by Virginia and NC
10th in both NET and Pomeroy
+1
Wisconsin is always the classic example, but Va Tech and Texas Tech are other good examples. Put up some 30, 40, & 50 point wins against bad opponents and it overinflates your metric ranking. I'm a little surprised we haven't seen Pomeroy institute a regressive model for the really big margins. Is there really a statistically significant difference between a 15 & 20 point win, 20 & 30, 30 & 50?
-
If you beat a team by 25, lets say by a score of 95-70 or 75-50, that means you were either very efficient on offense (first score) or on defense (second score). And it is that efficiency on one side of the ball or the other that helps your KenPom/NET ranking, not necessarily that you won by 25.
So the UTEP game didn’t help us not necessarily because we only won by 7. We only won by 7 because we didn’t play well on either side of the ball, which affected our rating.
I posted an article here a few weeks ago that Buffalo keeps in 1-2 regulars at the end of blowout wins in order to keep their efficiency numbers high. So if you are destroying an opponent and put in walk ons and freshman for the last 2-3 minutes, you usually play very poorly and can affect your efficiencies a bit. Thought it was interesting foresight by their coach.
-
If you beat a team by 25, lets say by a score of 95-70 or 75-50, that means you were either very efficient on offense (first score) or on defense (second score). And it is that efficiency on one side of the ball or the other that helps your KenPom/NET ranking, not necessarily that you won by 25.
So the UTEP game didn’t help us not necessarily because we only won by 7. We only won by 7 because we didn’t play well on either side of the ball, which affected our rating.
I posted an article here a few weeks ago that Buffalo keeps in 1-2 regulars at the end of blowout wins in order to keep their efficiency numbers high. So if you are destroying an opponent and put in walk ons and freshman for the last 2-3 minutes, you usually play very poorly and can affect your efficiencies a bit. Thought it was interesting foresight by their coach.
I feel the highlighted shows that the model has some serious flaws--it doesn't have context.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
-
FOX
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1091442326671568896
CBS
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
-
Howie Schwab got no love for the BEast.
-
Howie Schwab got no love for the BEast.
Nothing to do with his ranking of us, but he’s awful. He constantly talks about how people are going to be mad at him over his comments. So hard to watch him.
-
FOX
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1091442326671568896
CBS
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Would love that CBS bracket.
-
Would love that CBS bracket.
Definitely.
And I'm sure UW-Madison fans would say the same.
-
Nothing to do with his ranking of us, but he’s awful. He constantly talks about how people are going to be mad at him over his comments. So hard to watch him.
I watched Stump the Schwab all the time. And it was because watching that fat idiot lose every couple of episodes was priceless. Looked like he would cry or flip over the table. Can’t believe they have him back in front of the camera.
-
Would love that CBS bracket.
Yes please
-
Two thoughts...
FOX
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1091442326671568896
Murray State as First Four Out is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. They have absolutely no shot at the bubble. None. Auto-bid or bust.
CBS
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
UNC on the 4-line, especially behind Louisville, seems crazy. For Marquette, however, I love the draw. Elite 8 seems likely and Final Four very plausible.
Worth noting, Palm seems to have no idea how locating teams works. He's just putting teams in the field in order. You don't put the best 1, best 2, best 3, and best 4 all in the same region. That's not how this works.
-
Two thoughts...
Murray State as First Four Out is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. They have absolutely no shot at the bubble. None. Auto-bid or bust.
Ja Morant factor I guess. But agreed
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Yes, please.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Like #2 but that would be a rough region and don't want to be in the West.
-
When Marquette and Virginia Tech end up on the 2 and 3 lines, someone in that room will point out the Buzz Williams connection and put us in the same bracket, dont'cha think?
-
When Marquette and Virginia Tech end up on the 2 and 3 lines, someone in that room will point out the Buzz Williams connection and put us in the same bracket, dont'cha think?
People said that for the entire Tom Crean tenure at Indiana and it only seemed to cause boners for every bracketologist. The committee doesn't care.
-
People said that for the entire Tom Crean tenure at Indiana and it only seemed to cause boners for every bracketologist. The committee doesn't care.
to be fair, if Indiana didn't choke against Cuse we could've played them in the Elite 8, although then again we did the same.
-
to be fair, if Indiana didn't choke against Cuse we could've played them in the Elite 8, although then again we did the same.
Crean never met a zone he couldn't crap his pants against.
-
to be fair, if Indiana didn't choke against Cuse we could've played them in the Elite 8, although then again we did the same.
Indiana would've been a much better matchup for that Marquette team. Syracuse was ready for the jumbo lineup the 2nd time around. I think MU goes to the Final 4 if they get Indiana instead.
-
Indiana would've been a much better matchup for that Marquette team. Syracuse was ready for the jumbo lineup the 2nd time around. I think MU goes to the Final 4 if they get Indiana instead.
Given that Syracuse just scored another couple of baskets against Indiana, it's a moot point because the Orange crushed 'em.
-
On Saturday (12:30 p.m. ET on CBS), the men's basketball committee will release its top 16 teams (through Friday's games) on the 3rd annual Bracket Preview Show.
-
When Marquette and Virginia Tech end up on the 2 and 3 lines, someone in that room will point out the Buzz Williams connection and put us in the same bracket, dont'cha think?
they're in a battle on their home floor, down by 12 at 6:30 mark to louisville
-
Lunardi's bracket down to 3 Big East teams and St. John's last 4 in. Yikes.
-
Lunardi's bracket down to 3 Big East teams and St. John's last 4 in. Yikes.
This is not really that surprising at least to me. I called this nearly 3 weeks ago. I believe barring a team not named Marquette or Nova winning the BET that Seton Hall and St. Johns are the only two teams remaining that have a chance. With the only shot being if either one upset Marquette or Nova from this point forward.. There just are too many bad teams in the conference this year to pick up quality wins. Seton Hall and St. Johns both have 2 shots remaining. Every loss for those teams at this point is a bad loss.
-
This is not really that surprising at least to me. I called this nearly 3 weeks ago. I believe barring a team not named Marquette or Nova winning the BET that Seton Hall and St. Johns are the only two teams remaining that have a chance. With the only shot being if either one upset Marquette or Nova from this point forward.. There just are too many bad teams in the conference this year to pick up quality wins. Seton Hall and St. Johns both have 2 shots remaining. Every loss for those teams at this point is a bad loss.
Slow your roll there and actually look at his bracket. He only has three teams right now, but literally his first three out are all Beast teams, so while only getting 3 bids is a possibility, getting 6 is also still a possibility. There's still plenty of time for teams to play themselves in or out of the field.
-
At this point every team in the Big east reminds me of us the past three years. Competitive and objectively above average yet not good enough to deserve consideration for the tournament.
-
Conference is half over. 2-3 teams are going to have solid February/March runs and make the dance joining MU and Nova.
-
At this point every team in the Big east reminds me of us the past three years. Competitive and objectively above average yet not good enough to deserve consideration for the tournament.
Well, we obviously were "good enough to deserve consideration" in 2017, since we made the field with plenty of room to spare. We also were good enough to be considered last season, but sadly not good enough to make it.
-
Well, we obviously were "good enough to deserve consideration" in 2017, since we made the field with plenty of room to spare. We also were good enough to be considered last season, but sadly not good enough to make it.
we lose to nova and we're not in. I was including them because it's a similar comparison for all the BE teams desperate for a win vs us or Nova this year to get considered
-
we lose to nova and we're not in. I was including them because it's a similar comparison for all the BE teams desperate for a win vs us or Nova this year to get considered
Do we know for certain that a loss to Nova eliminates us in 2017? Maybe. I'm not saying you're wrong ... but you sure seem certain about it.
If you are on the first-4-out line, as 3 BEast teams, you are "good enough to deserve consideration." But yeah, I do agree that 2-3 (maybe 4) of these teams need a win or two against us or Nova to have a realistic at deserving an actual bid.
-
Do we know for certain that a loss to Nova eliminates us in 2017? Maybe. I'm not saying you're wrong ... but you sure seem certain about it.
If you are on the first-4-out line, as 3 BEast teams, you are "good enough to deserve consideration." But yeah, I do agree that 2-3 (maybe 4) of these teams need a win or two against us or Nova to have a realistic at deserving an actual bid.
We were the last four byes so that puts us near enough I'm comfortable saying that it was a nova win or bust
-
Do we know for certain that a loss to Nova eliminates us in 2017? Maybe. I'm not saying you're wrong ... but you sure seem certain about it.
If you are on the first-4-out line, as 3 BEast teams, you are "good enough to deserve consideration." But yeah, I do agree that 2-3 (maybe 4) of these teams need a win or two against us or Nova to have a realistic at deserving an actual bid.
I don't even think that it would require a MU/Nova win. 9-9 should be enough for SH, and they have 3 of the next 4 at home, and have already played their two toughest conference games, I could see them getting in without a MU/Nova win. CU plays 4 of their last 6 at home with the only road games being at us and at DePaul, they could easily go 5-1 in that stretch.
Also, Joe's bracketology has a few question marks. The Big 12 getting 80% of their conference in? Unlikely, some teams won't make the cut for many of the same reasons that Beast teams won't. Pac 12 a multi-bid league? No. Bowling Green is ahead of Buffalo in the MAC standings, so right now he has it as a multi-bid league. Bowling Green's only chance is the conference tourney. Sure there will be bid stealers, but as many have said, they have to take 68 teams.
-
We were the last four byes so that puts us near enough I'm comfortable saying that it was a nova win or bust
Perhaps. Thanks for the response.
I don't even think that it would require a MU/Nova win. 9-9 should be enough for SH, and they have 3 of the next 4 at home, and have already played their two toughest conference games, I could see them getting in without a MU/Nova win. CU plays 4 of their last 6 at home with the only road games being at us and at DePaul, they could easily go 5-1 in that stretch.
Also, Joe's bracketology has a few question marks. The Big 12 getting 80% of their conference in? Unlikely, some teams won't make the cut for many of the same reasons that Beast teams won't. Pac 12 a multi-bid league? No. Bowling Green is ahead of Buffalo in the MAC standings, so right now he has it as a multi-bid league. Bowling Green's only chance is the conference tourney. Sure there will be bid stealers, but as many have said, they have to take 68 teams.
SH has some nice wins, so you might be right about 5-1 getting them in.
BEast can't afford too many bid-stealers, that's for sure. Then again, it's not out of the realm of possibility that a Seton Hall or St. John's (or even GTown?) could get hot for a few days and steal the BEast auto-bid.
-
Lunardi's bracket down to 3 Big East teams and St. John's last 4 in. Yikes.
He also has Creighton, Butler and Seton Hall as his first 3 teams out. Still think the BE ends up with 4, maybe 5 in the dance. Gtown can't be too far behind those guys.
-
This is not really that surprising at least to me. I called this nearly 3 weeks ago. I believe barring a team not named Marquette or Nova winning the BET that Seton Hall and St. Johns are the only two teams remaining that have a chance. With the only shot being if either one upset Marquette or Nova from this point forward.. There just are too many bad teams in the conference this year to pick up quality wins. Seton Hall and St. Johns both have 2 shots remaining. Every loss for those teams at this point is a bad loss.
I disagree very strongly. And there really aren't any BAD teams in the conference at all. There are 2 great teams. And then 6 good to solid teams, and 2 decent to mediocre teams. None of them are bad.
-
This is not really that surprising at least to me. I called this nearly 3 weeks ago. I believe barring a team not named Marquette or Nova winning the BET that Seton Hall and St. Johns are the only two teams remaining that have a chance. With the only shot being if either one upset Marquette or Nova from this point forward.. There just are too many bad teams in the conference this year to pick up quality wins. Seton Hall and St. Johns both have 2 shots remaining. Every loss for those teams at this point is a bad loss.
This is the first year of the NET. The NCAA has not published the NET formula. So the bracket people may not be as accurate as in years past. It may take a year to see how the tournament selection committee works under this new paradigm.
I disagree very strongly. And there really aren't any BAD teams in the conference at all. There are 2 great teams. And then 6 good to solid teams, and 2 decent to mediocre teams. None of them are bad.
A couple of the 6 good to solid teams will go on a run. Also worth noting that several of those teams have quality wins on their non conference resume.
-
First bubble watch of the season:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness)
-
First bubble watch of the season:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness)
Petty but how is Purdue and Kansas a lock and we are a "should be in"?
-
Also a very interesting triple negative while describing Wisconsin:
"The Badgers beat Michigan, their road victory at Iowa keeps improving with age and Ethan Happ and his eager minions are above .500 (5-4) in Quad 1 games. All of which is to say, no, you likely won't be seeing Wisconsin in non-lock territory for much longer."
-
Last one...everything about the write ups are sadly wrong.
For Marquette:
"In particular, Marquette's wins in 2018-19 have shown an uncanny tendency to look better with age, as vanquished foes such as Louisville, Kansas State, Wisconsin and Buffalo have charted upward trajectories as the season's progressed."
Louisville is the only game that has aged well. While the other games haven't aged poorly, every other team has gone down in the rankings since.
-
I always love articles like this when writers feel the need to point out they were missing stars. This is no different than Golden State Warriors. Oh you were short handed? You mean Duke couldn't beat Syracuse with the top 3 recruits from last year but lets blame the loss on the point guard who wouldn't have made a difference.
Syracuse Orange
The official motto of Syracuse in 2019 is "We won at Duke." That's an excellent motto (yes, yes, the Blue Devils were short-handed, duly noted), one that will balance some demerits -- such as the four Orange losses in Quads 2 and 3. Not to mention few Bubble Watch teams are blessed with as many upcoming opportunities: Florida State (see previous item), Louisville, Duke and Virginia are all heading to the Carrier Dome in the next few weeks.
-
http://barttorvik.com/tranketology.php
Updates after every game. Also predicting based off of predictions for the season. You can also hover over the first 4 seeds to see which pod they would be assigned to.
-
First bubble watch of the season:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/welcome-start-madness)
The Big East bias is evident. There are 10 locks. Only 2 of the top 10 teams in the AP (Nevada and MU) are not locks. Instead they have Kansas (struggling of late) and Purdue as locks.
If "lock" means teams that no matter what will be in (meaning they lose every remaining game still in tournament), then there are no locks right now. If you mean statistically improbable, then if Purdue and Kansas are locks, so is MU.
-
There is a lot of season yet to play... but even with that, I just don't see any team other than St. Johns or Seton Hall making a run good enough to overcome what they've done so far. I was really holding out hope, but I spent time today looking at their team sheets in detail and I just don't see it happening for anyone beyond that.
-
Eamonn Brennan now does bubble watch for The Athletic. He used to do it for ESPN and was really the first to run with the extensive bubble watch coverage. His is far, far better, in my opinion.
-
There is a lot of season yet to play... but even with that, I just don't see any team other than St. Johns or Seton Hall making a run good enough to overcome what they've done so far. I was really holding out hope, but I spent time today looking at their team sheets in detail and I just don't see it happening for anyone beyond that.
The thing you're ignoring is the other teams around the bubble.
-
I signred up for the Athletic so I could read the Hauser story a few weeks ago with the intent of cancelling after the trial period but the writing is very good and lots of good NCAA basketball stories. Well worth the 65 a year IMO so Im keeping it.
Surprising to see how many writers ESPN let go of in the last year, the good ones ended up at the Athletic, Andy Katz didn't.
-
Petty but how is Purdue and Kansas a lock and we are a "should be in"?
I don't think Purdue is a lock. At 16-16, they could get left out assuming they lose out. Kansas losing out would be 17-15 and in. They really look like a lock. Their resume is very strong and there aren't any really bad potential losses left on their schedule.
I think we need one more win. 20-12 (9-9) with our non-con would be enough. 19 wins probably does it, but 20 would be a guarantee.
-
The thing you're ignoring is the other teams around the bubble.
That is kind of what I went through. I didn't check them all, but I did spot checks of various other bubble teams. I suppose if any of them went on a tear and won out there is that... but otherwise I just don't see it happening. I'm not saying impossible, but at this point in time, I'm putting it in the unlikely bucket.
-
I don't think Purdue is a lock. At 16-16, they could get left out assuming they lose out. Kansas losing out would be 17-15 and in. They really look like a lock. Their resume is very strong and there aren't any really bad potential losses left on their schedule.
I think we need one more win. 20-12 (9-9) with our non-con would be enough. 19 wins probably does it, but 20 would be a guarantee.
I always wonder when they say "lock" this early in the season they assume said team will win at least a few. If they had 10 games left they always assume they go 2-8 at a minimum. Now by mid Feb lock means if they lose out and still get an at large.
-
Lets not worry guys. Lets allow the Markus 'Bucky' slight and the BEast disrespect to fuel a double digit win tonight. The Johnnies deserve a beatdown.
-
I wonder if Markus will see that.
-
I always wonder when they say "lock" this early in the season they assume said team will win at least a few. If they had 10 games left they always assume they go 2-8 at a minimum. Now by mid Feb lock means if they lose out and still get an at large.
I think you are right, but if that is the case, then MU and Nova are both locks at this point. A 21-10 (10-8) MU team, and 20-11 (11-7) Nova team are both dancing. They'd be a bubbly, but there are no bad losses possible for either of them from hear on out.
I don't think Purdue is a lock. At 16-16, they could get left out assuming they lose out. Kansas losing out would be 17-15 and in. They really look like a lock. Their resume is very strong and there aren't any really bad potential losses left on their schedule.
I think we need one more win. 20-12 (9-9) with our non-con would be enough. 19 wins probably does it, but 20 would be a guarantee.
You might be right, but I'm not sure a 17-15 (6-12) Kansas team is in. Just don't see them letting a team 6 games below 0.500 in conference into the dance.
-
Dumb writers write dumb things. But hey can’t blame them for not investigating the BEast very well.
Having said that. We got this. I’m
Hoping for a 4 seed at worst. Let’s do dis.
-
I dont get the love for Texas...12-10? With home losses to Providence and Radford, and a losses to Georgia and OSU?
-
They have some really good wins. Those can be hard to come by when you get to teams at the bottom of the s-curve
-
You might be right, but I'm not sure a 17-15 (6-12) Kansas team is in. Just don't see them letting a team 6 games below 0.500 in conference into the dance.
They say they ignore conference standings. Where KU stands out is 3 numbers. 5, 8, 13. That's the number of Q1A wins, total Q1 wins, and Q1+2 wins they already have. No one close to the bubble would be able to compete with that.
I dont get the love for Texas...12-10? With home losses to Providence and Radford, and a losses to Georgia and OSU?
Like Pepe said, it's the big wins. They've got wins over UNC, Purdue, Kansas, & K-State. That gives them a lot of leeway other teams just don't have.
-
Like Pepe said, it's the big wins. They've got wins over UNC, Purdue, Kansas, & K-State. That gives them a lot of leeway other teams just don't have.
How on earth does a team beat UNC, Purdue, KU and KSU...and lose to PC, Radford, UGa and tOSU?
I get teams having a couple of really bad (or good) games, but UT seems like the epitome of playing up or down to their competition every time. On the plus side, it would seem to guarantee close games in the Dance. ;)
-
Speaking of KState, win looking good these days.
Question about Regions. Where do you think MU lands if ~4 seed? Whats our natural region? Is it a crapshoot? Do these bracket guys have some special knowledge when it comes to placement?
South=Louisville,Midwest=KansasCity,East=Washington ... We are equally close to each...so does it matter.
Reason I ask is that the Washington or KC ones I could really make if we go to the Sweet-16. Is there any help to someone who want to plan ahead?
-
Speaking of KState, win looking good these days.
Question about Regions. Where do you think MU lands if ~4 seed? Whats our natural region? Is it a crapshoot? Do these bracket guys have some special knowledge when it comes to placement?
South=Louisville,Midwest=KansasCity,East=Washington ... We are equally close to each...so does it matter.
Reason I ask is that the Washington or KC ones I could really make if we go to the Sweet-16. Is there any help to someone who want to plan ahead?
