Home › Forums › All StateFansNation › And The Bubble Bursts…(Major 3/18 Update)
- This topic has 98 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 7 months ago by PackFamily.
-
AuthorPosts
-
03/18/2014 at 11:48 AM #47439VaWolf82Keymaster
I must say I (and many others) continue to not understand why Lville is a 4 seed, whilst UVA garnered a 1.
Did you post this before or after reading my addition to the main blog entry?
03/18/2014 at 11:55 AM #47442WulfpackParticipantIt was before I saw your update, but it still seems skewed. No way there should be that much separation between a UVA and Lville. Lville is darn good, and it has nothing to do with what they did last year. I’m just not seeing Wellman’s rhetoric match-up on this one, and it is a widely shared opinion.
03/18/2014 at 12:01 PM #47443VaWolf82KeymasterThere are alot of people that believe in alien abductions, Bigfoot, and shooters on the Grassy knoll. In other words, the people that are confused aren’t looking at the facts.
Against the RPI Top 50
(#3) Kansas…12-7 (insanely difficult schedule)
(#6) Wiscy…..7-5
(#5) “Nova…..6-3
(#11) Mich…..10-5Which of these #2 seeds would you like to move down for (#19) Louisville @ 5-5?
03/18/2014 at 12:02 PM #47444BJD95KeymasterAgain, would you rather have Duke or Michigan’s 2/3 seed, or be #4 and have regional games in your backyard?
Don’t shed a tear for the Ville.
03/18/2014 at 12:12 PM #47446VaWolf82KeymasterThe Selection Committee can either argue opinions or discuss facts. The only thing that I’ve seen used to support Louisville is opinion.
03/18/2014 at 12:17 PM #47447WulfpackParticipantIt’s just the spread that has me. UVA beat no one out of conference. Nor did Ville. Both won their conference, and are very good teams. Wellman said it was the non-conference performance, and admitted Lville was considered as a 1. If non conference performance matters so much, as he stated, how in the heck is UVA a 1?
03/18/2014 at 12:26 PM #47450VaWolf82KeymasterLouisville’s OOC scheduling sucked in comparison to the top seeds (other than Wichita St).
The Selection Committee doesn’t want to reward teams for playing weak OOC schedules.
I don’t see the issue.I say again, “a really good team” would do better than 0.500 against the RPI Top-50. Being considered as one of the top 16 in the country is hardly a screw job.
03/18/2014 at 12:47 PM #47457BJD95KeymasterUVA won a better conference, too. At 16-2. It’s clear the committee found the AAC rather meh.
03/18/2014 at 12:49 PM #47458BJD95KeymasterFrankly, UConn only getting a 7 surprised me more. Figured the Ville was likely a 3, UConn a 5.
03/18/2014 at 1:01 PM #47463VaWolf82KeymasterThe bottom half of the AAC was bad and provided alot of easy wins for the top-half. I saw one article where the writer said that the huge drop-off made the AAC teams hard to evaluate.
I’m surprised (but not concerned) with Kentucky as an 8-seed.
RPI………..17
SOS…………3
OOC SOS…95 or 6 seed I would take without a second thought. But 8?
03/18/2014 at 1:06 PM #47464VaWolf82KeymasterFrankly, UConn only getting a 7 surprised me more.
RPI = 22, so a 6 seed +/- 1
Not enough difference for me to worry about03/18/2014 at 1:14 PM #47466BJD95KeymasterI’m convinced the UK seed was part of the “screw Greg Marshall” plan, too.
Oh, and here’s my album dedication to the “bracketologists” at ESPN:
03/18/2014 at 1:53 PM #47472VaWolf82KeymasterI’m convinced the UK seed was part of the “screw Greg Marshall” plan, too.
LOL. A conspiracy theorist would certainly claim that “irony” is a key ingredient in the seeding and bracketing.
One thing that complicates post-selection seeding discussions are the rules about rematches that force teams to be moved away from where the Selection Committee actually put them. In any event, I would like to move from studying bubble discussions to more in-depth seeding discussions one day. But like chop, I’m not very optimistic about that happening.
03/18/2014 at 2:08 PM #47474VaWolf82KeymasterLas Vegas’ take on brackets
“The committee is a bunch of frauds. The way they do this thing makes no sense.”
Key difference between selection committee and odds-makers:
The selection committee attempts to seed teams best on what it’s proven in the schedule, not what it thinks it will do in March. The NCAA tournament field is supposed to be reflective, not predictive. And that’s why we can have inconsistencies with teams’ placement in relation to their title/Final Four/game-by-game odds. There’s also the issue of geography, which plays into the top four seeds’ location. In an effort to keep the best teams as close to home/their fan base as possible, you can have situations where one bracket acts as a magnet for disparity because too many good teams happen to be all fairly close to one region.
