Bracketology: 2018 Final Edition

Here is a my final Bracketology of this 2018 season. Before Davidson beat Rhode Island in the A-10 final, I had made the decision to have Oklahoma State as my last team in. I was convinced the committee would ignore Oklahoma State’s poor RPI and SOS and weigh the quality wins more. The selection committee is moving away from the RPI more and more. Next year, there’s discussion that it will not be used at all. A great way to send it off would be including the lowest ever RPI for an at-large bid. I had thought the discussion on Oklahoma State had moved in this direction. Maybe it still has. But with Davidson winning, I just don’t have room for them in my field.

Before I get to the bracket, here’s a quick reminder on how the NCAA is bucketing wins this year:

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Here is the bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Advertisements

Bracketology: March 10, 2018 Morning Edition

Here is a quick Bracketology before today’s games. Here are the biggest changes involving Big 12 teams since yesterday’s bracket:

  • I’ve switched West Virginia and Texas Tech in the seed list. Both are still 4-seeds currently, but the Mountaineers are now one spot ahead of the Red Raiders.
  • I’ve moved Kansas ahead of Xavier in the seed list, which means the Jayhawks are now the 3rd 1-seed and are bracketed into the Midwest region, which would mean a Wichita-Omaha path for Kansas.
  • Because of Alabama winning and Nevada losing (which means the Mountain West will receive 2 bids now, Nevada is getting a bid), Oklahoma has fallen into the First Four games.
  • After re-examining resumes, Baylor has been removed from the field. Louisville has taken their place. Oklahoma State is still listed as the First Team Out. They are a great test case for the selection committee. Can they or will they ignore Oklahoma State’s high RPI?

As always, here’s my reminder about how the NCAA is bucketing wins this year:

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Here is the bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Bracketology: March 9, 2018 Morning Edition

Here is my latest updated Bracketology post, my first during Conference Tournament week. As always, here’s a permanent reminder of how the NCAA is doing their RPI bucketing this season:

 

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

At this point, I’ve got it narrowed down to 9 teams for 4 spots. I think it’ll be between Alabama, Arizona State, Baylor, Louisville, Marquette, Middle Tennessee, Oklahoma State, St. Mary’s, and Syracuse for those First Four at-large spots. I think Alabama and St. Mary’s might be just a tiny bit ahead of those other teams. So that would leave 7 teams for 2 spots. For now, I’ve got Middle Tennessee and Baylor as the last two teams in the field. I do not feel great about that. I am going to take a closer look at each of these resumes over the next couple of days to see if I’m missing something, so Baylor fans, don’t get too confident. There could be changes coming to this bracket before Sunday.

Once again, I’ve built an actual bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Bracketology: February 27, 2018 Edition

Here is my latest updated Bracketology post, my first since February 7th. With just six days left in the regular season and nine more Big 12 Tournament games, we are officially at the time of the season where Bracketology posts are popping up all over the internet and we get a creepy look-in to Joey Brackets’ lair. It’s time for me to give an update as well (hopefully it’s not as creepy as Mr. Lunardi’s).

A permanent reminder for this post — the NCAA has changed their “bucketing” of wins this season. It’s no longer top-25 or top-50; wins are now separated into quadrants that consider the impact of home vs. road games. These changes are slightly better than what was done in previous years, but it’s still incredibly flawed. The quadrant system is still based on the RPI which is the first major problem, and the random buckets can create a scenario where a win over the 75th team in RPI is far more important than a win over the 76th team in RPI. The system should not function in that way.

Ultimately, my opinion doesn’t matter, so I will write this post adhering to the new system. Below is what I’ve written previously about these new changes.

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Once again, I’ve built an actual bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Bracketology: February 7, 2018 Edition

Here is my latest updated Bracketology post, my first in two weeks. Most Big 12 teams have now played 11 games, and we have just 3.5 weeks left of conference action. It’s time to re-examine where Big 12 teams stand in the grand scheme of the Bracketology science.

A permanent reminder for this post — the NCAA has changed their “bucketing” of wins this season. It’s no longer top-25 or top-50; wins are now separated into quadrants to considering the impact of home vs. road games. You’ll still see the top-25 and top-50 designations on ESPN during games, and I’m not sure why. I’m guessing they like the ease of it, and don’t want to deal with the headache of explaining the new buckets to the viewers. I’ll explain it here then. Below is what I’ve written previously about these new changes.

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Once again, I’ve built an actual bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Bracketology: January 23, 2018 Edition

Here is my latest updated Bracketology post, my first in two weeks. A lot has changed in the last two weeks. We’re approaching the halfway point of Big 12 play as we get nearer to the month of February. Things are starting to take shape.

A reminder from my last Bracketology post — the NCAA has changed their “bucketing” of wins this season. It’s no longer top-25 or top-50; wins are now separated into quadrants to considering the impact of home vs. road games. Below is an inset of what I wrote in the last Bracketology post:

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Once again, I’ve built an actual bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading

Bracketology: January 9, 2018 Edition

Now that college football is over and the NFL season’s end is fast approaching, focus on college basketball is about to increase rapidly. You’ll start seeing a lot more Bracketology updates across the web as we get deeper into conference play. I wanted to give an update on my projected Bracketology, given that’s it’s been nearly a month since I’ve done so (here’s the last edition on December 19) and now that we have some conference games to factor into the projections.

A reminder from my last Bracketology post — the NCAA has changed their “bucketing” of wins this season. It’s no longer top-25 or top-50; wins are now separated into quadrants to considering the impact of home vs. road games. Below is an inset of what I wrote in the last Bracketology post:

One important development since my last Bracketology post is that the NCAA has revealed some of their new logic in selecting teams for this year’s tournament. No longer will we see the historical Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 wins. Now, the committee has placed more importance on road/neutral games and have created “quadrants” to properly place these games. Straight from the linked article above from the NCAA website, here is how the quadrants will be bucketed:
  Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus

So now instead of talking about top-50 wins, you’ll hear and read about Quadrant 1 wins when you read Bracketology posts. If a site is still talking about top-50 wins in regards to a team’s NCAA Tournament chances without mentioning if that win came at home, on the road, or at a neutral site, quit reading that site. It is uninformed. There are two tools I like to use to see how a team’s wins will look at the end of the season: RPIForecast and barttorvik.com. Both sites show a current projection of where a team’s RPI is expected to be at the end of the season, but you can also tinker with results to see what it would mean for their RPI. At barttorvik.com, there is an RPI Forecast page and a TeamCast page. The latter allows you to input results into future games for a specific team to see the RPI and NCAA Tournament likelihood effects on that team — it’s a great tool. Use these tools if you’re curious about your favorite school’s Selection Sunday chances.

Once again, I’ve built an actual bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. Also included below is group of teams I have just outside of the field currently. I’ll break down what this all means for each Big 12 team below. Continue reading