To me the pod is much more important than the region. We could have a lot of fans in Des Moines or Columbus. That is when the crowd could help the team versus a similarly matched foe. Once it gets to the actual regionals we are going to be going against very good teams and the opposing team will probably have plenty of their own fans.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com
Didnt drop at all after the loss
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com
Didnt drop at all after the loss
Not putting any stock in any bracketology yet untill after saturday.
-
Not putting any stock in any bracketology yet untill after saturday.
I mean, you can put a little stock in it since it's updated through last night. But yes there will obviously be much more movement after the weekend.
-
Marquette stayed a 3 seed on bracketmatrix but dropped from 10 to 12 overall.
Seems about right. After the top 7, I think there's a tier from 8-15, then another tier of 16-25.
-
Marquette stayed a 3 seed on bracketmatrix but dropped from 10 to 12 overall.
Seems about right. After the top 7, I think there's a tier from 8-15, then another tier of 16-25.
I agree. It certainly helps that we have wins against 3 of those teams in those tiers. And we'll have 4 in about 55 hours.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com
Didnt drop at all after the loss
Dave has been historically one of the most accurate guys out there so this is good to see.
Those wins over UW, Kansas State and Louisville have aged very well for MU.
-
Dave has been historically one of the most accurate guys out there so this is good to see.
Those wins over UW, Kansas State and Louisville have aged very well for MU.
True. And what's kind of funny is that about 5-6 weeks ago, many were lamenting about how poorly those wins had aged. It's a season, a grind. Things are gonna play out the way they play out.
-
Another thing to watch going forward.......the Win at Georgetown is now a quad 1....at last for the time being......they are up to 73 in the NET....top 75 road wins are quad 1.
MU now is 7-3 in Quad 1 games.....with another big one coming up on Saturday.
-
Dave has been historically one of the most accurate guys out there so this is good to see.
Those wins over UW, Kansas State and Louisville have aged very well for MU.
Yeah. I would have linked from his page at Yahoo or NBC to give more credibility in case people didn't know which he was, but I didn't see it updated there.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi dropped us to a 4
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi dropped us to a 4
About right, I’ve always thought this was a 4/5 seed team.
-
Agreed. Going into season my Hope was a 6 seed. I will GLADLY take a 3-5 seed. A 2 would be amazing. But everyone freaking out cause we might not get a 2 seed (albeit very few people freaking out) need to remember that expectations for this year weren’t that high.
I love exceeding expectations but a 3-5 seed is still fan-freaking-tastic.
Having said that. Let’s get a 3 or 4 please.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Palm dropped us to a 3.
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2019/02/07/bracketology-duke-holds-no-1-position/
Dave Ommen still has us as a 3.
https://theathletic.com/806716/2019/02/08/bracket-watch-is-it-kentucky-or-gonzaga-for-final-no-1-seed/
Brian Bennett from the Athletic has us as a 3.
3-4 line sounds about right to me at this stage. We'll see what the committee says tomorrow but I don't think our loss to SJU hurt all that much, especially if we bounce back with a win tomorrow.
-
Agreed. Going into season my Hope was a 6 seed. I will GLADLY take a 3-5 seed. A 2 would be amazing. But everyone freaking out cause we might not get a 2 seed (albeit very few people freaking out) need to remember that expectations for this year weren’t that high.
I love exceeding expectations but a 3-5 seed is still fan-freaking-tastic.
Having said that. Let’s get a 3 or 4 please.
Who's expectations weren't?? I thought all along this was a talented enough team to contend(realistically win) for the BE title and be a top 4-5 seed in the NCAA's. The eyes...even at my age, never fail me. So much talent on this team.
-
Who's expectations weren't?? I thought all along this was a talented enough team to contend(realistically win) for the BE title and be a top 4-5 seed in the NCAA's. The eyes...even at my age, never fail me. So much talent on this team.
FJM said people didn't expect this team to be a 2 seed preseason, so 3-5 seed would be great.
-
Who's expectations weren't?? I thought all along this was a talented enough team to contend(realistically win) for the BE title and be a top 4-5 seed in the NCAA's. The eyes...even at my age, never fail me. So much talent on this team.
You are arguing just to argue here, guru. Or you simply didn't read fjm's post right.
-
FJM said people didn't expect this team to be a 2 seed preseason, so 3-5 seed would be great.
Ya. Thanks TAMU & 82
Guru. What I said was people didn’t expect a 2 seed. Most expected higher (like you said 4-5). Therefore a 3-5 seed would be great.
A 3 seed would even exceed your lofty expectations. So we agree. I think you may have misread what I said.
-
Ya. Thanks TAMU & 82
Guru. What I said was people didn’t expect a 2 seed. Most expected higher (like you said 4-5). Therefore a 3-5 seed would be great.
A 3 seed would even exceed your lofty expectations. So we agree. I think you may have misread what I said.
I did...my bad...I thought you meant that even a 3-5 seed was exceeding expectations for this team.
-
I did...my bad...I thought you meant that even a 3-5 seed was exceeding expectations for this team.
No worries home slice!
Go MU today! Glad we can see eye to eye for atleast today until 1:30pm ;)
-
Last 3 seed on the bracket show
-
Big game today for both teams given the bracket show.
-
Big game today for both teams given the bracket show.
Much bigger for MU considering we’re at home.
-
Much bigger for MU considering we’re at home.
I'd argue the opposite is true. Much more room for Nova to move up with a win
-
Biggest game of the year.
-
I'd argue the opposite is true. Much more room for Nova to move up with a win
Nova can also afford a loss today and win the conference. This feels like a bigger game for MU. We lose today and we likely get swept by Nova
-
Biggest game of the year.
Gotta respect the consistency!
-
Nova can also afford a loss today and win the conference. This feels like a bigger game for MU. We lose today and we likely get swept by Nova
But we didn't. And we won't. And I think we'll beat 'em in Philly too.
Go Marquette!
-
Although there is a typo in the current iteration wherein the editors accidentially forgot to include the two word 'Lock: Marquette' line, we've been added as the Lock list went from 10 to 12 after yesterday's games. Nova still on the 'Should Be In' list.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/good-news-acc
-
Although there is a typo in the current iteration wherein the editors accidentially forgot to include the two word 'Lock: Marquette' line, we've been added as the Lock list went from 10 to 12 after yesterday's games. Nova still on the 'Should Be In' list.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/25923557/good-news-acc
I think yesterday’s win did lock up our bid. Assuming a loss in the last 8 guaranteed games, MU would still be sitting at 20-12 (9-9) with a high number of Q1 wins. Not an ideal way to finish the season, but should be back in the big dance this year for sure regardless of the remaining games.
-
I think yesterday’s win did lock up our bid. Assuming a loss in the last 8 guaranteed games, MU would still be sitting at 20-12 (9-9) with a high number of Q1 wins. Not an ideal way to finish the season, but should be back in the big dance this year for sure regardless of the remaining games.
This strategy got Oklahoma in last year.
-
I think yesterday’s win did lock up our bid. Assuming a loss in the last 8 guaranteed games, MU would still be sitting at 20-12 (9-9) with a high number of Q1 wins. Not an ideal way to finish the season, but should be back in the big dance this year for sure regardless of the remaining games.
MU's bid was "locked" up a long time ago(barring a disaster happening).
-
Not sure if posted but espn front page bubble watch article on the college page doesnt even show marquette as a lock. Has nova as should be in. Good to see how much those losers respect us.
-
This strategy got Oklahoma in last year.
It worked so well they are trying to do it even more so this year
-
Not sure if posted but espn front page bubble watch article on the college page doesnt even show marquette as a lock. Has nova as should be in. Good to see how much those losers respect us.
Pretty clearly a typo. They’re supposed to be listed as a lock.
-
MU's bid was "locked" up a long time ago(barring a disaster happening).
That’s a contradiction. The definition of being a “lock” is being able to lose the rest of your games and still be in. I don’t think that was the case until after yesterday’s win.
-
That’s a contradiction. The definition of being a “lock” is being able to lose the rest of your games and still be in. I don’t think that was the case until after yesterday’s win.
I agree with this. We would've had a shot at 19-13, but 20-12 is where we hit lock status. There is no way we aren't safely in the field after yesterday's win.
-
That’s a contradiction. The definition of being a “lock” is being able to lose the rest of your games and still be in. I don’t think that was the case until after yesterday’s win.
Technically maybe correct, practically speaking though, there was ZERO doubt they were going to the NCAA tournament after the non conference season. Barring a catastrophic injury to someone, there was ZERO doubt.
-
Technically maybe correct, practically speaking though, there was ZERO doubt they were going to the NCAA tournament after the non conference season. Barring a catastrophic injury to someone, there was ZERO doubt.
Absolutely and cheers to that. Earning a top 3 seed is the next goal now as it greatly increases the chance for advancement in the tournament. Also, avoiding a one seed until the elite eight would be really great.
-
Sometimes you guys worry too much. I was simply pointing the administrative switch. ESPN discussed it in their first article this season. 'Lose the rest of your games and still have a 100% chance of making the dance.' Of course that's not happening to MU but the point still stands. In week #1, they started with a mere 10 teams. Now it's 12. Even Nova isn't there yet but after another week they will. And finally the bubble contracts to the teams that need to make progress in the next 6 weeks.
-
CBS: https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Bracketville/NBC Sports:
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Bracketmatrix:
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
-
CBS: https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Bracketville/NBC Sports:
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Bracketmatrix:
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
First 2 have 5 BEast teams in, including StJ comfortably so and Seton Hall with still a little wiggle room. Butler one of last 4 in, which is a little hard for me to figure, but whatever.
Bracketmatrix has StJ and SH in but lower and Butler out.
All have MU at a 3 seed.
I'd love to be the 3-seed in the West region with this path to the FF: UC-Irving, Iowa, Michigan St, Gonzaga.
-
MU's bid was "locked" up a long time ago(barring a disaster happening).
I think that is the point of a lock, even if disaster happens you are still in....this now a lock.
-
CBS: https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
Bracketville/NBC Sports:
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Bracketmatrix:
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Ugh, the CBS bracket would suck. Going to Hartford and playing Yale in their home state, which they crowd would definitely get behind, and then possibly Maryland the next game, which will travel well and have a ton of fans due to staying on the East Coast. Then having to go through Michigan and Duke if we got to the next weekend. Yikes.
-
But we didn't. And we won't. And I think we'll beat 'em in Philly too.
Go Marquette!
You do? Bold.
-
Ugh, the CBS bracket would suck. Going to Hartford and playing Yale in their home state, which they crowd would definitely get behind, and then possibly Maryland the next game, which will travel well and have a ton of fans due to staying on the East Coast. Then having to go through Michigan and Duke if we got to the next weekend. Yikes.
Yale is very good this year. They have a player who I believe people expect will be a pro.
-
Yale is very good this year. They have a player who I believe people expect will be a pro.
Eff Yale.
The only kids who go there are the ones who weren't smart enough to get into Marquette!
-
North Carolina going down!
-
In years past these bracket people were very accurate as they had all the formulas down. Given this is the first year of the NET tool, I am going to pretty much ignore all the bracket people.
-
North Carolina going down!
Virginia wins 69-61. I’m ok with UNC staying ranked in front of us unless they lose this weekend (too lazy to look if/who they play). We caught a nice break staying at 10 I thought.
-
Virginia wins 69-61. I’m ok with UNC staying ranked in front of us unless they lose this weekend (too lazy to look if/who they play). We caught a nice break staying at 10 I thought.
UNC is at Wake this weekend. I don't expect them to drop this week in the polls. They might in the S-Curve if MSU beats Wisconsin tomorrow, but I don't have them dropping based on this result.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1095112213822504961
-
UNC is at Wake this weekend. I don't expect them to drop this week in the polls. They might in the S-Curve if MSU beats Wisconsin tomorrow, but I don't have them dropping based on this result.
Brew, it's all about the S curve right now. Come to think about it, that's a helluva lot more fun that bubble watching. ;D
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1095112213822504961
St John’s awaits potentially
-
St John’s awaits potentially
They wouldn't do that, especially with just 3 Big East teams in the field.
-
They wouldn't do that, especially with just 3 Big East teams in the field.
Not that early, I agree, but could happen. I remember Memphis playing an opponent 4 times and winning all 4 in a season when we were in a conference together.
-
Well, two seed doesn't seem that far out of reach now.
-
Just so you guys know, crashingthedance is up and running. They don't usually start until early February.
https://crashingthedance.com/
-
They wouldn't do that, especially with just 3 Big East teams in the field.
I thought there was some rule where unless forced to by sheer number of bids, no conference teams can be paired to face each other in rounds 1 or 2. I seem to recall something about this in the Old Big East years where the tourney was just flooded w/ BE teams.
-
I thought there was some rule where unless forced to by sheer number of bids, no conference teams can be paired to face each other in rounds 1 or 2. I seem to recall something about this in the Old Big East years where the tourney was just flooded w/ BE teams.
You are correct they are not supposed to face conference teams until the S16. 2011 when MU made the tournament as an 11 seed there were 10 other teams from the big east in it. In the second round they faced Syracuse another Big east school and beat them!
-
Just so you guys know, crashingthedance is up and running. They don't usually start until early February.
https://crashingthedance.com/
Thanks for posting. Middle of the 3rd seed line which I’ll sign up for. We’ve had some success there.
I’m most surprised that site has Wisconsin as a 7 seed. That’s as low as I’ve seen them.
-
Just so you guys know, crashingthedance is up and running. They don't usually start until early February.
https://crashingthedance.com/
They still use RPI though instead of NET? That may sway their data.
-
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2019/02/14/bracketology-happy-valentines-day-for-duke-lsu/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
-
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2019/02/14/bracketology-happy-valentines-day-for-duke-lsu/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
I find it very unlikely there will be 4 Big East teams in 1 region and 0 Big East teams in the other 3 regions.
-
https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2019/02/14/bracketology-happy-valentines-day-for-duke-lsu/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Damn. Bracketville has Seton Hall and St. John's pretty comfortably in the tournament. They have Butler in the First Four Out, Georgetown in the Next Four Out, and DePaul in the Next Next Next Four out. No mentions of Creighton, Providence, or Xavier (duh). I was optimistic about DePaul and not so optimistic about Creighton to start the season, but I never imagined to ever see them listed above all three of those teams in an S-Curve this season.
-
They still use RPI though instead of NET? That may sway their data.
They admit that is the case. "While using RPI rather than NET may lead to less accurate results, the limited amount of available NET data would likely do the same. Here's hoping the NCAA will provide more details about NET over the coming weeks."
There are some wild swings with RPI vs NET. This was from a few weeks ago
BIGGEST DIFFERENCES, RPI versus NET in favor of RPI
Kansas (1, 19)
Oklahoma (6, 30)
Maryland (10, 20)
Nevada (11, 23)
Kansas State (13, 35)
TCU (16, 31)
Villanova (19, 28)
Florida State (22, 33)
Temple (26, 61)
VCU (30, 51)
Seton Hall (37, 56)
Alabama (39, 50)
Minnesota (40, 67)
UNCG (41, 58)
Davidson (43, 71)
Georgia State (44, 120)
New Mexico State (48, 78)
Arizona State (49, 72)
BIGGEST DIFFERENCES, RPI versus NET in favor of NET
Gonzaga (12, 3)
Kentucky (21, 8)
Virginia Tech (25, 9)
Texas Tech (28, 11)
Nebraska (47, 15)
North Carolina State (111, 27)
Wofford (45, 29)
Wisconsin (34, 16)
Indiana (51, 34)
Florida (81, 36)
San Francisco (59, 39)
Ohio State (54, 40)
Utah State (60, 41)
Murray State (87, 43)
St. Mary’s (82, 49)
-
I find it very unlikely there will be 4 Big East teams in 1 region and 0 Big East teams in the other 3 regions.
Not sure what you're referring to, but Dave has the 4 Big East teams spread out among 3 regions in the link I provided
-
I've followed CTD for years. As of this morning they have the Johnnies at 'At Large - 21, Hall - 30, and Butler - 36, the very last spot. The Hall and the Dawgs need some success in coming weeks. Creighton is still on the board, and in striking distance, although losing last night at X is gonna leave a mark once the update comes out. Friars, barely. Everyone else: toast.
-
I find it very unlikely there will be 4 Big East teams in 1 region and 0 Big East teams in the other 3 regions.
Such is why the S-Curve is far from the bottom line. In fact, it's only step 2 ("Seeding") of the selection committee's process... there's also a step 3 ("Bracketing") that is more complex than the other two steps combined.
Bracketing Rule #1: "Each of the first four teams selected from a conference shall be placed in different regions if they are seeded on the first four lines." This means - provided MU and Nova are both top 4 seeds - Nova and MU will not be in the same region. But that does mean that unless St. John's or SHU can sneak onto the 4-line, you could have 3 BE teams in one region and 1 in another if the committee stopped here.
Then there's also this little nugget, which happens to be Bracketing Rule #2...
"Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional final if they played each other three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament." This actually favors the Big East because of the H&H scheduling... let's say SHU, SJU, MU and Nova all come out of the BE; if each of those four teams match up with at least one other in the BET, then you could only have a maximum of two BE teams per region. But if those were the four teams in the BET semifinals, that increases the chances that the BE would be represented in three or more different regions.
But don't forget about rules #3 and #4:
Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional semifinals if they played each other twice during the regular season and conference tournament.
Teams from the same conference may play each other as early as the second round if they played no more than once during the regular season and conference tournament
Frankly, even if only four teams come out of the BE, the simple math favors at least three different regions.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-10-19/how-field-68-teams-picked-march-madness
-
Such is why the S-Curve is far from the bottom line. In fact, it's only step 2 ("Seeding") of the selection committee's process... there's also a step 3 ("Bracketing") that is more complex than the other two steps combined.
Bracketing Rule #1:...#2...#3 and #4...
... thanks for the link. Intuitively I figured something like these were being followed but didn't know they codified them. I imagine they have a great computer program that takes all the stuff seeds,"S", location,bracketing rules,etc... and generates different potential brackets with anomalies highlighted. Sort of like MLB, NBA regular season schedules.
-
... thanks for the link. Intuitively I figured something like these were being followed but didn't know they codified them. I imagine they have a great computer program that takes all the stuff seeds,"S", location,bracketing rules,etc... and generates different potential brackets with anomalies highlighted. Sort of like MLB, NBA regular season schedules.
Nope. It's simply 10 people sequestered at the Adam's Mark in downtown Indy working through the bracket for as long as it takes. The only work the computers are doing is to display the data, stats, results, etc. for the committee members. They might have a smart-board that allows them to shift names and sites around the bracket which the touch of a finger, but it's the humans populating that data, not the computers.
-
You are correct they are not supposed to face conference teams until the S16. 2011 when MU made the tournament as an 11 seed there were 10 other teams from the big east in it. In the second round they faced Syracuse another Big east school and beat them!
As long as there aren't more than 16 teams in a conference, you could always make a bracket where no teams faces a conference foe until the round of 16. They allow round of 32 matchups because not to would be a pain the bracketing neck and would also cause movement in seeds and increase the difficulty of preserving the rules for protecting the top 4 seeds from unfavorable geography in the rounds of 64 and 32.
-
Alright someone who has time and educated enough...take a look at http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ and let me know where the 11 teams in front of us would play and where you think we would be. I need to see who I need to root against in order to get Des Moines
-
Alright someone who has time and educated enough...take a look at http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ and let me know where the 11 teams in front of us would play and where you think we would be. I need to see who I need to root against in order to get Des Moines
From the top down, based strictly on geography... not taking anything else into account:
Columbia - Duke, Virginia
Columbus - Tennessee, Michigan
Jacksonville - North Carolina, Louisville
Des Moines - Kentucky, Michigan State
Tulsa - Kansas, Houston
Hartford - Purdue, Marquette
Salt Lake - Wisconsin, Gonzaga
San Jose - LSU, Nevada
EDITED
-
From the top down, based strictly on geography... not taking anything else into account:
Columbia - Duke, Virginia
Columbus - Tennessee, Michigan
Jacksonville - North Carolina, Louisville
Des Moines - Kentucky, Michigan State
Tulsa - Kansas, Houston
Hartford - Purdue, Marquette
Salt Lake - Wisconsin, LSU
San Jose - Gonzaga, Nevada
Yeah that is what I am afraid of
-
From the top down, based strictly on geography... not taking anything else into account:
Columbia - Duke, Virginia
Columbus - Tennessee, Michigan
Jacksonville - North Carolina, Louisville
Des Moines - Kentucky, Michigan State
Tulsa - Kansas, Houston
Hartford - Purdue, Marquette
Salt Lake - Wisconsin, LSU
San Jose - Gonzaga, Nevada
LOL at Wisconsin being a 4 seed. Not a chance after the last 2 games.
