Bracketology (11/6)

[hail2pitt]

Would love to see ASU/SMU in Pittsburgh. Actually that match would be so fun. Both really good serving teams. ASU better passing. SMU more physical.

[bprtbone]

Nov 6, 2024 4:04:46 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Big Ten

Michigan stands the best chance of now - they have potential plus they have only lost to at-large caliber teams.

This would have been accurate if they had not lost their top scorer and best passer to injury. They are going to struggle the rest of the way, sadly. 

[heystvn]

Starting a prayer circle for Michigan and Allison Jacob's ankle.

[trojansc]

Nov 6, 2024 14:59:37 GMT -5 bprtbone said:

Nov 6, 2024 4:04:46 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Big Ten

Michigan stands the best chance of now - they have potential plus they have only lost to at-large caliber teams.

This would have been accurate if they had not lost their top scorer and best passer to injury. They are going to struggle the rest of the way, sadly. 

I still enter every year with the dream that Michigan will knock Stanford out of the tournament.

I do not give up that hope until Michigan’s tournament chances become zero. Then when that becomes zero, I’ll put my delusional hope into Leisa Rosen’s bulldogs.

[dbro1970]

Please explain to me how Wisconsin with a 7 RPI and 7 AVCA ranking ends up with a 3 seed in the Nebraska quad, implying that they are 11th in your bracket.  Also, putting Texas at 3 in the PSU bracket implies that they are a higher seed than Wisconsin right now..... really?

[trojansc]

Nov 6, 2024 16:00:14 GMT -5 dbro1970 said:

Please explain to me how Wisconsin with a 7 RPI and 7 AVCA ranking ends up with a 3 seed in the Nebraska quad, implying that they are 11th in your bracket.  Also, putting Texas at 3 in the PSU bracket implies that they are a higher seed than Wisconsin right now..... really?

(1) I will never, ever consider AVCA rankings

(2) Wisconsin "true seed" in this bracket is #9 overall, and with Kansas at #8, that could really go either way. It does not matter in this instance.

(3) Texas "true seed" is #12 overall in this bracket.

[sleepy]

Nov 6, 2024 16:00:14 GMT -5 dbro1970 said:

Please explain to me how Wisconsin with a 7 RPI and 7 AVCA ranking ends up with a 3 seed in the Nebraska quad, implying that they are 11th in your bracket.  Also, putting Texas at 3 in the PSU bracket implies that they are a higher seed than Wisconsin right now..... really?

wisconsin would be 9th overall not 11. Neb, Pitt, Louisville, penn, creighton, stanford, SMU, Kansas, wisconsin

[knapplc]

Nov 6, 2024 16:15:05 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:00:14 GMT -5 dbro1970 said:

Please explain to me how Wisconsin with a 7 RPI and 7 AVCA ranking ends up with a 3 seed in the Nebraska quad, implying that they are 11th in your bracket.  Also, putting Texas at 3 in the PSU bracket implies that they are a higher seed than Wisconsin right now..... really?

(1) I will never, ever consider AVCA rankings

(2) Wisconsin "true seed" in this bracket is #9 overall, and with Kansas at #8, that could really go either way. It does not matter in this instance.

(3) Texas "true seed" is #12 overall in this bracket.

Does the committee consider that this would be a third Wisconsin/Nebraska match and shuffle to avoid that?

[trojansc]

Nov 6, 2024 16:22:04 GMT -5 knapplc said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:15:05 GMT -5 trojansc said:

(1) I will never, ever consider AVCA rankings

(2) Wisconsin "true seed" in this bracket is #9 overall, and with Kansas at #8, that could really go either way. It does not matter in this instance.

(3) Texas "true seed" is #12 overall in this bracket.

Does the committee consider that this would be a third Wisconsin/Nebraska match and shuffle to avoid that?

I don't think there's any conclusive evidence that the committee will or won't do those things. And with committees changing every year, it's even more unpredictable.

I personally don't do those shufflings when I do Bracketology. I shuffle in toss-ups or close call scenarios, but not for avoiding re-matches. I also think like, there's no guarantee that matchup happens.

Pitt/Louisville matched up as a Regional Final last year though... even though I think that was the right call, if the committee WANTED to avoid it, they probably could have found a way to justify it. It wouldn't have been the craziest thing.

[maigrey]

Nov 6, 2024 15:03:29 GMT -5 heystvn said:

Starting a prayer circle for Michigan and Allison Jacob's ankle.

we need one for Kierstyn Barton and the Huskies as well.

