reclegend22;1587080 wrote:I get that the AP poll isn't a deciding factor, I simply added that "stat" to my chart above just for the hell of it. My main reason for putting Syracuse (prior to tonight obviously) ahead of Kansas was the larger body of work (record, better big wins, etc.)



An example in my favor would be Duke and North Carolina in 2011. The Tar Heels won the ACC regular-season outright that year, splitting games with Duke. They ultimately met again in the ACC Tournament final, with UNC standing at 26-6 and Duke 29-4 heading into the matchup. It was widely accepted that the ACC would get one of the top seeds. Many believed that UNC, having won the ACC regular-season and beaten Duke once already, would still get it with a loss. Duke beat them by double figures, however, and captured the last No. 1.

So, as you point out, there are examples supporting both sides of the argument.

Thats a bad example, imo. Duke beat UNC 2-1 and had a better OOC resume. Had Duke been bad, like 6th in the ACC and then won the ACCT over UNC...UNC would have been a 1 seed.

All I am saying is if you gave the committee Virginia and Team A. The only thing the committee knows about EITHER is that Virginia won the ACC Reg. Season and Team A won the ACCT, Virginia is going to get more love. I think Reg. Seasons are taken into account way more than the Conference Tourneys. But, all of it is a resume, and all 3 portions (OOC) play a part in the decision. The Tourneys being last often get the most pub, but if you dig deeper into the full resumes of teams, you would probably find that the whole season was more a factor than the Conference Tournament in the seeding process.

Laley23;1587082 wrote:Thats a bad example, imo. Duke beat UNC 2-1 and had a better OOC resume. Had Duke been bad, like 6th in the ACC and then won the ACCT over UNC...UNC would have been a 1 seed.

I disagree. You stated earlier that the committee places more importance on a regular-season conference championship. The presence of certain factors, however, such as head-to-head matchups or extreme unbalanced schedules -- can instead sometimes give the overall edge to the conference tournament champion under the right circumstances. My argument is that, because Virginia only played the ACC's number 2, 3 and 4 teams once each (and two of them at home) and had the overall easiest conference schedule among all league teams, any of Duke, Syracuse or North Carolina winning the tournament would present just as worthy a champion, especially if Virginia lost to one of them along the way.

But anyway, if Duke had been sixth in the ACC of course UNC would have still gotten a one seed. That's the point. If, in your example, Minnesota had finished 2nd in the Big Ten regular-season and had a solid overall resume, then the Gophers may have taken the one seed from Indiana by beating them in the conference tournament. Even though Indiana won the regular-season, in that scenario the committee may have placed more emphasis on what happened in the tournament.

Laley23 wrote:All I am saying is if you gave the committee Virginia and Team A. The only thing the committee knows about EITHER is that Virginia won the ACC Reg. Season and Team A won the ACCT, Virginia is going to get more love. I think Reg. Seasons are taken into account way more than the Conference Tourneys. But, all of it is a resume, and all 3 portions (OOC) play a part in the decision. The Tourneys being last often get the most pub, but if you dig deeper into the full resumes of teams, you would probably find that the whole season was more a factor than the Conference Tournament in the seeding process.

This is probably true a lot of the time. I just don't think it's always the case.

Right now, the order for the final #1 pretty much has to be:

1. Kansas
2. Wisconsin
3. ACC's top team
4. Villanova (has the best record, but plays in the weakest conference where they've been schooled twice by the only other team rated higher than on-the-bubble)

Kansas is clearly number one at this point, and I also agree with Wisconsin as number two -- the Badgers have been lights out since the beginning of February and their list of OOC wins is best in the country.

My list would go:

1. Kansas
2. Duke
3. Wisconsin
4. Nova/North Carolina/Virginia/Syracuse/Louisville (if the above three all crash and burn)

While I agree that the Badgers are probably the second-most deserving team right now based on their OOC wins (Florida, @Virginia, Saint Louis) and their 5-1 record against RPI Top 25, I just think that an ACC champion Duke would get the nod. As a fan, though, I don't care if Duke gets a one or two seed. I like Wisconsin and think they are deserving.

reclegend22;1587198 wrote:Kansas is clearly number one at this point, and I also agree with Wisconsin as number two -- the Badgers have been lights out since the beginning of February and their list of OOC wins is best in the country.

My list would go:

1. Kansas
2. Duke
3. Wisconsin
4. Nova/North Carolina/Virginia/Syracuse/Louisville (if the above three all crash and burn)

While I agree that the Badgers are probably the second-most deserving team right now based on their OOC wins (Florida, @Virginia, Saint Louis) and their 5-1 record against RPI Top 25, I just think that an ACC champion Duke would get the nod. As a fan, though, I don't care if Duke gets a one or two seed. I like Wisconsin and think they are deserving.

Can't disagree with that. A lot between Duke and Wisconsin might have to do with (assuming they win their conference tournament) who they play there to get to the title. Especially with how the B1G has turned into an "anyone can win at any time" sort of league. If there are upsets and the Badgers wind up playing (going by current standings) Purdue and Penn State (a possibility since they'd be matched up with OSU in the first round at this moment with the winner playing slumping MSU) instead of Indiana and Michigan State, Duke would definitely have the edge.

