2025 Bracketologies

[cyclones500]

Jon was a top 10 bracketer last year and this is updated for today. It seems like a trend is forming. LOTS of brackets have us as a 3 in the east.

Hoops HD

College Basketball Analysis in High Def

hoopshd.com

That'd be my least-favorite 14 to face, but overall I'd be cool with it.

He swapped BYU from a 6 to 7 due most likely to Friday/Sunday /// Thursday/Saturday, but has it facing WVU. Unless it's unavoidable, that violates a bracketing principle (he could swap placement w/ Gonzaga, perhaps). No biggie, just something I noticed.

 

[AlaCyclone]

I don't understand the hate for UNC as an at-large. OOC, they played @ Kansas (L 89-92), Auburn (L 72-85), Michigan State (L 91-94 in OT), Alabama (L 79-94), Florida (L 84-90) and UCLA (W 76-74). For damn! OKay, so they wouldn't win the SEC, but those are six high quality OOC games (1-5). They won one and three of them were close. Only Auburn and Alabama beat them by more than two possessions.

 

[dahliaclone]

I don't understand the hate for UNC as an at-large. OOC, they played @ Kansas (L 89-92), Auburn (L 72-85), Michigan State (L 91-94 in OT), Alabama (L 79-94), Florida (L 84-90) and UCLA (W 76-74). For damn! OKay, so they wouldn't win the SEC, but those are six high quality OOC games (1-5). They won one and three of them were close. Only Auburn and Alabama beat them by more than two possessions.

But they didn’t win any of those games. Gotta win games. And the ACC sucks so their wins are inflated by **** teams. Pretty easy why they shouldn’t be in.

 

[ca4cy]

This post focuses on seed range rather that actual seeds. He has 5 teams in the mix for the four 3 seeds.

 

[alexssdean12]

The hottest teams the last month of the season:



Id like to avoid BYU, Colorado St, and Gonzaga the first two games.

 

[CloneIce]

I don't understand the hate for UNC as an at-large. OOC, they played @ Kansas (L 89-92), Auburn (L 72-85), Michigan State (L 91-94 in OT), Alabama (L 79-94), Florida (L 84-90) and UCLA (W 76-74). For damn! OKay, so they wouldn't win the SEC, but those are six high quality OOC games (1-5). They won one and three of them were close. Only Auburn and Alabama beat them by more than two possessions.

I agree. On top of that, they were red hot to end the season. To me they look like a tourney team.

It’s weird to see how much the ACC is currently looked down on.

 

[WastedTalent]

I agree. On top of that, they were red hot to end the season. To me they look like a tourney team.

It’s weird to see how much the ACC is currently looked down on.

They haven't beaten anybody with a pulse. Since Feb 1st, they have beaten bad teams, and lost 3 times to Duke by 17, 13 and 3 (when they were down by 20, and no Flagg) and once to Clemson by 20. They have ONE quad 1 win.
Similar to their non con, great they played good teams, but they have no wins.

 

[dahliaclone]

I agree. On top of that, they were red hot to end the season. To me they look like a tourney team.

It’s weird to see how much the ACC is currently looked down on.

Red hot over…who?

 

[Cyched]

This post focuses on seed range rather that actual seeds. He has 5 teams in the mix for the four 3 seeds.

Drawing on my math education from Iowa public schools and the Iowa State University, I can conclude that 5>4

 

[AlaCyclone]

But they didn’t win any of those games. Gotta win games. And the ACC sucks so their wins are inflated by **** teams. Pretty easy why they shouldn’t be in.

I get that (winning is better than losing), but they did beat UCLA and three of the losses (@ KU, MSU and Florida) were close. If UNC scheduled middle of the road for those games and finished 4-1 instead of 1-4, they would be a shoe-In IMO. Just giving them therir props for scheduling @ Kansas, Michigan State, UCLA, Alabama, Auburn and Florida OOC. I wonder how ISU would have done against that schedule? (1-2) as it is - with the loss to Auburn and split with KU. Plus, I don't think the ACC is as aweful as projected. I just think UNC should receive some bonus points for playing six really tough OOC games with @ Kansas or UCLA being the easiest of the six.