-
LOL at Wisconsin being a 4 seed. Not a chance after the last 2 games.
That's not how S-Curve's typically work. Losing games you are supposed to lose don't tend to move you down. Now, combining those losses with LSU's win over Kentucky and Texas Tech winning two road games and Wisconsin has probably dropped down to a 5 seed.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
No significant updates, although Wisconsin has indeed moved down to a 5 seed
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
No significant updates, although Wisconsin has indeed moved down to a 5 seed
Kentucky still has Tennessee twice and an potentially tough game against Ole Miss. I could them falling hard. Same with Michigan St vs Michigan. We continue to take care of business and could find ourselves sitting as a 2 seed
-
If we lose only 2 more games we're either a 2 or 3. If we lose only 1 more game we're a 2. Win out and we might be a 1.
I expect a 3.
-
If we lose only 2 more games we're either a 2 or 3. If we lose only 1 more game we're a 2. Win out and we might be a 1.
I expect a 3.
I don't see a path to a 1. Maybe if MSU and UM split, UT and UK split, duke and unc split, then maybe zags lose? Just seems like the issue is that the 1s cant be caught right now and if the 2s and high 3s beat them we'd remain stuck where we are.
-
I don't see a path to a 1. Maybe if MSU and UM split, UT and UK split, duke and unc split, then maybe zags lose? Just seems like the issue is that the 1s cant be caught right now and if the 2s and high 3s beat them we'd remain stuck where we are.
Winning out would put us at 30-4 and we'd pick up about 5 more Q1 wins. I think we'd be a 1. The chances we win out are obviously very slim.
I think a 3-4 is a safe bet.
-
Winning out would put us at 30-4 and we'd pick up about 5 more Q1 wins. I think we'd be a 1. The chances we win out are obviously very slim.
I think a 3-4 is a safe bet.
30-4 gives us a 1. But 30-4 is likely a pipe dream.
-
Ohio st loses at home to Illinois and they don’t move down. The bubble is awful.
-
Winning out would put us at 30-4 and we'd pick up about 5 more Q1 wins. I think we'd be a 1. The chances we win out are obviously very slim.
I think a 3-4 is a safe bet.
Right but as always it's about what the teams ahead of you do. If we win out but Mich, Duke, UT, and Zags do as well who do you expect we jump to get there? That'd put us as at least the 2nd 2 if I'm thinking about this right. my point was that It's not only about what we do now, it's about what we do relative to what the teams ahead of do.
-
Too bad this wasn't the bubble last year...
-
Right but as always it's about what the teams ahead of you do. If we win out but Mich, Duke, UT, and Zags do as well who do you expect we jump to get there? That'd put us as at least the 2nd 2 if I'm thinking about this right. my point was that It's not only about what we do now, it's about what we do relative to what the teams ahead of do.
Not always. You're confusing the methodology of the AP voters (and to a lesser extent, the graduate assistant voters) with that of the Selection Committee. The AP voting is hugely biased at the top such that you're absolutely correct that your performance, specifically your wins and losses, must be better on a relative basis in order to move up, with rare exceptions made for quality of win/loss (e.g. when #1 wins, #2 beats #3, and #2 moves up to #1 on Monday). In short, the process for most AP voters at this point in the season is to look at last week's ballot, and starting at the top, looking at the results for each team from 1 to 25 and adjusting accordingly. That said, there's also an ego component involved here... when you have a team ranked in the top 10 after plowing through a weak OOC and proceeds to lose their first three or four conference games, they'll stay in the Top 25 for a couple weeks before voters drop them completely because the voters don't like to admit they were wrong about a team (which is what would be implied if they dropped them out after the first conference loss). In short, consideration for the teams in each week's poll is heavily biased by the previous week's position, and this bias can carry over - and compound - every week that goes by.
However, while "inertia" can play a role with the Committee, the Committee's process is fundamentally different in that they may not put together the first s-curve until Selection Friday or Saturday, i.e. until after 99.5% of the season has already been played. So they are looking at 68 individual, mostly completed resumes and comparing them to one another, not compared to what those teams did the week prior, or the week prior, and so forth. Now, teams will move up and down the S-curve according to how they play on Selection Weekend, and so at this point, your movement up and down the S-curve can be relative to how teams in front of you perform, but your initial position is based on where you compared to other teams a day or two ago without any regard for how you compared 3-4 weeks (or months) ago.
"But Benny... what about the Top 16 that's been released by the committee? They've already placed these teams into an S-Curve."
Not exactly. And quit whining. What happened last week (prior to the first release) is that the committee did a quick exercise and run-through of the selection process, except instead of doing it for 68 teams, they did it for 16. While it makes for great media, a little known fact: the NCAA is doing this not to get a jump-start on the selection process, but to get the ten committee members into the selection mindset, make sure they can work out any kinks in the process, and make sure that everyone knows their role BEFORE they convene in Indianapolis so that they can work efficiently through the selection process when the time comes. Call it an orientation exercise, or better yet, we're talking about practice, here. So all of the ballots, seeding lists, placements into the bracket.... after the announcement on Saturday was made, this along with the notes, paperwork, power point presentations, etc. are all thrown in the trash, and the committee will start all over again in a few weeks when the real selection process begins.
tl;dr --- When it comes to seeding in the tournament, it doesn't matter how MU performs relative to teams ahead of them over the next 3-4 weeks, it matters how MU has performed relative to the teams in 3-4 weeks.
-
You guys are both right. The committee makes the bracket from scratch, not just moving teams up and down on an existing bracket like the bracketologists do, but at the same time, even if we win out, I don't think our resume will match up to the current consensus #1 seeds unless they drop a couple of games.
-
You guys are both right. The committee makes the bracket from scratch, not just moving teams up and down on an existing bracket like the bracketologists do, but at the same time, even if we win out, I don't think our resume will match up to the current consensus #1 seeds unless they drop a couple of games.
This. Winning out would certainly give us a resume worthy of a 1 seed in most seasons. But if all the current 1 seeds win out as well then we will be SOL.
-
Benny your last two paragraphs are more relevant. I understand the poll does not have anything to do with seeding I was going off the released 16 and the future schedules of the teams ahead of us
-
This. Winning out would certainly give us a resume worthy of a 1 seed in most seasons. But if all the current 1 seeds win out as well then we will be SOL.
Possibly. But it could work the other way around.
Look at it this way.... everyone came into the year expecting Duke to be good and Marquette to be a team hovering in and out of the Top 25 all season. At this point in the season, one might look at Duke and Marquette and say, Duke is doing exactly what they were going to do, but although Marquette is doing much better, but I still don't think they're better than Duke. If both teams win out, then one might say "Well, I was right that Duke is good, but you know, I really underestimated Marquette... they may be just as good as Duke" [even if they actually aren't].
It's something along the lines of a reverse-biased overvaluation... the longer you underestimate something from the beginning, the greater the tendency to overcompensate in the end.
I don't know if there's a term for it, so let's just call it the "Gonzaga Lamborghini" principle.
-
Possibly. But it could work the other way around.
Look at it this way.... everyone came into the year expecting Duke to be good and Marquette to be a team hovering in and out of the Top 25 all season. At this point in the season, one might look at Duke and Marquette and say, Duke is doing exactly what they were going to do, but although Marquette is doing much better, but I still don't think they're better than Duke. If both teams win out, then one might say "Well, I was right that Duke is good, but you know, I really underestimated Marquette... they may be just as good as Duke" [even if they actually aren't].
It's something along the lines of a reverse-biased overvaluation... the longer you underestimate something from the beginning, the greater the tendency to overcompensate in the end.
I don't know if there's a term for it, so let's just call it the "Gonzaga Lamborghini" principle.
So wait please correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds like your argument that MU could overtake a team like duke (that has a better resume) is that we finish hot and the committee says "they were better than we expected whereas duke we expected"?
-
So wait please correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds like your argument that MU could overtake a team like duke (that has a better resume) is that we finish hot and the committee says "they were better than we expected whereas duke we expected"?
Not an argument. Merely presenting the principle of the Gonzaga Lamborghini. It could affect anyone, not just Marquette; which it has, hence the namesake.
If it makes you feel better, go with the following:
Possibly. But it could work the other way around.
Look at it this way.... everyone came into the year expecting Duke to be good and Marquette to be a team hovering in and out of the Top 25 all season. At this point in the season, one might look at Duke and Houston and say, Duke is doing exactly what they were going to do, but although Houston is doing much better, I still don't think they're better than Duke. If both teams win out, then one might say "Well, I was right that Duke is good, but you know, I really underestimated Houston... they may be just as good as Duke" [even if they actually aren't].
(I did fix the double-but just in case)
-
Updated FOX Bracket
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1096503140260540416
-
Updated FOX Bracket
https://twitter.com/CBBonFOX/status/1096503140260540416
Howie is just terrible. Pretty sure every poster here could do a better job than that.
-
Kentucky still has Tennessee twice and an potentially tough game against Ole Miss. I could them falling hard. Same with Michigan St vs Michigan. We continue to take care of business and could find ourselves sitting as a 2 seed
I want to believe this is true..but honestly, given who the two seeds are, it almost seems like it doesn't matter who they lose to, they aren't moving down. Take Michigan State for example...I kinda thought losing at home to IU, and then losing to Illinois would move them off the two line...but it didn't. So who would they have to lose to to drop?? Michigan just lost to Penn State, I'd bet almost anything that didn't drop them off the two line. Now, the one thing that MAYBE could happen is Purdue losing to Maryland, MAY have dropped them down the 3 line and MU up..But I REALLY want a #2 seed, just given the results to this point, it sure doesn't seem like it's possible. If you lose to Illinois and Penn State respectively, and it has ZERO effect on you, then what exactly has to happen??
-
I want to believe this is true..but honestly, given who the two seeds are, it almost seems like it doesn't matter who they lose to, they aren't moving down. Take Michigan State for example...I kinda thought losing at home to IU, and then losing to Illinois would move them off the two line...but it didn't. So who would they have to lose to to drop?? Michigan just lost to Penn State, I'd bet almost anything that didn't drop them off the two line. Now, the one thing that MAYBE could happen is Purdue losing to Maryland, MAY have dropped them down the 3 line and MU up..But I REALLY want a #2 seed, just given the results to this point, it sure doesn't seem like it's possible. If you lose to Illinois and Penn State respectively, and it has ZERO effect on you, then what exactly has to happen??
Couple of things with this.
1. You talk about Michigan State not getting knocked off the 2 seed line by those two losses. We don't know where they were before those two losses, but I would guess that it was either the last 1 seed or first 2 seed. So the two losses did knock them down to the very last 2 seed. Movement is absolutely possible.
2. You also have to keep Michigan State's good wins in mind. At the time of the bracket reveal they had more Q1 victories than any other team in the country. Having that many big wins negates damage from bad losses
3. We don't know how much Michigan moved, but you are probably right that they are still on the 2-seed line. But that's partially because 2/3 of the teams right behind them lost this week as well. If I had to guess, they are probably the last 2 seed at this point.
4. There aren't equal gaps between each position on the s-curve. Meaning the distance between #6 Michigan and #7 North Carolina is not going to be the same as the distance between #12 Marquette and #13 Iowa State. So you are right, it is harder for those teams to move down because they likely have built some pretty big cushions between them and the lower seeds, but that doesn't mean those losses aren't closing the gap a bit.
If we want a 2 seed, we likely have to be 2 wins better than 1 of the current 2 seeds, and 1 win better than the 3 3 seeds in front of us. (Yes Benny, I know that's not how the selection committee actually works. I am just making a guess on a possible scenario that could get us a 2 seed)
-
I just don't know what bubble teams want to keep playing in March. Creighton and Butler? Guess not. Auburn or Alabama? Doesn't look like it. Indiana, Ohio State, or Nebraska? Not so much. Syracuse or NC State? At least one of them got a win since they played each other. Either Arizona school? We all know the Pac-12 isn't interested in the NCAAs. Maybe a mid major like UNCG or Lipscomb? They'll pass too.
Does anyone actually want to play in the NCAA tournament?
-
Worst bubble that I can remember.........pretty damn strong 1-2 seed lines.....
This is like the NBA this year.......lol. Bubble teams playing like they have a shot at Zion in the draft!
-
Couple of things with this.
1. You talk about Michigan State not getting knocked off the 2 seed line by those two losses. We don't know where they were before those two losses, but I would guess that it was either the last 1 seed or first 2 seed. So the two losses did knock them down to the very last 2 seed. Movement is absolutely possible.
2. You also have to keep Michigan State's good wins in mind. At the time of the bracket reveal they had more Q1 victories than any other team in the country. Having that many big wins negates damage from bad losses
3. We don't know how much Michigan moved, but you are probably right that they are still on the 2-seed line. But that's partially because 2/3 of the teams right behind them lost this week as well. If I had to guess, they are probably the last 2 seed at this point.
4. There aren't equal gaps between each position on the s-curve. Meaning the distance between #6 Michigan and #7 North Carolina is not going to be the same as the distance between #12 Marquette and #13 Iowa State. So you are right, it is harder for those teams to move down because they likely have built some pretty big cushions between them and the lower seeds, but that doesn't mean those losses aren't closing the gap a bit.
If we want a 2 seed, we likely have to be 2 wins better than 1 of the current 2 seeds, and 1 win better than the 3 3 seeds in front of us. (Yes Benny, I know that's not how the selection committee actually works. I am just making a guess on a possible scenario that could get us a 2 seed)
If the committee is anything like last year, a big win will have a much bigger impact than a bad loss.
-
Maybe it’s because I’m not watching it closely this year because MU isn’t close to the bubble. But it looks like the bubble is not only weak, but there are fewer teams even competing for the last spots. Whenever I think some of these teams with conference records well below .500 have to be playing themselves out of the field, I see that they are still in and understand why the first 4 or 8 out aren’t ahead of them. I guess the problem is that some of the mid major conferences that used to have 2 or 3 or 4 teams in bubble contention now have almost no chance to get more than one bid.
I would support eliminating the First Four games as completely superfluous.
-
Okay when do we start talking about Des Moines and Columbus? Want to be there. MSU and Michigan looking to take two spots.
Not that many spots left. Dont we need to start cheering against teams near our locale and seed and for teams further away? For instance Looeyville and Iowa/Iowa State/UW-Madison and others near us geographically and seed?
-
Today we want the following teams to win:
Tennessee over Kentucky
Maryland over Michigan
Wake Forest over North Carolina
Penn State over Purdue
As far as Iowa St there conference should take care of them with more losses as the season goes on. For Madison we would have to really collapse at this point and they would need to win out to even have a discussion on them beating us out for a location.
As much as I hate to say it that Michigan St win over Wisconsin was huge. If Wisconsin would have won I could have seen Marquette jumping over them. That would have been 4 losses in their last 5 games. Now they just added another Q1 road win. I can't seem them falling off the 2 line even with 2 losses to Michigan.
-
Today we want the following teams to win:
Tennessee over Kentucky
Maryland over Michigan
Wake Forest over North Carolina
Penn State over Kentucky
Crap forgot about Kentucky. They would take another Columbus spot. Too many good teams near these sites.
-
If MU keeps winning they have a good chance to jump over Michigan. It seems to be going unnoticed that Michigan was one of the top teams in the country the first few weeks of the season, but since early December they have been very mediocre. A favorable early B10 schedule has allowed them to stay near the top of the B10, butbthey have home and homes remaining with Maryland and MSU and a game at Minnesota. Given how they have played on the road in the B10 and at home in narrow wins over Minnesota and Wisconsin they could easily be looking at 3 or 4 more losses.
Unlike other recent Beilein teams, this year’s version has not improved since November, mainly because none of their reserves have stepped up to bolster their shaky depth.
-
The record percentage of a conference to make the tourney was the BE two years ago at 70%, 7 of 10, including MU. The old record was the BE again in 2011 when 11 of 16, or 68%, got in, also including an S16 MU.
Currently, Lundari has 8 of 10 (80%) of the Big 12 teams getting in. This would be a new record.
Interestingly, none are better than a #3 seed (Kansas) and TCU at 17-8 (5-7) is in. Oklahoma at 16-10 (4-9) is a "last four in" team.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
So, does the Big 12 take out the BE record for highest percentage of the conference to get in?
-
The record percentage of a conference to make the tourney was the BE two years ago at 70%, 7 of 10, including MU. The old record was the BE again in 2011 when 11 of 16, or 68%, got in, also including an S16 MU.
Currently, Lundari has 8 of 10 (80%) of the Big 12 teams getting in. This would be a new record.
Interestingly, none are better than a #3 seed (Kansas) and TCU at 17-8 (5-7) is in. Oklahoma at 16-10 (4-9) is a "last four in" team.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
So, does the Big 12 take out the BE record for highest percentage of the conference to get in?
We’ll see in 29 days.
-
The record percentage of a conference to make the tourney was the BE two years ago at 70%, 7 of 10, including MU. The old record was the BE again in 2011 when 11 of 16, or 68%, got in, also including an S16 MU.
Currently, Lundari has 8 of 10 (80%) of the Big 12 teams getting in. This would be a new record.
Interestingly, none are better than a #3 seed (Kansas) and TCU at 17-8 (5-7) is in. Oklahoma at 16-10 (4-9) is a "last four in" team.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
So, does the Big 12 take out the BE record for highest percentage of the conference to get in?
no way Oklahoma makes it in if they are 5+ games under .500 in league play. Lazy journalism
-
no way Oklahoma makes it in if they are 5+ games under .500 in league play. Lazy journalism
Actually its not lazy journalism at all. During the halftime report of the K-State/Iowa State game one of the anchors asked him in a littler 3 minute segment specifically about Oklahoma and being under .500 in league. Joe replyed he doesn't believe they are a tournament team but predicting based on how he thinks the committee will select. He actually game examples of 8 teams over the last 4 years who have made it with below .500 conference records. He said there were 4-6 teams this year that would make it with well below .500 records this year.
He also added that it was worse this year to past years because of the switch from RPI to Net Ranking using Kansas state as the example. He said they are 12 in RPI and 26 in NR.
-
I saw that. But again, the committee is not going to put a team in 5+ games under. IMO, He is going.by the computer numbers.
-
The record percentage of a conference to make the tourney was the BE two years ago at 70%, 7 of 10, including MU. The old record was the BE again in 2011 when 11 of 16, or 68%, got in, also including an S16 MU.
So by the Big East setting the record two years ago, do you mean the Big East tying the Big 12's record two years ago, a record that the Big 12 set in 2014 and has tied in 2015, 2016, and 2018?
-
The record percentage of a conference to make the tourney was the BE two years ago at 70%, 7 of 10, including MU. The old record was the BE again in 2011 when 11 of 16, or 68%, got in, also including an S16 MU.
Currently, Lundari has 8 of 10 (80%) of the Big 12 teams getting in. This would be a new record.
Interestingly, none are better than a #3 seed (Kansas) and TCU at 17-8 (5-7) is in. Oklahoma at 16-10 (4-9) is a "last four in" team.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
So, does the Big 12 take out the BE record for highest percentage of the conference to get in?
This is all incorrect. The record percentage is 77.7% when 7/9 Big East teams made the field in 1991.
The Big 12 got to 70% before the new Big East did. They placed 7/10 in 2014, 2015, & 2016 before the Big East did it in 2017.
-
Lol.
