Bracketology '17

[kayako]

Whether we get 5, 6, or 7 in, one thing is for sure: someone not named Villanova better do something or we will build a reputation for being a 1 trick pony...

We're overdue. If we keep sending 5+ teams to the tourney, eventually one of the lower seeded teams will get in on the upset action that's dominated 1st weekend headlines in recent years.

[kayako]

Gonzaga drops to a 4-seed? Gotta like a guy who puts 2 of our teams on the first line.

I think that of all years there are going to be some surprises this season. The remaining games will be very important.

It's an algorithm without human "tweak" like teamrankings, so its going to have its quirks
I think people who weren't paying attention to the committee's message a couple weeks ago will be in for a big surprise. The weak bubble argument goes out the window with a few bid thieves in conference tournaments.

[kayako]

The thing that's weird for PC, SH, and Marquette- you almost don't want them to move up much at all now.. In the 64+ team era of the NCAA tourney(since 1985)-
8 seeds made sweet 16 12 times
9 seeds made sweet 16 5 times(which is crazy since 8 vs 9 game is 64-64.
10 seeds made sweet 16 23 times
11 seeds made sweet 16 19 times
12 seeds made sweet 16 20 times

so 8 and 9 seeds combined have made the sweet 16 fewer times than the 10, 11, or 12 seeds individually. Hell, the 13 seeds have made the sweet 16(6 times)- more than the 9 seeds have.

Thanks for the stats. I've always thought a team's better off being 10-12 seeds than 8 or 9, but admittedly I'm a gambler. I can see why someone else might prefer the easier 1st RD matchup. Looking at Bracket Matrix, I think our 3 teams will find it hard to move up to 8-9 territory, short of upsetting Villanova and Butler.

[milksteak]

Gonzaga drops to a 4-seed? Gotta like a guy who puts 2 of our teams on the first line.

I think that of all years there are going to be some surprises this season. The remaining games will be very important.

It's an algorithm without human "tweak" like teamrankings, so its going to have its quirks
I think people who weren't paying attention to the committee's message a couple weeks ago will be in for a big surprise. The weak bubble argument goes out the window with a few bid thieves in conference tournaments.

Huh? Team Rankings is all computer-based.

"Every day, we run thousands of computer simulations of the college basketball season, including all remaining regular season games, all conference tournaments, NCAA selection and seeding, and the NCAA tournament itself." - TeamRankings.com

[stever20]

The thing that's weird for PC, SH, and Marquette- you almost don't want them to move up much at all now.. In the 64+ team era of the NCAA tourney(since 1985)-
8 seeds made sweet 16 12 times
9 seeds made sweet 16 5 times(which is crazy since 8 vs 9 game is 64-64.
10 seeds made sweet 16 23 times
11 seeds made sweet 16 19 times
12 seeds made sweet 16 20 times

so 8 and 9 seeds combined have made the sweet 16 fewer times than the 10, 11, or 12 seeds individually. Hell, the 13 seeds have made the sweet 16(6 times)- more than the 9 seeds have.

Thanks for the stats. I've always thought a team's better off being 10-12 seeds than 8 or 9, but admittedly I'm a gambler. I can see why someone else might prefer the easier 1st RD matchup. Looking at Bracket Matrix, I think our 3 teams will find it hard to move up to 8-9 territory, short of upsetting Villanova and Butler.

all of those stats from the wiki page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Divi ... Tournament

I think the other thing that's wild- and I do mean wild.... 7 seeds have made the sweet 16 23 times.

So it's 7 seeds 23, 8 seeds 12, 9 seeds 5, and 10 seeds 23. So 7 and 10 make the sweet 16 equally, but 8 and 9 don't.

[MUWarrior1090]

So you take some of these "bracketology" sites seriously?

As far as chance of bid% goes, I like the "dance card" much better personally.

http://www.unf.edu/~jcoleman/dance.htm

Bracketology? It's not hard for most "bracketologists" to get 65 or so teams correct, but if you're expecting correct seedings and matchups, it's pretty much crapshoot as you say. I am just interested in where the BE teams stand, and the last few spots up for grabs. This is the first season that my two interests are aligned since the formation of the NBE.

Dance Card is very accurate at the end of the season, but until then it's just not a good source. For example, Marquette hasn't played a game since Sunday. Monday night, Dance card had Marquette as about the 10th team out and with a 0.03% chance of a bid.

Today? 2nd last team IN, 27.23% chance. And they haven't played a game in that timeframe.

[SJHooper]

I agree it's more likely that Nova and Butler are the only likely possibilities to make the second weekend and beyond. Of course our conference suffered injuries to some of our best key players which ended up knocking Xavier and Creighton out of the top 25 and makes it nearly impossible to go far in the tourney. The problem is that the casual basketball fan doesn't know that, so they will say "the Big East sucks...only Nova and Butler did anything". These early years are what will form our perception.

[kayako]

Huh? Team Rankings is all computer-based.

That's what I said.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

NCAA Tournament Bubble Watch: History against Syracuse, K-State, Illinois - Jerry Palm, CBS Sports - February 28, 2017

Bubble Watch: In for now
Xavier Musketeers
Seton Hall Pirates
Providence Friars

Bubble Watch: On the fence
Marquette Golden Eagles

Bubble Watch: Work to do

[Bill Marsh]

Huh? Team Rankings is all computer-based.

That's what I said.

Who does human tweaks?