[VaWolf82]

That should end BC’s search.

[VaWolf82]

A team potentially loaded…[snip rosy projections]

If I had a dime for every rosy WTNY (or the year after) projection made at NC State sites, then I would be out enjoying the fabulous weather this afternoon instead of working.

[VaWolf82]

The 2015-2016 season is one that I feel can be a very good year,

None of us has any clue what that team will look like. So I see no sense in making projections based on nothing more than a wild-assed guess.

[VaWolf82]

the most gut wrenching loss in NCSU Basketball history

Two words…Dudley Bradley

I’m in a bad mood, so I’m not really in the mood to talk the Pack up a whole lot this week,

Thanks for taking the time to put this together. For Jo Dee Messina fans, last weekend State proved that they were below the upper. Not it’s time to see if they’re above the below.

[VaWolf82]

I like this site that gives winning percentages versus seed

http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml

[VaWolf82]

For future reference. Official NCAA Seeding List
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24487953/official-ncaa-1-68-seeding-order

1. 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.

[VaWolf82]

Does 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.

[VaWolf82]

Las 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.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24490065/vegas-ncaas-seeding-over-the-top-insane-committee-a-bunch-of-frauds

[VaWolf82]

I’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.

[VaWolf82]

Thanks for the Xavier perspective.

we are good but inconsistent.

Damn, this sounds familiar.

[VaWolf82]

BJD95 wrote:

Frankly, UConn only getting a 7 surprised me more.

RPI = 22, so a 6 seed +/- 1
Not enough difference for me to worry about

[VaWolf82]

The 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…9

5 or 6 seed I would take without a second thought. But 8?

[VaWolf82]

Louisville’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.

[VaWolf82]

The Selection Committee can either argue opinions or discuss facts. The only thing that I’ve seen used to support Louisville is opinion.

[VaWolf82]

There 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…..10-5

Which of these #2 seeds would you like to move down for (#19) Louisville @ 5-5?

[VaWolf82]

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?

[VaWolf82]

I made a major addition to the bottom of the blog entry to capture some of the points discussed here and in the forums. I added discussion on
– BYU and bad losses
– Iowa and stumbling down the stretch
– NCSU vs UVA
– Louisville and UVA seeding

[VaWolf82]

I really appreciate people adding links and quotes in the comments. Believe it or not, I go back to this type of entry to see if there is anything to change or some way to improve a similar entry in the future. My goal has always been to understand the philosophy/technique used by the selection committee…as opposed to the idiocy spewed by far too many in the media.

From the Friedlander article:

According to Wellman, scheduling was the deciding factor between State as the last team in at 21-13 and SMU as the [first] team out at 23-9.

I find it truly amazing that the issue of OOC scheduling is still an open topic…or a revelation to some. Exactly how many times do you have to watch some team get burnt before you move away from the fire?

Here’s my song dedication to Jay Bilas

[VaWolf82]

I can’t imagine that this surprised anyone.

[VaWolf82]

Bill’s EPI is BS. There are too many people examining the selection results to be able to pull that trick off.

Statistics wizards behind the Dance Card show that decisions can be predicted based on only 6 factors.

Most of the WTF decisions that we’ve looked at over the years that I’ve been doing these go to mid-majors, not the big schools.

[VaWolf82]

That would let him justify his selections over the Committee’s.

[VaWolf82]

Of course, this unofficial one might count as scary as well:

[VaWolf82]

Scary Wheat:

[VaWolf82]

Cut that Yahoo! editor some slack

You should know that I don’t suffer fools gladly. Everyone here has a real job and less time to write than he does.

I don’t argue with his take on NC State. It’s the ridiculous teams that he wants to replace them with that earns my contempt.

[VaWolf82]

Swiiiinnngggg and a miss:

Judging from the reaction of NC State players to hearing their name called during the selection show, they were as surprised as anyone to make the field, and they should have been. Little about their profile suggested they were worthy of beating out an SMU team ranked in the Top 25 as recently as Monday or a Green Bay team that dominated its league and beat Virginia in non-league play but stumbled in the Horizon semifinals.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/three-things-the-selection-committee-got-right-and-three-it-got-wrong-021348203.html

Super-shallow analysis on bogus criteria. Absolutely no one cares about the AP Top 25 and dominating the Horizon hardly qualifies for serious consideration.

[Author]

Posts