-
Crap forgot about Kentucky. They would take another Columbus spot. Too many good teams near these sites.
A number of prognosticators saying Hartford or San Jose for us. Too many top teams ahead of us that will bump us out.
-
Man, this day so far has done us zero favors, maybe Louisville winning was a good thing.
Kentucky up early on Tennessee, maybe the Vols can help us out. Not holding out a lot of hope that San Diego or Wyoming can knock of Gonzaga/Nevada but I guess it's possible.
-
Man, this day so far has done us zero favors, maybe Louisville winning was a good thing.
Kentucky up early on Tennessee, maybe the Vols can help us out. Not holding out a lot of hope that San Diego or Wyoming can knock of Gonzaga/Nevada but I guess it's possible.
Other than MU failing to get a pod all together, what Gonzaga or Nevada do really doesn't matter. They are taking 2 of the 4 western pods. Frankly, Nevada falling out would be bad because then 3 teams have to take their pods west.
-
Other than MU failing to get a pod all together, what Gonzaga or Nevada do really doesn't matter. They are taking 2 of the 4 western pods. Frankly, Nevada falling out would be bad because then 3 teams have to take their pods west.
That's a good point, but I'd rather have a higher seed out west then a lower one in Des Moines. I doubt we catch Gonzaga and I doubt Nevada gets to a 2 seed but you never know
-
That's a good point, but I'd rather have a higher seed out west then a lower one in Des Moines. I doubt we catch Gonzaga and I doubt Nevada gets to a 2 seed but you never know
Don't know other peoples take on Gonzaga but frankly I am getting sick of them. Yes the beat Duke there is no denying that but outside of them they have no good wins. There conference year after year is average at best. They get seeded in the tournament based on their record in a weak WCC. Isnt it about time they join a real conference like the Pac 12?
Yes they were a fun story of a mid major around the year 2000 but they have been relevant for 20 years. I would really like to see how they would do if they have to play the likes of Duke, North Carolina , Virigina, Syracuse, Villanova, Marquette, etc 2 x a year.
-
They're a year removed from a national championship appearance and do everything they can to schedule tough in the non-con. They went 6-2 against high majors in non-con play. What other conference could they join? Without football the Pac-12 is a non-starter. Maybe the Mountain West, but per Pomeroy 5/10 WCC teams are top-100 while just 3/11 MWC teams are.
-
They're a year removed from a national championship appearance and do everything they can to schedule tough in the non-con. They went 6-2 against high majors in non-con play. What other conference could they join? Without football the Pac-12 is a non-starter. Maybe the Mountain West, but per Pomeroy 5/10 WCC teams are top-100 while just 3/11 MWC teams are.
Brew, where is MU on your S-Curve today?? Move up at all after beating Nova??
-
That's a good point, but I'd rather have a higher seed out west then a lower one in Des Moines. I doubt we catch Gonzaga and I doubt Nevada gets to a 2 seed but you never know
You don't live in Wisconsin. Des Moines is basically the only chance I have of being able to go to a game, since flying is out of the picture financially.
-
Brew, where is MU on your S-Curve today?? Move up at all after beating Nova??
I have them at #11, though I'm in the process of re-evaluating right now. At a quick glance, nothing that happened this week seems likely to change that.
-
I have them at #11, though I'm in the process of re-evaluating right now. At a quick glance, nothing that happened this week seems likely to change that.
What is the EASIEST(if there is one, which I have my doubts) to a 2 seed?? MU wins the rest of their regular season games, and Michigan loses 2?? But then Houston is in there as well, and they aren't losing again most likely.
-
You don't live in Wisconsin. Des Moines is basically the only chance I have of being able to go to a game, since flying is out of the picture financially.
Again, I'd rather have a better seed with less fans then a worse seed with more fans
-
NBC Sports Update:
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
-
What is the EASIEST(if there is one, which I have my doubts) to a 2 seed?? MU wins the rest of their regular season games, and Michigan loses 2?? But then Houston is in there as well, and they aren't losing again most likely.
I would say Michigan St. They lost another starter in Nick Ward for most likely the rest of the regular season. A split with Michigan really does nothing for us.
My questions is at what point does that amount of losses take away from your Q1 wins. Kansas is the prefect example. They have 2 more losses than us, more Q1 wins but are ahead of us in the S curve. Yes they have the head to head but you think 4 losses vs 6 losses would start to lean more Marquette. Michigan state has 5 losses but would they still be ahead of us with 7 losses?
-
Again, I'd rather have a better seed with less fans then a worse seed with more fans
This, this, 1000 times this.
For me to be able to go to games, it would be nice if MU was sent to Columbia or Jax on the first weekend and DC or Louisville in the regionals.
But here's the kind of guy I am: I'd gladly sacrifice those in-person viewing opportunities for MU to get the best path to the Final Four.
Based on every single bracket projection I have seen the last month, I'd LOVE for MU to be the 2 or 3 seed out West.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology
I understand the Nova is seed 6 because of their bad losses to Penn and Furman but they would run through that bracket to the final 4 line a hot knife through butter.
-
I understand the Nova is seed 6 because of their bad losses to Penn and Furman but they would run through that bracket to the final 4 line a hot knife through butter.
Maybe. But they couldn't even hold a 19-point lead over a StJ team that some Scoopers say is horrible at a venue where they hadn't lost to StJ in almost 2 decades.
Nova is a good team, but it wouldn't surprise me one iota if they lost in the first round. Wouldn't stun me if they put together a FF run, either.
-
I understand the Nova is seed 6 because of their bad losses to Penn and Furman but they would run through that bracket to the final 4 line a hot knife through butter.
Gonna disagree with you there. UNC is better than Nova. I do think they'd get out of the first weekend.
-
This, this, 1000 times this.
For me to be able to go to games, it would be nice if MU was sent to Columbia or Jax on the first weekend and DC or Louisville in the regionals.
But here's the kind of guy I am: I'd gladly sacrifice those in-person viewing opportunities for MU to get the best path to the Final Four.
Based on every single bracket projection I have seen the last month, I'd LOVE for MU to be the 2 or 3 seed out West.
What I'm talking about though is the opening weekend pod. It can literally be anywhere and in any Region. So Des Moines and West, all good for me!
Plus, the likelihood of a Sweet 16 is enhanced somewhat if MU can get a large contingent to the game in person.
-
My questions is at what point does that amount of losses take away from your Q1 wins. Kansas is the prefect example. They have 2 more losses than us, more Q1 wins but are ahead of us in the S curve. Yes they have the head to head but you think 4 losses vs 6 losses would start to lean more Marquette. Michigan state has 5 losses but would they still be ahead of us with 7 losses?
You can't just look at the totals, you also have to look at who the wins and losses are against.
Kansas has 2 more losses but all but one are Q1 losses. And 4/5 of their Q1 losses are of the Q1A variety, meaning 4 of their losses are to teams that would beat almost anybody in the venue the played in. For comparisons sake, only 1 of Marquette's losses is Q1A (to Kansas) the others are Q1B (x2) and Q2A.
Meanwhile, they also have 9 Q1 wins (most in the country), including 6 Q1A wins (also most in the country). Marquette has 7 Q1 wins only 2 of which are Q1A wins.
And despite Kansas having 2 more Q1 wins, 4 more Q1A wins, and 1 less non-Q1A loss, they are only two spots ahead of us on the S-Curve.
So to answer your question, the 2 extra losses have basically dropped Kansas from a 1 seed all the way to a 3 seed.
-
What I'm talking about though is the opening weekend pod. It can literally be anywhere and in any Region. So Des Moines and West, all good for me!
Plus, the likelihood of a Sweet 16 is enhanced somewhat if MU can get a large contingent to the game in person.
That's fair, and it certainly works for me. I will gladly sacrifice getting to watch MU in person for you to get to go watch us win twice in Des Moines and then for us to advance to the FF.
What a selfless guy I am!
-
By looking just at the s-curve of the Early 16 announced by the committee plus geographic proximity (i.e. not taking anything else into consideration yet):
[Note: Gonzaga and Nevada have no impact on the other 14 teams... in every possible scenario, including if both were to drop to 15th and 16th on the s-curve - San Jose and/or SLC are available options when their respective spots comes up. Those schools can send their thank you cards to the Pac-12.]
1) Columbia is closest for both UVA and Duke. (If there's one takeaway here, it's to pray MU doesn't drop to an 8/9 seed here, because good luck getting a hotel in Columbia that weekend :-[)
2) Columbus is the closest site for five teams - UM, UK, MSU, PU, & UL - four of whom are ahead of MU on the s-curve.
3) Of those five, only UM gets placed in Columbus, because Tenn was already bumped to Columbus.
4) Since MSU and UK are bumped from Columbus (and Columbia is full), both end up at the next closest available site: Des Moines.
5) With Columbus and Columbia now off the board, UNC ends up at their third closest: Jacksonville.
6) Tulsa is closest for KU and Houston, and since it's their turn, that's where they be off to.
7) Now it's PU's and MU's turn... for both, closest available is Hartford.
8) UL ends up at their fifth closest, Jacksonville. Which leaves UW-Madison and LSU to be shipped out west (SLC and SJ, respectively).
So it's pretty clear that Columbus is the longest of long shots for MU, and the most likely way to get to Des Moines is to overtake two of UK, MSU and PU on the s-curve. Otherwise, Hartford seems like the most probable site for MU at this juncture.
That being said, I'm only looking at geography here.... there are over a dozen other guidelines and principles that could realistically impact MU's placement, so even if the season ended today, there's a distinct possibility that MU would not end up in Hartford; that doesn't mean MU would be placed closer to home, but there's really no easy exercise to ascertain the probabilities until they start building the entire bracket, not just the top 16. But if I were playing with money, I would comfortably bet against Columbia, Columbus, and San Jose.
-
By looking just at the s-curve of the Early 16 announced by the committee plus geographic proximity (i.e. not taking anything else into consideration yet):
[Note: Gonzaga and Nevada have no impact on the other 14 teams... in every possible scenario, including if both were to drop to 15th and 16th on the s-curve - San Jose and/or SLC are available options when their respective spots comes up. Those schools can send their thank you cards to the Pac-12.]
1) Columbia is closest for both UVA and Duke. (If there's one takeaway here, it's to pray MU doesn't drop to an 8/9 seed here, because good luck getting a hotel in Columbia that weekend :-[)
2) Columbus is the closest site for five teams - UM, UK, MSU, PU, & UL - four of whom are ahead of MU on the s-curve.
3) Of those five, only UM gets placed in Columbus, because Tenn was already bumped to Columbus.
4) Since MSU and UK are bumped from Columbus (and Columbia is full), both end up at the next closest available site: Des Moines.
5) With Columbus and Columbia now off the board, UNC ends up at their third closest: Jacksonville.
6) Tulsa is closest for KU and Houston, and since it's their turn, that's where they be off to.
7) Now it's PU's and MU's turn... for both, closest available is Hartford.
8) UL ends up at their fifth closest, Jacksonville. Which leaves UW-Madison and LSU to be shipped out west (SLC and SJ, respectively).
So it's pretty clear that Columbus is the longest of long shots for MU, and the most likely way to get to Des Moines is to overtake two of UK, MSU and PU on the s-curve. Otherwise, Hartford seems like the most probable site for MU at this juncture.
That being said, I'm only looking at geography here.... there are over a dozen other guidelines and principles that could realistically impact MU's placement, so even if the season ended today, there's a distinct possibility that MU would not end up in Hartford; that doesn't mean MU would be placed closer to home, but there's really no easy exercise to ascertain the probabilities until they start building the entire bracket, not just the top 16. But if I were playing with money, I would comfortably bet against Columbia, Columbus, and San Jose.
I actually think there's another very plausible scenario. I don't think Tennessee will get Columbus. They will end up on the 2-line behind Kentucky, which will give Columbus to Kentucky and the second closest for Tennessee is Jacksonville, not Des Moines. That could move us up the pecking order. UT's schedule gets significantly more difficult; their easy SEC road has their current SOS as easier than teams like Gonzaga & Houston, who are frequently knocked for their SOS.
-
Just don't want to get stuck playing a 2nd round game against Iowa in Des Moines......
-
Just don't want to get stuck playing a 2nd round game against Iowa in Des Moines......
Who would?
-
I'm convinced MU to Hartford or San Jose. Not enough juicy wins left to climb the latter enough. Big East isn't strong enough to propel us, and if we lose against Seton Hall, Nova, etc, we will drop.
-
Just don't want to get stuck playing a 2nd round game against Iowa in Des Moines......
See, now this should NEVER happen..Iowa, as a lower and unprotected seed should NOT be allowed to play that close to home. Not saying it won't, but that sh*t should NEVER happen.
-
See, now this should NEVER happen..Iowa, as a lower and unprotected seed should NOT be allowed to play that close to home. Not saying it won't, but that sh*t should NEVER happen.
Seemed like it happened to Duke against South Carolina that year. Another tournament where MU got screwed on location. I wouldn’t put it past them.
-
Seemed like it happened to Duke against South Carolina that year. Another tournament where MU got screwed on location. I wouldn’t put it past them.
Yep it shouldn't happen but it has
-
Seemed like it happened to Duke against South Carolina that year. Another tournament where MU got screwed on location. I wouldn’t put it past them.
Actually, that "pod" was supposed to be played in Greensboro. But the passage of HB2 (the "bathroom bill," which turned North Carolina into an international laughingstock) caused the NCAA to move all championship events out of the state. So it got moved to Greenville.
-
Actually, that "pod" was supposed to be played in Greensboro. But the passage of HB2 (the "bathroom bill," which turned North Carolina into an international laughingstock) caused the NCAA to move all championship events out of the state. So it got moved to Greenville.
Nicely done....good weaving into the post...top notch....
-
Nicely done....good weaving into the post...top notch....
I know that facts bother you, troll.
-
Actually, that "pod" was supposed to be played in Greensboro. But the passage of HB2 (the "bathroom bill," which turned North Carolina into an international laughingstock) caused the NCAA to move all championship events out of the state. So it got moved to Greenville.
All true, but it was also known well before hand where the games would be. It wasn't a late switch that gave SC home court.
-
Yep it shouldn't happen but it has
When? The protected seeds (top 4) only apply in the first round game, so the Duke matchup is irrelevant and MU was not protected, so vs. SC in Greenville was fair game.
-
When? The protected seeds (top 4) only apply in the first round game, so the Duke matchup is irrelevant and MU was not protected, so vs. SC in Greenville was fair game.
I don't think protected seeds should have to play a defacto road game in the 2nd round......I understand that it is allowed and therefore could happen.
I just want to avoid that situation as an MU fan......understand now?
-
All true, but it was also known well before hand where the games would be. It wasn't a late switch that gave SC home court.
True.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
I honestly just don't see is getting a 2 even winning out. But I mean maybe Houston drops @cinci and MSU sweeps mich or the other way around.
-
I honestly just don't see is getting a 2 even winning out. But I mean maybe Houston drops @cinci and MSU sweeps mich or the other way around.
There is 0 chance that a 30-4 Big East team that went 19-2 between the BE regular season and BET and is 27-2 since Thanksgiving is anything less than a 2 seed, especially with non-con wins over KState (maybe the B12 champ), Wisconsin (very outside shot at a share of a B1G championship), Buffalo (MAC champ), and Louisville. Maybe even a 1 seed.
-
I like how both of those sites still have Villanova bolded and not Marquette.
-
There is 0 chance that a 30-4 Big East team that went 19-2 between the BE regular season and BET and is 27-2 since Thanksgiving is anything less than a 2 seed, especially with non-con wins over KState (maybe the B12 champ), Wisconsin (very outside shot at a share of a B1G championship), Buffalo (MAC champ), and Louisville. Maybe even a 1 seed.
That's a one dimensional look. You have to compare that against the teams ahead of us. If Unc sweeps duke then duke maybe falls to the two and unc steps up. Same with UT and UK. If the michigan schools split neither is falling below us. If Houston wins out they aren't falling below us. Same with KU.
-
We will be a 3 seed. I think we still lose 3 more games this season sadly.
BET game.
Nova
And then either providence away or Creighton at home.
-
We will be a 3 seed. I think we still lose 3 more games this season sadly.
BET game.
Nova
And then either providence away or Creighton at home.
A month ago, 2 months ago, how many games did you think we would lose?
I'm not being snarky, just curious about your track record for MU predictions this season.
-
That's a one dimensional look. You have to compare that against the teams ahead of us. If Unc sweeps duke then duke maybe falls to the two and unc steps up. Same with UT and UK. If the michigan schools split neither is falling below us. If Houston wins out they aren't falling below us. Same with KU.
There are a lot of losses out there. It's one dimensional in that I don't know who specifically is going to lose what games, but too many of the top teams still play each other to not lose some games. Duke/UVA/UNC all will play each other plus the Louisvilles and VTs of the ACC, including ACC Tournament games. Michigan and Michigan State play twice plus a potential B1G Tournament game, plus loseable games against the Wisconsins of the B1G. Kentucky and Tennessee plus the LSUs and the SEC Tournament.
There are just too many losses out there. Somebody has to lose some of those games they're playing against each other.
And if we win out we pass Houston without question if you ask me, regardless of whether Houston wins out or not.
-
A month ago, 2 months ago, how many games did you think we would lose?
I'm not being snarky, just curious about your track record for MU predictions this season.
I hear ya.
Someone made a post a few weeks back. I said we would finish the season 6-3.
One loss with StJ’s.
I think we are playing great. But I just see a bubble team or Creighton getting hot against us.
I really hope I’m wrong.
-
At nova, providence and SHU is not easy. Winning 2/3 would be fantastic
-
There is 0 chance that a 30-4 Big East team that went 19-2 between the BE regular season and BET and is 27-2 since Thanksgiving is anything less than a 2 seed, especially with non-con wins over KState (maybe the B12 champ), Wisconsin (very outside shot at a share of a B1G championship), Buffalo (MAC champ), and Louisville. Maybe even a 1 seed.
I'd say the only way we don't land a 2 seed if we win out is if KU also wins out and none of the 3 ACC teams collapses.
Either Michigan or Michigan State have three guaranteed Ls between them, plus UM still has @Maryland. One of those will fall to a 3 (whichever takes 2 or more of the guaranteed Ls).
Even if Houston wins out, we'll easily pass them if we do the same as that would include a minimum of a win @nova and probably a win against nova in the BET.
-
I hear ya.
Someone made a post a few weeks back. I said we would finish the season 6-3.
One loss with StJ’s.
I think we are playing great. But I just see a bubble team or Creighton getting hot against us.
I really hope I’m wrong.
Thanks for accepting my inquiry in the manner in which I made it.
I wouldn't be stunned if you were right. Look around college basketball. Teams that "shouldn't lose" lose every night. I also hope you're wrong, of course!
-
That's a one dimensional look. You have to compare that against the teams ahead of us. If Unc sweeps duke then duke maybe falls to the two and unc steps up. Same with UT and UK. If the michigan schools split neither is falling below us. If Houston wins out they aren't falling below us. Same with KU.
One of those schools is guaranteed 2 more losses by the end of championship week. We'll pass that one if we win out.
-
A month ago, 2 months ago, how many games did you think we would lose?
I'm not being snarky, just curious about your track record for MU predictions this season.
82, I went back n checked. I thought/posted we would go 6-4 over our last 10 and end up at 13-5.
So gladly I have been far wrong.
Im always very optimistic. But just trying to keep cautious. Really hoping for only 1-2 more losses max.
-
Thanks for accepting my inquiry in the manner in which I made it.
I wouldn't be stunned if you were right. Look around college basketball. Teams that "shouldn't lose" lose every night. I also hope you're wrong, of course!
Yeah last night was a Who’s Who of teams that shouldn’t have lost.
-
That's a one dimensional look. You have to compare that against the teams ahead of us. If Unc sweeps duke then duke maybe falls to the two and unc steps up. Same with UT and UK. If the michigan schools split neither is falling below us. If Houston wins out they aren't falling below us. Same with KU.
