Is NCAA selection show after ACC selection show?

Looks like you excluded the First Four games. Combine those 16 seeds into games where the winner plays Virginia and Gonzaga. Just doing that will slide everyone up 2 spots in the seedings and give you 2 more at large teams.

Then just add 2 more at larges to play whoever were your last 2 in's.

BTW this is really neat. Thanks for doing it.
Yep, I did. Mentioned it in #4 in my post before. I'm biased against a bigger-than-64 team field so I eliminated them :)

I'm even more biased against it as I see teams ranked in the 30s not making the tournament over St. John's.
 
Yep, I did. Mentioned it in #4 in my post before. I'm biased against a bigger-than-64 team field so I eliminated them :)

I'm even more biased against it as I see teams ranked in the 30s not making the tournament over St. John's.

Then just tell me who your first four out were using this method? Those are the teams that would be in those games if using this method for this years tournament in the current system.
 
Then just tell me who your first four out were using this method? Those are the teams that would be in those games if using this method for this years tournament in the current system.
There are 6 11s and 6 16s.

I eliminated the two worst 11s and the two worst 16s because I didn't want to go through the work of redoing all the seeds like I would have had to if i eliminated the four worst 16s.
 
Quite honestly in a one game tournament setting the stats go out the window. Iowa has been struggling to get the open shots they were getting lately. Between JBo, Moss, Joe W, and Baer I think we had a very good 3pt shooting team if we can get them open.
Totally agree. As we've seen, if we shoot/play like we did against Michigan (1st time) we can beat anyone. If we shoot/play like we did against Michigan (2nd time) anyone can beat us.
 
They have a NET ranking of 31 which is higher than ours. People could say the same thing about Iowa.

See, this is what’s wrong with the current selection process. People can’t be objective.

Statistically Florida is the 31st best team in the NCAA according to NET (and Sagarin/Kenpom confirm it by both rating them 28), yet we STILL have people who think they shouldn’t even make the tournament. Jesus Christ, folks...

All of those three ratings systems use actual statistical data with no human interaction. Are they perfect? No, because they were developed by humans. But they are completely impartial, which is what counts.
yeah but here's the thing, they've barely won more games then they've lost. its great they have some random number assigned to them by a computer, but in games they've actually played, they've basically broke even, there a barely over 500 ball club winning percentage wise. Florida is 19-15, iowa is 22-11. iowa wins 2 out of every 3 games, they are bascially 1 out of 2. its. i get the ratings and net and all that, i guess i just think a team whose barely won half their games, and against crappy teams, doesn't deserve to be in. other than some rating on the net configuration i can make a better argument for drake to be in then florida.
 
yeah but here's the thing, they've barely won more games then they've lost. its great they have some random number assigned to them by a computer, but in games they've actually played, they've basically broke even, there a barely over 500 ball club winning percentage wise. Florida is 19-15, iowa is 22-11. iowa wins 2 out of every 3 games, they are bascially 1 out of 2. its. i get the ratings and net and all that, i guess i just think a team whose barely won half their games, and against crappy teams, doesn't deserve to be in. other than some rating on the net configuration i can make a better argument for drake to be in then florida.
Lol, it’s not a random number assigned by a computer. Good lord.

The rankings are based on stats. Substantive stats. Florida has a much, much tougher schedule than Iowa, and is better in a bunch of other categories.

And the NET is validated by being very similar to the KP and Sagarin rating systems. In short, it’s a statistically rigorous, impartial ranking system.

Before you dismiss it, do some research on how it works.
 
Lol, it’s not a random number assigned by a computer. Good lord.

The rankings are based on stats. Substantive stats. Florida has a much, much tougher schedule than Iowa, and is better in a bunch of other categories.

And the NET is validated by being very similar to the KP and Sagarin rating systems. In short, it’s a statistically rigorous, impartial ranking system.

Before you dismiss it, do some research on how it works.
so I have, and I get the stats thing, I'm a math guy. I'm simply saying more important than any other stats you could point to should be wins and losses and there should be some legitimate winning percentage to be in the field. I look at Florida's record and their wins and losses and I think, man its great you played all these teams, but you should probably win a couple of them. I'm not actually comparing them to Iowa, you threw Iowa out there so I ran with, I'm saying they barely won a majority of their games. In which case I don't care about your analytics, win some dang games. Here's a stat, don't lose 15 games out of 34. And more than one of those wins should be against somebody with a pulse. They may have played some great schedule but they lost to all of em. So who cares how tough the schedule was, they lost to every good team on their schedule. They went 19-15, 19-15. They had a crappy year, and they're in the tournament.

We can agree to disagree, but rather than break out the standard be a jerk and say things like "actually do some research" lines, how bout you read my argument. you're arguing apples, and I'm arguing a filet o fish. Which you can get a second one of for a dollar extra at McDonald's right now. You know who can't get an extra something right now? Florida cause they only beat one good team on their whole dang schedule. But hey, agree to disagree. Moving on. Go Hawks!
 

Latest posts

Top