Bracketology 2024

[Cyforce]

I would rather play a lot of projected 6 seeds than 7 seeds, but I want no part of there being a chance Drake could play us as an 11 seed if they win their first game.

I think we'd get Bodie in foul trouble and then pound them on the inside.

 

[Cyforce]

Yeah, '92. There was lead-up discussion to bracket reveal that assumed James Madison and Iowa State may be vying for the final slot. But ISU wound up as a 10 seed, so the projections were a bit off. (JMU didn't get invite).

Edit - @ca4cy posted clip shortly before my post. (Although that doesn't include majority of the studio discussion, just the classic punchline)

Team was 5-9 in conference but made the finals in KC. So I'd say those 2 wins definitely counted.

 

[NiceMarmot]

Not at the regional level it isn’t. It’s about matching up teams that align in the S-Curve (while maintaining other rules like avoiding conference matchups from the top teams, etc.)

I've posted this before but can't remember when or where, but here's the order of operations for placing the top 16 teams into the field.

1. If schools from the same conference are in the top 16, they MUST be in different regions. This is a hard and fast rule.
   1. This is why Iowa State won't be in the South, why Creighton/Marquette won't be in the East, why Illinois won't be in the Midwest.
2. Geographical distance to the regional site
3. Regional balance

Here are the main points from the NCAA link on bracket principles that can be a guide for people when trying to determine region placement.

Teams will remain in or as close to their areas of natural interest as possible, as determined by mileage from campus to the venue. A team moved out of its natural area will be placed in the next closest region to the extent possible. If two teams from the same natural region are in contention for the same bracket position, the team ranked higher in the seed list shall remain in its natural region.

1. The committee will place the four No. 1 seeds in each of the four regions, thus determining the Final Four semifinals pairings (overall 1 vs. 4; 2 vs. 3). The overall No. 1 seed has the opportunity to select its preferred first- and second-round site and preferred region.

2. The committee will then place the No. 2 seeds in each region in true seed list order. The committee may relax the principle of keeping teams as close to their area of natural interest for seeding teams on the No. 2 line to avoid, for example, the overall No. 5 seed being sent to the same region as the overall No. 1 seed. The committee will not compromise the principle of keeping teams from the same conference in separate regions.

3. The committee will then place the No. 3 seeds in each region in true seed list order.

4. The committee will then place the No. 4 seeds in each region in true seed list order

5. After the top four seed lines have been assigned, the committee will review the relative strengths of the regions by adding the “true seed” numbers in each region to determine if any severe numerical imbalance exists. Generally, no more than five points should separate the lowest and highest total.

Point 2 above essentially means they will avoid putting the #5 overall team in the #1 overall team's region, but after that, it's entirely conference and geography based. So if Tennessee is the #5 overall team and Purdue is #1, even though they are closer to Detroit than they are to Dallas, I'm guessing they'll go to Dallas to avoid giving Purdue the top 2-seed. After that, THEY DO NOT USE THE S-CURVE. I've seen that floating around a lot in this thread, but it's simply not the case. They don't try to have 1, 8, 9, 16 in one region and 2, 7, 10, 15 in the next. That is essentially impossible since they have to keep same conference schools in different regions as well as factor in "areas of natural interest".

Point 5 above is also relevant. After they place the top 16 teams in each region, they'll add up their totals. This typically results in figures from 30-37. If all 4 regions are within 5 of each other, they're good to go. If not, they'll see where they can adjust to make each regional as balanced as possible while still following the "each conference team in different region" rule.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Mississippi State may have locked a bid.

Can we get UNC, Arizona, and Marquette to lose like that tonight? Although, that said, even then it's probably too late for ISU to claim the 1 seed even in that scenario.

 

[LarryISU]

I've noticed in the past, Kansas will lose the Big 12 championship game, but still be a #1 seed. It makes me feel like these brackets are pretty much set in stone by the time the regular season ends. I think the Committee just wants us to think the conference tournaments matter to them, but not really. Maybe a team on the bubble can play their way in. But the seeds 1-4 I'll bet have been decided already.

 

[NiceMarmot]

I've posted this before but can't remember when or where, but here's the order of operations for placing the top 16 teams into the field.

1. If schools from the same conference are in the top 16, they MUST be in different regions. This is a hard and fast rule.
   1. This is why Iowa State won't be in the South, why Creighton/Marquette won't be in the East, why Illinois won't be in the Midwest.
2. Geographical distance to the regional site
3. Regional balance

Here are the main points from the NCAA link on bracket principles that can be a guide for people when trying to determine region placement.