You're not wrong, but probability is that there will be enough losses out there that we would get a 2 seed. If somehow every team ahead of us defies the odds and we still end up with a 3 seed after winning out we would have the best 3 seed resume in the history of the NCAA.
All that being said, its all probably academic at this point. Us winning the next 8 games is also way against probabilities.
-
Thanks for accepting my inquiry in the manner in which I made it.
I wouldn't be stunned if you were right. Look around college basketball. Teams that "shouldn't lose" lose every night. I also hope you're wrong, of course!
Someone can run the game by game numbers, but even if we assume a 70% win prob in ALL our remaining games, it's about 5% that we win out. That said, I sure hope we do!
-
Us winning the next 8 games is also way against probabilities.
Blasphemer!
-
You're not wrong, but probability is that there will be enough losses out there that we would get a 2 seed. If somehow every team ahead of us defies the odds and we still end up with a 3 seed after winning out we would have the best 3 seed resume in the history of the NCAA.
All that being said, its all probably academic at this point. Us winning the next 8 games is also way against probabilities.
One of those schools is guaranteed 2 more losses by the end of championship week. We'll pass that one if we win out.
There are a lot of losses out there. It's one dimensional in that I don't know who specifically is going to lose what games, but too many of the top teams still play each other to not lose some games. Duke/UVA/UNC all will play each other plus the Louisvilles and VTs of the ACC, including ACC Tournament games. Michigan and Michigan State play twice plus a potential B1G Tournament game, plus loseable games against the Wisconsins of the B1G. Kentucky and Tennessee plus the LSUs and the SEC Tournament.
There are just too many losses out there. Somebody has to lose some of those games they're playing against each other.
And if we win out we pass Houston without question if you ask me, regardless of whether Houston wins out or not.
Just going to combine this response and say I forgot about conference tournaments and was only going win out regular season relative to what the teams ahead of us do. With three ACC teams ahead, two SEC team and two B1G teams it makes more sense how you guys are looking at it.
My bad.
-
I know we are all frustrated that we can't seem to move up on the seed line, but some good news at least is that the team's right behind us have lost.
Since the bracket preview, here's what the teams right behind us have done:
#12 Marquette 3-0 (big win vs. Nova)
#13 Iowa State 1-2 (big win at K-State, home losses to TCU and Baylor)
#14 Nevada 2-1 (no good wins, bad loss at San Diego State)
#15 Louisville 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at Syracuse)
#16 Wisconsin 1-2 (no good wins or bad losses)
#17 Villanova 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at SJU, bad loss at Georgetown)
#18-20 LSU 3-1 (big win at Kentucky, bad loss vs Florida)
#18-20 Texas Tech 3-0 (goodish win at Oklahoma)
#18-20 Virginia Tech 2-2 (no good wins, badish loss at Clemson)
I'd say the gap between a 3 and 4 seed is pretty sizable at the moment. Gives us some nice wiggle room in case we drop a game.
-
You're not wrong, but probability is that there will be enough losses out there that we would get a 2 seed. If somehow every team ahead of us defies the odds and we still end up with a 3 seed after winning out we would have the best 3 seed resume in the history of the NCAA.
All that being said, its all probably academic at this point. Us winning the next 8 games is also way against probabilities.
Based on kenpom probabilities (if I'm doing this right), we have ~8% chance to win out the regular season, then if you figure 75% game 1 / 60% game 2 / 50% game 3 (assuming Nova), that brings the probability down to ~2% to get to 30-4 heading into the tournament. Not bad!
-
I know we are all frustrated that we can't seem to move up on the seed line, but some good news at least is that the team's right behind us have lost.
Since the bracket preview, here's what the teams right behind us have done:
#12 Marquette 3-0 (big win vs. Nova)
#13 Iowa State 1-2 (big win at K-State, home losses to TCU and Baylor)
#14 Nevada 2-1 (no good wins, bad loss at San Diego State)
#15 Louisville 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at Syracuse)
#16 Wisconsin 1-2 (no good wins or bad losses)
#17 Villanova 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at SJU, bad loss at Georgetown)
#18-20 LSU 3-1 (big win at Kentucky, bad loss vs Florida)
#18-20 Texas Tech 3-0 (goodish win at Oklahoma)
#18-20 Virginia Tech 2-2 (no good wins, badish loss at Clemson)
I'd say the gap between a 3 and 4 seed is pretty sizable at the moment. Gives us some nice wiggle room in case we drop a game.
Ooooh. I like this. This is the content we need! More of this!
-
I know we are all frustrated that we can't seem to move up on the seed line, but some good news at least is that the team's right behind us have lost.
Since the bracket preview, here's what the teams right behind us have done:
#12 Marquette 3-0 (big win vs. Nova)
#13 Iowa State 1-2 (big win at K-State, home losses to TCU and Baylor)
#14 Nevada 2-1 (no good wins, bad loss at San Diego State)
#15 Louisville 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at Syracuse)
#16 Wisconsin 1-2 (no good wins or bad losses)
#17 Villanova 1-3 (no good wins, badish loss at SJU, bad loss at Georgetown)
#18-20 LSU 3-1 (big win at Kentucky, bad loss vs Florida)
#18-20 Texas Tech 3-0 (goodish win at Oklahoma)
#18-20 Virginia Tech 2-2 (no good wins, badish loss at Clemson)
I'd say the gap between a 3 and 4 seed is pretty sizable at the moment. Gives us some nice wiggle room in case we drop a game.
Spot on TAMU. The gap back to the #4 (and beyond) line is growing materially.
-
Villanova is edging towards no longer being a Q1 win at home. They better step it up going forward (except against MU)! #27 NET right now.
-
Villanova is edging towards no longer being a Q1 win at home. They better step it up going forward (except against MU)! #27 NET right now.
At the same time though, Georgetown is now a Q1 win. So it was a fair trade off last night.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Louisville as a 6 seed in the second round? No thank you...
-
Based on kenpom probabilities (if I'm doing this right), we have ~8% chance to win out the regular season, then if you figure 75% game 1 / 60% game 2 / 50% game 3 (assuming Nova), that brings the probability down to ~2% to get to 30-4 heading into the tournament. Not bad!
According to my calculations, we have a 100% chance of winning out.
-
According to my calculations, we have a 100% chance of winning out.
Ha hard to argue against that, in my heart I know it to be true
-
I like how both of those sites still have Villanova bolded and not Marquette.
Ever notice how MU performs just a teency bit better when they're the underdog / behind the eight ball?
Wojo must be using some kind of sorcery the way he's been able to maintain that illusion despite having the #11 team in the country.
-
According to my calculations, we have a 100% chance of winning out.
Dammit, 82.... you're supposed to be the math expert around here.
You've been taking too many of the blue pills again, haven't you? I'm sure you're making Mrs. 82 very happy, but you've got to get some blood flow back above your neck.
-
Ever notice how MU performs just a teency bit better when they're the underdog / behind the eight ball?
Wojo must be using some kind of sorcery the way he's been able to maintain that illusion despite having the #11 team in the country.
#mindgames
-
According to my calculations, we have a 100% chance of winning out.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/43/ce/9b/43ce9b0c0f752bd483a9b0e9dffedb8b--math-memes-class-memes.jpg)
-
According to my calculations, we have a 100% chance of winning out.
Actually I think our odds are 50/50 http://www.cc.com/video-clips/hzqmb9/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-large-hadron-collider (http://www.cc.com/video-clips/hzqmb9/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-large-hadron-collider)
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Butler sneaks in.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Butler sneaks in.
If we're a 3 seed i do not want to play louisville again or virginia tech
-
If we're a 3 seed i do not want to play louisville again or virginia tech
Louisville no. Virginia Tech isn't actually that good, they just beat up on cupcakes which inflated their computer #s
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
I really wish for the betterment of the sport teams like Belmont & Lipscomb get in over the likes of Oklahoma & Clemson.
-
Louisville no. Virginia Tech isn't actually that good, they just beat up on cupcakes which inflated their computer #s
Part of me would love to see our guys crush Buzz. But part of me REALLY doesn't want to lose to Buzz.
-
I really wish for the betterment of the sport teams like Belmont & Lipscomb get in over the likes of Oklahoma & Clemson.
I will die on the hill of "there is no way Oklahoma would make it in if the season ended today". They are currently 5 games under .500 in league play. Moot point probably, they have 3 games against ranked teams. If they lose them all, they are definitely toast.
-
Part of me would love to see our guys crush Buzz. But part of me REALLY doesn't want to lose to Buzz.
That's the thing with dreams...they can turn into nightmares.
-
I will die on the hill of "there is no way Oklahoma would make it in if the season ended today". They are currently 5 games under .500 in league play. Moot point probably, they have 3 games against ranked teams. If they lose them all, they are definitely toast.
I suspect you'd be lonely on that hill, at least in the "if the season ended today" sense. While they may trend out of the field, they have too much quality on the resume to be left out. 3 Q1 wins, no losses outside Q2, and really bolstered by the fact that they didn't play any Q4 games so they have an excellent SOS. If they go 3-2 the rest of the way, they're almost certainly in, even with a 7-11 conference record.
-
Part of me would love to see our guys crush Buzz. But part of me REALLY doesn't want to lose to Buzz.
This
-
I suspect you'd be lonely on that hill, at least in the "if the season ended today" sense. While they may trend out of the field, they have too much quality on the resume to be left out. 3 Q1 wins, no losses outside Q2, and really bolstered by the fact that they didn't play any Q4 games so they have an excellent SOS. If they go 3-2 the rest of the way, they're almost certainly in, even with a 7-11 conference record.
I don't want to be that "eye test" guy, but, to me a team who only wins 1/3 of their conference game doesn't deserve to be in the field.
-
I did look at OU's non-conference schedule. It was pretty tough. :-\
-
I don't want to be that "eye test" guy, but, to me a team who only wins 1/3 of their conference game doesn't deserve to be in the field.
The committee has said repeatedly conference play isn't weighted any differently than non-con. Just compare USC & Arizona State's resumes from last year.
Teams will crash out, but with Indiana, Nebraska, NC State, & the Pac-12 in freefall, someone has to get the bid.
-
The committee has said repeatedly conference play isn't weighted any differently than non-con. Just compare USC & Arizona State's resumes from last year.
Teams will crash out, but with Indiana, Nebraska, NC State, & the Pac-12 in freefall, someone has to get the bid.
Don’t you think the committee will be under pressure to put in a midmajor then an IU or OU? I feel like that pressure will be there.
-
Don’t you think the committee will be under pressure to put in a midmajor then an IU or OU? I feel like that pressure will be there.
I think IU's record will be below .500 which will likely take them out of at large consideration.
The big change to the Selection Committee this year is the makeup. In recent years, it's been 5 high major & 5 mid/low major representatives. This year it's only 4 high major & 6 mid/low major reps. In the past, similar makeups led to more at large bids for traditional one bid leagues. I expect schools like Wofford, Lipscomb, Furman, Utah State to benefit, especially in a year when the high majors are collectively crapping all over themselves.
-
Don’t you think the committee will be under pressure to put in a midmajor then an IU or OU? I feel like that pressure will be there.
Here are the NCAA team sheets. They are pretty comprehensive and worth reviewing. A team like IU has 5 Q1 wins. They are now in overtime at Iowa and have a chance to pick up another.
https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats%20Library/NET%20Team%20Sheets%20-%20Games%20through%20Feb.%2021,%202019.pdf
-
Here are the NCAA team sheets. They are pretty comprehensive and worth reviewing. A team like IU has 5 Q1 wins. They are now in overtime at Iowa and have a chance to pick up another.
https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats%20Library/NET%20Team%20Sheets%20-%20Games%20through%20Feb.%2021,%202019.pdf
IU had a golden chance tonight, but goes down in OT. I just don’t see it
-
I wanted Indiana to lose to us and to beat everybody else.
Eff Indiana for not doing what I wanted!
-
I wasted far too much time on this tonight, but the time-consuming work is out of the way. I'll update it periodically.
To find the first round site for the top 16, I calculated (Google Maps) the distance from each campus to each host city. Then I worked my way down from Duke to Virginia Tech (based off the current AP Top 25, which will change Monday) assigning each team to its closest available city.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roateBVil2mn1EhYLccIh0bl2PGDFuP3LuCmuCjDCsk/edit?usp=sharing
Green is a first-choice location
Red is a blocked location, due to higher seed's preferential location
Yellow is the next closest location after eliminating blocked cities
Currently, this has Marquette in Tulsa. Amazingly, the last site to fill up was not Salt Lake or San Jose but Hartford.
For Des Moines-ers, the best thing that happened this week that is not reflected on here is Tennessee losing. Tennessee losing will potentially drop them behind Michigan, sending Michigan to Columbus instead of Des Moines. Tennessee's #2 (technically #3 after Columbia) is Jacksonville, which opens a spot in Des Moines for Marquette.
-
I wasted far too much time on this tonight, but the time-consuming work is out of the way. I'll update it periodically.
To find the first round site for the top 16, I calculated (Google Maps) the distance from each campus to each host city. Then I worked my way down from Duke to Virginia Tech (based off the current AP Top 25, which will change Monday) assigning each team to its closest available city.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roateBVil2mn1EhYLccIh0bl2PGDFuP3LuCmuCjDCsk/edit?usp=sharing
Green is a first-choice location
Red is a blocked location, due to higher seed's preferential location
Yellow is the next closest location after eliminating blocked cities
Currently, this has Marquette in Tulsa. Amazingly, the last site to fill up was not Salt Lake or San Jose but Hartford.
For Des Moines-ers, the best thing that happened this week that is not reflected on here is Tennessee losing. Tennessee losing will potentially drop them behind Michigan, sending Michigan to Columbus instead of Des Moines. Tennessee's #2 (technically #3 after Columbia) is Jacksonville, which opens a spot in Des Moines for Marquette.
This is absolutely fantastic! Great work, and thank you for putting in the time on this.
-
So the bracket reveal told us that the teams in front of us were:
#8 Michigan State
#9 Purdue
#10 Kansas
#11 Houston
#12 Marquette
Since that time, Marquette is undefeated with a big win against Villanova and pretty dominant performances against everyone else. Purdue lost at Maryland and looked very meh against bad Penn State, Indiana, and Nebraska teams. I think they are below us on the s-curve. Kansas just lost by a bajillion to Texas Tech. Losing at Tech isn't bad by the margin might be enough to drop them a few spots.
I think it is safe to say that Marquette is one of the top two 3 seeds at this point. If Michigan State loses to Michigan tomorrow, I still don't think it's enough to bump us or Houston to the 2 line, but it does get us closer.
-
So the bracket reveal told us that the teams in front of us were:
#8 Michigan State
#9 Purdue
#10 Kansas
#11 Houston
#12 Marquette
Since that time, Marquette is undefeated with a big win against Villanova and pretty dominant performances against everyone else. Purdue lost at Maryland and looked very meh against bad Penn State, Indiana, and Nebraska teams. I think they are below us on the s-curve. Kansas just lost by a bajillion to Texas Tech. Losing at Tech isn't bad by the margin might be enough to drop them a few spots.
I think it is safe to say that Marquette is one of the top two 3 seeds at this point. If Michigan State loses to Michigan tomorrow, I still don't think it's enough to bump us or Houston to the 2 line, but it does get us closer.
I honestly don't think anything MSU does at this point will drop them off the #2 line..I mean it didn't(theoretically), when they lost to IU(at home), and then lost to Illinois. It seems as though for whatever reason, they are safely on the 2 line and not moving. I'm not sure why, but that's just how it seems to be.
-
I honestly don't think anything MSU does at this point will drop them off the #2 line..I mean it didn't(theoretically), when they lost to IU(at home), and then lost to Illinois. It seems as though for whatever reason, they are safely on the 2 line and not moving. I'm not sure why, but that's just how it seems to be.
They were on the 1 line. The losses to IU and Illinois dropped them to the last spot on the 2 line.
If they lose more games and we continue to win we will pass them.
-
They were on the 1 line. The losses to IU and Illinois dropped them to the last spot on the 2 line.
If they lose more games and we continue to win we will pass them.
Yes, I know but that's what i mean, I don't think they will move any further than off the last two spot...and what really irks me is, I really feel like MU HAS to win out at this point(which is total BS), to even be CONSIDERED for a #2 seed, when personally I think they should still have a great shot at one even with one more loss. I'm sorry I just don't and never have trusted the committee in regards to seeding, locations, or anything.
-
Tennessee has lost twice since the reveal. They were #2, but they are now 4-3 in Q1 games while we are 9-3 (until PC drops tomorrow). Come tomorrow morning, we will both have 3 Q1A wins (Buffalo will move ahead of Kansas to #15 most likely). Considering their closing schedule, they could fall off the 3 line as well.
-
Yes, I know but that's what i mean, I don't think they will move any further than off the last two spot...and what really irks me is, I really feel like MU HAS to win out at this point(which is total BS), to even be CONSIDERED for a #2 seed, when personally I think they should still have a great shot at one even with one more loss. I'm sorry I just don't and never have trusted the committee in regards to seeding, locations, or anything.
There's no conspiracy. Michigan State has a better resume than we do. We can lose one more, but then Michigan State would likely have to lose 3 more for us to pass them.
-
There's no conspiracy. Michigan State has a better resume than we do. We can lose one more, but then Michigan State would likely have to lose 3 more for us to pass them.
They did, I'm not sure they still do. They have more Q1 wins, but also more and worse losses. If they lose today, overall record is definitely a worthwhile comparison, especially with similar SOS rankings. If Ward & Langford are both indeed done for the season, that'll likely factor into their seeding.
-
They did, I'm not sure they still do. They have more Q1 wins, but also more and worse losses. If they lose today, overall record is definitely a worthwhile comparison, especially with similar SOS rankings. If Ward & Langford are both indeed done for the season, that'll likely factor into their seeding.
I mean the committee just told us that they have the better resume. Since then, both of us our undefeated with their best win (at Wisconsin) being more impressive than ours (vs Villanova). I'm not sure there's any way to say with any confidence that their resume is no longer better than ours in the committee's eyes.
As for the injuries, would they really give a team a lower seed because a player got hurt? If that's true, I really don't like that. Your seed in the tournament should be based on what you earned. You shouldn't get penalized because one (or two) of your players got hurt.
-
I mean the committee just told us that they have the better resume. Since then, both of us our undefeated with their best win (at Wisconsin) being more impressive than ours (vs Villanova). I'm not sure there's any way to say with any confidence that their resume is no longer better than ours in the committee's eyes.
As for the injuries, would they really give a team a lower seed because a player got hurt? If that's true, I really don't like that. Your seed in the tournament should be based on what you earned. You shouldn't get penalized because one (or two) of your players got hurt.
Teams have been penalized in the past. Marquette when McNeal got injured his sophomore year dropped to an 8. Cincy dropped to a 2 seed after Kenyon Martin got injured late in the year.
Rule of thumb is, the committee will drop a team as much as one seed line due to injuries.
-
I mean the committee just told us that they have the better resume. Since then, both of us our undefeated with their best win (at Wisconsin) being more impressive than ours (vs Villanova). I'm not sure there's any way to say with any confidence that their resume is no longer better than ours in the committee's eyes.
As for the injuries, would they really give a team a lower seed because a player got hurt? If that's true, I really don't like that. Your seed in the tournament should be based on what you earned. You shouldn't get penalized because one (or two) of your players got hurt.
Yes. Happened to Cincinnati when they were going to be a 1 seed. Happened to us with McNeal. Reasoning is sound...if you played as a 1 seed all year and your best player breaks his leg in the conference tournament, then giving you a 1 seed means you are penalizing other NCAA teams in any of the other three brackets as they would be facing more difficult path to Final Four. End of the day, brackets are supposed to be balanced as best they can, and if an injury as described makes the #2 team in the country really the number 17 team because of that player....need to adjust seeding. Sucks, but makes sense from competitive fairness perspective.
-
I think it is strange to have the committee tell everyone that they are judging a team based on their complete body of work, but then change their seeding based on an injury.
-
I think it is strange to have the committee tell everyone that they are judging a team based on their complete body of work, but then change their seeding based on an injury.
