Bracket predictions

kingnebwsu · 03-13-2005, 07:53 AM

Maryland and Notre Dame will undeservedly get bids. The MAC will sadly only receive one bid (Ohio). The #1 seeds will be Illinois, UNC, Kentucky, and Duke.

st.cronin · 03-13-2005, 08:11 AM

Wisconsin will smoke Illinois tonight, and get an 8 seed.

JeeberD · 03-13-2005, 08:14 AM

Nevada will be sweating it out this afternoon after Utah's and Pacific's upset losses last night. However, they'll get in as a 12 seed and my beloved Miners will be a 10 seed...

Arles · 03-13-2005, 08:22 AM

Yeah, big accomplishment by Duke - maybe winning the ACC without playing North Carolina or Wake Forest - and playing only one (GT) of the top 5 teams. But, I'm sure these three wins against Virginia, NC State and Tech will be enough for Dukey Vitale to start pimping them out for a one.

I can't see either Maryland or Notre Dame getting in. I see St. Mary's and UAB over either Maryland or ND. For the number 1s, the selection committee is notorious for not caring about Sunday finals, so they will be Illinois, NC, Wake and Kentucky.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 08:30 AM

So, if all the #1 and #2 seeds choke in the NCAA's and Arizona wins, its not a real national championship? That has to be one of the most bullshit ideas ever... nevermind that they already beat UNC and Wake.

Arles · 03-13-2005, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So, if all the #1 and #2 seeds choke in the NCAA's and Arizona wins, its not a real national championship? That has to be one of the most bullshit ideas ever... nevermind that they already beat UNC and Wake.

No, but if you walk to the title by playing only one team in the RPI top 50 and no ranked teams, should it mean as much as if you beat Wake or NC? If Arizona won the Pac-10 after beating Cal, Oregon State and Washington State, I certainly wouldn't consider that much of an accomplishment.

But don't worry, it's Duke. They'll probably end up getting a No. 1 regardless.

digamma · 03-13-2005, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arles

No, but if you walk to the title by playing only one team in the RPI top 50 and no ranked teams, should it mean as much as if you beat Wake or NC? If Arizona won the Pac-10 after beating Cal, Oregon State and Washington State, I certainly wouldn't consider that much of an accomplishment.

But don't worry, it's Duke. They'll probably end up getting a No. 1 regardless.

Re: The ACC tournament, the only thing that will matter tomorrow is who gets to hang a banner from their rafters. The ACCT means a heck of a lot more to the teams involved than the Pac 10 tourney or the Big Televen tourney. Whether it counts for seeding this afternoon, who knows. I think if Kentucky wins, they get the fourth number one, no matter what Duke does.

I think one of Notre Dame and Maryland will get in. I'd give the edge to Notre Dame, though I don't think either should get in.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 09:21 AM

I think it would be equal to beating Oregon (RPI 82), Arizona State (69), and UCLA (38). But if winning your conference isn't an accomplishment, more power to ya.

And personally, I don't think Duke is good enough for a #1 seed. I'm fine with a #2. I think Redick, Ewing and Williams are one of the best 1-2-3 punches in the country, but outside of that they have no depth, and you just can't win the NCAA's without depth (Melchioni has come on, but I don' think he can keep this up).

However, who else would get the last #1 (assuming KU, UNC and UI are #1)?

Teams with less or equal losses to Duke (and assuming everyone wins and loses as they should today, otherwise Duke is a #2 and all this is useless):
Pacific 26-3 (13 wins v 200+ RPI, which can essentially be assumed, 13 good wins)
Gonzaga 25-4 (3, 22)
BC 24-4 (3, 21)
Louisville 27-4 (6, 21)
Washington 26-5 (2, 24)
Duke 24-5 (1, 23)
Wake 26-5 (3, 23)
Utah 25-5 (11, 14)
Old Dominion 27-5 (14, 13)
Wisconsin Milwaukee 22-5 (10, 12)
Winthrop 24-5 (19 and 1 loss, 5)

Now, we can pretty much throw out Pacific, Gonzaga, Utah, ODU, Wisc-Mil, and Winthrop. So that leaves us Washington, BC, Duke, Louisville and Wake.

