Bracketology Thread

[BearcatsHoops]

How are we ranked 7th in country but a 4 seed, I know they don't look at rankings, but how we we aren't a two seed amazes me

RPI gives a better gauge as to why they are a 4 seed. #14 in the RPI would theoretically put them as the second 4 seed. With their remaining games, they certainly have a chance to bolster their resume. They also have a shot to lose a few in a row. I'm still set they will probably be a #3 seed. It will all change day to day, but it's fun to see where they stand right now. Didn't think this was the year I was projecting a 3 seed!

 

[JasonS]

RPI gives a better gauge as to why they are a 4 seed. #14 in the RPI would theoretically put them as the second 4 seed. With their remaining games, they certainly have a chance to bolster their resume. They also have a shot to lose a few in a row. I'm still set they will probably be a #3 seed. It will all change day to day, but it's fun to see where they stand right now. Didn't think this was the year I was projecting a 3 seed!

Not really. Going by RPI only (which is why the committee doesn't do this) you would see Wisconsin as a 2 seed, Kansas as a 1 seed, Iowa State as a 3 seed, St. Louis and Kentucky as 3 seeds and UCLA as 4 seeds.

 

[Bearcat Rob]

Not really. Going by RPI only (which is why the committee doesn't do this) you would see Wisconsin as a 2 seed, Kansas as a 1 seed, Iowa State as a 3 seed, St. Louis and Kentucky as 3 seeds and UCLA as 4 seeds.

yes there is more to it than just RPI, san diego st's rpi is 20th (worse than uc's) and they are two seed. Uc rpi is 14th.
They look at quality wins:
5 wins against rpi top 50, including at memphis, at louisville, and against uconn. (thats pretty good)
They look at bad losses:
we have none, unless u want to count xu, but lunardi somehow has them at a 10 seed. (so no bad losses, pretty good)
They look at how you have played down they stretch:
we have won 16 of last 17, but still to be determined. (pretty good)
add a 23-3 record to that, now our sos isnt that great but will be after our three game stretch.

This looks like a resume of a 2 to me, we are ranked 7th in the country for a
reason. but winning takes care of everything. palm had us as a 2 seed, so who knows. Also lunardi is automatic at predicting who is in the field but his seeding may not always be 100%. Either way great season so far, just looking for a little more respect. We are a solid 2 IMO

 

[JasonS]

yes there is more to it than just RPI, san diego st's rpi is 20th (worse than uc's) and they are two seed. Uc rpi is 14th.
They look at quality wins:
5 wins against rpi top 50, including at memphis, at louisville, and against uconn. (thats pretty good)
They look at bad losses:
we have none, unless u want to count xu, but lunardi somehow has them at a 10 seed. (so no bad losses, pretty good)
They look at how you have played down they stretch:
we have won 16 of last 17, but still to be determined. (pretty good)
add a 23-3 record to that, now our sos isnt that great but will be after our three game stretch.

This looks like a resume of a 2 to me, we are ranked 7th in the country for a
reason. but winning takes care of everything. palm had us as a 2 seed, so who knows. Also lunardi is automatic at predicting who is in the field but his seeding may not always be 100%. Either way great season so far, just looking for a little more respect. We are a solid 2 IMO

Yup. And that is basically what I was inferring. I just didn't feel like taking the time to write something more like this. I still think, unless UC wins at least a share of the conference title and wins the conference tourney, there is no chance at a 2 seed whether they deserve it or not. I think a 3 is far more likely and, if I were a betting man, I think you see them on the 3 or 4 line. I don't know about anyone else, but I would have taken that at the beginning of the year!

 

[Bearcat22]

Yup. And that is basically what I was inferring. I just didn't feel like taking the time to write something more like this. I still think, unless UC wins at least a share of the conference title and wins the conference tourney, there is no chance at a 2 seed whether they deserve it or not. I think a 3 is far more likely and, if I were a betting man, I think you see them on the 3 or 4 line. I don't know about anyone else, but I would have taken that at the beginning of the year!