Judging complete body of work to get in to tournament. Macro.
Injury situation for seeding. Micro.
Two different things.
-
I think it is strange to have the committee tell everyone that they are judging a team based on their complete body of work, but then change their seeding based on an injury.
But their body of work to that point was based on having the injured player with them. If they aren't as good without that player, then you HAVE to base things on the team that will be in the tournament. It has happened as people cited above. I mean look at Nebraska..They were easily a tourney team before they lost Copeland for the year, now they have no chance of getting in. But if they were still hanging around the bubble and ultimately got in, their seed would most definitely be affected by not having him for a vast majority of the year.
-
Yes. Happened to Cincinnati when they were going to be a 1 seed. Happened to us with McNeal. Reasoning is sound...if you played as a 1 seed all year and your best player breaks his leg in the conference tournament, then giving you a 1 seed means you are penalizing other NCAA teams in any of the other three brackets as they would be facing more difficult path to Final Four. End of the day, brackets are supposed to be balanced as best they can, and if an injury as described makes the #2 team in the country really the number 17 team because of that player....need to adjust seeding. Sucks, but makes sense from competitive fairness perspective.
If Zion doesn’t return, then based upon your logic Duke should expect a significant seed drop. Best player in the country on a #1 seed seems to fit your criteria that it makes sense to drop them.
-
But their body of work to that point was based on having the injured player with them. If they aren't as good without that player, then you HAVE to base things on the team that will be in the tournament. It has happened as people cited above. I mean look at Nebraska..They were easily a tourney team before they lost Copeland for the year, now they have no chance of getting in. But if they were still hanging around the bubble and ultimately got in, their seed would most definitely be affected by not having him for a vast majority of the year.
I get the theory though I disagree with it. Teams should be judged based upon what they accomplished, not by what the committee thinks they will do moving forward. I also think in practice this only ends up happening in high profile situations. I doubt a 15 seed moves into the First Four due to an injury.
-
If Zion doesn’t return, then based upon your logic Duke should expect a significant seed drop. Best player in the country on a #1 seed seems to fit your criteria that it makes sense to drop them.
It's kind of a case-by-case thing, though and would depend on how Duke plays without Zion. If they roll through the rest of their schedule and win the ACC, they're still a 1 seed, even without him.
In Cincy's case, when Martin went down they proceeded to get thumped by a mediocre St. Louis team. And unlike Duke, that Cincy team wasn't loaded with future NBA first-round picks.
-
I get the theory though I disagree with it. Teams should be judged based upon what they accomplished, not by what the committee thinks they will do moving forward. I also think in practice this only ends up happening in high profile situations. I doubt a 15 seed moves into the First Four due to an injury.
Maybe
When Kenyon Martin got hurt they were reliant heavily on him at Cincy and he lost in the conference tournament....a game they lost to a not very good SLU team. They weren’t able to prove to anyone how much it impacted them except that game, which they lost by 10.
With Zion, who I believe is playing again before the NCAA selection committee, Duke has three weeks to show how good they are without him. Lots of opportunities. Plus, the spector of him coming back exists no matter what since the injury isn’t deemed season ending. With Martin, his leg snapped in two....he wasn’t coming back.
Big differences, so by my “logic” it depends how things shake out as time is still available.
-
I get the theory though I disagree with it. Teams should be judged based upon what they accomplished, not by what the committee thinks they will do moving forward. I also think in practice this only ends up happening in high profile situations. I doubt a 15 seed moves into the First Four due to an injury.
This is where I am at. I get that tournament seeding is not an objective process, but I think seeds should be based on what a team has earned not what the committee thinks the team will be capable of moving forward.
-
This is where I am at. I get that tournament seeding is not an objective process, but I think seeds should be based on what a team has earned not what the committee thinks the team will be capable of moving forward.
You would be begging to be in the Cincinnati side of the bracket back in 2000 when he was hurt, as would any other school. That's how much it impacted their team.
And not surprisingly, Cincinnati was ousted in the second round by 7th seed Tulsa.
-
You would be begging to be in the Cincinnati side of the bracket back in 2000 when he was hurt, as would any other school. That's how much it impacted their team.
And not surprisingly, Cincinnati was ousted in the second round by 7th seed Tulsa.
But if you truly believe the tourney is a crapshoot, what difference does it make? ;)
-
You would be begging to be in the Cincinnati side of the bracket back in 2000 when he was hurt, as would any other school. That's how much it impacted their team.
And not surprisingly, Cincinnati was ousted in the second round by 7th seed Tulsa.
This bothers me a lot less. But I can see both sides of the argument.
-
But if you truly believe the tourney is a crapshoot, what difference does it make? ;)
It's still a crapshoot, that doesn't change one iota in a 1 game situation...see UVA vs UMBC. In a one game series, anything can happen but of course there are still probabilities of winning an individual game. If you are in a weaker bracket, your probability to get through is still enhanced, but certainly not a guarantee. Anything you can do to get better odds or probability of victory, is a good thing. Still a crapshoot overall, which is why the best team so often doesn't win the championship. The best team in the NBA wins the championship at a REMARKABLY higher rate than the NCAA tournament, not even close.
-
Except Duke had two other All-Americans/lottery picks they can turn to, Cinci did not. How they decide to seed Duke won't bother me one way or another as I can see both arguments, but It's tough to compare that Cinci team to this Duke team.
-
Latest Bracketology would have us playing the Hillbilly in the Round of 32.
That could be in Guam and I'd go to see us take down the Hillbilly.
Vengeance. Not a good Christian trait. But in this case, I would not be an especially good Christian, what with the Hillbilly's behavior on the way out. I'll go to confession to deal with not turning the other cheek on this one!!!!!
-
Latest Bracketology would have us playing the Hillbilly in the Round of 32.
That could be in Guam and I'd go to see us take down the Hillbilly.
Vengeance. Not a good Christian trait. But in this case, I would not be an especially good Christian, what with the Hillbilly's behavior on the way out. I'll go to confession to deal with not turning the other cheek on this one!!!!!
It really amazes me how big of grudges people can hold sometimes...especially when Coaches leave.
-
Latest Bracketology would have us playing the Hillbilly in the Round of 32.
That could be in Guam and I'd go to see us take down the Hillbilly.
Vengeance. Not a good Christian trait. But in this case, I would not be an especially good Christian, what with the Hillbilly's behavior on the way out. I'll go to confession to deal with not turning the other cheek on this one!!!!!
“Vengeance is bad unless I can rationalize it”. Neat. Personally I’ll always appreciate Buzz for what he did for my beloved program
-
“Vengeance is bad unless I can rationalize it”. Neat. Personally I’ll always appreciate Buzz for what he did for my beloved program
I appreciate what he did for my beloved program while also being sour on him for the way he cr@pped on my beloved program on his way out the door.
-
I appreciate what Buzz did for Marquette, but he can go sit on a rusty, electrocuted pole.
-
I appreciate what he did for my beloved program while also being sour on him for the way he cr@pped on my beloved program on his way out the door.
I don’t think that’s unfair. And I’m sure you don’t run around feeling the need to call him names or feel vengeful
-
I appreciate what he did for my beloved program while also being sour on him for the way he cr@pped on my beloved program on his way out the door.
Dont see how he crapped on the program on his way out the door, because the door hit him firmly in the ass out the door. More likely he took a dump on the porch outside the door. And right after that, he saddled his donkey and rode into the sunset, singing "I'm so Lonesome I Could Cry."
-
I appreciate what Buzz did for Marquette, but he can go sit on a rusty, electrocuted pole.
What did the Polish ever do to you?
-
This is where I am at. I get that tournament seeding is not an objective process, but I think seeds should be based on what a team has earned not what the committee thinks the team will be capable of moving forward.
It's largely case by case. When a team loses a player in January or February & there's a noted dropoff, you can expect it to hurt their seed. Though if they lose said player in January, get them back in February & return to form, they will likely be more forgiving of what happened without him.
I don't think you'll see a seed drop unless there's significant evidence of a change in play quality. If there's concrete indicators of quality change, and the player isn't expected to return, it will hurt the seeding, and likely justifiably so because they lost without said player. If the player will be back, that quality dip will likely be forgiven. Seems fair to me.
-
It's kind of a case-by-case thing, though and would depend on how Duke plays without Zion. If they roll through the rest of their schedule and win the ACC, they're still a 1 seed, even without him.
In Cincy's case, when Martin went down they proceeded to get thumped by a mediocre St. Louis team. And unlike Duke, that Cincy team wasn't loaded with future NBA first-round picks.
I understand, but that’s not what Chico’s said. He said they should drop based upon the injury alone...not how well the team responded after the injury in their games prior to the tourney.
-
I understand, but that’s not what Chico’s said. He said they should drop based upon the injury alone...not how well the team responded after the injury in their games prior to the tourney.
I did? Maybe read again. I said it depends, I also said the reasoning was sound in the case of Cincy
-
It's largely case by case. When a team loses a player in January or February & there's a noted dropoff, you can expect it to hurt their seed. Though if they lose said player in January, get them back in February & return to form, they will likely be more forgiving of what happened without him.
I don't think you'll see a seed drop unless there's significant evidence of a change in play quality. If there's concrete indicators of quality change, and the player isn't expected to return, it will hurt the seeding, and likely justifiably so because they lost without said player. If the player will be back, that quality dip will likely be forgiven. Seems fair to me.
I pretty much agree with this but last season the committee said they thought long and hard about putting ND into,the field......even though their resume wasn't close to good enough. It was like they wanted to give them wins they didn't earn when Colson was hurt.
If a team is good enough to be in the tournament based on their body of work I have no trouble if they bump them up or down a bit because of an injury situation......but you can't act like the injury never happened and just say.....hey they would have beaten this team or that team if player x hadn't gotten hurt......
Those games happened.......they count.
-
It really amazes me how big of grudges people can hold sometimes...especially when Coaches leave.
Fair comment. I was disappointed when Tom Crean and Kevin O'Neill left. But I at least understood Crean's move at the time. O'Neill, I didn't but he had a good gig at UT until he realized men's basketball was not going to replace Big Orange football.
Buzz was different. I admit it probably is a character flaw but while I moved on and feel good about where we are now, I thought he was classless when he left and that we could do without the publicity that came from the basketball coach being called before the police.
That stuff does not appear to be happening since he left.
-
Yes. Happened to Cincinnati when they were going to be a 1 seed. Happened to us with McNeal. Reasoning is sound...if you played as a 1 seed all year and your best player breaks his leg in the conference tournament, then giving you a 1 seed means you are penalizing other NCAA teams in any of the other three brackets as they would be facing more difficult path to Final Four. End of the day, brackets are supposed to be balanced as best they can, and if an injury as described makes the #2 team in the country really the number 17 team because of that player....need to adjust seeding. Sucks, but makes sense from competitive fairness perspective.
-
Fair comment. I was disappointed when Tom Crean and Kevin O'Neill left. But I at least understood Crean's move at the time. O'Neill, I didn't but he had a good gig at UT until he realized men's basketball was not going to replace Big Orange football.
Buzz was different. I admit it probably is a character flaw but while I moved on and feel good about where we are now, I thought he was classless when he left and that we could do without the publicity that came from the basketball coach being called before the police.
That stuff does not appear to be happening since he left.
I guess I just look at it like i was grateful for where he took the program...they were knocking on the door of being elite..It's sad it ended the way it did, but I hope Wojo has the program at a level now where it is consistently good, no more worries about making the tourney every year and knocks on the door of the elite as well.
-
I guess I just look at it like i was grateful for where he took the program...they were knocking on the door of being elite..It's sad it ended the way it did, but I hope Wojo has the program at a level now where it is consistently good, no more worries about making the tourney every year and knocks on the door of the elite as well.
For those who love Kenpom...this team is ranked 24th.
Buzz only finished better than 24th twice in his 6 years. We ranked 19th in 2009 and 18th in 2012. Our best 3 Kenpom finishes were all under Crean. 11 (2002), 14 (2008) and 15 (2003).
-
Buzz Williams last 4 seasons & what he did to our program.
2011 - Sweet 16
2012 - Sweet 16
2013 - Elite 8
2014 - 9-9 in conf and said the conference wasn’t stable and big time football was a better bet
Man, what a _________.
-
Buzz Williams last 4 seasons & what he did to our program.
2011 - Sweet 16
2012 - Sweet 16
2013 - Elite 8
2014 - 9-9 in conf and said the conference wasn’t stable and big time football was a better bet
Man, what a _________.
Publicly ripped the NBE, went on national TV during tourney time days after taking the new job sporting a VT pin and orange tie, used his cronies in the media to boost his public image prior to leaving, left the cupboard completely bare, kind of gave up towards the end of that 2014 season.
-
It's largely case by case. When a team loses a player in January or February & there's a noted dropoff, you can expect it to hurt their seed. Though if they lose said player in January, get them back in February & return to form, they will likely be more forgiving of what happened without him.
I don't think you'll see a seed drop unless there's significant evidence of a change in play quality. If there's concrete indicators of quality change, and the player isn't expected to return, it will hurt the seeding, and likely justifiably so because they lost without said player. If the player will be back, that quality dip will likely be forgiven. Seems fair to me.
I don’t like it, cause the universities can easily lie and say guys are “day to day” even though they never have a chance to come back, ala Rick Jackson from Cuse in 2010 (I think that was the year).
-
Read it again Final Four, and the specific example I gave which was in the conf tournament where they have no chance to show what they can do without that player. It’s also why I said each situation is different an$ pointed out why Duke’s case is different...I did not say injury alone should drop them.
-
I appreciate what he did for my beloved program while also being sour on him for the way he cr@pped on my beloved program on his way out the door.
I was more worried about how he got my beloved program on the front page of the Chicago Tribune so much of the Midwest could crap on us for our crappy behavior off the court.
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
-
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
I would happily take that draw.
-
I would happily take that draw.
Agreed. With that draw I'm pretty confident about a Sweet 16 and have hope for an Elite Eight. If the Zags trip up in the first three games we could be talking Final Four.
-
Agreed. With that draw I'm pretty confident about a Sweet 16 and have hope for an Elite Eight. If the Zags trip up in the first three games we could be talking Final Four.
Would not want to play nova in the tournament
-
Would not want to play nova in the tournament
Chances are we wouldn't. And if we did, I would love to beat them a 4th time ;D
That is a good point though, I don't think the committee would put the top two Big East teams in the same region with only 4 Big East teams total.
-
Would not want to play nova in the tournament
The committee will separate the top two BE teams. The only way Marquette plays Nova in the tournament is if both make the Final Four.
-
The committee will separate the top two BE teams. The only way Marquette plays Nova in the tournament is if both make the Final Four.
Not to mention, teams meeting three times during the season cannot face each other until the regional finals.
-
Not to mention, teams meeting three times during the season cannot face each other until the regional finals.
Which is one of the reasons why Palm's brackets are dogsh*t and nobody should take them remotely seriously
-
I'd much rather play Cincy than the Clones.
Miss State too imo
-
I'd much rather play Cincy than the Clones.
Miss State too imo
I'd love to play anyone in the SEC other than Kentucky
-
I'd love to play anyone in the SEC other than Kentucky
Mississippi State, Tennessee, no thanks
-
Which is one of the reasons why Palm's brackets are dogsh*t and nobody should take them remotely seriously
CBS begs to differ with you. Nobody, never, always = lazy
-
Mississippi State, Tennessee, no thanks
If Marquette is scared to play Mississippi State, might as well turn down the invite. I'm not saying it'd be an easy game but definitely not one to be scared of.
-
CBS begs to differ with you. Nobody, never, always = lazy
Nobody cares that Palm answers your emails. How's that for lazy?
Or the fact that he was still quoting RPI instead of NET until a week ago? Does that count as lazy?
-
Nobody cares that Palm answers your emails. How's that for lazy?
Or the fact that he was still quoting RPI instead of NET until a week ago? Does that count as lazy?
You said I was on ignore a few days ago...I'm blushing that you took me off...you complete me.
Palm said why he was using RPI, for the same reason Team Rankings and others are ALSO using RPI because of the lack of a track record with NET Rankings. Until they have actual data points and see how the committee uses it and the correlation to seeds, they are going with what they have data on it. He is hardly alone, there are a number of them doing it.
As an example, here is MU's bracketology projections by Team Rankings. https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/team/marquette-golden-eagles/bracketology
TR clearly points out WHY they are using RPI (little blue rectangle box at the top). Palm, is using NET and RPI, along with other metrics.
-
Mississippi State, Tennessee, no thanks
Tennessee's conference schedule until they played Kentucky was easier than Gonzaga's. I'm not saying they are a paper tiger, but they are one of the more beatable top 4 seeds IMO. Not saying we would beat them but we also shouldn't be scared to play them. Quite frankly other than a full strength Duke or a Gonazaga, I think MU matches up well with any of the top 15 teams out there.
-
Tennessee's conference schedule until they played Kentucky was easier than Gonzaga's. I'm not saying they are a paper tiger, but they are one of the more beatable top 4 seeds IMO. Not saying we would beat them but we also shouldn't be scared to play them. Quite frankly other than a full strength Duke or a Gonazaga, I think MU matches up well with any of the top 15 teams out there.
Williams and Schofield are really really good. But yah, if we end up a 3, I won't be devastated if Tennessee is the 2 in our region.
-
Williams and Schofield are really really good. But yah, if we end up a 3, I won't be devastated if Tennessee is the 2 in our region.
The funny thing about Schofield is that he always played second fiddle to Milik Yarbrough while at Zion-Benton. While Yarbrough has been solid at Illinois St. he certainly isn't one of the best players on a top-10 team.
-
The funny thing about Schofield is that he always played second fiddle to Milik Yarbrough while at Zion-Benton. While Yarbrough has been solid at Illinois St. he certainly isn't one of the best players on a top-10 team.
I did not know Schofield was a ZeeBee. They always had good hoops when I was at Warren in the same conference.
But more importantly, I updated my Locations Spreadsheet, but this time I went with the Bracket Matrix rankings.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roateBVil2mn1EhYLccIh0bl2PGDFuP3LuCmuCjDCsk/edit?usp=sharing
Of note, now Marquette is favored to get its first choice in Des Moines. Stay ahead of Purdue, Kansas, and Wisconsin and we have a good shot to go to Iowa.
However, those teams on the 4 line are screwed when it comes to location. All four of them had their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th locations blocked by higher teams, and Florida St got stuck flying to San Jose, which was their last choice.
Hartford is still one of the last to fill up. While there are East coast squads in the top 16, there aren't any north of the Mason-Dixon that would be natural fits for Hartford, like Cuse, UConn, St. Johns, Maryland, or Villanova would be.
-
Tennessee's conference schedule until they played Kentucky was easier than Gonzaga's. I'm not saying they are a paper tiger, but they are one of the more beatable top 4 seeds IMO. Not saying we would beat them but we also shouldn't be scared to play them. Quite frankly other than a full strength Duke or a Gonazaga, I think MU matches up well with any of the top 15 teams out there.
Fair enough, and actually I meant Florida and not MSU. Florida is top 15 defense. In the tourney when things start to pucker up, good defensive teams that find a way to get stops are scary. Length is the other thing that has me concerned.
FSU, Texas Tech, UVA, Michigan State, Maryland I realize many of these are not SEC schools, in general I'd rather avoid solid defensive teams more than solid offensive teams....unless you do both well and I'd rather avoid altogether.
-
So as long as we're insisting on jerking around with the Palm, here's Benny's prognostication for most excellent ideal MU tourney path:
Hartford
vs. 14-LUC
vs. 11-Minnesota
Kansas City
vs. 7-Virginny Polytechnickin Edumacation Insteetushun
vs. 4-LSU
Minneapolis
vs. 2-Tennessee
vs. 3-Texas Tech
Final Score: TTU 77; MU 91
-
My guess is that it will be very unlikely for us to win the whole thing without having to play a team with length or the ability to play defense. It's hard to win 6 games without winning a "bad matchup". That talk is much ado about nothing.