Their RPI's
BC 11
UL 13
UW 3
DU 5
WF 6

vs. top 100
BC 13-4
UL 12-3 (1 loss v. 101-200)
WU 17-4 (1 loss v. 101-200)
DU 14-4 (1 loss v. 101-200)
WF 18-4 (1 loss v. 101-200)

So by this, Wake has played the best versus the most competition, closely followed by Washington, then Louisville, Duke, and BC.

Average RPI of teams lost to (and average margin of loss):
BC 40 (9.25 and didn't win conference)
UL 60 (6.75)
WU 40 (11.4)
DU 47 (4.6 and assuming win)
WF 46 (10.6 and didn't win conference)

Last 10
BC 6-4
UL 9-1
WU 8-2
DU 7-3
WF 8-2

So BC and Washington had the best losses, but Washington had the worst losses by points (BC was in the middle). Duke had the 2nd worst RPI losses, but the best points losses.

So here is how I break it down:
Fairly or not, based on RPI Louisville is out, 13 is too low.
BC is pretty much a non-factor with an 11
Washington has the best overall RPI
Washington has the most wins over the top 200 (barely)
Wake is the best versus the top 100 (barely)
BC has the best RPI loss (technically .5 of Washington, I just rounded, and no, I didn't factor home v. road losses because I'm lazy)
Duke has the lowest margin of lost (almost twice as good).
Louisville is playing the best of late

Based on my poor math skills, I'd break it down this way:
Washington (3 top finishesI think they won or finished #2 in all categories, and I wouldn't be bothered by them being a #1)
Duke (1 top finish, though I'm sure you'll argue I fixed the math to favor Duke, although these were the stats I picked, I think I could go on if I was bored enough though)
Wake (won once, I wouldn't argue against them, except they were out in their first conference tourney game, albeit without their top player)
BC (Won once, not as bad as people think they are, but they also lost in the first round of their tourney)
Louisville (the hottest late, but their RPI isn't strong enough.)

Do you think this is a fair assesment?

edit to say, dammit, I need to read stats better

terpkristin · 03-13-2005, 09:37 AM

Even as a Terp fan, I don't think Maryland should get in. They've played like absolute crap every chance they've had. Granted, I think the reason behind this is that for once, Gary's got superstar high schoolers who just don't taking coaching very well (for more on this, I wrote it in my blog the other night, http://gimpygal.blogspot.com/2005/03/terps-upset.html ).

I think if the Terps DO get a bid, it's going to be because they'll draw an audience. As much as people deny it, the committee does consider ratings when selecting teams, and the Terps will get ratings.

Granted, over the last few years I've really disagreed with seedings and brackets...I remember last season some lower-seeded teams were placed in brackets that effectively were their home court, while other higher-seeded teams were placed in brackets on the other side of the country. It didn't make any sense at all, and possibly gave an edge to those teams that might otherwise not have done as well.

Oh well, guess we'll see how it all ends up tonight...

/tk

kcchief19 · 03-13-2005, 09:39 AM

I think making the ACC final puts Duke ahead of Wake.

Should be interesting -- Illinois is the only slam-dunk No. 1 seed. UNC and KU appear to be locks based on RPI and regular season titles, but neither made their conference tourney finals. Having seen them play down the stretch, I don't think KU deserves a No. 1 seed, but they will probably get one by default. How they are No. 1 in the RPI underscores an inherent flaw in the formula.

My Pac-10 bias dismisses Washington as a No. 1. If their is a darkhorse, it's Louisville.

My guess is Illinois, UNC, KU and Duke. Louisville would be next if UNC or KU get dropped to a No. 2.

kcchief19 · 03-13-2005, 09:48 AM

One thing I wonder about is the new formula counting road wins as 1.4 wins and home wins 0.6 wins and losses proportionately as well. Has anyone seen a Web site that breaks down records using this formula?