Point 2 above essentially means they will avoid putting the #5 overall team in the #1 overall team's region, but after that, it's entirely conference and geography based. So if Tennessee is the #5 overall team and Purdue is #1, even though they are closer to Detroit than they are to Dallas, I'm guessing they'll go to Dallas to avoid giving Purdue the top 2-seed. After that, THEY DO NOT USE THE S-CURVE. I've seen that floating around a lot in this thread, but it's simply not the case. They don't try to have 1, 8, 9, 16 in one region and 2, 7, 10, 15 in the next. That is essentially impossible since they have to keep same conference schools in different regions as well as factor in "areas of natural interest".

Point 5 above is also relevant. After they place the top 16 teams in each region, they'll add up their totals. This typically results in figures from 30-37. If all 4 regions are within 5 of each other, they're good to go. If not, they'll see where they can adjust to make each regional as balanced as possible while still following the "each conference team in different region" rule.

As an example, if you use my bracket from earlier today, Tennessee should technically be in the Midwest as Detroit is closest to them, but they are my #5 overall team so I moved them to the South. Arizona goes to the West, Marquette to Midwest, Iowa State to the East. If Iowa State jumps Marquette in the seed list, we still might not get the Midwest, because Marquette cannot be placed in the East due to UConn being the 1-seed there. Tennessee is 514 miles from Detroit, 846 from Dallas, and 938 from Boston, so they might say the difference is negligible and put Tennessee in the East. That's a situation where I'm not entirely sure how or what the exact guidelines and cutoffs are for "area of natural interest".

 

[ClubCy]

I want Purdue in our bracket as the 1, they don’t have the guard play

Based on? They have 3 guards avg double figures and a G/F who shoots 48% from 3. Their pg had season averages only done once in Big 10 history. The other guy was Magic Johnson.

Purdue is very much real this year.

 

[mctallerton]

I've noticed in the past, Kansas will lose the Big 12 championship game, but still be a #1 seed. It makes me feel like these brackets are pretty much set in stone by the time the regular season ends. I think the Committee just wants us to think the conference tournaments matter to them, but not really. Maybe a team on the bubble can play their way in. But the seeds 1-4 I'll bet have been decided already.

I have seen a few guys say it is generally tough to move seed lines in the conference tourney. At that point your body of work is your body of work. If things are close you could see some movement (ISU and Baylor tonight for last two first three) but for the most part the top 16 are set Wednesday, with a little room for movement.

 

[Jacktronic]

Siap but do we think Baylor jumps us if they win tonight?

 

[1UNI2ISU]

I think we'd get Bodie in foul trouble and then pound them on the inside.

UNI beat them by going small and making him guard on the perimeter because he can't do it and that the is the common thread in all their losses.

You let Tucker get his, create a game where Brodie is unplayable and make Wright and Overton beat you.

 

[cyclones500]

I have seen a few guys say it is generally tough to move seed lines in the conference tourney. At that point your body of work is your body of work. If things are close you could see some movement (ISU and Baylor tonight for last two first three) but for the most part the top 16 are set Wednesday, with a little room for movement.

Yep, any type of movement depends on who you happen to beat (or who beats you), just like regular season, and after 33-ish games, needle simply isn't moving a lot, certainly not game-to-game. ISU/BU situation is a rare case when teams happen to be pretty much a lot apart, so that specific game can swing it.

In the example @LarryISU presented, at least some seasons (can't recall without checking) when KU lost B12 title game it usually came against tournament locks that in some cases were in top 4/5 seed range, so that loss isn't enough to drop off the 1 line in a typical case, (the 1/2 cutline would have to be razor-thin)

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Siap but do we think Baylor jumps us if they win tonight?

Yes

 

[CycloneErik]

While this may be true, I don’t think anyone wants us to play that “off” game against Drake where they pick us off and we have to hear a year’s worth of Iowa media loving the story. Already puking at the thought.

Don't listen to 'em and it doesn't matter.

 

[Jayshellberg]

I've posted this before but can't remember when or where, but here's the order of operations for placing the top 16 teams into the field.

1. If schools from the same conference are in the top 16, they MUST be in different regions. This is a hard and fast rule.
   1. This is why Iowa State won't be in the South, why Creighton/Marquette won't be in the East, why Illinois won't be in the Midwest.
2. Geographical distance to the regional site
3. Regional balance

Here are the main points from the NCAA link on bracket principles that can be a guide for people when trying to determine region placement.



Point 2 above essentially means they will avoid putting the #5 overall team in the #1 overall team's region, but after that, it's entirely conference and geography based. So if Tennessee is the #5 overall team and Purdue is #1, even though they are closer to Detroit than they are to Dallas, I'm guessing they'll go to Dallas to avoid giving Purdue the top 2-seed. After that, THEY DO NOT USE THE S-CURVE. I've seen that floating around a lot in this thread, but it's simply not the case. They don't try to have 1, 8, 9, 16 in one region and 2, 7, 10, 15 in the next. That is essentially impossible since they have to keep same conference schools in different regions as well as factor in "areas of natural interest".

