Brackets vs NET

As I’m twiddling my thumbs waiting for the release of brackets, I came up with a little calculation to compare the difficulty of teams winning out to make the final four. I pulled up this morning’s NET and Lunardi’s projected bracket. I pulled the top four seeds in each one and assigned the NET ranking by each team. Example, Gonzaga is NET number 1 so they get 1 point, AR is number four seed in the same bracket and they get 20 points, etc. Here’s what I came up with:

Gonzaga 41 points (Gonz 1 AR 20 TX Tech 9 Pur 11)
Arizona 26
Kansas 45
Baylor 38

Using this "very scientific" approach leads one to think the Arizona bracket would be toughest and Kansas the easiest. Again, just twiddling my thumbs.

Nice. Makes as much sense as a lot of the punditry we’ll see over the next four days.

Kinda reminds me of something from my current job, the one I’m leaving at the end of April. I do a quick and dirty neurological exam to determine if diabetics are losing sensation in their hands and feet; see if they can feel sharp things and light touch and vibration and cold and hot. For hot, I turn on a hairdryer and point the hot blast at their feet. And my comment is always “and now this highly sensitive scientific instrument, otherwise known as a hairdryer.” Always good for a laugh.

2 Likes

The big question for the likely #4 seeds is which #1 would you most/least like to play in Sweet 16?

Good question. Kriisa is injured for Arizona and may not play this weekend but probably will be back for the second weekend, assuming they get there. Baylor has been struggling with injuries all season. Everyday Jon is out for the year and Cryer hasn’t played in weeks. Kansas doesn’t frighten me too much. I don’t want any part of the Zags but we probably get them anyway.

I worry more about which 5 (or 12) is in our bracket. Or, if we drop, which 4/13. Probably worry a little about which first round opponent.

When placing teams in first round locations, is any thought given to geographical proximity to each of the like seeds? Other than the overall #1 seed.

The higher your seed, the more likely you are to get put close to home. But there are limitations. Because, for example, they could very well put Baylor and Kansas both in Fort Worth, they aren’t going to put us there as a 4; the pods don’t work out that way. If a 1 seed is sent somewhere, they’re also going to get the 8-9 game there.

There is a very good chance that Wisconsin will be put in Milwaukee as a 3 seed. Purdue in Indianapolis. Etc.

I was asking mainly about within each seed group only. However, as a 4 or 5 seed, there are no locations anywhere near Arkansas, so it’s a moot point. The 3 available locations are Buffalo (twice), Portland, and Milwaukee. I guess we’d prefer Milwaukee, but it’s sure not close. I’d also prefer a Fri-Sun bracket.

1 Like

They theoretically could send us to any of the eight first round sites. Except for Fort Worth, which seemingly will be packed full of 1-8-9-16s.

Are Lunardi’s bracket locations not correct? If they are, we can only go to the locations who have 4,5,12, and 13 seeded teams coming in. There’s only 3 of those locations according to Lunardi?

After seeing Arizona last night I want no part of them. Would like a rematch with Baylor, and really none of the big 12 intimidates me. But I sort of want Gonzaga, not because I think they’re weak just on the principal of it. If we’re gonna be an underdog let’s really embrace it and I can’t think of a team I like rooting against more other than maybe Duke.

1 Like

Lunardi is purely guessing. His guess may be right, but sites aren’t locked in. With the pod format, where one group of four teams at a particular site can be in one region and the other four in another region, we could literally go anywhere.

Bracketology question: Why are four of the play-in teams seeded 16 and four of them are seeded 12? Seems like they would have eight teams seeded 16 and the winners would be the 16 seed in each bracket.

The 16 seed play-ins are the worst four conference champions. The 12s are the worst four at-large teams.

This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.