The committee has made a big deal about this, so I would bet that at least No. 1 seed will owe their ranking to that so the committee can point to them. Same with a couple of bubble teams.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 09:52 AM

Well, here is a blog with lots of info, but I'm not sure where it says it, but the last 3 posts are all about the RPI. Turns out ESPN has had the wrong RPI all year, and things aren't really as messed up as they've said (see links on the page)

http://kenpom.typepad.com/

edit to say:
I think ESPN applied the 1.4 to the whole formula, where it was only supposed to be applied to part of it. Read the Luke Wynn linked to article in the top post.

re-edit to also say that in my longer post above, KU for me is Kentucky and not Kansas. I don't see why Kansas deserves or will get a #1, RPI not withstanding.

They're 23-6, 20-6 against the top 200, only 8-4 against the top 100, lost by 6 points a game (not too bad, but no the best), and are 5-5 in their last 10

Airhog · 03-13-2005, 10:00 AM

I think if OSU wins today, they deserve at least a look at #1

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 10:01 AM

They're 7-5 against the top 50 (assuming a win), I don't know if they have a chance.

Arles · 03-13-2005, 10:20 AM

I agree that Duke is a shoo-in for a No. 2. I guess my bias is against the major conference tournaments. It often comes down to teams with a lot to play for based on bubble or seed (Georgia Tech, Washington, NC State, Texas Tech) because they didn't do as well in the 14-18 game conference season against teams with little or nothing to prove (NC, Wake, Arizona, Kansas). Look at yesterday for Arizona and North Carolina. For either team, it didn't matter if they won or lost. If Arizona wins, they are a 2. If they lose, they are probably a 2. So, Washington goes out and out-hustles them, kills them on the boards and ends up winning in the final minute. NC was in the same boat. Win - they are a 1. Lose - they are a 1. So, GT out-hustled them and pulled it out down the stretch.

So, what happens is you often have the better teams bowing out early because they just don't care. Neither Lute Olson or Roy Williams seemed all that concerned with their losses, so it's hard to imagine their teams had the same motivation as Georgia Tech (still somewhat on the bubble, and trying to get a single-digit seed) and Washington (could have shot from a 4 to a 2 on the Pac-10 tourney). Unless a team completely lays on egg in the first round, I see no reason why they should matter all that much to the major conference when teams are coming off numerous conference games to show what they can do.

Based on the season, the number 1s should go to Illinois, NC, Wake Forest and Kentucky.

Radii · 03-13-2005, 11:12 AM

Duke and Kentucky are pretty much a wash IMO. If either loses today, it should make it easy to decide who the #1 is... I would guess Kentucky would get the #1 if they both win, and will be the first #1 to fall. Otherwise, they'll be the first #2 seed to fall(their resume puts them in that seed but they're overrated as hell IMO).

#1s: Illinois, UNC, Wake, Kentucky

#2s: Duke, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma State

#3s: Arizona, Boston College, Washington, Syracuse

Latest Bracketology on EPSN shows that Wake played their way out of a #1 w/ the loss to NC State, but I am not buying that w/ the Chris Paul suspension.

Cuckoo · 03-13-2005, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airhog

I think if OSU wins today, they deserve at least a look at #1

I think OSU probably gets a 2 and plays in OKC regardless of what happens today. If they had split with Texas and beaten Nebraska, they'd be an easy 1 in my mind, but it's tough to argue that they deserve a 1 even if they win today. They had a rough end to the season and didn't have to play OU or Texas in the tournament as people had expected.

Tekneek · 03-13-2005, 11:15 AM

I don't think Maryland makes it.

Radii · 03-13-2005, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radii

#1s: Illinois, UNC, Wake, Kentucky

#2s: Duke, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma State

#3s: Arizona, Boston College, Washington, Syracuse

Switch Duke/Kentucky. Tech probably played their way up to a 6 or 7 seed, NC State what? 10? 11? One of the lowest at large's I assume. I can't imagine Maryland getting in.

dawgfan · 03-13-2005, 02:43 PM

How do you justify Washington as a #3 seed and not a #2?

And Easy Mac, minor quibble but it's the University of Washington, so your abbreviations should be UW, not WU (that'd be Washington University located in St. Louis).

