Bracket Matrix

[mikewebb68]

This has been posted here in prior year, but this link aggregates all of the major bracketology predictions together:

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/

Some observations:

1. I stated that OSU would be on the outside looking in if they lost to us by double digits and lost out, but that is not the story being told in the consensus brackets. They are rather comfortably in, and the Wisky OT loss does not probably change much for the brackets that have yet to be updated.
2. Indiana clearly has work to do if the consensus it to be believed. They are #3 in the first four out, which seems OK until you realize, there is a HUGE gap in the number of brackets in which they appear (29 of 76 total brackets) and the number of brackets the last team in occupies (Clemson, at 54). May need to win at least 2 in the BTT to be comfortably in..The only good news for Indiana is the competition behind them, save for Alabama, is not likely to pass them, as the bubbly is really, really soft again this year...
3. Arizona St. being last 4 in over Indiana and Belmont makes me physically ill. Hopefully that won't hold true
4. BIG 10 is appearing to be rewarded for its strength in the consensus thus far. with some excellent seed lines

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

This has been posted here in prior year, but this link aggregates all of the major bracketology predictions together:

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/

Some observations:

1. I stated that OSU would be on the outside looking in if they lost to us by double digits and lost out, but that is not the story being told in the consensus brackets. They are rather comfortably in, and the Wisky OT loss does not probably change much for the brackets that have yet to be updated.
2. Indiana clearly has work to do if the consensus it to be believed. They are #3 in the first four out, which seems OK until you realize, there is a HUGE gap in the number of brackets in which they appear (29 of 76 total brackets) and the number of brackets the last team in occupies (Clemson, at 54). May need to win at least 2 in the BTT to be comfortably in..The only good news for Indiana is the competition behind them, save for Alabama, is not likely to pass them, as the bubbly is really, really soft again this year...
3. Arizona St. being last 4 in over Indiana and Belmont makes me physically ill. Hopefully that won't hold true
4. BIG 10 is appearing to be rewarded for its strength in the consensus thus far. with some excellent seed lines

Interesting. Probably not a popular take here, but I think a team should have to go at least 500 in conference to get an invite. Similar to the bowl game 6 wins deal. Those 8 versus 9 games have zero appeal to me, even if projected to be close. Give me, Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Davidson and Furman. Good teams, excited to be there. I think they have an excellent shot against anyone in the 10 seed down. Why are Texas, Saint John’s and Florida allowed to limp in?

I know the PAC 12 stinks to high heaven this year, but why the ASU hate? They are at least winning games. Lastly, anytime Indiana and Archie Miller’s wife gets kicked to the curb is fine with me.

 

[CappyNU]

Those 8 versus 9 games have zero appeal to me, even if projected to be close.

The Northwestern-Vanderbilt game had zero appeal to you? For shame...

 

[Booty Maximus]

Interesting. Probably not a popular take here, but I think a team should have to go at least 500 in conference to get an invite.

If there's anything worse than using a data point that can't be reliable used within the very boundaries of its actual definition, much less outside of it, it would be assigning an arbitrary minimum value for that data point.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

If there's anything worse than using a data point that can't be reliable used within the very boundaries of its actual definition, much less outside of it, it would be assigning an arbitrary minimum value for that data point.

“Boundaries of its actual definition” Huh?

I need a decoder ring for the King’s English please.

 

[Booty Maximus]

“Boundaries of its actual definition” Huh?

I need a decoder ring for the King’s English please.

You can't even reliably compare conference records of teams in the same conference due to unbalanced scheduling. How can you possibly use it in the context of selecting at large teams?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

You can't even reliably compare conference records of teams in the same conference due to unbalanced scheduling. How can you possibly use it in the context of selecting at large teams?

Couldn’t you make the same conclusion on bowl selections in football?

Also, then what basis do you use when choosing between a set of similar teams?

My point is personally I would rather watch UNC Greensboro play NC State than watch Ohio State play NC State. There should be 2-3 more mid majors in the tourney each year instead of this VERY average teams that limp in winning 3 of their last 10.

 

[mikewebb68]

Interesting. Probably not a popular take here, but I think a team should have to go at least 500 in conference to get an invite. Similar to the bowl game 6 wins deal. Those 8 versus 9 games have zero appeal to me, even if projected to be close. Give me, Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Davidson and Furman. Good teams, excited to be there. I think they have an excellent shot against anyone in the 10 seed down. Why are Texas, Saint John’s and Florida allowed to limp in?

I know the PAC 12 stinks to high heaven this year, but why the ASU hate? They are at least winning games. Lastly, anytime Indiana and Archie Miller’s wife gets kicked to the curb is fine with me.

