https://twitter.com/DavidWorlock/status/971758619501920262
The committee has already gone through and placed the top 8 teams. Let's hope we're in there and can stay there.
https://twitter.com/DavidWorlock/status/971758619501920262
The committee has already gone through and placed the top 8 teams. Let's hope we're in there and can stay there.
I don't know why people are interpreting "have been seeded" to mean "are set in stone". The committee is following the process laid out in the principles and procedures document. All he is saying is they got through the first 3 steps.thats kind of a troll last sentence in that tweet when you read his comments after.
says the top 2 lines have been seeded and then says nothing is set, lots of scrubbing will take place and other teams can move into the top 8.
so why make that sentence?
Procedures for Seeding
1. Each committee member will submit a list of the best eight teams, in no particular order, from teams that are in the tournament as automatic qualifiers or atlarge selections
2. The eight teams receiving the most votes comprise the next seed list ballot.
3. Committee members rank the eight teams from No. 1, using a “ranking” scoring system (i.e., the best team is valued at one point).
Yeah no idea why people are freaking out....oh yeah I have an idea, most people are stupid.
People just don't care to look anything up anymore. Arguing is more important than learning.
I don't know why people are interpreting "have been seeded" to mean "are set in stone". The committee is following the process laid out in the principles and procedures document. All he is saying is they got through the first 3 steps.
This is my point. People read things without context, assume their interpretation is the right one, and proceed to argue with the author before trying to learn any context. All part of our new post-truth world.If somebody were to just see that tweet quoted it could imply the top 8 are seeded and locked in. I don’t think that’s a far stretch if you only read that tweet with no other context.
It makes me kind of sad that I'm considered "extremely on top of things" simply because I read the rules. Anyone who has any interest in learning, knows how to use the internet, and has 10 minutes of time can do the same thing. But people would rather argue about things they don't understand. This is true across many areas of society, not just sports.outside of people extremely on top of things such as yourself, how many people know about that procedure?
It makes me kind of sad that I'm considered "extremely on top of things" simply because I read the rules. Anyone who has any interest in learning, knows how to use the internet, and has 10 minutes of time can do the same thing. But people would rather argue about things they don't understand. This is true across many areas of society, not just sports.
The only terrible seed that I can remember is when Oregon got a 12 seed five years ago. They were an 8 on bracketmatrix. While it was bad for Oregon, it was even worse for their first couple of opponents. They went on to the Sweet 16. Mis-seeding a team that badly can really mess up an entire pod. But that's the only case like that I can remember.
WSU was badly seeded last year, at least according to KenPom. But they lost to UK in 2nd round so...
Oh yeah, I agree. I'm perfectly aware that I'm a very rare individual who looks to primary sources to identify and solve problems myself. I will always defend someone who provides information over a reactionary uninformed audience.take a poll here. and this is even a place that should have a higher percentage of fans willing to take the time to look things up.
i would bet, without a doubt, you'd be voted most likely to know the procedures. i had no idea what they were, not because i didn't take the time to learn them, but simply wasn't something that even peaked my interest. and i would think im more on top of things than most fans that are into college ball (nevermind average joe that only watches college ball in march.)
Oh yeah, I agree. I'm perfectly aware that I'm a very rare individual who looks to primary sources to identify and solve problems myself. I will always defend someone who provides information over a reactionary uninformed audience.
Edit: I'm probably being to aggressive. I don't mean to call anyone stupid. And I agree that the tweet could have been worded better if he had been more careful. Anyway, sorry for all of the off-topic banter, which I often complain about myself. Back to bracketology.
I feel like it's going to be hard for us to end up a 2 seed even if we win our tournament.
Auburn and Tennessee could each play 2-3 more quad 1 games if they win. I really don't think we have to worry much about the big 12 but WV and tech could also gain some ground like Michigan did if they win. It's good the big 10 tournament is over so we don't have to worry more about them.
I'm okay with a 3 seed though.