SackAttack · 03-13-2005, 02:45 PM

I've seen a couple of brackets now with Oakland in the play-in game. Why should a team that won its conference's automatic berth get relegated to having to play another game just for the right to make the field of 64?

I would think the play-in berths should be for at-large teams only.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgfan

How do you justify Washington as a #3 seed and not a #2?

And Easy Mac, minor quibble but it's the University of Washington, so your abbreviations should be UW, not WU (that'd be Washington University located in St. Louis).

oops, sorry

and Oakland is 12-18... play-in games have always involved conference winners. OTherwise, I'd say the play-in game would have to involved playing for a 12 seed between 2 bubble teams... and major conferences would never go for that.

MrBug708 · 03-13-2005, 02:51 PM

UCLA will get a 10 seed and have to face UOP in the first round. That's my prediction.

Oh, it will be in the East as well....

SackAttack · 03-13-2005, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

oops, sorry

and Oakland is 12-18... play-in games have always involved conference winners. OTherwise, I'd say the play-in game would have to involved playing for a 12 seed between 2 bubble teams... and major conferences would never go for that.

So? The mid-majors have one thing going for them: "There's more of us than there are of you." If the major conferences have a problem with that, they'll need to put forth a solution that's more amenable to the mid-majors, were the mid-majors to throw a fit about having two of their teams pitted against one another in the play-in.

sooner333 · 03-13-2005, 02:53 PM

Oklahoma will be shipped out to Tuscon despite being Big 12 Regular Season Co-champs.

MrBug708 · 03-13-2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sooner333

Oklahoma will be shipped out to Tuscon despite being Big 12 Regular Season Co-champs.

Tuscon is hardly a far-cry from Oklahoma

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So? The mid-majors have one thing going for them: "There's more of us than there are of you." If the major conferences have a problem with that, they'll need to put forth a solution that's more amenable to the mid-majors, were the mid-majors to throw a fit about having two of their teams pitted against one another in the play-in.

The majors control the money, they don't really have to cave to anyone.

Swaggs · 03-13-2005, 03:20 PM

No Big East love?

I think Syracuse deserves one of the last two 2 seeds.

tdydynasty · 03-13-2005, 03:51 PM

No. 1 seeds-Illnois is a lock even if they lose today, UNC despite losing in the ACC Tournament, Duke for winning the ACC Tournament, Louisville for winning the Conference USA Tournament.

Neuqua · 03-13-2005, 04:00 PM

My favorite sign of the year:

dawgfan · 03-13-2005, 04:22 PM

Mi Dook edukashun att werk.

dawgfan · 03-13-2005, 04:59 PM

I seriously doubt Washington will be any lower than a #2 seed, and Bilas (for one) has been pimping them for a #1.

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:02 PM

I'm guessing the following, just at a glance:

1) Illinois, North Carolina, Duke, Kentucky
2) Louisville, Wake, Kansas, Okie State
3) Washington, Boston College, Michigan State (?), Gonzaga (?), UConn (?)

SI

GoldenEagle · 03-13-2005, 05:02 PM

Memphis should get in over teams such as UCLA, UTEP, and any other fringe bubble teams but probably will not since their RPI is to high.

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:07 PM

Washington at 1? They're going to get the nasty bracket.

SI

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 05:11 PM

Washington had the #3 RPI in the country. So Illinois isn't the top seed, correct? THey don't get the playin game.

dawgfan · 03-13-2005, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdydynasty

Washington #1 seed, you got to be kidding me. Ranked lower than the other number 1 seed candidates. The 4th number 1 seed was the question.

Ranked lower in the polls, but not in RPI.

tdydynasty · 03-13-2005, 05:13 PM

Washington #1 seed, you got to be kidding me. Ranked lower than the other number 1 seed candidates. The 4th number 1 seed was the question.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 05:15 PM

Yeah, I thought BC would be a middle 3. they struggle late, but I thought they were among the top 12.. now they're probably 13 or 14

HeavyReign · 03-13-2005, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdydynasty

Washington #1 seed, you got to be kidding me. Ranked lower than the other number 1 seed candidates. The 4th number 1 seed was the question.

Easy Mac broke this down about as well as anyone could. Ignore the polls. They mean nothing here.

