Regressing: How Bad Did The Committee Seed The Tourney?

[Churlish79]

Great article on committee seeding by Deadspin's Stats wing Regressing:

Iowa shout outs for this year.

http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-badly-did-the-ncaa-tourney-committee-mess-up-this-y-1552788045

 

[kicker22]

IMO the arguments about Wichita States draw/region would have held more merit if they actually beat a few of the heavyweights before bowing out. I just don't understand the complaint, regardless of going undefeated, they simply didn't have "big" wins over respectable opponents.

I should add however that whichever team emerges from the Midwest region survived the "group of death", but I don't think Wichita State got hosed in the selection process after they bowed out after playing the first team (albeit a very good one) with a pulse.

 

[PCHawk]

When you're a 1 seed and you play a team that good in the second round, you got hosed. I would agree with you if they got dominated in that game but that wasn't the case.

 

[WindsorHawk]

I don't care if they went undefeated. Teams get left out for their SOS. Seeds should also be impacted. They should have been a 3 seed IMO.

 

[sportstalent]

I don't care if they went undefeated. Teams get left out for their SOS. Seeds should also be impacted. They should have been a 3 seed IMO.

It would have been better for them...let's remember Kentucky was Top 3 everywhere in the preseason. They played like it against WSU and if they play that well against UL they will win by double digits.

 

[sportstalent]

Of course, three of the four final four teams from last year and none of them had significant drop off were put in the same bracket...that makes a whole lot of sense.

 

[HawkeyeTech]

I noticed that he had Kansas as an expected 2 seed, which is where they ended up. Would someone please enlighten me as to how a team with 9 losses deserves a 2 seed? I don't care how much 'talent' is on a team, 9 losses makes you a 4 seed at best.

 

[528646]

. <= world's tiniest violin playing a sad, mournful tune for Wichita State.

Give me a freaking break - YOU WERE OVERRATED, DEAL WITH IT!

They went undefeated w/o playing a single Top 25 team in a ONE FREAKING BID CONFERENCE.

 

[DDThompson]

When you're a 1 seed and you play a team that good in the second round, you got hosed. I would agree with you if they got dominated in that game but that wasn't the case.

Final Four teams that return everyone a year older should be able to beat a team overrun with freshmen whether it was in the 2nd round or elite eight.

Maybe they were hosed in the 32 round. They would lose to L'ville in the 16 and still claimed they got hosed.

a mid-major that played nobody in the regular season and whose coach demands they be a number one seed and who says, "wolves are not concerned about the opinion of sheep" . . . . well, when the NCAA puts you in the toughest of bracket so that you actually have to prove you have fangs . . .well, gues what, "the sheep are not concerned about the whining howls of wolves in a trap."

 

[sportstalent]

When you're a 1 seed and you play a team that good in the second round, you got hosed. I would agree with you if they got dominated in that game but that wasn't the case.

It has been the best game of the tournament, competitive at the highest level. WSU was a great team this year and Kentucky played their best game of the season, it wouldn't surprise me if they lost to UL by double digits given the way they played against WSU.

 

[sportstalent]

Final Four teams that return everyone a year older should be able to beat a team overrun with freshmen whether it was in the 2nd round or elite eight.

Maybe they were hosed in the 32 round. They would lose to L'ville in the 16 and still claimed they got hosed.

a mid-major that played nobody in the regular season and whose coach demands they be a number one seed and who says, "wolves are not concerned about the opinion of sheep" . . . . well, when the NCAA puts you in the toughest of bracket so that you actually have to prove you have fangs . . .well, gues what, "the sheep are not concerned about the whining howls of wolves in a trap."

They didn't return everyone, so your theory is null and void. They returned their best player in Anthony, but Van Fleet was not a starter and Baker didn't start last season as a starter and IIRC, they lost their best Center as well. WSU was a great team and I think if they beat Kentucky they would have beaten UL, but that is all water under the bridge because they didn't beat Kentucky.

I guess the way I look at it, I am not surprised the lost to Kentucky given UK was a preseason Top 3 team and has a ton of talent. Also your whole hey didn't play anyone is crap because they made the Final Four last year, but not as high seed. The pressure got to them just like Gonzaga weather they will ever admit it or not. The game with them and UK was the game of the tournament and watching it, I am still surprised they lost, but they did. Sometimes the best teams don't always win a one game knock out, ask Duke, Kansas, Syracuse and every No. 5 seed, except St. Louis.

This is what the NCAA tournament is...great basketball and upsets, the best teams don't always win, but that I why I love it. Again, why put 3 of the 4 Final Four teams from the previous year in the same bracket?