 

[iowastatefan1929]

Red hot over…who?

Remember how red hot ISU was before that fateful Thursday vs UAB.

What you really need is at least one red hot shooter and we might have that with Curtis Jones.

 

[dahliaclone]

I get that (winning is better than losing), but they did beat UCLA and three of the losses (@ KU, MSU and Florida) were close. If UNC scheduled middle of the road for those games and finished 4-1 instead of 1-4, they would be a shoe-In IMO. Just giving them therir props for scheduling @ Kansas, Michigan State, UCLA, Alabama, Auburn and Florida OOC. I wonder how ISU would have done against that schedule? (1-2) as it is - with the loss to Auburn and split with KU. Plus, I don't think the ACC is as aweful as projected. I just think UNC should receive some bonus points for playing six really tough OOC games with @ Kansas or UCLA being the easiest of the six.

The acc is truly as bad as the look. Truly.

 

[AlaCyclone]

The acc is truly as bad as the look. Truly.

Well, I was talking to Erskine Caldwell about it... / sarcasm.

 

[WastedTalent]

I get that (winning is better than losing), but they did beat UCLA and three of the losses (@ KU, MSU and Florida) were close. If UNC scheduled middle of the road for those games and finished 4-1 instead of 1-4, they would be a shoe-In IMO. Just giving them therir props for scheduling @ Kansas, Michigan State, UCLA, Alabama, Auburn and Florida OOC. I wonder how ISU would have done against that schedule? (1-2) as it is - with the loss to Auburn and split with KU. Plus, I don't think the ACC is as aweful as projected. I just think UNC should receive some bonus points for playing six really tough OOC games with @ Kansas or UCLA being the easiest of the six.

Highly doubt the whole committee is looking at margin of defeat or victory, especially from games in November. IF they are, then are they also looking at how they got blown out by Duke and Clemson (only teams they played with a pulse) in February and March

 

[AlaCyclone]

Highly doubt the whole committee is looking at margin of defeat or victory, especially from games in November. IF they are, then are they also looking at how they got blown out by Duke and Clemson (only teams they played with a pulse) in February and March

That's fine. I truly don't care if they are in or out, but I think playing an OOC schedule of @ Kansas, Michigan State, UCLA, Alabama, Auburn and Florida is GREAT!

 

[cyclones500]

They haven't beaten anybody with a pulse. Since Feb 1st, they have beaten bad teams, and lost 3 times to Duke by 17, 13 and 3 (when they were down by 20, and no Flagg) and once to Clemson by 20. They have ONE quad 1 win.
Similar to their non con, great they played good teams, but they have no wins.

Yep. At some point, wins have to matter. A program with UNC's tradition can schedule as many of those type of non-cons as they want (and get high-level MTEs), and yes it's a positive they could maximize. But NC didn't maximize opportunities.

No requirement to win ALL of those, or even a majority of Q1s, but ... show us something.

 

[cyclones500]

An X factor is how ISU's injury/illness enters the assessment. It's considered by the committee, but I continue to wonder how it's "quantifiable." So many variables (speaking of it generally, not specific to ISU this season).

There could "simpler" cases, say a team's leading scorer is out for a month (say, January) and that's the only time there's a dip in team performance. But even that could depend on quality of opponents during the stretch. No way to guess, maybe the team would've lost as many or almost as many at full strength.

We know the missed games affected ISU's ability and to an extend its rotation/chemistry, but that's partly because we are hyper-focused on it and followed it game by game.

 

[CloneIce]

Red hot over…who?

ACC teams. I think they are better than the media narrative. They certainly were last season.

 

[madguy30]

I agree. On top of that, they were red hot to end the season. To me they look like a tourney team.

It’s weird to see how much the ACC is currently looked down on.

The ACC is ranked far below the other power conferences by a long ways.

 

[RezClone]

But they didn’t win any of those games. Gotta win games. And the ACC sucks so their wins are inflated by **** teams. Pretty easy why they shouldn’t be in.

Ya they are like 1-12 in quad 1 or something like that.

Why don't we just we put Iowa in while we're at it.