Uh, because ASU plays in a garbage conference, and they would have a record similar to Nebby's if they played in the BIG?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Uh, because ASU plays in a garbage conference, and they would have a record similar to Nebby's if they played in the BIG?

So you would get physically ill if they get in the tourney instead of that “powerhouse” Indiana team?

 

[mikewebb68]

So you would get physically ill if they get in the tourney instead of that “powerhouse” Indiana team?

Yup. Let's see if I can put this in terms you can understand. Remembrer Utah? You know, that team we absolutely annihilated earlier this season? They finished THIRD in the lol Pac 12! THIRD! If there was ever a Power 5 conference that fully deserved only one bid, it is the Pac-12 this year...and I've watched a lot of Pac-12 games because I like Walton...

Indiana would slaughter Arizona St. In a neutral site game...

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Yup. Let's see if I can put this in terms you can understand. Remembrer Utah? You know, that team we absolutely annihilated earlier this season? They finished THIRD in the lol Pac 12! THIRD! If there was ever a Power 5 conference that fully deserved only one bid, it is the Pac-12 this year...and I've watched a lot of Pac-12 games because I like Walton...

Indiana would slaughter Arizona St. In a neutral site game...

Uh, I think I can understand, doesn’t mean I have to agree. My point I was/is I would rather see the Belmont’s, UNCG’s, Furman’s and Davidson’s in the tourney than the last 4 in. I didn’t indicate if that I thought they were better or not. For the record, I think all 4 of those teams are good enough to beat the lower Power conference teams in the tourney and I would expect close games. They certainly wouldn’t have been Boatraced and I personally would find the games more interesting. UNCG won 28 games and will be NIT bound.

I could care less about ASU, but I would hardly be ill if they made it instead of a 8-12 Big Ten Indiana team or a stumbling OSU. I don’t stay up and watch a lot of PAC-12 games like you, but based on your bracket matrix projections ASU did very well against teams projected to be in the Tourney. 5-1 with wins over then #1 Kansas and The PAC ten champion Washington. The lone loss was a 6 point defeat to then number 6 Nevada. Indiana not so good against projected tourney teams at 5-10. Again, I only asked why you reacted so strongly to ASU and inferred they were significantly inferior to Indiana. I am not suggesting ASU is some powerhouse and I agree with your “garbage league” for the PAC 12. However, the second place team in the garbage league has a resume that sure seems to be aligned with the 9 team in the Big 10. Indiana is like a box of chocolates. Indiana can look good like they have against MSU or terribad like they did against Minny. I would agree that Indiana would probably win ( although they are good at finding ways to lose) against ASU, but let’s not act like it is an outrage if they are selected. They may stink like you suggest, but on paper they are in the selection conversation. Ironically, if they do make it, there is a chance they draw a Big Ten team.

Bottom line is I would rather see a few of these 25 win plus teams from smaller conferences that these 500 or below teams in major conferences instead of teams like Indiana, OSU or ASU. I find it more interesting. You disagree, so we’ll move on.

 

[mikewebb68]

Uh, I think I can understand, doesn’t mean I have to agree. My point I was/is I would rather see the Belmont’s, UNCG’s, Furman’s and Davidson’s in the tourney than the last 4 in. I didn’t indicate if that I thought they were better or not. For the record, I think all 4 of those teams are good enough to beat the lower Power conference teams in the tourney and I would expect close games. They certainly wouldn’t have been Boatraced and I personally would find the games more interesting. UNCG won 28 games and will be NIT bound.

I could care less about ASU, but I would hardly be ill if they made it instead of a 8-12 Big Ten Indiana team or a stumbling OSU. I don’t stay up and watch a lot of PAC-12 games like you, but based on your bracket matrix projections ASU did very well against teams projected to be in the Tourney. 5-1 with wins over then #1 Kansas and The PAC ten champion Washington. The lone loss was a 6 point defeat to then number 6 Nevada. Indiana not so good against projected tourney teams at 5-10. Again, I only asked why you reacted so strongly to ASU and inferred they were significantly inferior to Indiana. I am not suggesting ASU is some powerhouse and I agree with your “garbage league” for the PAC 12. However, the second place team in the garbage league has a resume that sure seems to be aligned with the 9 team in the Big 10. Indiana is like a box of chocolates. Indiana can look good like they have against MSU or terribad like they did against Minny. I would agree that Indiana would probably win ( although they are good at finding ways to lose) against ASU, but let’s not act like it is an outrage if they are selected. They may stink like you suggest, but on paper they are in the selection conversation. Ironically, if they do make it, there is a chance they draw a Big Ten team.