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:17 PM

Tough assignment for Zona. That's a rough pod. Texas, thanks for coming. Vermont is going to take you apart. BC down to a 4. Wow.

SI

TazFTW · 03-13-2005, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Washington had the #3 RPI in the country. So Illinois isn't the top seed, correct? THey don't get the playin game.

Illinois is the top #1, they spent the first 5 minutes talking about the ranked #1s.

It is Illinois, NC, Duke, Washington.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavyReign

Easy Mac broke this down about as well as anyone could. Ignore the polls. They mean nothing here.

And to think, I was trying to prove Duke deserved a #1

dawgfan · 03-13-2005, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Washington at 1? They're going to get the nasty bracket.

SI

Well, they got Wake Forest, Gonzaga, Louisville and Georgia Tech in their bracket - definitely not an easy road.

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 05:38 PM

I'd actually say Louisville and Gonzaga are the best 3's there are.

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Well, they got Wake Forest, Gonzaga, Louisville and Georgia Tech in their bracket - definitely not an easy road.

Yeah, but you can say that about pretty much every bracket. Every bracket has at least 3 really good teams. But I don't see the land mines there that I expected. Usually the lowest seed gets this hell bracket. They have Pacific probably in the 2nd which is rough but the Zags aren't the best third, for instance. Are Louiville or GT the best of their seeds? No scary double digits- Creighton's down, UCLA- blah, etc.

SI

Easy Mac · 03-13-2005, 05:40 PM

They beat Washington by 12 this year... I think they should pose a challenge for them.

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:42 PM

Vermont got hosed.

Iowa made it??

Jeebs- that Utah/UTEP game looks fun

SI

sterlingice · 03-13-2005, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

I'd actually say Louisville and Gonzaga are the best 3's there are.

No way. Zags the best 3?

SI

Sharpieman · 03-13-2005, 05:48 PM

Duke, Syracuse, Kentucky, Oklahoma. Thats one tough bracket.

03-13-2005, 08:22 AM	#4
Arles Grey Dog Software Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL	Yeah, big accomplishment by Duke - maybe winning the ACC without playing North Carolina or Wake Forest - and playing only one (GT) of the top 5 teams. But, I'm sure these three wins against Virginia, NC State and Tech will be enough for Dukey Vitale to start pimping them out for a one. I can't see either Maryland or Notre Dame getting in. I see St. Mary's and UAB over either Maryland or ND. For the number 1s, the selection committee is notorious for not caring about Sunday finals, so they will be Illinois, NC, Wake and Kentucky. __________________ Developer of Bowl Bound College Football http://www.greydogsoftware.com