03/18/2014 at 4:05 PM #47508wufpup76KeymasterThe Selection Committee can either argue opinions or discuss facts. The only thing that I’ve seen used to support Louisville is opinion.
The NCAA tournament field is supposed to be reflective, not predictive.
^I wish someone could paint these quotes in the studios at Espn. In fairness though, ‘bubble discussion’ gives them something to talk about and generate viewing interest with.
03/18/2014 at 4:34 PM #47514GoldenChainParticipantGreat piece VA. I was reading it last night and thinking:
How many guys like Lunardi, the guys who project NFL/NBA draft orders, the preseason pollsters, Jeff Saragin, guys who do power-rankings, h-s recruit rankings, etc make a hellofalot of jack off of pure speculation. Probably most of it more subjective than yours VA.
Does anyone ever go back and check how these guys do in actuality?
03/18/2014 at 4:44 PM #47515VaWolf82KeymasterDoes anyone ever go back and check how these guys do in actuality?
Hi GC, long time no see.
I know that they brag on themselves if they have a good year, but I don’t check. In the past, Lunardi has released a bracket the day after the championship game for the next year. So I have a hard time taking him seriously.
03/18/2014 at 4:53 PM #47519compsciwolfParticipantDon’t forget that their number one business is to drive eye balls to their respective sites. So while they need to retain some credibility by being mostly accurate, generating a bit of controversy doesn’t hurt their main goal. I would imagine this applies more to ESPN than others, as ESPN has always been more in the business of promoting and ginning up viewership that necessarily being truthful.
03/18/2014 at 5:04 PM #47521WulfpackParticipantLunardi has been very accurate:
Lunardi correctly predicted all 65 teams to appear in the 2008 NCAA Tournament,[1] while correctly selecting 63 out the 65 teams in the 2009 field by placing both Creighton and St. Mary’s incorrectly in his final bracket on March 15.[2] Lunardi correctly selected 64 of the 65 teams in the 2010 NCAA Tournament, believing that Illinois would receive the final at-large bid, while in reality, Florida did.[3] After making mistakes in both 2011 and 2012, Lunardi correctly predicted all 68 teams for the 2013 tournament. For 2014 March Madness, Lunardi came “close enough” by correctly picking 67 of 68 teams, with SMU as the only defect.
03/18/2014 at 5:19 PM #47526wufpup76Keymaster03/19/2014 at 9:02 AM #48051VaWolf82KeymasterFor future reference. Official NCAA Seeding List
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24487953/official-ncaa-1-68-seeding-order1. Florida
2.Arizona
3.Wichita St.
4.Virginia
5.Villanova
6.Michigan
7.Kansas
8.Wisconsin
9.Duke
10. Syracuse
11.Creighton
12. Iowa St.
13. Louisville
14.Michigan St.
15.UCLA
16. San Diego St.
17.Cincinnati
18. Saint Louis
19.VCU
20.Oklahoma
21.North Carolina
22.Ohio St.
23.Massachusetts
24.Baylor
25. Texas
26.UConn
27.Oregon
28.New Mexico
29.Kentucky
30.Gonzaga
31.Memphis
32.Colorado
33.Kansas St.
34.George Washington
35.Oklahoma St.
36.Pittsburgh
37. Stanford
38. Saint Joseph’s
39.BYU
40.Arizona St.
41.Dayton
42.Nebraska
43.Providence
44. Tennessee
45. Iowa
46.Xavier
47.North Carolina St.03/19/2014 at 9:18 AM #48052Deacon BluesParticipant^ they got one wrong, Swap 46 and 47….now lets see if we can swap 18….
03/19/2014 at 9:29 AM #480531.21 JigawattsKeymasterSome people just can’t let it go…
@DanWolken: NC State has no business being in the NCAA Tournament, but they will probably beat Saint Louis on Thursday.
03/19/2014 at 5:04 PM #48132PackFamilyParticipantSome people just can’t let it go…
@DanWolken: NC State has no business being in the NCAA Tournament, but they will probably beat Saint Louis on Thursday.Lol! Nor use logic… wouldn’t beating SL after beating Xavier pretty much prove we belong? Or does this guy have some unique criteria (i.e. pulled from his rectum) on who does have “business’ being in the tournament.
I have no business not being a super hunk………. according to me.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.