Tournament Seeding- Does it need "adjusted"?

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

This year's tournament may have signified that it's time to address an underlying issue that has been put off for far too long.

Even after Day 1, and perhaps before that, many were saying that the seeding was probably out of whack. And as the tournaments has progressed, that has only become more and more apparent.

Some could blame covid for not providing the scheduling sample sizes needed to more accurately seed teams. Some would also argue that preconceived biases and presumptions played a role in teams being under and over seeded.

So what should/could the committee do to go about changing the way they try to seed the NCAA Tournament? Or do you even think anything needs to change about the tournament?

One option I had entertained, is to go to either a true region-based tournament.....or a straightforward 1-68 seeded tournament, with no mix'n'mashing of the two in between (which absolutely happens, and you just have to look at the West region as a prime example).

I would, personally, like to at least see what a regionally-based tournament would look like, so in the following post I'm gonna redo the tourney field and seed the teams by their nearest region.

(side note- before I begin, I can already foresee one issue with the region-based tourney being the First Four games, and how you would go about seeding/pairing those teams).............

 

[thebasketballreasons]

It’s fine the way it is, though perhaps they will want to consider expanding the tournament to 72 teams to make first four into first eight.

 

[duckboy33]

I don’t think anything needs to be drastically changed. Just start rewarding teams who win games, not the ones with a bunch of quality losses

 

[Villian07]

The problem with the regional based concepts is you will likely end up with lots of rematches from the regular season, which the committee hates bc it’s more exciting for average fans watching two teams who aren’t familiar with one another in a win or go home scenario imo, than watching two teams play for the 2nd, 3rd, or possibly even 4th time.

 

[Villian07]

Quad system needs a tweak imo. Add another quadrant or something.

beating a top 5 team at home should not be equivalent to beating the 70-75th ranked team on the road.

Plus it takes no account into how the teams are playing at the time of the game, just where each ends up on selection Sunday.

I’ve mentioned before, but I don’t even know who our quad 1 win was, we only had 1. We beat VT at home when they were ranked 17th. And we beat GT who ended up winning the accT as well as having a few really good wins, so I don’t even know which one was our quad 1 win lol.

I also feel like they put a little too much stock in conf tourneys. Like Texas vaulting to a 3.

this year tho the short OOC made the task so much harder bc outside of 5-6 games all you can compare is the teams playing against teams in their conference. And like the big 12 this year, did pretty well in the short OOC, got 5 to 7 teams ranked. Then they play each other twice so any of those would be a “good” loss. As long as you didn’t shot the bed bs Kstate tcu or Iowa State, there weren’t any more chances to catch a bad loss.

So while the big 12teams sans Baylor beat each other up all year, they rarely moved down in the polls much bc the teams they were losing to were ranked as well.

same thing as big10, except worse. Reason why teams like NW and Minn would reel off 3-4 wins in a row and boom they are in the top 25, when in the end neither had a snowballs chance in hell to even make the tourney, much less be ranked top 25. But it was the same reason, everyone but Nebraska and maybe penn state was ranked at some point seemingly.

Now we are at the sweet 16 and each conf has 1 team left.

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

The committee should be an outside group of individuals that have little to no affiliation with any programs. Have all regions represented.

 

[Crappy Davenpot]

No such thing as good losses. You still fvcking lost. Having teams in the Top 10 with 8-9 losses is pathetic. ESP. In an covid shortened season.

 

[dukedevilz]

I don’t think anything needs to be drastically changed. Just start rewarding teams who win games, not the ones with a bunch of quality losses

lol right. Being "battle tested" and winning 60% of your conference games doesn't merit a 2 seed.

 

[asindc]

Yes, but not just because of this year. The committee has been over-relying on advanced metrics for years now. I think a team’s overall resume is what should be considered to secure a bid, but once the bids have been determined, how a team is playing in the last 3-4 weeks of the season should be the determining factor for seeding.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Before we begin, some ground rules for the region-based tournament:

- #1 seeds will still be given out to whom the committee deems to be the four most deserving seeds, and divide them into their own region (for example, even though Illinois and Michigan and technically more centrally located in the U.S., Michigan is more to the east and therefore they will get the #1 in the East, and Illinois the #1 in the Midwest, just like in the current bracket)

- Some liberties will obviously have to be taken when assigning teams to certain regions (there's just more teams in the east and midwest than there are in the west, at least as far as available teams for the tournament)

- Also, since the committee has created this notion of treating the "top 16 teams" differently, an effort will be made to divide those teams when possible into their own regions. However, sometimes that can't be avoided.)

