The last #1 seed

[SU Nittany Tide]

Yep but none of the teams on the 8/9 line apparently got punished . Oklahoma lost to WVU, Baylor got smoked , VCU lost to Rhode Island , Washington got crushed by Oregon and Iowa has a better resume than all those teams before the conference tourneys so not sure how losing to Michigan is worse than those losses

I'd rather be a 10 than an 8 or 9 in general. I believe 10's have a better track record of making it deeper in the tournament even if they might be less likely to win the first game.

 

[7Samurai13]

I think the committee actually mixed up the 2 teams but are too embarrassed to admit it. There's no reason for UM to have an easier draw than MSU.

Very good point, had not thought of that.

 

[catlanta33]

I still don't get unc over Kentucky. Identical records and similar metrics. UNC's essentially best two wins came against a short handed team. Kentucky easily beat them on a neutral court.

Oh well. Their paths potentially cross.

I don't know how a UK fan can even be surprised anymore. You know what's shocking and telling? Duke and UNC have never met in the NCAAs. UK, meanwhile, has faced UL, IU, Kansas, UCLA, and UNC within the last ten years and Duke going back to 1998.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the draw this year. I think they fucked UNC and Michigan State over if any 1 or 2 has a complaint.

But, it's funny to see the mental gymnastics they use to explain some of the seeding like saying UK wasn't even considered for a #1 seed yesterday.

 

[7Samurai13]

I think the committee actually mixed up the 2 teams but are too embarrassed to admit it. There's no reason for UM to have an easier draw than MSU.

Or they saw Michigan was up 13, turned in the brackets and went home because no way Michigan blows another double digit lead to MSU.

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

I don't know how a UK fan can even be surprised anymore. You know what's shocking and telling? Duke and UNC have never met in the NCAAs. UK, meanwhile, has faced UL, IU, Kansas, UCLA, and UNC within the last ten years and Duke going back to 1998.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the draw this year. I think they fucked UNC and Michigan State over if any 1 or 2 has a complaint.

But, it's funny to see the mental gymnastics they use to explain some of the seeding like saying UK wasn't even considered for a #1 seed yesterday.

I pretty much knew it would happen. I wouldn't have had any problem with it if Tennessee or MSU got it.

As it is, I'm happy with the draw.

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

Or they saw Michigan was up 13, turned in the brackets and went home because no way Michigan blows another double digit lead to MSU.

Past years have pretty much proven that Sunday championships don't matter.

 

[7Samurai13]

Past years have pretty much proven that Sunday championships don't matter.

So Michigan should get the better draw because why?

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

So Michigan should get the better draw because why?

Because they don't know what they're doing.

 

[NolePride]

Past years have pretty much proven that Sunday championships don't matter.

I think I agree with that.

It works both ways, but I think a league is better off if they give the Committee ample time to think
out the final seeding/bracketing.

At the beginning of the week, everybody knew there were 3 locks for #1 seeds...UNC, UVA and Gonzaga.
Then there were 6 teams in the running for the 4th #1 seed. Well, that 4th #1 wound up being the
#1 OVERALL seed.

I'm still puzzled by FSU being a 4. We were predicted to be a 4 at the start of the tourney. We beat another
4, we beat a #1 and then lost to a #1 by 10 and still remained a #4. Now considering we beat 2 #3's during
the season (LSU and Purdue) and neither went very far in their tournaments. I've always known that those early
losses to BC and Pitt would haunt us, but not like this.

 

[Hitman Hart]

I don't know how a UK fan can even be surprised anymore. You know what's shocking and telling? Duke and UNC have never met in the NCAAs. UK, meanwhile, has faced UL, IU, Kansas, UCLA, and UNC within the last ten years and Duke going back to 1998.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the draw this year. I think they fucked UNC and Michigan State over if any 1 or 2 has a complaint.

But, it's funny to see the mental gymnastics they use to explain some of the seeding like saying UK wasn't even considered for a #1 seed yesterday.

UK doesn't share a conference with any of those teams that you have listed. Duke + UNC share a conference, so the committee tries to put them in different brackets.

 

[catlanta33]

UK doesn't share a conference with any of those teams that you have listed. Duke + UNC share a conference, so the committee tries to put them in different brackets.

I get that. They do have VT and Duke together and Cuse with FSU this year. So, that's inconsistent at best. Just seems they are more than willing to give two Bluebloods the benefit of rarely every seeing each other in March but not so much for the others. The same conference does play a hand in that but I have my doubts that the only reason it has gone this way.

 

[Shower Fart]

Or they saw Michigan was up 13, turned in the brackets and went home because no way Michigan blows another double digit lead to MSU.

Actually that's very possible as well, I dont think it would surprise anyone.

 

[Hitman Hart]

I get that. They do have VT and Duke together and Cuse with FSU this year. So, that's inconsistent at best. Just seems they are more than willing to give two Bluebloods the benefit of rarely every seeing each other in March but not so much for the others. The same conference does play a hand in that but I have my doubts that the only reason it has gone this way.

agreed that it's dumb to have VT as the #4 seed in Duke's region. When I saw that, I immediately assumed it was because one of the ACC's bubble teams (NCSU or Clemson, perhaps both) had made the field.

i know it's easy to being a monday morning QB, but i feel like the committee does a pretty bad job of setting up match-ups.

 

[Wolverine830872]

Thought so too.

They woulda been better off losing it seems.

Which they should've. Those refs sucked some McQuaid dong today. Awful.

yeah those refs were brutal. What is nuts is how Mich. St. is the 2 seed in Duke's region. That means the committee considered them as the worst 2 seed. Michigan is the 2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket so the committee thought Michigan was the best two seed. How is Michigan higher ranked than Michigan State if Mich St beat Mich 3 times?!?

 

[7Samurai13]

yeah those refs were brutal. What is nuts is how Mich. St. is the 2 seed in Duke's region. That means the committee considered them as the worst 2 seed. Michigan is the 2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket so the committee thought Michigan was the best two seed. How is Michigan higher ranked than Michigan State if Mich St beat Mich 3 times?!?

Harbaugh

 

[Wolverine830872]

Harbaugh

 

[7Samurai13]

Legit answer is they don’t do the snake method, they go to the closest locations without doubling up with the same conference. Because the east is closer than the west MSU went to the East and Michigan got the last available 2 seed location, the west.

 

[Wolverine830872]

Legit answer is they don’t do the snake method, they go to the closest locations without doubling up with the same conference. Because the east is closer than the west MSU went to the East and Michigan got the last available 2 seed location, the west.

yeah that's a good point. I feel for Michigan State though, because they have a super strong team and could easily be in the championship game if they didn't run into Duke. Michigan getting Gonzaga as their 1 seed seems like a gift they don't deserve. With that being said, the lower seeds in Michigan's region seem more deadly compared to the other regions.

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

yeah those refs were brutal. What is nuts is how Mich. St. is the 2 seed in Duke's region. That means the committee considered them as the worst 2 seed. Michigan is the 2 seed in Gonzaga's bracket so the committee thought Michigan was the best two seed. How is Michigan higher ranked than Michigan State if Mich St beat Mich 3 times?!?

I think they only make sure the top 2 seed isn't in the same region as the top 1 seed.

 

[Wolverine830872]

I think they only make sure the top 2 seed isn't in the same region as the top 1 seed.

yeah that's what I'm hearing. Didn't realize that. I thought they went with a straight snake with only deviating for purposes of making sure same conference teams don't play each other early.