And they might anyway, as both UNC and Virginia are trending upward, while with the exception of Michigan, the other top B1G teams are trending downward to varying degrees.

reclegend22;1587198 wrote:Kansas is clearly number one at this point, and I also agree with Wisconsin as number two -- the Badgers have been lights out since the beginning of February and their list of OOC wins is best in the country.

.

Clearly number one? Wouldn't go that far. Do they have the edge for it currently? Yes. They still need to win out though. Not an easy task. Another loss they won't get it. Even though their resume looks very good, there are only a few teams(3) that have gotten #1 seed with 7 losses. Could be wrong, but don't believe anyone has gotten #1 seed with 8 losses. Still think Duke is in the discussion as well.
That being said, if things continue the way they have the past couple of weeks, we could still have some major shake up going on.

centralbucksfan;1587222 wrote:Clearly number one? Wouldn't go that far. Do they have the edge for it currently? Yes. They still need to win out though. Not an easy task. Another loss they won't get it. Even though their resume looks very good, there are only a few teams(3) that have gotten #1 seed with 7 losses. Could be wrong, but don't believe anyone has gotten #1 seed with 8 losses. Still think Duke is in the discussion as well.
That being said, if things continue the way they have the past couple of weeks, we could still have some major shake up going on.

Clearly is probably too strong a word. Definitely agree that with one more loss, Kansas -- with eight on the year -- would be eliminated from discussion, or at least should be. Duke and Wisconsin, on the other hand, could still conceivably lose one game and get it, under the right circumstances.

Even though Kansas appears to be the favorite of most analysts right now, like you, I still don't rule out the possibility that Duke could upend Kansas for the top spot even if both win out. If they win out, it means the Blue Devils will have beaten Syracuse, North Carolina and likely one (possibly two) of Syracuse/Virginia/North Carolina in the ACC Tournament, all in the last two weeks of the season. That would present a pretty impressive stretch.

Right now, though, due to their head-to-head win over Duke (even though it was a very close game, with Duke leading at the half), Kansas has the edge.

Heretic;1587210 wrote:Can't disagree with that. A lot between Duke and Wisconsin might have to do with (assuming they win their conference tournament) who they play there to get to the title. Especially with how the B1G has turned into an "anyone can win at any time" sort of league. If there are upsets and the Badgers wind up playing (going by current standings) Purdue and Penn State (a possibility since they'd be matched up with OSU in the first round at this moment with the winner playing slumping MSU) instead of Indiana and Michigan State, Duke would definitely have the edge.

And they might anyway, as both UNC and Virginia are trending upward, while with the exception of Michigan, the other top B1G teams are trending downward to varying degrees.

Exactly. As I said in my post above, I think that could also come into play with Duke and Kansas, depending on the situation.

centralbucksfan;1587222 wrote:Clearly number one? Wouldn't go that far. Do they have the edge for it currently? Yes. They still need to win out though. Not an easy task. Another loss they won't get it. Even though their resume looks very good, there are only a few teams(3) that have gotten #1 seed with 7 losses. Could be wrong, but don't believe anyone has gotten #1 seed with 8 losses. Still think Duke is in the discussion as well.
That being said, if things continue the way they have the past couple of weeks, we could still have some major shake up going on.

Obviously "clearly the number one right now" is assuming they win out.

Obviously if Kansas loses two more games they're not a 1 seed.

SportsAndLady;1587230 wrote:Obviously "clearly the number one right now" is assuming they win out.

Obviously if Kansas loses two more games they're not a 1 seed.

One more loss and its doubtful.

Kansas is pretty clearly the last 1 at the moment, IMO.

If Kansas ends up with 8 losses, I think Wisconsin gets the final one seed as long as they win out in the regular-season and reach the finals of the Big Ten Tournament. With their overall resume, unmatched list of OOC wins and only five losses (currently), the Badgers are certainly deserving.

If Kansas loses and Wisconsin trips up twice, it's possible that the ACC champion could still get a one seed (e.g. a 4-loss Syracuse who beats some combo of Duke/UNC/Virginia in the ACC Tournament; a 7-loss UNC who beats Duke and then a similar combo of teams in ACC Tournament; a 7-loss Duke who beats UNC and a similar combo of teams in the ACC Tournament; or Virginia who beats a similar combo of teams in the ACC Tournament). But it'll take the right dominoes falling.

Bracket Lunardi has moved Villanova into the final number one slot. Strongly disagree with that. Wisconsin is clearly the next most deserving team at this point, and I think the Badgers will prove that in the Big Ten Tournament.

If Wisconsin slips up early, then perhaps Nova is worthy. Aside from beating Kansas, though, the Wildcats really have no big wins, and got throttled by the second best team in their conference twice.