[hopefuldawg]

Nov 6, 2024 16:32:18 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:22:04 GMT -5 knapplc said:

Does the committee consider that this would be a third Wisconsin/Nebraska match and shuffle to avoid that?

I don't think there's any conclusive evidence that the committee will or won't do those things. And with committees changing every year, it's even more unpredictable.

I personally don't do those shufflings when I do Bracketology. I shuffle in toss-ups or close call scenarios, but not for avoiding re-matches. I also think like, there's no guarantee that matchup happens.

Pitt/Louisville matched up as a Regional Final last year though... even though I think that was the right call, if the committee WANTED to avoid it, they probably could have found a way to justify it. It wouldn't have been the craziest thing.

They also setup Kentucky/Arkansas as a regional semi for their 3rd meeting

[maigrey]

Nov 6, 2024 16:22:04 GMT -5 knapplc said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:15:05 GMT -5 trojansc said:

(1) I will never, ever consider AVCA rankings

(2) Wisconsin "true seed" in this bracket is #9 overall, and with Kansas at #8, that could really go either way. It does not matter in this instance.

(3) Texas "true seed" is #12 overall in this bracket.

Does the committee consider that this would be a third Wisconsin/Nebraska match and shuffle to avoid that?

I meant they shouldn't, but that doesn't mean there isn't an unconscious bias around that item.

[Resident Bitchy Canadian Fan]

Nov 6, 2024 16:32:18 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:22:04 GMT -5 knapplc said:

Does the committee consider that this would be a third Wisconsin/Nebraska match and shuffle to avoid that?

I don't think there's any conclusive evidence that the committee will or won't do those things. And with committees changing every year, it's even more unpredictable.

I personally don't do those shufflings when I do Bracketology. I shuffle in toss-ups or close call scenarios, but not for avoiding re-matches. I also think like, there's no guarantee that matchup happens.

Pitt/Louisville matched up as a Regional Final last year though... even though I think that was the right call, if the committee WANTED to avoid it, they probably could have found a way to justify it. It wouldn't have been the craziest thing.

it’s funny this was brought up because it seems like some years they avoid conference rematches in the regionals and other years they don’t. For example, in 2019 with how they seeded Pitt, Wisconsin and Nebraska. I do not recall what the RPI was at selection time, but I could’ve sworn Pitt was higher than both but got shafted while the committee went with the conference matchup in the 4/5 regional. I really thought Pitt and Wisconsin were going to be the 4/5 pairing that year, and Nebraska was going to be sent to Stanford lol

[trojansc]

Nov 6, 2024 16:39:57 GMT -5 Resident Bitchy Canadian Fan said:

Nov 6, 2024 16:32:18 GMT -5 trojansc said:

I don't think there's any conclusive evidence that the committee will or won't do those things. And with committees changing every year, it's even more unpredictable.

I personally don't do those shufflings when I do Bracketology. I shuffle in toss-ups or close call scenarios, but not for avoiding re-matches. I also think like, there's no guarantee that matchup happens.

Pitt/Louisville matched up as a Regional Final last year though... even though I think that was the right call, if the committee WANTED to avoid it, they probably could have found a way to justify it. It wouldn't have been the craziest thing.

it’s funny this was brought up because it seems like some years they avoid conference rematches in the regionals and other years they don’t. For example, in 2019 with how they seeded Pitt, Wisconsin and Nebraska. I do not recall what the RPI was at selection time, but I could’ve sworn Pitt was higher than both but got shafted while the committee went with the conference matchup in the 4/5 regional. I really thought Pitt and Wisconsin were going to be the 4/5 pairing that year, and Nebraska was going to be sent to Stanford lol

But 2019 was the Year of Big Ten Bias. Like every decision went in the Big Ten's favor. They hammered Marquette for losing to a good St. John's team who beat Creighton as well, and took away Marquette's top 16 seed. They over-seeded Nebraska by putting them #5. They gave an at-large to Illinois, who didn't have better wins and has a worse RPI than Cal (though I thought Illinois should have stayed in the field, it was VCU who should have been left out).

And who was rewarded for getting Marquette's lost seed? Of course it wasn't Utah who could have been considered better.. it was Purdue.

I know a lot of people were shocked at Nebraska's seed that year. It could have been to avoid a rematch, or it could have just been the obsession with the Big Ten.

When the committee chair was asked about Illinois, she specifically mentioned she liked their performance/body of work in the Big Ten, which really wasn't that outstanding.

[naujack85]

4 of the top 8 seeds from the ACC all on one side for the bracket?

Say it aint so