03-13-2005, 09:21 AM	#8
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	I think it would be equal to beating Oregon (RPI 82), Arizona State (69), and UCLA (38). But if winning your conference isn't an accomplishment, more power to ya. And personally, I don't think Duke is good enough for a #1 seed. I'm fine with a #2. I think Redick, Ewing and Williams are one of the best 1-2-3 punches in the country, but outside of that they have no depth, and you just can't win the NCAA's without depth (Melchioni has come on, but I don' think he can keep this up). However, who else would get the last #1 (assuming KU, UNC and UI are #1)? Teams with less or equal losses to Duke (and assuming everyone wins and loses as they should today, otherwise Duke is a #2 and all this is useless): Pacific 26-3 (13 wins v 200+ RPI, which can essentially be assumed, 13 good wins) Gonzaga 25-4 (3, 22) BC 24-4 (3, 21) Louisville 27-4 (6, 21) Washington 26-5 (2, 24) Duke 24-5 (1, 23) Wake 26-5 (3, 23) Utah 25-5 (11, 14) Old Dominion 27-5 (14, 13) Wisconsin Milwaukee 22-5 (10, 12) Winthrop 24-5 (19 and 1 loss, 5) Now, we can pretty much throw out Pacific, Gonzaga, Utah, ODU, Wisc-Mil, and Winthrop. So that leaves us Washington, BC, Duke, Louisville and Wake. Their RPI's BC 11 UL 13 UW 3 DU 5 WF 6 vs. top 100 BC 13-4 UL 12-3 (1 loss v. 101-200) WU 17-4 (1 loss v. 101-200) DU 14-4 (1 loss v. 101-200) WF 18-4 (1 loss v. 101-200) So by this, Wake has played the best versus the most competition, closely followed by Washington, then Louisville, Duke, and BC. Average RPI of teams lost to (and average margin of loss): BC 40 (9.25 and didn't win conference) UL 60 (6.75) WU 40 (11.4) DU 47 (4.6 and assuming win) WF 46 (10.6 and didn't win conference) Last 10 BC 6-4 UL 9-1 WU 8-2 DU 7-3 WF 8-2 So BC and Washington had the best losses, but Washington had the worst losses by points (BC was in the middle). Duke had the 2nd worst RPI losses, but the best points losses. So here is how I break it down: Fairly or not, based on RPI Louisville is out, 13 is too low. BC is pretty much a non-factor with an 11 Washington has the best overall RPI Washington has the most wins over the top 200 (barely) Wake is the best versus the top 100 (barely) BC has the best RPI loss (technically .5 of Washington, I just rounded, and no, I didn't factor home v. road losses because I'm lazy) Duke has the lowest margin of lost (almost twice as good). Louisville is playing the best of late Based on my poor math skills, I'd break it down this way: Washington (3 top finishesI think they won or finished #2 in all categories, and I wouldn't be bothered by them being a #1) Duke (1 top finish, though I'm sure you'll argue I fixed the math to favor Duke, although these were the stats I picked, I think I could go on if I was bored enough though) Wake (won once, I wouldn't argue against them, except they were out in their first conference tourney game, albeit without their top player) BC (Won once, not as bad as people think they are, but they also lost in the first round of their tourney) Louisville (the hottest late, but their RPI isn't strong enough.) Do you think this is a fair assesment? edit to say, dammit, I need to read stats better Last edited by Easy Mac : 03-13-2005 at 09:45 AM.

03-13-2005, 09:37 AM	#9
terpkristin Grizzled Veteran Join Date: May 2003 Location: Ashburn, VA	Even as a Terp fan, I don't think Maryland should get in. They've played like absolute crap every chance they've had. Granted, I think the reason behind this is that for once, Gary's got superstar high schoolers who just don't taking coaching very well (for more on this, I wrote it in my blog the other night, http://gimpygal.blogspot.com/2005/03/terps-upset.html ). I think if the Terps DO get a bid, it's going to be because they'll draw an audience. As much as people deny it, the committee does consider ratings when selecting teams, and the Terps will get ratings. Granted, over the last few years I've really disagreed with seedings and brackets...I remember last season some lower-seeded teams were placed in brackets that effectively were their home court, while other higher-seeded teams were placed in brackets on the other side of the country. It didn't make any sense at all, and possibly gave an edge to those teams that might otherwise not have done as well. Oh well, guess we'll see how it all ends up tonight... /tk __________________ GO TERPS! https://www.flickr.com/photos/terpkristin https://twitter.com/terpkristin

03-13-2005, 09:52 AM	#12
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	Well, here is a blog with lots of info, but I'm not sure where it says it, but the last 3 posts are all about the RPI. Turns out ESPN has had the wrong RPI all year, and things aren't really as messed up as they've said (see links on the page) http://kenpom.typepad.com/ edit to say: I think ESPN applied the 1.4 to the whole formula, where it was only supposed to be applied to part of it. Read the Luke Wynn linked to article in the top post. re-edit to also say that in my longer post above, KU for me is Kentucky and not Kansas. I don't see why Kansas deserves or will get a #1, RPI not withstanding. They're 23-6, 20-6 against the top 200, only 8-4 against the top 100, lost by 6 points a game (not too bad, but no the best), and are 5-5 in their last 10 Last edited by Easy Mac : 03-13-2005 at 09:58 AM.

03-13-2005, 10:00 AM	#13
Airhog Captain Obvious Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Norman, Oklahoma	I think if OSU wins today, they deserve at least a look at #1 __________________ Thread Killer extraordinaire Yay! its football season once again!