-
My guess is that it will be very unlikely for us to win the whole thing without having to play a team with length or the ability to play defense. It's hard to win 6 games without winning a "bad matchup". That talk is much ado about nothing.
Agreed, but postponing the bad matchups as long as possible gives us a better chance
-
Williams and Schofield are really really good. But yah, if we end up a 3, I won't be devastated if Tennessee is the 2 in our region.
I see tennessee like a villanova, clearly better but similar, in the sense that they have two pros n the rest good but nothing special. Very beatable.
-
The committee will separate the top two BE teams. The only way Marquette plays Nova in the tournament is if both make the Final Four.
Is the committee really sitting around saying “hey I know we have 68 of these to get through, and these two teams are 4 seeds apart, but we should keep them separated”
-
So as long as we're insisting on jerking around with the Palm, here's Benny's prognostication for most excellent ideal MU tourney path:
Hartford
vs. 14-LUC
vs. 11-Minnesota
Kansas City
vs. 7-Virginny Polytechnickin Edumacation Insteetushun
vs. 4-LSU
Minneapolis
vs. 2-Tennessee
vs. 3-Texas Tech
Final Score: TTU 77; MU 91
You have a way with words, Benny....
-
Is the committee really sitting around saying “hey I know we have 68 of these to get through, and these two teams are 4 seeds apart, but we should keep them separated”
It is literally their job.
Edit: I once read somewhere that the bracketing process actually takes weeks and the final bracket is 98% done before conference championship weekend. Where Nova and MU are slotted will largely decided on Friday or Saturday of championship weekend.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
-
Is the committee really sitting around saying “hey I know we have 68 of these to get through, and these two teams are 4 seeds apart, but we should keep them separated”
I reviewed the bracketing procedure. The earliest teams from the same conference can meet:
1) In the 2nd round if they played once.
2) In the regional semifinals (Sweet 16) if they played twice (regular season and conference tournament).
3) In the regional finals (Elite 8) if they play 3 times (regular season and conference tournament).
So if Marquette and Villanova do not play each other in the conference tournament, they could be slotted the way Palm has them in his latest bracket.
However, that would still be considered poor form. The committee would try to avoid doing so, as long as the rest of the bracket is not disrupted.
-
It is literally their job.
Edit: I once read somewhere that the bracketing process actually takes weeks and the final bracket is 98% done before conference championship weekend. Where Nova and MU are slotted will largely decided on Friday or Saturday of championship weekend.
Candidly, it would be virtually impossible for the Selection Committee to pull off an entire tournament bracket if they left everything to Selection Weekend. 98% might be a relative figure, but yes, I would agree that Phase I (Selecting the Teams) and Phase II (S-Curve) is substantially complete by Selection Thursday Afternoon and Phase III (Bracketing) is well underway by Selection Friday morning.
In fact, I would estimate that before the committee members even arrive in Indianapolis, Phase I is probably 98% complete; IOW, the committee will arrive to the Adam's Mark having already produced a sheet of a couple dozen locks ("Field") and another 2-3 dozen teams still "Under Consideration." Chances are, if you're not on either list by Selection Monday, you better damn well win your conference tournament.
There are always going to be a few teams that could play their way in or out of the Field in the 96 hours leading up to the Selection Show, but the generally, enough teams will be solidly in the Field by Friday such that the beginning of the bracket, at the very least the protected seeds and the known AQ's from one-bid conferences, will already be taking shape.
All that said... what happens on Saturday and Sunday can have an effect, even for a team like MU... for example, if MU is a 3-seed in Tulsa on Saturday morning, a BET win over Nova that evening - perhaps coupled with a Moo U, KU, Tenn and Houston bed-defecation - could easily mean a promotion to a 2-seed in Des Moines (especially if whoever was on the 2-line is an easy swap with MU without triggering a bunch of other necessary changes).
-
I definitely feel like that was the case in 2013 as well Benny. Thought Marquette lost their chance for a 3 seed after their god awful showing in the BET. That is when I learned how little conference tourney results actually matter if you've been a lock since January.
-
I reviewed the bracketing procedure. The earliest teams from the same conference can meet:
1) In the 2nd round if they played once.
2) In the regional semifinals (Sweet 16) if they played twice (regular season and conference tournament).
3) In the regional finals (Elite 8) if they play 3 times (regular season and conference tournament).
So if Marquette and Villanova do not play each other in the conference tournament, they could be slotted the way Palm has them in his latest bracket.
However, that would still be considered poor form. The committee would try to avoid doing so, as long as the rest of the bracket is not disrupted.
I don't actually have the algorithm or proof to back this up, but I believe there's something to keeping the top 2-3 teams from a conference split into separate regions that is more than simply for purposes of form/balance/fairness/equability. For example, even if you could put UNC and Duke, or Nova and MU, or UK and Tennessee, etc. into the same region, doing so increases your chances of indirectly creating more violations of bracketing guidelines than had you put them into separate regions to begin with.
-
I don't actually have the algorithm or proof to back this up, but I believe there's something to keeping the top 2-3 teams from a conference split into separate regions that is more than simply for purposes of form/balance/fairness/equability. For example, even if you could put UNC and Duke, or Nova and MU, or UK and Tennessee, etc. into the same region, doing so increases your chances of indirectly creating more violations of bracketing guidelines than had you put them into separate regions to begin with.
This brings up a separate point on bracketing procedure. Teams from the same conference that are a 4 seed or better must be placed in separate regions.
However, that only applies to the first four teams from a conference. If a conference has five teams with 4 seeds or better, the first four go to separate regions. The 5th team would then be placed in accordance with the other bracketing procedure.
-
So as long as we're insisting on jerking around with the Palm, here's Benny's prognostication for most excellent ideal MU tourney path:
Hartford
vs. 14-LUC
vs. 11-Minnesota
Kansas City
vs. 7-Virginny Polytechnickin Edumacation Insteetushun
vs. 4-LSU
Minneapolis
vs. 2-Tennessee
vs. 3-Texas Tech
Final Score: TTU 77; MU 91
I was looking at Lundardi's trends since late November. He's had us, literally, at every first round site except Columbia, SC. Seems like we end up most frequently in Hartford or Tulsa.
I know Brother Benny you want us in Des Moines or Columbus but I would be very happy if our Warriors ended up in Jacksonville. A short hop up Interstate 95 and I'm there! Afternoon sessions would be nice too, saves a hotel bill.
-
I reviewed the bracketing procedure. The earliest teams from the same conference can meet:
1) In the 2nd round if they played once.
2) In the regional semifinals (Sweet 16) if they played twice (regular season and conference tournament).
3) In the regional finals (Elite 8) if they play 3 times (regular season and conference tournament).
So if Marquette and Villanova do not play each other in the conference tournament, they could be slotted the way Palm has them in his latest bracket.
However, that would still be considered poor form. The committee would try to avoid doing so, as long as the rest of the bracket is not disrupted.
Nicely done
-
I reviewed the bracketing procedure. The earliest teams from the same conference can meet:
1) In the 2nd round if they played once.
2) In the regional semifinals (Sweet 16) if they played twice (regular season and conference tournament).
3) In the regional finals (Elite 8) if they play 3 times (regular season and conference tournament).
So if Marquette and Villanova do not play each other in the conference tournament, they could be slotted the way Palm has them in his latest bracket.
However, that would still be considered poor form. The committee would try to avoid doing so, as long as the rest of the bracket is not disrupted.
When you have 4 teams from a single conference in the tournament it is easier to keep them separated until very late. I think the above rules are more in play when a conference has 7/8 teams playing.
-
I definitely feel like that was the case in 2013 as well Benny. Thought Marquette lost their chance for a 3 seed after their god awful showing in the BET. That is when I learned how little conference tourney results actually matter if you've been a lock since January.
Fun Fact: The last 3 three times we got NCAA 3 seeds, we were coming off an 0-1 in Conference Tourney.
'03 Lost to UAB
'12 UL
'13 ND
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Drooling at that pat to an E8... not sure we'd get Buffalo for round 2 though. If those were the 6 seeds I'm guessing they'd put Mississippi St. in our region since we played the other three already
-
Drooling at that pat to an E8... not sure we'd get Buffalo for round 2 though. If those were the 6 seeds I'm guessing they'd put Mississippi St. in our region since we played the other three already
Maybe, but the rules don't prohibit us playing them in the second round either....which is why what Palm had the other day was fine, despite your claims it wasn't.
-
Drooling at that pat to an E8... not sure we'd get Buffalo for round 2 though. If those were the 6 seeds I'm guessing they'd put Mississippi St. in our region since we played the other three already
Vermont and Buffalo will both have a sizeable contingent of fans in Hartford. It would definitely be more like a road game for us in that venue if we had to play them.
-
Andy Katz's latest as MU as a 3 seed out East looking at Vermont and then VaTech/Minnesota.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/2019-02-26/complete-march-madness-field-68-predicted-last-days-march
-
F katz
F wisconsin
-
Andy Katz's latest as MU as a 3 seed out East looking at Vermont and then VaTech/Minnesota.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/2019-02-26/complete-march-madness-field-68-predicted-last-days-march
That looks like a final four run
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Did not drop a spot after last night.
-
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/
https://bracketville.wordpress.com/s-curve/
Did not drop a spot after last night.
Like our positioning but Wisky as 15 is a joke. SJU at 30 is kind of a joke too.
-
Not that he's the committee or anything but...Lunardi has MU as a #4 now...just as I had suspected.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
-
Not that he's the committee or anything but...Lunardi has MU as a #4 now...just as I had suspected.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Yep, with Texas Tech taking the last 3 seed. You may recall that Texas Tech recently beat Kansas by a bajillion points and hasn't lost since the bracket reveal. If we win out the regular season and they lose one more (or Purdue, Kansas, Houston lose one more) we will hop over them. That's assuming that they have actually passed us in the committee's mind.
-
Yep, with Texas Tech taking the last 3 seed. You may recall that Texas Tech recently beat Kansas by a bajillion points and hasn't lost since the bracket reveal. If we win out the regular season and they lose one more (or Purdue, Kansas, Houston lose one more) we will hop over them. That's assuming that they have actually passed us in the committee's mind.
Yup and that’s totally fair in my mind.
-
You need to have a freaking pry bar to get Wisconsin off that 4 line.
-
Most of these guys are just taking the "S curve" and plopping it down on a chart.....
Then they modify it for "conference non-play" rules and they are done.....
They may guess at the last 4 in/out stuff.....But that is about it.....
-
You need to have a freaking pry bar to get Wisconsin off that 4 line.
Who deserves to be there over them? Personally I would say you should swap them with Florida State. Maybe Virginia Tech. But they are definitely above the other two 5 seeds Iowa State and Maryland.
The top 3 seeds plus Texas Tech and LSU have all been winning. Everyone else below them has been losing an alarming number of games. Lots of parity after the top 14 teams.
-
Who deserves to be there over them? Personally I would say you should swap them with Florida State. Maybe Virginia Tech. But they are definitely above the other two 5 seeds Iowa State and Maryland.
The top 3 seeds plus Texas Tech and LSU have all been winning. Everyone else below them has been losing an alarming number of games. Lots of parity after the top 14 teams.
I definitely see a top 14. 8 or 9 teams in the running for the 1 and 2 seeds, depending on what the committee thinks of Houston.
Next tier is 15-26. That means the last two 4 seeds through the first two 7 seeds have little separation.
-
This is not MUBB related but saw this and laughed.
https://twitter.com/wabash1kc/status/1101301294600540160?s=21
-
This is not MUBB related but saw this and laughed.
https://twitter.com/wabash1kc/status/1101301294600540160?s=21
Ten years ago me would have thought this was hilarious and nothing more.
Today me looks at this and thinks, "did they honestly think that making Texas Tech the Univision team was a good idea?"
-
Not that he's the committee or anything but...Lunardi has MU as a #4 now...just as I had suspected.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Take care of business the rest of the season and MU is safely a 3. I think 4 is the floor unless we lose 5 in a row, which I can't see happening.
-
Take care of business the rest of the season and MU is safely a 3. I think 4 is the floor unless we lose 5 in a row, which I can't see happening.
Agreed. Still a 3 on bracket matrix (http://bracketmatrix.com/). Don't forget, Lunardi is average when it comes to bracket predictions: placed 68/127 over 5 year avg
-
This is not MUBB related but saw this and laughed.
https://twitter.com/wabash1kc/status/1101301294600540160?s=21
The Big XII meme war is a thing of legends on r/collegebasketball on Reddit.
-
You need to have a freaking pry bar to get Wisconsin off that 4 line.
More like a crane! They are another great example of what I'm talking about...though none of these guys are committee members(and we don't know how the comm feels), You have seen teams that have lost games(in some cases multiple) since the reveal show, and they don't move...at all. Yet, MU loses at Nova, and boom! They drop a line. Again, We don't know how the committee thinks or feels about any of this, but I am and always have been skeptical of the committee and IF it played out this way, you can understand why. Why are some teams(like UW for example), given a longer leash if they lose games, then others are, like MU?? MU still has a better resume in terms of Q1 wins.
-
Why should Wisconsin not be a 4 or 5?
They have 1 bad loss. They have wins over Iowa, Oklahoma, NC State, @ Xavier, Michigan and Maryland.
-
More like a crane! They are another great example of what I'm talking about...though none of these guys are committee members(and we don't know how the comm feels), You have seen teams that have lost games(in some cases multiple) since the reveal show, and they don't move...at all. Yet, MU loses at Nova, and boom! They drop a line. Again, We don't know how the committee thinks or feels about any of this, but I am and always have been skeptical of the committee and IF it played out this way, you can understand why. Why are some teams(like UW for example), given a longer leash if they lose games, then others are, like MU?? MU still has a better resume in terms of Q1 wins.
1. We don't know that Marquette dropped a seed line
2. At the bracket reveal we were the last 3 seed. Since then, Houston is undefeated and Kansas/Purdue has had the same amount of losses, why would we have moved up?
3. Since the bracket reveal, Texas Tech (who was rated between 18-20) has gone undefeated including beating Kansas by a bajillion, so if they did pass us, its not like it would be a controversial pass
4. We don't know that Wisconsin hasn't dropped a seed line
5. Literally all the teams around Wisconsin have been losing, to worse teams than Wisconsin has
6. Who would you replace Wisconsin with? Maybe Florida State (who has two sub-100 losses) or Virginia Tech (who besides beating a Zion-less Duke and Purdue has beaten no one) but I don't see anyone else with a more deserving resume
-
Bracketville still has us 10th and the 2nd best 3
-
Bracketville still has us 10th and the 2nd best 3
Curious because I haven't followed it, did bracketville make adjustments after the bracket reveal?
-
Curious because I haven't followed it, did bracketville make adjustments after the bracket reveal?
Yes, I believe they did.
-
We dropped not only because we lost to Villanova, but because St. John's keeps losing games they should win. It makes our two losses to them look even worse. Villanova losing three straight games before they beat us also did not help. Had they not loss those three games, we probably would of still been a three even with the loss to them.
-
We dropped not only because we lost to Villanova, but because St. John's keeps losing games they should win. It makes our two losses to them look even worse. Villanova losing three straight games before they beat us also did not help. Had they not loss those three games, we probably would of still been a three even with the loss to them.
Nah. Because they are losing to teams we beat, giving us better wins.
-
We dropped not only because we lost to Villanova, but because St. John's keeps losing games they should win. It makes our two losses to them look even worse. Villanova losing three straight games before they beat us also did not help. Had they not loss those three games, we probably would of still been a three even with the loss to them.
Nope.
Nah. Because they are losing to teams we beat, giving us better wins.
Yep.
Conference play in a double round robin conference is essentially a circle jerk. Any ground you lose by a conference opponent losing is essentially made up for because the other conference opponent won.
-
I updated my NCAA locations chart again. This week's results pushed is to a 4 seed in Bracket Matrix, which would send us to Hartford. Purdue, Michigan, and Kansas are the three we want to root against if we want Des Moines (which I know many of you don't care about).
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roateBVil2mn1EhYLccIh0bl2PGDFuP3LuCmuCjDCsk/edit?usp=drivesdk
-
Ok State collapsing down the stretch vs Kansas. Would be major help.
That's also why they are 10-18
-
Good to see Indiana win against mich state
Tennessee loses? Marquette win puts them in better position
-
Ok State still with a shot here.
Let's see if they can draw one up.
-
Jeez couldn't even get a shot off
-
LSU looking likely to win too.
Not the results we wanted
-
So...MU loses to #27 Villanova and MSU loses to unranked Indiana. Who drops the most? I bet we do. Big 10 bias!
-
Why do people think Marquette has been slighted?
Ranked 10th. Seems exactly right to me. 3 seed in the bracket reveal. Seemed exactly right to me.
-
Yes, 10 is right. I’m talking about our ranking on monday
-
So...MU loses to #27 Villanova and MSU loses to unranked Indiana. Who drops the most? I bet we do. Big 10 bias!
And somehow, I bet that loss won't move MSU a seed line...at all. Big ten teams can lose and not move..it's amazing
-
And somehow, I bet that loss won't move MSU a seed line...at all. Big ten teams can lose and not move..it's amazing
They also just beat a top 10 Michigan team on the road. You gotta stop looking at single results
-
And somehow, I bet that loss won't move MSU a seed line...at all. Big ten teams can lose and not move..it's amazing
You’re ridiculous.
-
I’m not just looking at single game results. Both teams are rated what we are based on all our games to this point. Then we both play a game and you revaluation. We lost to a ranked team on the road and they lost to an unranked team on the road. My question was who falls the most spots? I think we will and we shouldn’t. I think MSU, because of Izzo and previous seasons, gets the benefit of the doubt and we don’t.
-
I’m not just looking at single game results. Both teams are rated what we are based on all our games to this point. Then we both play a game and you revaluation. We lost to a ranked team on the road and they lost to an unranked team on the road. My question was who falls the most spots? I think we will and we shouldn’t. I think MSU, because of Izzo and previous seasons, gets the benefit of the doubt and we don’t.
Let's win tomorrow first
-
Yes, then we will see what happens Monday
-
You’re ridiculous.
No...I'm not. The selection committee is (presumably) ridiculous. Yes, they just beat a top 10 Michigan team on the road..but dammit, I am tired of the standards for some teams being different than for others. Being completely unbiased, if I'm an outsider and I look at results from this week...I see #10 Marquette loses @ a ranked Villanova team by 6...not a bad loss at all. Then I see Michigan State go to a 2 game over .500 Indiana team and lose after blowing a 12 point lead. That's a BAD loss. Yet, I'd bet MASSIVE amounts of money if one team were to fall a seed line(not just because of that singular result) it would be MU and NOT Michigan State. Yap at me all you want about MSU's Q1A wins..I get it, but that does NOT mean that because you have that many you are essentially given a "free pass" the rest of the year and can lose several games and not suffer the consequences.
And don't even get me started on Houston with their 3 Q1 wins, and 24-27 of their overall wins being Q2 or below.
-
Not a great day so far for the Warriors. Except for Michigan State, pretty much every team in our proximity, in front of or behind us, has won.
We are almost certain to fall some due to the loss to Nova. We could fall pretty far if we lose tomorrow ... but good thing we ain't gonna lose!
-
Not a great day so far for the Warriors. Except for Michigan State, pretty much every team in our proximity, in front of or behind us, has won.
We are almost certain to fall some due to the loss to Nova. We could fall pretty far if we lose tomorrow ... but good thing we ain't gonna lose!
Texeas Tech beating the hell out of TCU
and no way UCF beats Houston imo
So yeah, we gotta just win.
-
No...I'm not. The selection committee is (presumably) ridiculous. Yes, they just beat a top 10 Michigan team on the road..but dammit, I am tired of the standards for some teams being different than for others. Being completely unbiased, if I'm an outsider and I look at results from this week...I see #10 Marquette loses @ a ranked Villanova team by 6...not a bad loss at all. Then I see Michigan State go to a 2 game over .500 Indiana team and lose after blowing a 12 point lead. That's a BAD loss. Yet, I'd bet MASSIVE amounts of money if one team were to fall a seed line(not just because of that singular result) it would be MU and NOT Michigan State. Yap at me all you want about MSU's Q1A wins..I get it, but that does NOT mean that because you have that many you are essentially given a "free pass" the rest of the year and can lose several games and not suffer the consequences.
