Don't take this guy too serious...he has Purdue as a 5 seed :goofy:
I don't have a huge problem with KSU above ISU, but I don't know if it's 6 slots on the S-curve.
Several things even worse about that projection.
* Purdue as a 5 seed. Can't see it.
* Northwestern in, but not as play-in; Texas out.
* Florida is higher than a 7
As with any bracket, plenty of it is fine as far as the field itself — seedings seem out of whack in places.
Note: KState is considered higher seed.
It's clear that some "experts" value the big win more than consistency, or avoiding bad losses - to a fault.
I hate the use of the terms "higher" and "lower" in reference to seeds. About half of the people mean one thing and the other half mean the the exact opposite. I've always thought of a "higher" seed as better, so your thread title made me pause for a minute.
I try to stick to "better" and "worse" in reference to seeds now.
KState has more quality wins than us, I am not offended by this projection. If we win another game we will jump them.
But we swept them... And we swept OU, who swept them....
KSUs resume is a little better than ours, especially their top 25 record (4-3) vs ours (1-4), and that they have 2 top 25 ROAD wins. Both highly valued by the committee. I'd be surprised if they aren't a higher seed than us come selection day (unless we win out :spinny:.
Anyway — Considered as a whole, ISU & KSU resumes have become nearly indistinguishable at this point. A few things in each team's favor:
Team comparison ISU vs. KSU
I realize we may see head-to-head sweep as a tiebreaker; but that isn't an official selection factor (not to say it is never considered)