Villanova is a shame, IMO. To get hammered by arguably the 2nd best team you played (Kansas) twice...and once on your home court says it all to me. They played nobody because the Big East is so down this year. No way they are better than Wisconsin, Duke even Kansas though they beat them. They are a fraud #1. And...I hate Wisconsin lol. But even I can see they are the #1 seed in this scenario despite Michigan wining the B1G

Laley23;1588168 wrote:Villanova is a shame, IMO. To get hammered by arguably the 2nd best team you played (Kansas) twice...and once on your home court says it all to me. They played nobody because the Big East is so down this year. No way they are better than Wisconsin, Duke even Kansas though they beat them. They are a fraud #1. And...I hate Wisconsin lol. But even I can see they are the #1 seed in this scenario despite Michigan wining the B1G

Wisconsin
Record: 25-5
RPI: 5
SOS: 4
vs. RPI Top 25: 5-1
Best Wins: Florida, Saint Louis, @Virginia, Michigan State, @Michigan

Villanova
Record: 27-3
RPI: 4
SOS: 41
vs. RPI Top 25: 1-3
Best Wins: Kansas

It's not even a discussion. Joe Lunardi is a fucking joke. Hopefully the Selection Committee isn't drunk when picking.

reclegend22;1588185 wrote:
Wisconsin
Record: 25-5
RPI: 5
SOS: 4
vs. RPI Top 25: 5-1
Best Wins: Florida, Saint Louis, @Virginia, Michigan State, @Michigan

Villanova
Record: 27-3
RPI: 4
SOS: 41
vs. RPI Top 25: 1-3
Best Wins: Kansas

It's not even a discussion. Joe Lunardi is a fucking joke. Hopefully the Selection Committee isn't drunk when picking.

All this

Most of the outside looking in potential #1 (the final one).....all lost. Wisky, Kansas, Duke, Virginia, UNC.....Cuse and Nova did not.

I still believe Nova, Kansas, Cuse, Virginia and Duke have a chance at that final #1.....maybe Wisky should still have as much chance as some of those teams but I don't believe the committee under any circumstance will award them that final #1

If Nova, Kansas don't win their championships and UNC wins the ACCT and Michigan wins the B1G.....could Michigan sneak the final #1?

Ironman92;1588384 wrote:Most of the outside looking in potential #1 (the final one).....all lost. Wisky, Kansas, Duke, Virginia, UNC.....Cuse and Nova did not.

I still believe Nova, Kansas, Cuse, Virginia and Duke have a chance at that final #1.....maybe Wisky should still have as much chance as some of those teams but I don't believe the committee under any circumstance will award them that final #1

If Nova, Kansas don't win their championships and UNC wins the ACCT and Michigan wins the B1G.....could Michigan sneak the final #1?

No team with 8 or more losses has gotten a #1 seed, ever. That could change. But its doubtful.

Villanova has 4 OT wins and defeated a, then inexperienced, Kansas team 63-59.Their 3 losses were by 16, 21, and 28 points respectively. If I were a coach I would love to be in Nova's bracket.They have been very fortunate this year.

Prescott;1588394 wrote:Villanova has 4 OT wins and defeated a, then inexperienced, Kansas team 63-59.Their 3 losses were by 16, 21, and 28 points respectively. If I were a coach I would love to be in Nova's bracket.They have been very fortunate this year.

My view of this Villanova team is somewhat similar to my view of the 2010 edition. The general consensus that year was that the Wildcats ended up overseeded as a No. 2, without having proven much against anybody outside of the Big East. Nova needed OT to survive 15th-seeded Robert Morris in the opening round and then fell to Saint Mary's in round two. I anticipate a similar outcome to their season again this year.

If Nova slips up, the ACC once again has a dog in this race if the right champion emerges in Greensboro. If Syracuse is that team, then I could see the Orange jumping Nova, even with the black marks on their resume. At just four losses on the year, an ACC title and a head-to-head win over Nova, Syracuse would be my pick.

A team most people seem to forget, who is climbing the charts....Louisville. Wouldn't be shocked to see them grab that last #1 seed.

centralbucksfan;1588604 wrote:A team most people seem to forget, who is climbing the charts....Louisville. Wouldn't be shocked to see them grab that last #1 seed.

Surprised they were ranked so high.

SOS 92nd and RPI of 24

Down to UVA, UM, Duke, Louisville for the final 1 IMO.

If UVA wins the ACC and ACCT....I give it to them in a slight edge over UM if they beat MSU.

If Duke dominates or everyone looks meh and Louisville dominates the final.

Louisville doesn't deserve a 1. They have terrible numbers and an inflated poll ranking. It has been inflated all year. Louisville is closer to a 4-seed than they are a 1. Either going to get a 2 (with a win) or a 3 (with a loss).

Please tell me who UofL has beaten? Only 6-5 vs the top 100. They are 22-0 vs teams lower than 100...

Azubuike24;1590945 wrote:Louisville doesn't deserve a 1. They have terrible numbers and an inflated poll ranking. It has been inflated all year. Louisville is closer to a 4-seed than they are a 1. Either going to get a 2 (with a win) or a 3 (with a loss).

Please tell me who UofL has beaten? Only 6-5 vs the top 100. They are 22-0 vs teams lower than 100...

Do the seedings ever make perfect sense?

If Mich St wins, and Duke/UVA play a crappy game.....I won't be surprised one bit if Louisville is a #1