Bracketology discussion

[Proud Army Wife]

Purdue’s defense can be suspect at times. I would much rather be in their region than Houston or UConn. Also, let’s not forget they are the only program to get put out of the tournament 3 straight seasons by a 13 seed or worse. The last 2 seasons was a 16 seed and 15 seed that beat them.

Color me superstitious but beating Purdue isn’t allowed if your name is Tennessee.

 

[wtmvol]

I still haven’t seen/would like to see the case study of P5 tourney champs and how they fair in the NCAAT

So this analysis only includes the last 10 tournaments. I'd like to go back further to get more data points, but I just don't have the time. I included the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac 12, and SEC. Whether or not the Big East should count as a "P5" in some of those earlier years is iffy, but I just did it to be consistent. I also didn't include the American, though there were a couple years they probably would have qualified including 2014 when UConn won the championship from that conference.

I'll start with teams who won their conference championship...

- 3 teams who won their conference tourney went on to win the NCAA Championship: Kansas in 2022, Villanova in 2018, and Louisville in 2013. All 3 of those teams were 1 seeds in the NCAA Tournament
- Another 3 teams who won their conference tourney were eventual National Runners Up: UNC in 2016, Michigan in 2018, and Wisconsin in 2015. UNC and Wisconsin were 1 seeds. Michigan was a 3.
- Another 6 teams advanced to the Final 4 (but no further). Auburn, a 5 seed, was the only team seeded lower than a 2.
- 10 teams lost in the Elite 8 with Oregon State being the only low seed to accomplish that
- 13 teams lost in the Sweet 16, with Oregon twice accomplishing that as a 12 seed
- 11 teams lost in the Round of 32, but several of those were teams seeded about where you'd expect to lose fairly early
- 14 teams lost in the 1st Round, but 4 of those teams were 1st round underdogs based on seed.

Let's isolate this to teams who got a top 4 seed in the NCAA Tournament...

- There are 142 teams in the last 10 tournaments from these conferences getting a top 4 seed
- Conference Tournament champions advanced to the Final 4 over 25% of the time.
- Teams who lost in the conference championship game advanced to the Final 4 12% of the time
- Teams who lost in the Semifinals advanced to the Final 4 about 19% of the time
- Teams who lost in the Quarterfinals advanced to the Final 4 only 7% of the time (only twice out of 28)
- It starts to flatten out more in the earlier rounds

What about lower seeds in the NCAA tournament. Did they gain momentum by overperforming in their conference tournament?

- I looked at teams who were seeded 6 or below
- Conference tourney champions who got a low seed didn't really gather much steam as 8 of the 12 teams lost in the 1st weekend. Oregon State (darn them!) was the only one to make an Elite 8
- though 2 teams lost in the conference quarterfinals and made a Final 4 from a low seed, we're talking about 2 out of 76. 70 of the 76 teams lost prior to the Sweet 16

Let's look specifically at the SEC...

- Of the 5 Final 4 teams from the SEC in the last 10 years, only 1 has lost prior to Sunday in the SEC Tournament (South Carolina and the Fighting Thornwells)


Bottom line: there is a bit of correlation to say that conference tourney champions are far more likely to advance to a Final 4 than those who lose in the quarterfinals (but still get a top 4 seed). However, conference tourney champions are also far more likely to get 1/2 seeds and, as we know, your odds of making it to a Final 4 improve with each seed. Maybe a better way to say this is that the best teams tend to win more conference tournaments. I think that's the real correlation here. I certainly don't think there's data to suggest that it's better to lose early in the conference tournament.

I have the data if anyone wants this viewed another way...

 

[VolPack22]

Color me superstitious but beating Purdue isn’t allowed if your name is Tennessee.

My point is we more than likely won’t even see them in the E8

 

[KoachKrab127]

I don’t see us getting a #1 seed unless we go undefeated the rest of the season. And we know that the SEC tournament means nothing to the selection committee. So winning that won’t matter.

 

[turbovol]

If we win 1 of our remaining 3 regular season games we should stay in a 2-seed slot, I would think. If we 2 of the 3, we'll probably be the top 2 seed, maybe. Win the rest we could get a 1.

The tournament? Who cares---conference tournaments are a joke after playing 18 conference games are a freakin' joke.

 

[Proud Army Wife]

My point is we more than likely won’t even see them in the E8

lol you’re not wrong

 

[KTrain]

Wouldn't mind another shot at Purdue in the EE. Knecht has came a long way, ZZ is back to form, and we have two bigs to throw at Edey.