Point 5 above is also relevant. After they place the top 16 teams in each region, they'll add up their totals. This typically results in figures from 30-37. If all 4 regions are within 5 of each other, they're good to go. If not, they'll see where they can adjust to make each regional as balanced as possible while still following the "each conference team in different region" rule.

Sounds Like a waterfall approach. The committee ranks to top 16 overall teams, makes certain none of the top 16 from the same conference are placed in the same region, then considers geography and regional balance.

However, the committee would be unlikely to place its fifth overall seed in the same region as its number one overall seed EVEN if the closest regional site for both teams is the same. Consequently, if UConn was the committee’s top ovrrall seed and NC was its fifth overall seed, they wouldn’t place them both in the East. One the other hand, if UConn was the committee’s second overall seed or if NC was its sixth overall seed, they very well could place them in the same region. Is that correct?

 

[mctallerton]

As an example, if you use my bracket from earlier today, Tennessee should technically be in the Midwest as Detroit is closest to them, but they are my #5 overall team so I moved them to the South. Arizona goes to the West, Marquette to Midwest, Iowa State to the East. If Iowa State jumps Marquette in the seed list, we still might not get the Midwest, because Marquette cannot be placed in the East due to UConn being the 1-seed there. Tennessee is 514 miles from Detroit, 846 from Dallas, and 938 from Boston, so they might say the difference is negligible and put Tennessee in the East. That's a situation where I'm not entirely sure how or what the exact guidelines and cutoffs are for "area of natural interest".

View attachment 125626

So looking at this, if Baylor were to win tonight and move up to the last 2 and ISU were the first 3, all four 6/11 games would be on a Thursday. By rule doesn't one have to be on Friday because of first four? So what do you think would be more likely, ISU stays a 2 or Illinois move up to a 3? I realize it's not a vacuum and Kentucky, Auburn, and Alabama all play into this as well...

 

[1UNI2ISU]

So looking at this, if Baylor were to win tonight and move up to the last 2 and ISU were the first 3, all four 6/11 games would be on a Thursday. By rule doesn't one have to be on Friday because of first four? So what do you think would be more likely, ISU stays a 2 or Illinois move up to a 3? I realize it's not a vacuum and Kentucky, Auburn, and Alabama all play into this as well...

They'd bump one of the first 4 games down to a 12 seed. They've done it before.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

As an example, if you use my bracket from earlier today, Tennessee should technically be in the Midwest as Detroit is closest to them, but they are my #5 overall team so I moved them to the South. Arizona goes to the West, Marquette to Midwest, Iowa State to the East. If Iowa State jumps Marquette in the seed list, we still might not get the Midwest, because Marquette cannot be placed in the East due to UConn being the 1-seed there. Tennessee is 514 miles from Detroit, 846 from Dallas, and 938 from Boston, so they might say the difference is negligible and put Tennessee in the East. That's a situation where I'm not entirely sure how or what the exact guidelines and cutoffs are for "area of natural interest".

View attachment 125626

Interesting, I stand corrected then. Although I don’t really agree with the committee’s approach to that, but that’s irrelevant

 

[clone52]

My updated bracket this morning after that loaded slate of Thursday games.

View attachment 125610

• If Iowa State beats Baylor, they're a 2-seed. If they lose, they're the 3-seed in the Midwest.
  • Most likely scenario if they beat Baylor is a 2-seed in the East. Depending on how UNC/Tennessee/Arizona/Marquette finish the season, they could also be the 2-seed in the Midwest or West. I'd say East/Midwest/West is order of operations there.
• I originally had Drake as the 11-seed in Omaha in the Kansas pod, but I had to move them to account for First Four matchups. If Iowa State is the 3-seed in the Midwest, don't be shocked if Drake is the 11 there.
• Here are my rough tiers right now per my seed list:
  • 1-3, 4-6, 7-10, 11-16, 17-28, 29-35, 36-42, 43-46 (plus first 3 out).
• In my opinion, there are 7 spots available amongst these 12 teams. Colorado, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, St. John's, Texas A&M, New Mexico, Pittsburgh, Indiana State, Seton Hall, Providence, Ohio State, Kansas State. That's the order I would have them ranked as well.
  • Of those 12 teams, I think Colorado, Oklahoma, and Mississippi State are 90%+ to make it, and I think Ohio State and Kansas State are at less than 10% (if Ohio State beats Illinois, that changes).
  • So you could simplify it a little further to 4 spots for 7 teams. Three of these teams will not make it -- St. John's, Texas A&M, New Mexico, Pittsburgh, Indiana State, Seton Hall, Providence. There's your bubble.
• Having said all that, it's a bit curious to me how all 105 brackets on Bracket Matrix have Seton Hall in the field right now, and 6 have Kansas State. Let me be clear, I don't think and I don't want Kansas State in the field -- they are my least favorite Big 12 team. But these resumes are quite similar to me, yet one is in 105 brackets, and one is in 6. View attachment 125604
  • I do think there's some groupthink going on right now with Seton Hall, and the entire reason everyone has them in is because they beat UConn. Just last year, Rutgers big resume win was at Purdue, and they had somewhat similar resume metrics (Seton Hall KPI/SOR 68/40; 2023 Rutgers KPI/SOR 49/57). They're my pick right now for the Selection Sunday "how did this team not make it?" surprise reaction.