03-13-2005, 08:11 AM	#2
st.cronin General Manager Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: New Mexico	Wisconsin will smoke Illinois tonight, and get an 8 seed.

03-13-2005, 08:14 AM	#3
JeeberD General Manager Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: The Town of Flower Mound	Nevada will be sweating it out this afternoon after Utah's and Pacific's upset losses last night. However, they'll get in as a 12 seed and my beloved Miners will be a 10 seed... __________________ UTEP Miners!!! I solemnly swear to never cheer for TO

03-13-2005, 08:30 AM	#5
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	So, if all the #1 and #2 seeds choke in the NCAA's and Arizona wins, its not a real national championship? That has to be one of the most bullshit ideas ever... nevermind that they already beat UNC and Wake.

03-13-2005, 09:39 AM	#10
kcchief19 Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Kansas City, MO	I think making the ACC final puts Duke ahead of Wake. Should be interesting -- Illinois is the only slam-dunk No. 1 seed. UNC and KU appear to be locks based on RPI and regular season titles, but neither made their conference tourney finals. Having seen them play down the stretch, I don't think KU deserves a No. 1 seed, but they will probably get one by default. How they are No. 1 in the RPI underscores an inherent flaw in the formula. My Pac-10 bias dismisses Washington as a No. 1. If their is a darkhorse, it's Louisville. My guess is Illinois, UNC, KU and Duke. Louisville would be next if UNC or KU get dropped to a No. 2.

03-13-2005, 09:48 AM	#11
kcchief19 Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Kansas City, MO	One thing I wonder about is the new formula counting road wins as 1.4 wins and home wins 0.6 wins and losses proportionately as well. Has anyone seen a Web site that breaks down records using this formula? The committee has made a big deal about this, so I would bet that at least No. 1 seed will owe their ranking to that so the committee can point to them. Same with a couple of bubble teams.

03-13-2005, 10:01 AM	#14
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	They're 7-5 against the top 50 (assuming a win), I don't know if they have a chance.

03-13-2005, 10:20 AM	#15
Arles Grey Dog Software Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL	I agree that Duke is a shoo-in for a No. 2. I guess my bias is against the major conference tournaments. It often comes down to teams with a lot to play for based on bubble or seed (Georgia Tech, Washington, NC State, Texas Tech) because they didn't do as well in the 14-18 game conference season against teams with little or nothing to prove (NC, Wake, Arizona, Kansas). Look at yesterday for Arizona and North Carolina. For either team, it didn't matter if they won or lost. If Arizona wins, they are a 2. If they lose, they are probably a 2. So, Washington goes out and out-hustles them, kills them on the boards and ends up winning in the final minute. NC was in the same boat. Win - they are a 1. Lose - they are a 1. So, GT out-hustled them and pulled it out down the stretch. So, what happens is you often have the better teams bowing out early because they just don't care. Neither Lute Olson or Roy Williams seemed all that concerned with their losses, so it's hard to imagine their teams had the same motivation as Georgia Tech (still somewhat on the bubble, and trying to get a single-digit seed) and Washington (could have shot from a 4 to a 2 on the Pac-10 tourney). Unless a team completely lays on egg in the first round, I see no reason why they should matter all that much to the major conference when teams are coming off numerous conference games to show what they can do. Based on the season, the number 1s should go to Illinois, NC, Wake Forest and Kentucky. __________________ Developer of Bowl Bound College Football http://www.greydogsoftware.com

03-13-2005, 11:12 AM	#16
Radii Head Coach Join Date: Jul 2001	Duke and Kentucky are pretty much a wash IMO. If either loses today, it should make it easy to decide who the #1 is... I would guess Kentucky would get the #1 if they both win, and will be the first #1 to fall. Otherwise, they'll be the first #2 seed to fall(their resume puts them in that seed but they're overrated as hell IMO). #1s: Illinois, UNC, Wake, Kentucky #2s: Duke, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma State #3s: Arizona, Boston College, Washington, Syracuse Latest Bracketology on EPSN shows that Wake played their way out of a #1 w/ the loss to NC State, but I am not buying that w/ the Chris Paul suspension.

