NCAA Top Seed Scenarios

[tommy]

P.S. I think sporthenry makes a very good point - the NCAA Selection Committee is, for the first time, releasing (and discussing on TV at length) their 1-68 rankings and the S-curve. This as much as anything will hamper any shenanigans like dropping Duke to #8 overall in order to get them into KY's region. Odds are pretty good for us to be a 2-seed, but ultimately it shouldn't matter much whether we are a late-#1 selection or early-#2 pick. Either way, the Elite-8 matchup would be against one of KA or MSU (though the path there might be slightly easier as a #1)...

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.

[uh_no]

Lunardi currently has us as a #2 seed potentially facing resurgent UConn in the 2nd round....yuck.

well we (and especially me) can take comfort in the fact that joe lunardi's matchups are almost always wrong.

[throatybeard]

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.

People from the committee insist, when interviewed, that they don't actively pursue "interesting" matchups, but I have trouble believing they won't try to set up a Duke-Kentucky matchup in the twentieth anniversary year, if they can and still follow the rules.

[Karl Beem]

People from the committee insist, when interviewed, that they don't actively pursue "interesting" matchups, but I have trouble believing they won't try to set up a Duke-Kentucky matchup in the twentieth anniversary year, if they can and still follow the rules.

Duke plays UK next November in the Champions Classic.

[sporthenry]

They generally justify their selections regardless. People may not like their reasons, but they exist. They gave a reason why VCU was in the field for example. It was they had a good rpi, but they gave the reason. They give reasons for seeding...like why florida was a 2 seed last year and UK was not...

It will not change the way they actually do the bracketing. If they feel like they want to put a 2 seed closer geographically but with a better 1 seed then they would have faced otherwise, they will still do so. As someone pointed out, there are rules, and there are guidlines. The committee changes from year to year, and they can interpret the guidlines differently (or choose to bend them more from year to year).

Releasing the S-curve is more to give people things to talk about...to provide even more transparency in the process. In the end, after the first could seed lines, the S curve is largely meaningless. Teams are allowed to move a seedline in either directino (and likely often do) in order to satisfy other rules (where they can play, when they can play, against whom they can play) In the end we get what they happened to make work.

It will be interesting to see how they match the top 4 seeds though. I just don't think they will build the bracket any differently knowing that the s-curve is public. It will simply give conspiracy theorists something to complain about when their 8 seed team was pushed back to a 9 seed to avoid playing someone from their own conference....

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.

[sporthenry]

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.

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.

[tommy]

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.

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.

[FerryFor50]

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.

[hurleyfor3]

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.

[Billy Dat]

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 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.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

When we win the tournament, we'll be a #1 seed. Syracuse will also be a #1 seed, today's loss means nothing.

[CDu]

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'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.

[FerryFor50]

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 agree that Syracuse is a lock for a 1.

But them losing could help in terms of placement...

[CDu]

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.

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.

[CDu]

I agree that Syracuse is a lock for a 1.

But them losing could help in terms of placement...

We won't jump them in placement. They're going to be the #2 overall regardless.

[sporthenry]

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.

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.

[DukeWarhead]

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.

[CDu]

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.

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.

[FerryFor50]

We won't jump them in placement. They're going to be the #2 overall regardless.

I was thinking in terms of some of the asinine decisions made over late season performances. There have been head scratchers before... but was probably more wishful thinking.

[FerryFor50]

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 should 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 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.

The perfect bracket:

#1 Kentucky
#2 UNC
#3 Kansas

But that won't happen...