I agree. It's a sign of a great, and unexpected year, when the current debate is whether the Cats will be a 2 or 3 seed. I thought bubble team at best at the start of the season - Couldn't be happier to be wrong

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

yes there is more to it than just RPI, san diego st's rpi is 20th (worse than uc's) and they are two seed. Uc rpi is 14th.
They look at quality wins:
5 wins against rpi top 50, including at memphis, at louisville, and against uconn. (thats pretty good)
They look at bad losses:
we have none, unless u want to count xu, but lunardi somehow has them at a 10 seed. (so no bad losses, pretty good)
They look at how you have played down they stretch:
we have won 16 of last 17, but still to be determined. (pretty good)
add a 23-3 record to that, now our sos isnt that great but will be after our three game stretch.

This looks like a resume of a 2 to me, we are ranked 7th in the country for a
reason. but winning takes care of everything. palm had us as a 2 seed, so who knows. Also lunardi is automatic at predicting who is in the field but his seeding may not always be 100%. Either way great season so far, just looking for a little more respect. We are a solid 2 IMO

BTW NC State and Nebraska are sitting at 51 and 53 respectively. UC could add 2 more top 50 wins in the coming weeks...

 

[Scheids21]

Per Mike Decourcy, they no longer consider how you've played recently. Human nature will put more weight on a win in February than a win in December though.

 

[Levettation]

Per Mike Decourcy, they no longer consider how you've played recently. Human nature will put more weight on a win in February than a win in December though.

That statement seems paradoxical. While Decourcy may have that right, how can you both not consider recent play and add weight to a win in Feb over Nov?

 

[JasonS]

That statement seems paradoxical. While Decourcy may have that right, how can you both not consider recent play and add weight to a win in Feb over Nov?

They pay attention to how you are playing lately, they just don't limit it to your last 10 games. They could look at your last 5 or your last 15 or all of conference play. It's just not an official metric.

 

[Levettation]

They pay attention to how you are playing lately, they just don't limit it to your last 10 games. They could look at your last 5 or your last 15 or all of conference play. It's just not an official metric.

I'd say that's a good thing, but contradicts the statement made earlier that "they don't look at how you've played recently".

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

When evaluating your tournament resume there is not a particular formula. How you are playing at the end of the season COULD matter to a certain member of the committee, but it is subjective. For example a team that had a few bad losses early in the season but came on strong at the end of the year could be favored over a team that had their best wins in November, but it is rare that a head to head situation like that arises.

 

[#BearcatNation]

From a UC-fan perspective, it seems like they don't care too much about momentum and how a team has been playing. Just a couple years ago ('11-12), we had early season losses to Presbyterian and Marshall, and after a TON of huge wins (I believe we beat 8 ranked teams that year), we were still just a 6 seed. If they really cared about momentum, that team would've been no worse than a 4. In comparison, the team a year before ('10-11) was also a 6 seed. That '11-12 team was far and away better; I think everyone would agree with me on that. The '10-11 team just had a hot start (15-0 I believe) and didn't have any bad losses. It's all about the big picture.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

From a UC-fan perspective, it seems like they don't care too much about momentum and how a team has been playing. Just a couple years ago ('11-12), we had early season losses to Presbyterian and Marshall, and after a TON of huge wins (I believe we beat 8 ranked teams that year), we were still just a 6 seed. If they really cared about momentum, that team would've been no worse than a 4. In comparison, the team a year before ('10-11) was also a 6 seed. That '11-12 team was far and away better; I think everyone would agree with me on that. The '10-11 team just had a hot start (15-0 I believe) and didn't have any bad losses. It's all about the big picture.

The committee punishes teams that don't schedule well in the non-conference. Cincinnati losing those games was just the icing on the cake. Both of those Cincinnati teams should have been seeded higher but the poor OOC schedule's hurt. I actually think the '10-'11 team was better suited to do damage in the tournament (better offense and defensive team per KenPom) but they were unfortunately seeded against the ONE team that was destined to win. If UC could have gotten by UConn, I think they would be in the Final 4. Remember, that team didn't lose to anyone outside of the Big East (and neither did UConn). Truly one of the best college basketball seasons for a conference, IMO.

 

[UCalum08]

Does anyone else think its a joke they are predicting 5-6 Big East teams get in the tourney this year? I was thinking 3 at best. Is it because the bubble is so weak this year?

 

[Scheids21]

Does anyone else think its a joke they are predicting 5-6 Big East teams get in the tourney this year? I was thinking 3 at best. Is it because the bubble is so weak this year?