I think you might have the regions wrong. There are some distance issues, but the balance just barely works.

Based on your seed list, Tennessee would go to Detroit as that is its closest region. If you flip UNC and Tennesse, UNC would go to detroit as its closer than boston. Arizona goes West, Marquette South and ISU East.
Baylor would be MW, Creighton West (can't be East or South), Kansas East (can't be south) and Kentucky (south)
Illinois South (can't be MW) Duke MW, Alabama East and Auburn W

Big 12 has both Iowa State and Kansas in the East. Not allowed.
SEC is in MW, South, East, West (not allowed
Big 10 is in MW and South
Big East is East, South and West
Pac 12 is West
ACC is West and MW

How to fix Kansas and Iowa State. Can't move Kansas. Creighton can't go to the East due to UConn and Kansas can't go south due to Houston.
Can you move Iowa State? Iowa State would need to go West, meaning Arizona goes East. That really sucks for Arizona. It probably means Iowa State West, Arizona South, but Marquette can't go east. Arizona to the East is probably the only way.

Now MW has Purdue (1), Tennessee (5), Baylor (9) and Duke (14) for a total of 29
East has Uconn (2), Arizona (6), Kansas (11) and Alabama (15) for a total of 34
South has Houston (3), Marquette (7), Kentucky (12) and Illinois (13) for a total of 35.
West has UNC (4), Iowa State (8), Creighton (10) and Auburn (16) for a total of 38

Generally, there should be no more than a gap of 5, so we have a problem. How do you fix it? It is a cluster. You could swap Tennessee, Baylor for ISU, Creighton but that has 2 SEC teams in the West. You swap Arizona and Tennessee and Duke/Alabama

Now MW has Purdue (1), Iowa State (8), Creighton (10) and Alabama (16) for a total of 35
East has Uconn (2), Tennessee(5), Kansas (11) and Duke (14) for a total of 32
South has Houston (3), Marquette (7), Kentucky (12) and Illinois (13) for a total of 35.
West has UNC (4), Arizona (6), Baylor (9) and Auburn (15) for a total of 34

Your MW is Purdue (1), Marquette (7), Baylor (9) and Alabama (16) for a total of 33
Your East has Uconn (2), Iowa State (8), Kentucky (12) and Duke (14) for a total of 36
Your South has Houston (3), Tennessee (5), Creighton (10) and Illinois (13) for a total of 31
Your West has UNC (4), Arizona (6), Kansas (11) and Auburn (15) for a total of 36

Mine has better balance, but yours does save hurt Marquette more than Iowa State. Would the committee like more balance at the expense of benefiting #8 over #7? I don't know.

 

[NiceMarmot]

You’re worrying me Nice with KU still getting a “3” seed. You’re one of the few that I have seen who still slots them there. That would put Kansas in Omaha with Iowa State and drive up ticket prices.

I will be cheering for Illinois and Kentucky to win today and tomorrow to get the nod over the Jayhawks for one of the “3” seeds.

Sounds Like a waterfall approach. The committee ranks to top 16 overall teams, makes certain none of the top 16 from the same conference are placed in the same region, then considers geography and regional balance.

However, the committee would be unlikely to place its fifth overall seed in the same region as its number one overall seed EVEN if the closest regional site for both teams is the same. Consequently, if UConn was the committee’s top ovrrall seed and NC was its fifth overall seed, they wouldn’t place them both in the East. One the other hand, if UConn was the committee’s second overall seed or if NC was its sixth overall seed, they very well could place them in the same region. Is that correct?

That's how I read it. UNC is another surprising distance one, though. Chapel Hill is technically closer to Detroit than it is to Boston, so I'd read that as their preferred region being the Midwest.

 

[HackTheGibson]

ISU wins against Baylor and Houston. Arizona and UNC loses today. Give us the one out west and let's get going!