Bracketology (11/12)

[ay2013]

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

[ay2013]

Nov 14, 2024 17:39:44 GMT -5 azsker said:

I want my final four to be Nebraska vs Louisville and Pitt vs Wisconsin so the bracket needs to reflect that possibility and this one doesn’t so it’s not for me

well, blame Wisconsin for losing so much. This wouldn't be much of an issue if they had a solid look at the 4 or 5 seed....

[avid 2.0]

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

i accept. 

[uofaGRAD]

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

please

[trianglevolleyball]

Nov 14, 2024 17:42:27 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 14, 2024 17:34:18 GMT -5 mikegarrison said:

I feel like I should point out that RPI Futures and Pablo are not independent, because Pablo is used to generate the RPI Futures.

If Pablo has a team too high (or too low), then RPI Futures will be predicting their RPI too high (or too low).

But like regardless of whatever you want to use in this instance, RPI Futures is using Pablo to predict 1 more loss - Kansas only has 2 opponents remaining that have records above .500 and they have a home match against one of those teams.

You’re looking at the wrong schedule. They have home games against two good teams (one is the hottest in the conference) and an away game against a team that they squeaked by in 5 at home playing very well right now.

Kansas also is struggling majorly. Their opposite can’t hit positive. 2 losses is very much a possibility and 1 should keep them out of the top ten.

[maigrey]

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

I rebuke any bracket that has us going to Pitt. Try again.

[trianglevolleyball]

Nov 14, 2024 17:34:21 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

Nov 14, 2024 17:22:18 GMT -5 bbg95 said:

Penn State's best win is way better than any Creighton win.

If that is the criteria - then SMU should be the #2 seed.

Penn State (if they beat Purdue and end up with only 3 losses on the season) will be a top 4 seed.  They will have the edge over Creighton because of common opponents and deserve the seed.  However, that doesn't mean that Penn State's wins are better than Creighton - because they aren't (necessarily).

I do agree it’s H2H and Common Opponent keeping them out. Better wins is not criteria but I’d assume it’s on the mind when the margins are thin and you’ve been discussing said teams for seeds.

And they are necessarily better. And will remain so. Simplify it by cancelling out the shared wins.

Do you seriously think the committee is going to look at a team with wins over #3, #10, #16 against a team with wins over #11, #15, and #19 X3 and say “well it’s somewhat impressive Penn State beat a team we just gave a regional to, but holy cow look at how many times Creighton beat #19!!” They could even change the Big East Tournament to a 10 game H2H against Marquette and I still would not look at their set of wins as stronger.

You also missed the PSU three possible future T50 wins when boasting about Creighton’s dominance over teams ranked 15-50.

[trojansc]

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

In this bracket, if you had to take geography into account, USC would have to go to Arizona State. Georgia Tech would have to go to Kentucky. Dayton would have to go to Purdue. Some of those would require multiple moves to avoid intra-conference.

[blue10]

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

uh switch Pitt and Nebraska pls then I’m happy

[ay2013]

Nov 14, 2024 20:17:48 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

In this bracket, if you had to take geography into account, USC would have to go to Arizona State. Georgia Tech would have to go to Kentucky. Dayton would have to go to Purdue. Some of those would require multiple moves to avoid intra-conference.

I'm fine with those changes, but that begs the question...what if geography and intra-conference matchups conflict within the 4 team seed range? what takes precedent (I would assume intra-conference takes precedent)? Putting someone in a different seed line just to avoid one of those two things seems wrong to me....which is why they should just seed the entire bracket and let the chips fall where they may.

[horns1]

Nov 14, 2024 20:17:48 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 14, 2024 17:58:03 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

selection criteria notwithstanding, this is the bracket of the top 32 that I propose:

in brackets are their seeded sub regional team:

1- Pitt (Oklahoma)
8- Wisconsin (Marquette)
9- ASU (Texas A&M)
16- TCU (Missouri)

2- Nebraska (North Carolina)
7- SMU (Washington)
10- Kansas (Florida)
15- Utah (Dayton)

3- Louisville (LMU)
6- Penn State (Miami-FL)
11- Texas (Georgia Tech)
14- Oregon (BYU)

4- Creighton (Florida State)
5- Stanford (Minnesota)
12- Kentucky (USC)
13- Purdue (Baylor)

5 Seeds: Dayton, Missouri, BYU, Baylor
6 Seeds: USC, Florida, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M,
7 Seeds: Marquette, Minnesota, Washington, Miami-FL
8 Seeds: North Carolina, Florida State, LMU, Oklahoma

In this bracket, if you had to take geography into account, USC would have to go to Arizona State. Georgia Tech would have to go to Kentucky. Dayton would have to go to Purdue. Some of those would require multiple moves to avoid intra-conference.