 

[DDThompson]

They didn't return everyone, so your theory is null and void. They returned their best player in Anthony, but Van Fleet was not a starter and Baker didn't start last season as a starter and IIRC, they lost their best Center as well. WSU was a great team and I think if they beat Kentucky they would have beaten UL, but that is all water under the bridge because they didn't beat Kentucky.

Obviously an exaggeration to prove the point. They were not a great team because they didn't beat anyone in the season and then couldn't beat a bunch of kiddies in the tourney. They were a good team, not a great team. There are no great teams this season.

Why put 3 of the final four teams in the same bracket? Well, here's one possibility.

whose coach demands they be a number one seed (when they haven't played anyone) and who says, "wolves are not concerned about the opinion of sheep" . . . . well, when the NCAA puts you in the toughest of bracket so that you actually have to prove you have fangs..."

But I would ask, why is it assumed that 3 final four teams in the same bracket is designed to take down WSU?
Are the other two final four teams complaining?

 

[sportstalent]

Obviously an exaggeration to prove the point. They were not a great team because they didn't beat anyone in the season and then couldn't beat a bunch of kiddies in the tourney. They were a good team, not a great team. There are no great teams this season.

Why put 3 of the final four teams in the same bracket? Well, here's one possibility.

whose coach demands they be a number one seed (when they haven't played anyone) and who says, "wolves are not concerned about the opinion of sheep" . . . . well, when the NCAA puts you in the toughest of bracket so that you actually have to prove you have fangs..."

But I would ask, why is it assumed that 3 final four teams in the same bracket is designed to take down WSU?
Are the other two final four teams complaining?

They should be and a ton of media folks have latched onto this bracket asking the same thing. WSU was and is a great team as I said before look at where UK started in the polls so it isn't like they were chopped liver. Had WSU lost to K-State my opinion may change a little bit.

The pressure that comes with the 1-seed is the same pressure Gonzaga had to go through. Fact is they couldn't sneak up on anyone and the UK team they played had superior talent at each position, worst possible matchup WSU could draw.

 

[tm3308]

They should be and a ton of media folks have latched onto this bracket asking the same thing. WSU was and is a great team as I said before look at where UK started in the polls so it isn't like they were chopped liver. Had WSU lost to K-State my opinion may change a little bit.

The pressure that comes with the 1-seed is the same pressure Gonzaga had to go through. Fact is they couldn't sneak up on anyone and the UK team they played had superior talent at each position, worst possible matchup WSU could draw.

This. If/when Kentucky plays the way they did against WSU, I'm not sure anyone in the field would beat them. Way too much talent when they're playing their best.

 

[DDThompson]

They should be and a ton of media folks have latched onto this bracket asking the same thing. WSU was and is a great team as I said before look at where UK started in the polls so it isn't like they were chopped liver. Had WSU lost to K-State my opinion may change a little bit.

The same media that you are using to support your question is also the same media that says there are no great teams in college basketball this season. There are many good teams; no great teams.

The pressure that comes with the 1-seed is the same pressure Gonzaga had to go through. Fact is they couldn't sneak up on anyone and the UK team they played had superior talent at each position, worst possible matchup WSU could draw. a mid-major that played nobody in the regular season and whose coach demands they be a number one seed and who says, "wolves are not concerned about the opinion of sheep" . . . . well, when the NCAA puts you in the toughest of bracket so that you actually have to prove you have fangs . . .well, gues what, "the sheep are not concerned about the whining howls of wolves in a trap."

 

[docholihawk]

The only point I would make is I thought Iowa should have been a 10 seed. Before the tournament teams were announced I never saw one thing claiming Iowa was in the last 4 in bracket. Higher seeds were messed up but it is the NCAA, when have they ever done things the right way in any situation. They have schools who they prefer to win. How else can schools who are poor in athletics get a prominent booster like Phil Knight or T. Boone Pickens and all of a sudden these schools go from mid level success to national title contenders.

 

[Igothawked]

The only point I would make is I thought Iowa should have been a 10 seed. Before the tournament teams were announced I never saw one thing claiming Iowa was in the last 4 in bracket. Higher seeds were messed up but it is the NCAA, when have they ever done things the right way in any situation. They have schools who they prefer to win. How else can schools who are poor in athletics get a prominent booster like Phil Knight or T. Boone Pickens and all of a sudden these schools go from mid level success to national title contenders.

I personally thought the Hawks were gonna be the 10 seed in the midwest region until the Sunday of conference tourney week. UVA won the ACC and Mich lost to MSU. I think had Mich won the B1G tourney or UVA lost to Duke in ACC champ game, UVA would have been the 2 seed in midwest region and Mich would have gotten that 4th 1 seed planting Iowa as the 10 seed playing Texas.