Started By
Message
re: Bracketology Updates
Posted on 3/5/24 at 1:36 am to makersmark1
Posted on 3/5/24 at 1:36 am to makersmark1
I remember that too…
0
Posted on 3/5/24 at 9:34 am to AUTiger789
Looking at the Top 4-5 seed projections, here are three of my favorites averages together (I like these three because they rank them 1-20 so you know how close they are from moving up or down a seed):
Average of Lunardi, JBR, and T3 Bracketology (all updated on Monday):
1- seeds: Purdue, Houston, UConn, Tennessee
2-seeds: Arizona, N. Carolina, Marquette, Iowa State
3-seeds: Baylor, Duke, Kansas, Creighton
4-seeds: Alabama, Illinois, Kentucky, San Diego State
5-seeds: Auburn, BYU, Washington St, Clemson
Tennessee is #4 overall (last 1-seed)
Alabama is #13 overall (1st 4-seed)
Kentucky is #15 overall (3rd 4-seed)
Auburn is #17 overall (1st 5-seed)
S Carolina is #21 overall (1st 6-seed)
Average of Lunardi, JBR, and T3 Bracketology (all updated on Monday):
1- seeds: Purdue, Houston, UConn, Tennessee
2-seeds: Arizona, N. Carolina, Marquette, Iowa State
3-seeds: Baylor, Duke, Kansas, Creighton
4-seeds: Alabama, Illinois, Kentucky, San Diego State
5-seeds: Auburn, BYU, Washington St, Clemson
Tennessee is #4 overall (last 1-seed)
Alabama is #13 overall (1st 4-seed)
Kentucky is #15 overall (3rd 4-seed)
Auburn is #17 overall (1st 5-seed)
S Carolina is #21 overall (1st 6-seed)
Posted on 3/5/24 at 9:44 am to cjohn
A&M is, as alawys, such a disappointment. We have some really good wins (Tennessee, Iowa State, Kentucky) and a lot of atrocious losses.
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:00 am to FootballFrenzy
quote:
A&M is, as alawys, such a disappointment. We have some really good wins (Tennessee, Iowa State, Kentucky) and a lot of atrocious losses.
Yeah no kidding. The four quad 3 losses (Arkansas, @ Arkansas, LSU, @ Vandy) are a resume killer.
Had A&M won all four of those games, they’d be sitting as a solid 6-seed with the five Quad 1 wins. Each one of those losses cost A&M around 1.5 seed lines.
Had they won all 4 of those they’d be a 6-seed.
Had they won three of those they’d be a 7/8 seed
Had they won two of those, they’d be a 10-seed
Had they won just one of those they’d be right on the bubble line.
But losing all four has pushed the Aggies to around 8th or 9th out.
Ole Miss is probably going to miss the tournament, and would have made it had they won 1-2 more games.
LSU is similar. Had they won against Nichols, @ Syracuse, and @ Georgia, they’d be on that bubble line.
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:21 am to wm72
quote:
quote:
I don't particularly understand how UK is a 4 seed. I don't see what makes their resume more impressive than SC.
It's simply the NET efficiency metrics that are dragging South Carolina down.
The main reason the NET is so low is that South Carolina played numerous close games (many at home) out of conference against some very bad teams:
73-69 Vs NET #315
73-68 Vs NET #321
74-64 Vs NET #364
Most teams with the same other great resume points South Carolina has (SEC record, Q1/Q2 wins) beat these type teams by 30-50 points. It really kills the computer efficiency numbers to have many games where all the stats are pretty equal with sub-300 NET teams.
How do people feel about Net factoring game 1 the same as game 30?
I know we are 3-3 vs Quad one, but it is frustrating that we have 4 other wins that fall within 8 spots of being quad 1. Us beating them was enough to push them from Q1 to Q2
This post was edited on 3/5/24 at 10:24 am
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:25 am to GamecockUltimate
I'm not going to be upset at a 6 seed at all.
I know there's a big disconnect in South Carolina's human rankings vs computer rankings, but a potential 6 seed for a team that was picked to finish last in conference is amazing.
Paris scheduling an easy OOC was a really good move. I know it hurts the NET, but it was a good way for a new team to gel and learn how to play with each other.
I know there's a big disconnect in South Carolina's human rankings vs computer rankings, but a potential 6 seed for a team that was picked to finish last in conference is amazing.
Paris scheduling an easy OOC was a really good move. I know it hurts the NET, but it was a good way for a new team to gel and learn how to play with each other.
This post was edited on 3/5/24 at 10:27 am
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:28 am to GamecockUltimate
quote:
I know we are 3-3 vs Quad one, but it is frustrating that we have 4 other wins that fall within 8 spots of being quad 1
Auburn is in the same boat. We have two Quad 2 wins that are within 2, and 3 spots, respectively of being Quad 1 wins. We have a Quad 3 win within 1 spot of becoming a Quad 2 win.
Basically Auburn needs to be rooting hard for Ole Miss, Miss State, and Indiana to close out strong.
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:41 am to makersmark1
I remember just hoping to be on the NIT bubble with Jeff Lebo. Only made it once. 
Thank god things have changed.
Thank god things have changed.
Posted on 3/5/24 at 10:50 am to GamecockUltimate
quote:
I don't particularly understand how UK is a 4 seed. I don't see what makes their resume more impressive than SC.
Perhaps you missed the part where their resume says "Kentucky" at the top.
Posted on 3/5/24 at 12:56 pm to AUTiger789
Really hoping we go on a run here to end the season. The difference between a 3 seed and a 4 seed is huge
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News