Yep, I think Barnes throwing Awaka & Aidoo in there together to my surprise has worked great. Seems last year and most of this year until lately they played separately. I thought about it and when they are in there as the only big they get a lot more attention. I think playing them together helps Awaka & Aidoo a lot, ergo helps the whole team.

 

[OrangeBeachVol]

If we win 1 of our remaining 3 regular season games we should stay in a 2-seed slot, I would think. If we 2 of the 3, we'll probably be the top 2 seed, maybe. Win the rest we could get a 1.

The tournament? Who cares---conference tournaments are a joke after playing 18 conference games are a freakin' joke.

Yes the SEC tourney is just for teams that are on the NCAA bubble and either need to win the tourney for the auto bid or win a couple of games to improve their rating. Of course you always have that lower ranked team come out of nowhere to win it and get the SEC tourney invite.

IMO the top 4 seeds should not even have to play in it. Rest their players for the real tourney.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

So this analysis only includes the last 10 tournaments. I'd like to go back further to get more data points, but I just don't have the time. I included the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac 12, and SEC. Whether or not the Big East should count as a "P5" in some of those earlier years is iffy, but I just did it to be consistent. I also didn't include the American, though there were a couple years they probably would have qualified including 2014 when UConn won the championship from that conference.

I'll start with teams who won their conference championship...

- 3 teams who won their conference tourney went on to win the NCAA Championship: Kansas in 2022, Villanova in 2018, and Louisville in 2013. All 3 of those teams were 1 seeds in the NCAA Tournament
- Another 3 teams who won their conference tourney were eventual National Runners Up: UNC in 2016, Michigan in 2018, and Wisconsin in 2015. UNC and Wisconsin were 1 seeds. Michigan was a 3.
- Another 6 teams advanced to the Final 4 (but no further). Auburn, a 5 seed, was the only team seeded lower than a 2.
- 10 teams lost in the Elite 8 with Oregon State being the only low seed to accomplish that
- 13 teams lost in the Sweet 16, with Oregon twice accomplishing that as a 12 seed
- 11 teams lost in the Round of 32, but several of those were teams seeded about where you'd expect to lose fairly early
- 14 teams lost in the 1st Round, but 4 of those teams were 1st round underdogs based on seed.

Let's isolate this to teams who got a top 4 seed in the NCAA Tournament...

- There are 142 teams in the last 10 tournaments from these conferences getting a top 4 seed
- Conference Tournament champions advanced to the Final 4 over 25% of the time.
- Teams who lost in the conference championship game advanced to the Final 4 12% of the time
- Teams who lost in the Semifinals advanced to the Final 4 about 19% of the time
- Teams who lost in the Quarterfinals advanced to the Final 4 only 7% of the time (only twice out of 28)
- It starts to flatten out more in the earlier rounds

What about lower seeds in the NCAA tournament. Did they gain momentum by overperforming in their conference tournament?

- I looked at teams who were seeded 6 or below
- Conference tourney champions who got a low seed didn't really gather much steam as 8 of the 12 teams lost in the 1st weekend. Oregon State (darn them!) was the only one to make an Elite 8
- though 2 teams lost in the conference quarterfinals and made a Final 4 from a low seed, we're talking about 2 out of 76. 70 of the 76 teams lost prior to the Sweet 16

Let's look specifically at the SEC...

- Of the 5 Final 4 teams from the SEC in the last 10 years, only 1 has lost prior to Sunday in the SEC Tournament (South Carolina and the Fighting Thornwells)


Bottom line: there is a bit of correlation to say that conference tourney champions are far more likely to advance to a Final 4 than those who lose in the quarterfinals (but still get a top 4 seed). However, conference tourney champions are also far more likely to get 1/2 seeds and, as we know, your odds of making it to a Final 4 improve with each seed. Maybe a better way to say this is that the best teams tend to win more conference tournaments. I think that's the real correlation here. I certainly don't think there's data to suggest that it's better to lose early in the conference tournament.

I have the data if anyone wants this viewed another way...

Appreciate the information, was kinda my hunch, good teams wins and best seeds win, doesn’t matter if they just played 3 games in 3 days or not.

 

[BigOrangePhoenix]

The Selection committee does allow the conference tourny to determine seeding, but only up to Saturday.

