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

Advertisements

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

Bracketology: Pre-Holidays Edition – December 19, 2017

We’re approaching the time of the year where there will be a holiday break for most teams — this is especially true in the Big 12. After Saturday, December 23, there will be no Big 12 games until the following Friday, when conference play commences. This feels like the perfect window for a Bracketology update.

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

Continue reading

Bracketology: Post-Feast Week Edition – November 27, 2017

Here is my Bracketology projection following the conclusion of Feast Week. Most teams have now played anywhere between 5 and 8 games, and most have played at least one game against quality competition, if not more. The holiday tournaments have given us many more chances to evaluate teams and see whether they’re for real or not.

I’ve built a bracket for this edition, and I’ve seeded the teams 1-68. I’m also showing who I have on the outside looking in at this time. The toughest thing right now is evaluating teams based on actual results compared to preseason expectations. The perfect example of this is Arizona.

Arizona went to the Battle 4 Atlantis ranked #2 in the country, lost 3 straight games (including one by 25 to Purdue), and are now not even ranked. How do you balance their performance with what we all expected from them? If the tournament started today, they almost certainly would not receive a bid. Nothing is in their resume to deserve it. But, they still have loads of talent and are ranked in the top 20 of Kenpom. What do you do? I’ve basically punted, and I’ve seeded them as a 7-seed. They no longer deserved to be seeded as a top seed, but it’s not like they’re going to miss out on the tournament. So I’ve split the difference essentially for now.

Wisconsin is a similar team. The Badgers are 3-3 with no bad losses but no quality wins. They likely have another loss headed their way tonight, as they play at Virginia. Before the season, I had them as a 10-seed. For now, I have them just outside the 68 team field, as my first team out. That seems like the proper placement for the Badgers at this time.

Alright, here is my current bracket. I’ll dive into what this all means for each Big 12 team below.
Continue reading

Bracketology: Preseason Edition

Here is my preseason edition of “Bracketology”. I didn’t build a bracket at this point, because that’s basically entirely pointless at this time. I just seeded the teams 1-68, making sure to have one bid from each league and the correct amount of at-large bids. This gives you a good idea of where teams are currently situated headed into the season and who their direct competition is for particular seeds, regions, and pods.

I’ll dive into what this all means for each of the relevant Big 12 teams below. Here is the seed list.
Continue reading