And don't even get me started on Houston with their 3 Q1 wins, and 24-27 of their overall wins being Q2 or below.
Yo. You know we are talking about the same Indian team we lost to by over 20 right?
-
Yo. You know we are talking about the same Indian team we lost to by over 20 right?
Unfortunately, I'm very well aware...but this is still a 15-14 Indiana team...I will have nightmares about that MU-IU game for years, it's probably the BIGGEST thing keeping them off the #2 line right now.
-
I'm done worrying about seed. We will likely be a top 4 seed. Hopefully a 3. Either way we're gonna have to beat some good teams. Avoid the corner of the bracket with a healthy Duke and anything can happen.
-
Being completely unbiased...
::)
-
So...MU loses to #27 Villanova and MSU loses to unranked Indiana. Who drops the most? I bet we do. Big 10 bias!
Villanova is not ranked #27.
-
I'm done worrying about seed. We will likely be a top 4 seed. Hopefully a 3. Either way we're gonna have to beat some good teams. Avoid the corner of the bracket with a healthy Duke and anything can happen.
Or...avoid any of the #1's which won't happen if they are a four, but yes, most preferably avoiding Duke.
-
Villanova is not ranked #27.
looks to me they are ranked 27th ?
-
UCF holding on would be big. Removes Houston from the 2/3 conversation
-
UCF holding on would be big. Removes Houston from the 2/3 conversation
I think they are still in the 3 convo.
Dawkins with a brutal TO to let Houston have momentum at the under 4
-
UCF meltdown in full effect
Can't pass.
Similar to Ok state vs KU
-
UCF meltdown in full effect
Can't pass.
Similar to Ok state vs KU
40 year old Dawkins coming up huge!
UCF back up 4 with 30 seconds left.
-
Texeas Tech beating the hell out of TCU
and no way UCF beats Houston imo
So yeah, we gotta just win.
Glad to be wrong.
Big win for UCF. If Houston loses to Cincy now they will def be outta the 3 seed convo.
-
Glad to be wrong.
Big win for UCF. If Houston loses to Cincy now they will def be outta the 3 seed convo.
I think this loss moves them to a 4. If MU losing at Nova moved them from 3 to 4, gotta think this does the same for Houston.
-
I think this loss moves them to a 4. If MU losing at Nova moved them from 3 to 4, gotta think this does the same for Houston.
Wisconsin losing to Indiana and then beating Penn State, probably moves them up to a #3
-
I'm done worrying about seed. We will likely be a top 4 seed. Hopefully a 3.
This. When it’s a bubble season I love to follow every result as it relates to MU. This season, I’m just enjoying the basketball games and pulling for the league. It’s a nice change of pace. MU will be what MU will be, and it is unlikely to be worse than a 5 even with a meltdown. 3 seems likely, 4 if we slip up another couple times. Really nothing to worry about.
-
looks to me they are ranked 27th ?
Source?
-
2nd in others recieving votes in both AP and Coaches polls.
-
looks to me they are ranked 27th ?
There is no one ranked 27th. Voters only go to 25. Every AP voter in the country could think Belmont is the 26th best team in the country, but because they only rank to 25, the Bruins get zero votes.
Villanova may have the 27th highest vote total, but that doesn't mean they are ranked 27th.
-
i signed in to "teamrankings.com" what a joke!
they have us at #20 in the country and #2 in the big east
100 % chance in the dance 28% chance to get auto bid and a projected 4 seed
42% chance to get to sa weet 16 and 5% chance final four
it's like turning on "one of the other stations" just to see what they are sayin ::)
who are deez guyses?
-
i signed in to "teamrankings.com" what a joke!
they have us at #20 in the country and #2 in the big east
100 % chance in the dance 28% chance to get auto bid and a projected 4 seed
42% chance to get to sa weet 16 and 5% chance final four
it's like turning on "one of the other stations" just to see what they are sayin ::)
who are deez guyses?
Other than maybe #2 in the BE/#20 overall I’m not sure what there is that is “a joke.”
-
Other than maybe #2 in the BE/#20 overall I’m not sure what there is that is “a joke.”
not sure? then when you are sure, come on back and enlighten me.
how do the AP and coaches have us at #9 & 10, then teamsteamingpile have us at #20? yes, i know, they run all these numbers thru a septic tank and bingo bango bongo burps out a #20
i also realize these rankings mean nothing except for the seeding. ya still have to beat who's in front of you. but i think a #20 is an insult.
-
I didn't watch Kentucky-Tennessee game but I did see a few seconds of highlights that ESPN showed. They aired just enough for everybody to see Calipari tear Herro a new one.
-
so herro blew that one for 'em, ey? best thing about freshman is they become sophomores...except at kentucky and duke they become 1st or 2nd round draft picks
-
Herro shouldn't be going pro yet. He has decent NBA size, and has had some eye-popping games, but he also has had games like yesterday where he looks lost.
-
Biggest bubble winners on Saturday was UCF & Utah State.
-
Houston probably dropped down to a 4-5 seed and Nevada a 7-8. If Nevada didn't go on that run last year they might be ranked/seeded even worse.
-
Herro shouldn't be going pro yet. He has decent NBA size, and has had some eye-popping games, but he also has had games like yesterday where he looks lost.
For many (perhaps even most) of these kids, "shouldn't" doesn't enter into it one iota.
It doesn't matter whether their skills are ready for the NBA. All that matters is that NBA teams are ready to draft them and pay them handsomely.
So while one could make an argument that both Henry and Vander "shouldn't" have gone pro when they did, that's only true for one of them -- the one who didn't get drafted/paid. And even he didn't want to be a college basketball player any more, so because of that he shouldn't have stayed.
-
Houston probably dropped down to a 4-5 seed and Nevada a 7-8. If Nevada didn't go on that run last year they might be ranked/seeded even worse.
Guess again. Both Houston losing at home to UCF and Nevada losing at Utah States were Q1 losses. A team is not going to tumble 2-3 seed lines because of a Q1 loss. If I had to guess, I would guess that Houston is probably the last 3 seed on the s-curve after last night. I think Nevada would be the 3rd or 4th 6 seed.
I think we are probably the top 4 seed at the moment, win today and maybe we can leapfrog Houston.
-
There is no one ranked 27th. Voters only go to 25. Every AP voter in the country could think Belmont is the 26th best team in the country, but because they only rank to 25, the Bruins get zero votes.
Villanova may have the 27th highest vote total, but that doesn't mean they are ranked 27th.
Villanova was number 27 in the NET, which, unlike the voted polls, actually means something if you’re thinking about NCAA seeding.
-
Guess again. Both Houston losing at home to UCF and Nevada losing at Utah States were Q1 losses. A team is not going to tumble 2-3 seed lines because of a Q1 loss. If I had to guess, I would guess that Houston is probably the last 3 seed on the s-curve after last night. I think Nevada would be the 3rd or 4th 6 seed.
I think we are probably the top 4 seed at the moment, win today and maybe we can leapfrog Houston.
Honest question..how in the hell could the committee justify putting Houston ahead of MU(and others)? So what...they have two total losses..but count em..2 Q1 wins and 20..thats right 20 wins against Q3-Q4..If Houston is seeded higher than MU someone's got some 'splaining to do. And my worries about the committee are justified. You cant seemingly place a huge priority on Q1 wins..then ignore it when it comes to Houston.
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/8J6RCzzl5rPS8/giphy.gif)
-
Guess again. Both Houston losing at home to UCF and Nevada losing at Utah States were Q1 losses. A team is not going to tumble 2-3 seed lines because of a Q1 loss. If I had to guess, I would guess that Houston is probably the last 3 seed on the s-curve after last night. I think Nevada would be the 3rd or 4th 6 seed.
I think we are probably the top 4 seed at the moment, win today and maybe we can leapfrog Houston.
Yea this is wrong in a few ways. Doesn't matter if it was a Q1 loss there were several teams waiting to pounce over Houston and Nevada when the initial rankings game out. If Houston was a 3 seed with 1 loss instead of a 1 seed it shows there lack of Q1 wins. No way they are on the 4 line let alone 3 with a loss to UCF even if a Q1 loss. Nevada was on the 4 line with 1 loss as well and has lost 2 since. They will be on the 7/8 line right now.
-
Yea this is wrong in a few ways. Doesn't matter if it was a Q1 loss there were several teams waiting to pounce over Houston and Nevada when the initial rankings game out. If Houston was a 3 seed with 1 loss instead of a 1 seed it shows there lack of Q1 wins. No way they are on the 4 line let alone 3 with a loss to UCF even if a Q1 loss. Nevada was on the 4 line with 1 loss as well and has lost 2 since. They will be on the 7/8 line right now.
This was Houston's first loss since the bracket reveal. Most had them either as the last 2 seed or the first 3 seed before last night's loss. Losing to a top 30 team is not going to drop them multiple seed lines.
There are also not many teams "waiting to pounce" on Houston. There is pretty large gap between the top 14 and the rest of the field. The lowest Houston could possibly drop with that loss is the 2nd 4 seed.
Nevada dropped from 4 seed line to the to the top 5 seed in most brackets after their much worse loss to San Diego State. A road loss to an NCAA tournament team is not going to drop them 2-3 seed lines. They are likely on the 6 seed line, maybe the top 7 seed.
-
Say goodbye to the 3 seed, hello 4 seed
-
Say goodbye to the 3 seed, hello 4 seed
3 looks impossible now. Probably 4/5.
-
3 looks impossible now. Probably 4/5.
No, it is not impossible. 2 is pretty close to impossible but 3 is very much possible. If I had to guess, I'd say we are 3rd on the 4 seed line. Teams in front of us will lose. If we win, we will pass them.
-
No, it is not impossible. 2 is pretty close to impossible but 3 is very much possible. If I had to guess, I'd say we are 3rd on the 4 seed line. Teams in front of us will lose. If we win, we will pass them.
You're right, impossible is probably not accurate. However, i think it's very unlikely they can get back up to a 3.
-
No, it is not impossible. 2 is pretty close to impossible but 3 is very much possible. If I had to guess, I'd say we are 3rd on the 4 seed line. Teams in front of us will lose. If we win, we will pass them.
How is this possible, you keep saying that teams don't move seed lines because of a loss or two, now you are saying MU is probably the 3rd 4 seed, when they were a 3 seed in the bracket reveal. When I kept saying MSU etc won't move because of losses, you say they shouldn't etc etc, now you fully admit MU has probably dropped a seed line when I was saying they would after nova and you kept refuting it. Consistency please.
-
How is this possible, you keep saying that teams don't move seed lines because of a loss or two, now you are saying MU is probably the 3rd 4 seed, when they were a 3 seed in the bracket reveal. When I kept saying MSU etc won't move because of losses, you say they shouldn't etc etc, now you fully admit MU has probably dropped a seed line when I was saying they would after nova and you kept refuting it. Consistency please.
We dropped from 4th on the 3 seed line to 3rd on the 4 seed line. That's not a lot of movement despite two losses, including a bad one to Creighton at home and one 1 good win to balance it (1 pt vs. Nova at home).
Michigan State has stayed about the same despite 2 losses. That's because in addition to those two losses (which were roughly equal to our losses) they have beaten top 10 Michigan on the road and top 20 Wisconsin on the road. Both of those wins are much better than our home win over Villanova. That is why they are staying put, while Marquette has dropped a whole 4 spots.
-
We dropped from 4th on the 3 seed line to 3rd on the 4 seed line. That's not a lot of movement despite two losses, including a bad one to Creighton at home and one 1 good win to balance it (1 pt vs. Nova at home).
Michigan State has stayed about the same despite 2 losses. That's because in addition to those two losses (which were roughly equal to our losses) they have beaten top 10 Michigan on the road and top 20 Wisconsin on the road. Both of those wins are much better than our home win over Villanova. That is why they are staying put, while Marquette has dropped a whole 4 spots.
It's still dropping a seed line, in which a 3 is astronomically better then a 4...I don't mean to come after you...I'm just salty AF. Trying to figure out how the hell you let a crap team like that, walk into your building this late in the year and beat you. Disgusting. There is no better way to put it. They don't deserve to be BE champions...Championship level teams don't let complete horse crap teams come into their building and win in March.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
4 seed as of tonight via Lunardi.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
4 seed as of tonight via Lunardi.
Of course in Duke's region..
-
Of course in Duke's region..
I get the feeling no matter what seed we get, who we’re matched up with and where we play you will whine. Enjoy the ride fool
-
Of course in Duke's region..
The odds are probably 50/50 we end up in Duke's region if we are a top-4 seed. Either them or Virginia because of the number of ACC and Big Ten teams near the top.
Outside chance we end up with Kentucky/Tennessee, highly unlikely we are in Gonzaga's region. That's just how the seeding rules work.
-
The odds are probably 50/50 we end up in Duke's region if we are a top-4 seed. Either them or Virginia because of the number of ACC and Big Ten teams near the top.
Outside chance we end up with Kentucky/Tennessee, highly unlikely we are in Gonzaga's region. That's just how the seeding rules work.
Still think we end up on the 3 line but we need to win out now.
-
4 seed at NBC/Bracketville. 14th on the S Curve.
4 at CBS.
-
The odds are probably 50/50 we end up in Duke's region if we are a top-4 seed. Either them or Virginia because of the number of ACC and Big Ten teams near the top.
Outside chance we end up with Kentucky/Tennessee, highly unlikely we are in Gonzaga's region. That's just how the seeding rules work.
Bracketmatrix has 5 ACC teams in the top 16. But bracket rules would permit the 5th team to be in Duke's or Virginia's bracket.
So much depends on the final S-curve. My mock bracket this morning put Marquette in Duke's region. But that also gave #1 Duke the toughest bracket and #4 Kentucky the easiest.
The cumulative seed difference was 4, so within the threshold of bracket rules. But swapping Marquette and Florida State would put the cumulative seed difference at 2. #2 Virginia then has the toughest and #3 Gonzaga the easiest.
But the committee's S-curve is what counts, so my bracketmatrix based S-curve might be a little off. And there's still a lot of basketball to be played.
-
Honest question..how in the hell could the committee justify putting Houston ahead of MU(and others)? So what...they have two total losses..but count em..2 Q1 wins and 20..thats right 20 wins against Q3-Q4..If Houston is seeded higher than MU someone's got some 'splaining to do. And my worries about the committee are justified. You cant seemingly place a huge priority on Q1 wins..then ignore it when it comes to Houston.
Not sure where you are getting your numbers, but Houston has 4 Q1 wins (including 2 Q1A), 9 Q2 wins (including 6 Q2A), and only 14 wins against Q3/Q4.
And you are doing the thing again where you zero in one stat and ignore all the other stats. Yes Houston only has 4 Q1 wins (same amount as #1 seeded Gonzaga). But they also only have two losses total, both in Q1 games. They are 23-0 against Q2/Q3/Q4 opponents, so no bad losses. They are also #6 in NET. They have a lot of positive things on their resume. The lower amount of Q1 wins is why they are only a 3/4 seed instead of a 1-seed.
-
I'm curious what the committee does with Kansas. The Jayhawks are 10-7 since Azubuike's season ended. Plus, Vick is still on his leave of absence. The early season wins against Michigan State, Marquette, and Tennessee were by a full strength Kansas.
The Kansas resumé and the team Kansas fields in the tournament is an interesting contrast.
-
I'm curious what the committee does with Kansas. The Jayhawks are 10-7 since Azubuike's season ended. Plus, Vick is still on his leave of absence. The early season wins against Michigan State, Marquette, and Tennessee were by a full strength Kansas.
The Kansas resumé and the team Kansas fields in the tournament is an interesting contrast.
The same thing that would happen to Duke if Zion's season is over.
(Which may explain why Duke is doing the smart thing and not saying a word until the committee meets.)
-
The same thing that would happen to Duke if Zion's season is over.
(Which may explain why Duke is doing the smart thing and not saying a word until the committee meets.)
Yep. Right now I am assuming Zion returns for the ACC tournament. Otherwise, Duke also gets debated heavily.
Michigan State with Ward is another one to watch. Langford has been out so long that I think that injury has already been factored into MSU's resumé. We shall see.
-
I'm curious what the committee does with Kansas. The Jayhawks are 10-7 since Azubuike's season ended. Plus, Vick is still on his leave of absence. The early season wins against Michigan State, Marquette, and Tennessee were by a full strength Kansas.
The Kansas resumé and the team Kansas fields in the tournament is an interesting contrast.
For that matter, will the committee think our loss to a full-strength Kansas looks "better" than, say, Texas Tech's loss to an Azubuike-less Kansas and K-State's loss to an Azubuike-less and Vick-less Kansas?
-
The same thing that would happen to Duke if Zion's season is over.
(Which may explain why Duke is doing the smart thing and not saying a word until the committee meets.)
Duke w/o Zion has not been convincing. They lost twice (UNC and @VT), though neither is a bad loss. They've won 3, but almost lost to a bad Wake Forest team. If they beat UNC on Saturday, all will be forgiven. A loss Saturday and a weak-ish showing in the ACC tournament and Duke will be staring at a 2 and maybe even a 3 seed.
-
We need to relax and just beat Georgetown. I would not be shocked to see us win the BET. While I don't think we can get a 3 seed anymore we can still get a 4 or 5 and the difference between 4 and 5 in marginal. I still see this team as a Sweet 16 team. I think the worst we will be is a 6 seed and thats if we lost our next 2 games. We still have a solid resume and any team greater than a 6 seed has a super weak resume.
-
There's almost reason to prefer a 5 to a 4. 4s will be matched up with 13s, who are going to be mostly mid-to-low-major conference champs. 5s get 12s, who will be mostly bad high major teams (like Arizona St. or Clemson or Minnesota). I'd rather take my chances against middle-of-the-pack Big 10 teams than proven winners from the lower conferences.
-
There's almost reason to prefer a 5 to a 4. 4s will be matched up with 13s, who are going to be mostly mid-to-low-major conference champs. 5s get 12s, who will be mostly bad high major teams (like Arizona St. or Clemson or Minnesota). I'd rather take my chances against middle-of-the-pack Big 10 teams than proven winners from the lower conferences.
I agree, I don’t think it really matters if we are a 3 or a 6 at this point. Earn a 3? You play 30-4 wofford. Get a 6? You play 19-13 Clemson. Not a huge difference. The second round game would obviously be tougher but not by a large stretch.
I guess avoiding a #1 or #2 as long as possible would be my ideal situation. It doesn’t look like MU will drop to a 7 or an 8 so that should be good at least.
-
I agree, I don’t think it really matters if we are a 3 or a 6 at this point. Earn a 3? You play 30-4 wofford. Get a 6? You play 19-13 Clemson. Not a huge difference. The second round game would obviously be tougher but not by a large stretch.
I guess avoiding a #1 or #2 as long as possible would be my ideal situation. It doesn’t look like MU will drop to a 7 or an 8 so that should be good at least.
Wofford is going to be a 10-12 seed. Personally, I'd rather be a 4 seed, there's a reason why the 5/12 upset is a thing.
-
Wofford is going to be a 10-12 seed. Personally, I'd rather be a 4 seed, there's a reason why the 5/12 upset is a thing.
The 5/12 being an upset is because the 12 seed is usually the strongest mid major year after year. However I believe Wofford will get a 8/9 seed.
-
The 5/12 being an upset is because the 12 seed is usually the strongest mid major year after year. However I believe Wofford will get a 8/9 seed.
Agreed on the reason for 5/12 upset. That's why I prefer a 4 seed.
-
Beat Georgetown.
Win two in BE tournament, get to final. Win or lose, should be a four seed.
-
Still a 4 seed in Lunardis update this morning FWIW.
-
Top 5 seed in bracketville. Beat GT and win one in NY and I think we will be on the 4 line