 

[wtmvol]

This race for a 1 seed between Arizona and Tennessee is pretty darn close. I stuck UNC in there just because with a win tomorrow at Duke, they could potentially creep back into the discussion.

Did I miss any metrics? You never quite know what the committee will emphasize since it's made up of a team of humans, all with inherent biases.

We really need to keep winning. Daggum Colorado winning on the road last night at Oregon didn't do us any favors as it gave Arizona another Q1 win on their resume.

 

[Vfl2407]

View attachment 625630

This race for a 1 seed between Arizona and Tennessee is pretty darn close. I stuck UNC in there just because with a win tomorrow at Duke, they could potentially creep back into the discussion.

Did I miss any metrics? You never quite know what the committee will emphasize since it's made up of a team of humans, all with inherent biases.

We really need to keep winning. Daggum Colorado winning on the road last night at Oregon didn't do us any favors as it gave Arizona another Q1 win on their resume.

I’m not sure it matters that much.
We are either going to be the 1 or 2 in the West Region and Arizona will be the other.
So, either way, we most likely will have to beat Arizona in Los Angeles in front of a heavily pro Arizona crowd to make it to the FF.

 

[wtmvol]

I’m not sure it matters that much.
We are either going to be the 1 or 2 in the West Region and Arizona will be the other.
So, either way, we most likely will have to beat Arizona in Los Angeles in front of a heavily pro Arizona crowd to make it to the FF.

We won't be a 2 in the West. We would be placed in either the Midwest or the South due to geography. In the initial bracket reveal a few weeks ago, the committee had us in the Midwest with Purdue, so I'm assuming that's where they'll put us if we don't get a 1 seed.

 

[Vfl2407]

We won't be a 2 in the West. We would be placed in either the Midwest or the South due to geography. In the initial bracket reveal a few weeks ago, the committee had us in the Midwest with Purdue, so I'm assuming that's where they'll put us if we don't get a 1 seed.

Both Lunardi and Palm previously had us as the #5 team, which is the first Second seed.
They also had Arizona as the #4 overall team, which is the fourth First seed.

The way seedlings work, those two seeds are paired in the same regional.
So, if everything holds, both Arizona and the Vols will be in Los Angeles region as either 1 or 2 seeds.
as of this morning, both Lunardi and Palm have the Vols as #1 in the West and Arizona #2 in the west.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/

Men's Bracketology: Kelvin Sampson has Houston pointing toward another deep run

Is Houston underrated coming off back-to-back No. 1 seeds and four straight second-weekend appearances in the NCAA tournament?

www.espn.com

 

[Stoerner Fumbles]

Both Lunardi and Palm previously had us as the #5 team, which is the first Second seed.
They also had Arizona as the #4 overall team, which is the fourth First seed.
The way seedlings work, those two seeds are paired in the same regional.
So, if everything holds, both Arizona and the Vols will be in Los Angeles region as either 1 or 2 seeds.

Sigh.

 

[knoxvol52]

Come March 17th.

Selection Sunday..

 

[ThatVolGuy]

Both Lunardi and Palm previously had us as the #5 team, which is the first Second seed.
They also had Arizona as the #4 overall team, which is the fourth First seed.

The way seedlings work, those two seeds are paired in the same regional.
So, if everything holds, both Arizona and the Vols will be in Los Angeles region as either 1 or 2 seeds.
as of this morning, both Lunardi and Palm have the Vols as #1 in the West and Arizona #2 in the west.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/

Men's Bracketology: Kelvin Sampson has Houston pointing toward another deep run

Is Houston underrated coming off back-to-back No. 1 seeds and four straight second-weekend appearances in the NCAA tournament?

www.espn.com

This is not how it works, but this has come up many times already in the past few weeks. The #4 and #5 overall seeds are not automatically paired in the same region.

 

[Vfl2407]

This is not how it works, but this has come up many times already in the past few weeks. The #4 and #5 overall seeds are not automatically paired in the same region.

Do you have a site or any documentation on that?
Not trying to be argumentative.
But I heard Jerry Palm explaining it that way on a radio show.

 

[BallerVolFan]

Both Lunardi and Palm previously had us as the #5 team, which is the first Second seed.
They also had Arizona as the #4 overall team, which is the fourth First seed.
The way seedlings work, those two seeds are paired in the same regional.
So, if everything holds, both Arizona and the Vols will be in Los Angeles region as either 1 or 2 seeds.

