It's Selection Sunday which means it's time to find out who's in who's out and who's playing who. We have worked hard all weekend and, as usual, had a tough time finding enough deserving teams to complete the field. This year was especially difficult because we had 3 more spots to fill. But with lots of debate and team comparison we feel confident we have selected the best 37 at-large teams. So, without further ado, here is our tournament as of now...
East Region/Newark Southeast/New Orleans
1 Ohio St. 1 Pittsburgh
16 UTSA/Alabama St. Cleveland Washington DC 16 Hampton
8 Washington 8 Temple
9 Villanova 9 Memphis
5 Vanderbilt 5 Kansas St.
12 USC/Clemson Denver Tuscon 12 Florida St.
4 Syracuse 4 Wisconsin
13 Princeton 13 Oakland
6 Old Dominion 6 Cincinnati
11 Michigan Cleveland Charlotte 11 Utah St.
3 Louisville 3 North Carolina
14 Wofford 14 Bucknell
7 Georgetown 7 UNLV
10 Illinois Tuscon Tampa 10 Marquette
2 San Diego St. 2 Florida
15 No. Colorado 15 Long Island
West/Anaheim Southwest/San Antonio
1 Duke 1 Kansas
16 Boston Charlotte Tulsa 16 UALR/Asheville
8 Tennessee 8 Michigan St.
9 UCLA 9 Butler
5 Arizona 5 West Virginia
12 Virginia Tech/Georgia Tulsa Tampa 12 Richmond
4 Texas 4 Kentucky
13 Morehead St. 13 Belmont
6 St. John's 6 Texas A&M
11 Colorado Denver Chicago 11 Gonzaga
3 BYU 3 Purdue
14 Indiana St. 14 St. Peter's
7 Xavier 7 Missouri
10 Penn St. Chicago Washington DC 10 George Mason
2 Notre Dame 2 UConn
15 UCSB 15 Akron
These are subject to change pending today's outcomes (especially if Dayton beats Richmond). As you can see our last 4 teams in Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia, and USC. Our first 4 out are Alabama, Boston College, VCU, and UAB. Harvard and St. Mary's were also under heavy consideration.
We really went back forth with Georgia, USC, and Alabama. And it was heavily discussed as to what to do with Richmond if they lose to Dayton. We think they are in no matter what.
Seeding wise we went with Ohio St. as over all number 1, but Kansas was right there. We put Duke as last number 1 over Notre Dame assuming they win ACC tourney. It was hard to seed UConn considering they won 5 games in 5 days in Big East tourney. Their overall body of work is very good so they were a top 16 seed anyways, but that run pushed them to a 2 seed. Let me know what you think.
Thinking about moving Kentucky to a 3 seed, but no consensus yet. They may be left at a 4.
First seeds right good job!!!
ReplyDeleteLooks like the committee somehow put UAB and VCU in over Virginia Tech and Colorado. Be interested to hear their theory there. Again though we were more accurate than espn's bracketologist as he had va tech, st. mary's and colorado in. With vcu, uab, and georgia out. More to come after I do some more analyzing.
ReplyDeleteWell it appears most analysts agree with us that virginia tech and colorado should be in over uab and vcu. Committee really messed up there. If you want the most accurate projections next year be sure you check us out.
ReplyDeleteIntern speaking: So i was planning on working for Lunardi next year, and you guys even told me id get paid more money working for him. However, yesterday was quite possibly the nerdiest most awesome thing i've done in a long while. And the meal was pretty delicious as well. Also, Triple J got more teams right than Lunardi, so i ask; how could i leave that for espn and all the fame in the world? i cant!
ReplyDeleteIf I was Colorado I would be starting a riot all the way to Indianapolis.
ReplyDeleteYes Colorado has a real beef. This is probably the worst job the committee has done in a few years when you factor in the last few teams they put in along with some seeding decisions. Good predicition with Florida the 2 seed, though I don't understand it. I also question whether conference tournaments help or not, as UConn's string of wins seemed to propel them whereas other teams were neither benefitted or hurt by their performance in the tourney.
ReplyDeleteUConn had a lot of really good wins. The problem is they hit a slump in the middle of the year and piled up a few losses. They got it together at the end though and then went on that amazing run. The wins they picked up in the tourney helped had to their top 50 wins which was impressive. Thinking about it now, a day later, a 2 seed may have been too high. However, I'm not sure which 3 I would replace them with. North Carolina? Maybe, but Carolina didn't have near the top 50 or 25 wins that UConn did.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, leaving Colorado out was a joke. If you put USC in you have to put Colorado in. They had basically the same resume. A few too many bad losses, and losses in general, but some big wins as well. Both teams beat Texas. We put both in because they proved they could beat tournament teams. UAB did not.
Florida's record against the top 50 and top 100 was outstanding as was their road/neutral court record. I know they lost to Kentucky twice, but the overall body of work was good. Head to head is not the only factor obviously, or Colorado would have been in over Kansas St. and Georgia over Alabama and Virginia Tech over Florida St. so and so forth. I did push for Kentucky to get a 3 seed, but ran out of time before I could get a consensus.
Thanks for your comments and I'm glad your sticking with Triple J's intern. LOL