Bottom line is I would rather see a few of these 25 win plus teams from smaller conferences that these 500 or below teams in major conferences instead of teams like Indiana, OSU or ASU. I find it more interesting. You disagree, so we’ll move on.

I'm guessing that I must be a horrible communicator, so I will try one more time. You know that PAC 12 champion Washington, that really strong team that ASU beat, one of only 6 projected Dance teams they played all sesson? (to put that in perspective, we've played six Dance teams---in the past month!). Well,ELEVEN BIG teams are ranked ahead of Washington in KenPom. ELEVEN. And guess who one of those 11 is?

Can you understand now why it should be an easy call for Belmont and Indiana to get in over Arizona State?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I'm guessing that I must be a horrible communicator, so I will try one more time. You know that PAC 12 champion Washington, that really strong team that ASU beat, one of only 6 projected Dance teams they played all sesson? (to put that in perspective, we've played six Dance teams---in the past month!). Well,ELEVEN BIG teams are ranked ahead of Washington in KenPom. ELEVEN. And guess who one of those 11 is?

Can you understand now why it should be an easy call for Belmont and Indiana to get in over Arizona State?

I am obviously a terrible communicator as well, so maybe we are made for each other.

My point is the tourney would be more INTERESTING to ME if the strong mid majors that get the 25+ wins like the 4 I mentioned were given a shot versus the sub 500 teams in the stronger conferences. The facts are neither these 4 or the sub 500 Big conference teams are a threat to win the Natty. They win 1 or maybe 2 games at most.

You won’t have to worry about ASU making the tourney if KenPom has any say in the matter. However, you may have to worry about Penn State making it in and ruining your number of teams making it in from the Big Ten prediction.

 

[mikewebb68]

I am obviously a terrible communicator as well, so maybe we are made for each other.

My point is the tourney would be more INTERESTING to ME if the strong mid majors that get the 25+ wins like the 4 I mentioned were given a shot versus the sub 500 teams in the stronger conferences. The facts are neither these 4 or the sub 500 Big conference teams are a threat to win the Natty. They win 1 or maybe 2 games at most.

You won’t have to worry about ASU making the tourney if KenPom has any say in the matter. However, you may have to worry about Penn State making it in and ruining your number of teams making it in from the Big Ten prediction.

Fair point. I prefer that the best at-large teams get in because they are well, the best. Belmont and Indiana are two of those teams, imo. Arizona St. Is clearly not,imo. You accused me of hating on Arizona St.because I made this point; zero to do with what would make for an "interesting" tournament, which is an entirely different discussion,imo.

 

[Booty Maximus]

Couldn’t you make the same conclusion on bowl selections in football?

I don't think they use conference records for bowl selections?

Also, then what basis do you use when choosing between a set of similar teams?

My point is personally I would rather watch UNC Greensboro play NC State than watch Ohio State play NC State. There should be 2-3 more mid majors in the tourney each year instead of this VERY average teams that limp in winning 3 of their last 10.

You use the entire body of work, not just a small subset of games that the team had no input in scheduling. There's a whole slew of criteria to use, conference record is one of the least useful.

I'm guessing if you put UNC Greensboro in the Big Ten or ACC, they'd probably "limp in winning 3 of their last 10" as well. Depending on their schedule of course, which is why the "last 10" isn't used either - too much "luck of the draw" with conference schedules.

Every team in the country has the opportunity to earn a bid by winning their conference tournament. The problem with creating arbitrary rules to get more of the "good" mid major teams in the field is those same rules would probably result in even more mediocre/bad mid major teams getting in that don't deserve it.

What's really hurt the mid major leagues is conference consolidation. It's ravaged leagues like the MVC, which lost good programs like Creighton and Wichita St, now it's a 1 bid league instead of frequently having a couple of worthy teams.

 

[mikewebb68]

Some updates:

1) Indiana moved up one position to 2nd out, largely due to the inclusion of additional brackets. And with NC State only appearing on 15 more brackets than Indiana now, there appears to be less work to do to get in, particularly with NC State and Clemson, two of the last four in, playing each other.
2) Looks likes Gonzaga's loss is already going to crush Belmont's dreams if the consensus is any indication
3) However, Bracketville (https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/) the most accurate bracket predictor over the last 5 years, gives Belmont a bit of a better shot. as 2nd out. It also has 9 BIG teams at this point, with Indiana (last 4 byes) actually in a more favorable position than OSU (last 4 in) at this point, which, as I previously posted, makes a lot more sense to me.