That’s not correct. They don’t place the teams into regions as 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, and 4v5. It could turn out that way if all teams seeded 1 through 8 fell into the bracket perfectly regarding geography. But that is not the case this year. Purdue, UConn, and Houston fall into the regions perfectly as the regions they’re in are close to home but Tennessee won’t be if they’re the last 1 seed. However, if we’re the top 2 seed they will not place us out west. They will put us into a region that falls closer to home. Now if we were a team like Oregon or USC or Washington or some team in that location somehow as the top 2 seed then the west would be their natural region. We don’t fall into that category.

- Last 1 seed: We’ll be in the West region
- Top 2 seed: We’ll be in a region closer to home (Midwest most likely)
- 2nd 2 seed: South region most likely

 

[VolCalls]

That’s not correct. They don’t place the teams into regions as 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, and 4v5. It could turn out that way if all teams seeded 1 through 8 fell into the bracket perfectly regarding geography. But that is not the case this year. Purdue, UConn, and Houston fall into the regions perfectly as the regions they’re in are close to home but Tennessee won’t be if they’re the last 1 seed. However, if we’re the top 2 seed they will not place us out west. They will put us into a region that falls closer to home. Now if we were a team like Oregon or USC or Washington or some team in that location somehow as the top 2 seed then the west would be their natural region. We don’t fall into that category.

- Last 1 seed: We’ll be in the West region
- Top 2 seed: We’ll be in a region closer to home (Midwest most likely)
- 2nd 2 seed: South region most likely

This is exactly how it works.

I’ll also add that if, on the S-curve, Houston is the 3 and Iowa State is the 6, they couldn’t put those two in the same region, because the first four teams selected from the same conference must be placed in different regions, per the bracketing principles. So from the Big 12, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, and Baylor will all be in different regions.

 

[Sudden Impact]

The way seedlings work, those two seeds are paired in the same regional.
So, if everything holds, both Arizona and the Vols will be in Los Angeles region as either 1 or 2 seeds.
as of this morning, both Lunardi and Palm have the Vols as #1 in the West and Arizona #2 in the west.

That is the way one would expect it to work, I agree. Tell me the last time if ever it has been that way. 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5. The Committee should but does not follow this rule at all. You are right it should be done this way to balance the Brackets but too many other factors and excuses make it the Committee's choice to do it anyway they see fit. Most of the time they cannot tell you why they did what they did.

 

[VolCalls]

That is the way one would expect it to work, I agree. Tell me the last time if ever it has been that way. 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5. The Committee should but does not follow this rule at all. You are right it should be done this way to balance the Brackets but too many other factors and excuses make it the Committee's choice to do it anyway they see fit. Most of the time they cannot tell you why they did what they did.

They aren’t excuses, they’re written into the bracketing principles the committee has followed for years.

 

[BigOrangePhoenix]

That’s not correct. They don’t place the teams into regions as 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, and 4v5. It could turn out that way if all teams seeded 1 through 8 fell into the bracket perfectly regarding geography. But that is not the case this year. Purdue, UConn, and Houston fall into the regions perfectly as the regions they’re in are close to home but Tennessee won’t be if they’re the last 1 seed. However, if we’re the top 2 seed they will not place us out west. They will put us into a region that falls closer to home. Now if we were a team like Oregon or USC or Washington or some team in that location somehow as the top 2 seed then the west would be their natural region. We don’t fall into that category.

- Last 1 seed: We’ll be in the West region
- Top 2 seed: We’ll be in a region closer to home (Midwest most likely)
- 2nd 2 seed: South region most likely

They will probably put us in the Houston bracket over Purdue bracket.

 

[Sudden Impact]

Do you have a site or any documentation on that?
Not trying to be argumentative.
But I heard Jerry Palm explaining it that way on a radio show.

Google is your friend and you can start at any point in the last 20+ years. Plus experience of watching the Seeding process over the past 20 years. The Region brackets are never balanced or equal. All you have to do is the top 16 teams to determine the balance. Too many factors is the Committee's reasons for giving stupid explanations as to why it happened.

 

[Sudden Impact]

They aren’t excuses, they’re written into the bracketing principles the committee has followed for years.

The committee can always justify their actions. The explanations in some cases are BS and not justified. I agree if we are not the 1 Seed out west and if we follow the committee's rules and logic of the past we will be a 2 seed somewhere else.

With Duke and UNC in the top 8 the 2 seed slot will more likely be given to the loser. Two Blue Bloods.