But, since ASU, GT, A&M, and Florida are on the 6-line, the 2 SEC schools (A&M and Florida) can't get sent to 3-seed SEC schools Texas or Kentucky.  Which is prioritized more -- avoiding intra-conference matchups in the sub-regionals, or drive-ins?

[trojansc]

Nov 14, 2024 20:36:34 GMT -5 horns1 said:

Nov 14, 2024 20:17:48 GMT -5 trojansc said:

In this bracket, if you had to take geography into account, USC would have to go to Arizona State. Georgia Tech would have to go to Kentucky. Dayton would have to go to Purdue. Some of those would require multiple moves to avoid intra-conference.

But, since ASU, GT, A&M, and Florida are on the 6-line, the 2 SEC schools (A&M and Florida) can't get sent to 3-seed SEC schools Texas or Kentucky.  Which is prioritized more -- avoiding intra-conference matchups in the sub-regionals, or drive-ins?

That is true, so, in this example, you would only be able to move one.

Well, actually, I guess it's never happened, but, I am assuming that intra-conference matchup is the most important first, and then adjust for geography if able.

[FTLOG]

Motivated Reasoning: a cognitive process where people use reason to justify their existing beliefs or desires, rather than to discover what is true. This can lead people to favor arguments that support their current beliefs and reject information that contradicts them.

(I know y'all know this, but I always love this thread because it's *such* a great example of this. None of us are immune.)

[bluepenquin]

Nov 14, 2024 19:17:05 GMT -5 trianglevolleyball said:

Nov 14, 2024 17:34:21 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

If that is the criteria - then SMU should be the #2 seed.

Penn State (if they beat Purdue and end up with only 3 losses on the season) will be a top 4 seed.  They will have the edge over Creighton because of common opponents and deserve the seed.  However, that doesn't mean that Penn State's wins are better than Creighton - because they aren't (necessarily).

I do agree it’s H2H and Common Opponent keeping them out. Better wins is not criteria but I’d assume it’s on the mind when the margins are thin and you’ve been discussing said teams for seeds.

And they are necessarily better. And will remain so. Simplify it by cancelling out the shared wins.

Do you seriously think the committee is going to look at a team with wins over #3, #10, #16 against a team with wins over #11, #15, and #19 X3 and say “well it’s somewhat impressive Penn State beat a team we just gave a regional to, but holy cow look at how many times Creighton beat #19!!” They could even change the Big East Tournament to a 10 game H2H against Marquette and I still would not look at their set of wins as stronger.

You also missed the PSU three possible future T50 wins when boasting about Creighton’s dominance over teams ranked 15-50.

I have said MULTIPLE times that Penn State's current and likely future resume is better than Creighton and will give them a top 4 seed.  My response was to you saying that Creighton has the 'worst set of wins we've ever seen' (from a team in consideration for a top 4 seed).  I think this is false.  I have shown that the list of Creighton wins is similar to Penn State this year (and superior to San Diego 2 years ago and Texas last year).  I have used Pablo and RPI to make this case - which you want to dismiss.  Instead - you want to cite that Kansas really isn't that good because they bled some sets to Kansas State while not using that standard when talking about PSU sets lost to Yale, Ohio State, Iowa, and Northwestern.

Right now - according to Figstats RPI - Creighton has played a tougher schedule than Penn State while having the same record.  RPI Futures believes that Penn State's SOS will close that gap by the end of the season and Creighton and Penn State will essentially have the same SOS (as calculated by RPI) - and the only likely way for Penn State to not have a worse record is for them to win the rest of their matches.

You continue to downgrade Creighton's quality of wins, schedule and resume as determined by the committee.  Creighton's resume (assuming they win out) will be very solid based on the standards the typical committee uses.  

[comet]

trojansc

Is MN pretty set in stone to go to Creighton or are there any other possibilities?