Exactly, its not a joke because the bubble is one of the worst in recent memory. Joe Linardi has St. John's as the last team in and look at their numbers: 17-9(7-6) in an average conference, RPI 53, SOS 41, Top 50 games 1-5.

Also, notice that St. John's and Providence are currently on the bubble, while Xavier is only 2 teams away from being on the bubble as well.

 

[Roast Beef]

Exactly, its not a joke because the bubble is one of the worst in recent memory. Joe Linardi has St. John's as the last team in and look at their numbers: 17-9(7-6) in an average conference, RPI 53, SOS 41, Top 50 games 1-5.

Also, notice that St. John's and Providence are currently on the bubble, while Xavier is only 2 teams away from being on the bubble as well.

Yeah, the Big East has 2 locks and 4 wobbly teams right now. Six seems unlikely but possible; they could get as few as 4.

The top-heaviness of the ACC seems to be part of the issue. In a good year, that conference could get 8, maybe 9 teams in. This is not going to be one of those years.

 

[Bearcat22]

Yeah, the Big East has 2 locks and 4 wobbly teams right now. Six seems unlikely but possible; they could get as few as 4.

The top-heaviness of the ACC seems to be part of the issue. In a good year, that conference could get 8, maybe 9 teams in. This is not going to be one of those years.

The big east might take care of itself since the top teams seem like they will all play each other down the stretch. St. Johns has been playing pretty well lately. Outside of creighton & nova, st. johns, providence, g'town, marquette and x might be fighting over one or two spots. with all the conference changes the big east is solid but not the gauntlet it once was, I wonder if Madison Square Garden will continue to host the tournament in years to come, wasn't there talk a while back about the ACC trying to move in?

The strength of the A-10 (SLU is really good) might end up limiting the at large bids from the big east and other conferences. The weak bubble is keeping a lot of teams alive overall. A few conference tournament upsets can change things as well.

I think the AAC is going to get 5 teams in - which would be pretty great.

 

[ucswais]

Yeah, the Big East has 2 locks and 4 wobbly teams right now. Six seems unlikely but possible; they could get as few as 4.

The top-heaviness of the ACC seems to be part of the issue. In a good year, that conference could get 8, maybe 9 teams in. This is not going to be one of those years.

I think it will be the strongest bubble year since 68 when all is said and done. There is 1 less at large this year and we have a glut of teams with mediocre resumes trying for those last 5 spots. That number 5 could decrease if people like Gonzaga lose conf tourney or there is a random winner in a major conference tourney. At least a couple of the 15-20 teams lurking around those 5 spots will put together a run to be just as good if not better than a normal bubble year IMO.

I believe the reason for this is the AAC, BE, MWC, A10 have all become conferences where you can build up good computer numbers and quality wins. Realignment has essentially made more power conferences and everyone else is a 1 bid league. By consolidating the good teams, the resumes get stronger. Last year, Middle Tennessee got in with it's best win over #47 Ole Miss and 2 pretty terrible losses. That profile is similar to the Lousiana Tech or Southern Miss profiles that are currently far from making it.

 

[Bearcat22]

I think it will be the strongest bubble year since 68 when all is said and done. There is 1 less at large this year and we have a glut of teams with mediocre resumes trying for those last 5 spots. That number 5 could decrease if people like Gonzaga lose conf tourney or there is a random winner in a major conference tourney. At least a couple of the 15-20 teams lurking around those 5 spots will put together a run to be just as good if not better than a normal bubble year IMO.

I believe the reason for this is the AAC, BE, MWC, A10 have all become conferences where you can build up good computer numbers and quality wins. Realignment has essentially made more power conferences and everyone else is a 1 bid league. By consolidating the good teams, the resumes get stronger. Last year, Middle Tennessee got in with it's best win over #47 Ole Miss and 2 pretty terrible losses. That profile is similar to the Lousiana Tech or Southern Miss profiles that are currently far from making it.

The bubble teams need San Diego State or New Mexico to win the MWC tournament or it could become a 3 bid league. The same for the Missouri Valley, if Wichita St. doesn't win the conference tourney the MVC becomes a 2 bid league.

 

[Scheids21]

The bubble teams need San Diego State or New Mexico to win the MWC tournament or it could become a 3 bid league. The same for the Missouri Valley, if Wichita St. doesn't win the conference tourney the MVC becomes a 2 bid league.

This holds true for any conference that is going to get an at-large bid as well.