But you're forgetting that the #2 seeds are placed with as much, or perhaps more, of a nod to geography than they are to the straight S-curve. Because of that, if we're a #2, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see us in the Atlanta region, which is likely to be where Kentucky is.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
Their usual justifications run mostly for the last few teams in and #1 seeds but in the five or so minutes on the CBS or ESPN program, you rarely if ever see them talk about actual seedings and matchups (Like best #3 and worst #2). I'm aware of the regional preferences but I think many would much rather see the #5 team play the #4 team regardless of location. The committee is supposed to balance out the top 4 so each bracket is relatively fair and I could pull up a few brackets where there was that tough bracket. Now the committee could just change the S-curve to fit their bracket but that could also make it obvious if Duke gets to Sunday and somehow falls to 8 on the S-curve.
I'm not saying it will change much but I think it will put a little seed in the back of the committee's mind where they know they have an hour on TV and the S-curve is published so they will have to justify every little thing as opposed to just who got a 1 or 2 or who got in. Now it will be, why did #1 overall get the best #2 and 2nd best #4.
And I think this is where the committee will probably get criticized on the most either this year or at some point especially with the S-curve being published. I know the guideline is regional preference but many analysts tend to agree that it is much better to have the best 2 seed play the worst 1 seed which I tend to agree. The gap between 5 and 8 is usually significant so to see the #5 team play the #1 team when they could very well play the #8 team makes no sense to me. They try to bring up travel but those top 10 teams travel a lot so it shouldn't be a huge issue and funding can be derived from the millions made in the next few weeks if that becomes an issue.
I hope they answer those types of questions, but if history is any guide, they won't. I find those little "interviews" that the committee chair does with CBS after the bracket comes out to be so maddening. The chair basically just speaks in vague generalities and platitudes about how many well-qualified teams there were, how difficult the process was, how close these teams are to those teams, how they can't really get into these specifics or those, and just to "trust us, this is as fair to everyone as it can be" and is the interview over now? I think this year will be no different -- he'll just have to continue to dodge the real questions for a little longer than usual.
I say if Duke wins the ACC tourny, they get a #1.
Heck, if they make the final, they still could get a #1 if Mizzou ends up losing in their tourny...
I never understood why Kansas was ahead of Duke to begin with with identical records and a head to head loss to Duke.
Syracuse is not, not, not, not, not dropping to a 2.
Nor is unc.
I think unc has to lose to ncsu and we have to win the ACC championship to snag the other #1, and even then it's not really likely.
Syracuse has only 2 losses.
The Big 12 was considered a better conference, especially at the top where KU, Baylor and Missouri has some great battles. Plus, KU played a really nasty schedule, too.
If we can win the ACCs and beat the Heels, we have a shot. Even then, it will be tough. If Missouri loses, too, it makes it easier, but we still have to win. I don't see it (getting a #1 even with an ACC tourny win) happening but I'll hope for it.
Last edited by Billy Dat; 03-09-2012 at 09:54 PM.
When we win the tournament, we'll be a #1 seed. Syracuse will also be a #1 seed, today's loss means nothing.
Ozzie, your paradigm of optimism!
Go To Hell carolina, Go To Hell!
9F 9F 9F
https://ecogreen.greentechaffiliate.com
Syracuse's loss is irrelevant. They're a lock for a #1 even with today's loss. Same for Kentucky, who is pretty clearly the #1 overall seed.
Kansas losing will help our cause. We'll need to make the finals and it wouldn't hurt to have UNC lose at some point too. But I think we've got a reasonable shot at a #1 if we keep winning.
I'm not sure that I agree. We've split with UNC and have many more quality wins (6 vs top-25) than they do (2). If we beat UNC in the final, there is no doubt we're the #1 seed over them. As is, if both of us lose early, I think you could still make a case for us over UNC. UNC is definitely the better team, but we have a better resume.
We also have a better RPI than Kansas and one more good win (basically the head-to-head win). I'd put us ahead of them, too. Same for Mizzou, unless they win their conference and we don't.
Basically, after UK and then Syracuse, I think we currently have as good a resume as anybody. We'll see how the Big-12 and ACC tourneys play out, though. A lot can still be decided.
Not sure why you think UNC is that high and mighty. They have some bad losses and if we beat them straight up 2/3 times, they only have the unbalanced ACC regular season championship. Traditionally, the committee looks favorably upon the tournament winners and even Doug Gottlieb on ESPN said that on paper, Duke's numbers are better which is what the committee usually pays more attention to. Now beating UNC will be a challenge but beating MSU, KU, and UNC twice will look very good come Sunday night.
I think Kansas losing is huge, at least, it should be.
They will end with a worse (or same) record as Duke, Duke won the head to head, and will finish with a higher RPI strength. Ever since KU's (albeit impressive) win againt Mizzou at home, people have been putting them down as a lock for #1. They shouldn't be automatically ahead of us, thought. On paper, Duke looks just a tad bit stronger.
If Duke can win just one more, thereby guaranteeing a better overall record than Kansas, that will be very big, I would think.
Then again, if MSU wins out, Duke and KU might both end up as #2s.
I must admit a bias here. After being surrounded by rather obnoxius KU fans for a number of years, I very much like
the idea of them having the rug swept out from under them this evening. I also want to see UNC and KU in the same bracket - that way I know at least one of them will not make the final 4.
Yup. If we win the ACC tournament, we'll be the third #1 seed. No questions asked. Our resume will be unquestionably better than UNC, Kansas, Mizzou, OSU, MSU, and anyone else laying claim to such a placement.
The question for me is, how early could we lose in the ACC tournament and still get a #1 seed? Hopefully, we won't have to find that out.