03-13-2005, 11:15 AM	#18
Tekneek Pro Rookie Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: USA	I don't think Maryland makes it.

03-13-2005, 02:43 PM	#20
dawgfan Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Seattle	How do you justify Washington as a #3 seed and not a #2? And Easy Mac, minor quibble but it's the University of Washington, so your abbreviations should be UW, not WU (that'd be Washington University located in St. Louis).

03-13-2005, 02:45 PM	#21
SackAttack Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Green Bay, WI	I've seen a couple of brackets now with Oakland in the play-in game. Why should a team that won its conference's automatic berth get relegated to having to play another game just for the right to make the field of 64? I would think the play-in berths should be for at-large teams only.

03-13-2005, 02:51 PM	#23
MrBug708 Head Coach Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Whittier	UCLA will get a 10 seed and have to face UOP in the first round. That's my prediction. Oh, it will be in the East as well....

03-13-2005, 02:53 PM	#25
sooner333 College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Norman, OK	Oklahoma will be shipped out to Tuscon despite being Big 12 Regular Season Co-champs.

03-13-2005, 03:20 PM	#28
Swaggs Coordinator Join Date: Oct 2000	No Big East love? I think Syracuse deserves one of the last two 2 seeds. __________________ DOWN WITH HATTRICK!!! The RWBL Are you reading In The Bleachers?

03-13-2005, 03:51 PM	#29
tdydynasty Banned Join Date: Aug 2002	No. 1 seeds-Illnois is a lock even if they lose today, UNC despite losing in the ACC Tournament, Duke for winning the ACC Tournament, Louisville for winning the Conference USA Tournament.

03-13-2005, 04:00 PM	#30
Neuqua Pro Rookie Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago, Ill	My favorite sign of the year: __________________ Our Deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?' Actually, who are you not to be?

03-13-2005, 04:22 PM	#31
dawgfan Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Seattle	Mi Dook edukashun att werk.

03-13-2005, 04:59 PM	#32
dawgfan Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Seattle	I seriously doubt Washington will be any lower than a #2 seed, and Bilas (for one) has been pimping them for a #1.

03-13-2005, 05:02 PM	#33
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	I'm guessing the following, just at a glance: 1) Illinois, North Carolina, Duke, Kentucky 2) Louisville, Wake, Kansas, Okie State 3) Washington, Boston College, Michigan State (?), Gonzaga (?), UConn (?) SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

03-13-2005, 05:02 PM	#34
GoldenEagle Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Little Rock, AR	Memphis should get in over teams such as UCLA, UTEP, and any other fringe bubble teams but probably will not since their RPI is to high. __________________ Xbox 360 Gamer Tag: GoldenEagle014

03-13-2005, 05:07 PM	#35
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	Washington at 1? They're going to get the nasty bracket. SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

03-13-2005, 05:11 PM	#36
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	Washington had the #3 RPI in the country. So Illinois isn't the top seed, correct? THey don't get the playin game.

03-13-2005, 05:13 PM	#38
tdydynasty Banned Join Date: Aug 2002	Washington #1 seed, you got to be kidding me. Ranked lower than the other number 1 seed candidates. The 4th number 1 seed was the question.

03-13-2005, 05:15 PM	#39
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	Yeah, I thought BC would be a middle 3. they struggle late, but I thought they were among the top 12.. now they're probably 13 or 14

03-13-2005, 05:17 PM	#41
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	Tough assignment for Zona. That's a rough pod. Texas, thanks for coming. Vermont is going to take you apart. BC down to a 4. Wow. SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

03-13-2005, 05:38 PM	#45
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	I'd actually say Louisville and Gonzaga are the best 3's there are.

03-13-2005, 05:40 PM	#47
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	They beat Washington by 12 this year... I think they should pose a challenge for them.

03-13-2005, 05:42 PM	#48
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	Vermont got hosed. Iowa made it?? Jeebs- that Utah/UTEP game looks fun SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

03-13-2005, 05:48 PM	#50
Sharpieman Greatly Missed. (7/11/84-06/12/05) Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Palo Alto, CA	Duke, Syracuse, Kentucky, Oklahoma. Thats one tough bracket. __________________ Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)