West Region (Los Angeles)-
1. Gonzaga
2. Texas
3. Oklahoma State
4. Colorado
5. Creighton
6. USC
7. Oregon
8. Oklahoma
9. UCLA
10. San Diego State
11. BYU
12. Oregon State
13. Utah State
14. UC Santa Barbara
15. Eastern Washington
16. Grand Canyon

South Region (Dallas)-
1. Baylor
2. Houston
3. Florida State
4. Virginia
5. Tennessee
6. Texas Tech
7. Florida
8. LSU
9. Clemson
10. Georgia Tech
11. Winthrop
12. UNC Greensboro
13. North Texas
14. Abilene Christian
15. Texas Southern
16. Appalachian State/Norfolk State

Midwest Region (Chicago)-
1. Illinois
2. Ohio State
3. Iowa
4. Arkansas
5. Kansas
6. Purdue
7. Loyola-Chicago
8. Wisconsin
9. Missouri
10. Wichita State
11. Drake
12. Michigan State
13. Ohio
14. Morehead State
15. Oral Roberts
16. Cleveland State

East Region (Philadelphia)-
1. Michigan
2. Alabama
3. West Virginia
4. Villanova
5. UConn
6. North Carolina
7. Saint Bonaventure
8. Maryland
9. Virginia Tech
10. Rutgers/Syracuse
11. VCU/Georgetown
12. Liberty
13. Colgate
14. Iona
15. Hartford
16. Mount St. Mary's/Drexel

 

[duckboy33]

Before we begin, some ground rules for the region-based tournament:

- #1 seeds will still be given out to whom the committee deems to be the four most deserving seeds, and divide them into their own region (for example, even though Illinois and Michigan and technically more centrally located in the U.S., Michigan is more to the east and therefore they will get the #1 in the East, and Illinois the #1 in the Midwest, just like in the current bracket)

- Some liberties will obviously have to be taken when assigning teams to certain regions (there's just more teams in the east and midwest than there are in the west, at least as far as available teams for the tournament)

- Also, since the committee has created this notion of treating the "top 16 teams" differently, an effort will be made to divide those teams when possible into their own regions. However, sometimes that can't be avoided.)

West Region (Los Angeles)-
1. Gonzaga
2. Texas
3. Oklahoma State
4. Colorado
5. Creighton
6. USC
7. Oregon
8. Oklahoma
9. UCLA
10. San Diego State
11. BYU
12. Oregon State
13. Utah State
14. UC Santa Barbara
15. Eastern Washington
16. Grand Canyon

South Region (Dallas)-
1. Baylor
2. Houston
3. Florida State
4. Virginia
5. Tennessee
6. Texas Tech
7. Florida
8. LSU
9. Clemson
10. Georgia Tech
11. Winthrop
12. UNC Greensboro
13. North Texas
14. Abilene Christian
15. Texas Southern
16. Appalachian State/Norfolk State

Midwest Region (Chicago)-
1. Illinois
2. Ohio State
3. Iowa
4. Arkansas
5. Kansas
6. Purdue
7. Loyola-Chicago
8. Wisconsin
9. Missouri
10. Wichita State
11. Drake
12. Michigan State
13. Ohio
14. Morehead State
15. Oral Roberts
16. Cleveland State

East Region (Philadelphia)-
1. Michigan
2. Alabama
3. West Virginia
4. Villanova
5. UConn
6. North Carolina
7. Saint Bonaventure
8. Maryland
9. Virginia Tech
10. Rutgers/Syracuse
11. VCU/Georgetown
12. Liberty
13. Colgate
14. Iona
15. Hartford
16. Mount St. Mary's/Drexel

I was going to complain about Oregon being the 7 seed but I saw Texas was the two seed so I'm fine with it.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

I was going to complain about Oregon being the 7 seed but I saw Texas was the two seed so I'm fine with it.

Tried to go off of the NCAA seeding and not let recency bias sway it too much.

Also, notice how there are no 1st Rd conference rematches anywhere.......

 

[Villian07]

That’s a really good bracket actually.

I still think it would be a problem having so many teams from the same conf in the same region. Maybe not round 1, but beyond that.

If chalk played out you’d have both Texas/okiest and osu/Iowa playing for the 2nd/3rd?? Time in the sweet 16. Obv Tex and osu both shat the bed, but just saying. I mean 6 big 10 teams in the Midwest, who also happened to shat the bed sans Mich. but just hypothetically you could have and entire region, or multiple regions, from the sweet 16 on with nothin but conference foes.

I don’t think it’s terrible or anything, but I kinda like the random matchups and how they spread out conference teams into different brackets, and I think it would draw more eyes than rematches, even deep into the tourney. I have more or a problem with the criteria they use to seed or decide who gets in, than the way they utilize the regions. Like with no rooting interest I’d rather watch Oregon/Iowa or usc/Kansas or any two teams who haven’t played each other in years, than matchups between between regionally close schools who may have played in the last couple of years and esp conf rematches. I don’t even think possible rematches are a big of a problem as possible conference foes remarching for the 2nd to possibly 4th time.

But I must admit your regional bracket would sell a helluva lot more tickets than the way they do it currently. And I did think loyola/illini was one of the better played games of the tourney (specifically loyolas offensive gameplan) and they are obv regionally close.

I guess when all’s said and done, I’d like the tourney regardless if they regionally seeded teams or kept doing it like they do.

 

[hawkit3113]

Do it like the lottery, added higher seeds as you go