Bracketology Thread 2018-19

[brewcity77]

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.

[MomofMUltiples]

Lunardi must have some fantasy about a Marquette-VPI matchup. Seems like every year he has them paired somewhere in the bracket.

[SaveOD238]

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.

[IrwinFletcher]

Michigan and Michigan St both #1 seeds playing in Columbus.  I wonder how that will go over?

[LoudMouth]

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

[brewcity77]

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.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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.

[PGsHeroes32]

Palm updated his bracket for the first time in months today

We are a 6



Louisville is a 5?


Ok

[JWags85]

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.

[brewcity77]

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.

[JWags85]

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.

[forgetful]

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.

[brewcity77]

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).

[wadesworld]

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.

[UWW2MU]

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.

[brewcity77]

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.

[WarriorDad]

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

[tower912]

I am sure wiscy moved up with their loss and MU dropped with their win

[JWags85]

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

[Its DJOver]

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

[Lennys Tap]

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.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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.

[Silkk the Shaka]

New Chicos old Cheeks strikes again! Loves his buddy Jerry.

So pathetic! Yet so, so funny! (to laugh at, not with)

[cheebs09]

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.

[brewcity77]

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.