"Actual" Seeds
I was curious if anyone has seen the official ranking of the 68 teams? During the selection show CBS said they would reveal that in their breakdown show. I didn't watch it, but I thought it would be available online. I can't find it anywhere. I thought it might be interesting because it feels like they maybe moved Michigan down a line to make things fit.
For the inevitable, I did spend 10 fruitless minutes with google, ESPN and CBS. I'm sure I'll feel like an idiiot in 25 seconds when someone posts the link, but I'll take the abuse over trying fruitlessly to keep searching. I'll admit defeat.
March 12th, 2012 at 12:55 PM ^
I know we were an average 3.5 seed so it could have gone either way.
and Georgetown should have been switched. The committee put too much stock in the BTT. Michigan State and Ohio State were hell-bent on having DEATHMATCH 3 and there was nothing that Michigan could do about. I am not saying OSU does not beat Michigan 7 out of 10 times, I am just saying that Michigan mailed it in and it was obvious. They should be a 3 based on their body of work. That being said, I love the matchups as a 4.
that location of the game factored in the decision making process of choosing between Georgetown and Michigan. I am OK with the committee keeping Michigan out of Columbus.
My drive to see them play Friday night is now 15 minutes instead of 8 hours. 4-seed works well for me.
How do they determine the individual matchups then? Michigan drops one slot below #12 Georgetown and goes from playing #24 ranked SDSU to #17 ranked Temple. That doesn't make sense unless the matchups are somewhat arbitrarily decided based upon regions, etc.
in order to their closest pod. For instance, Temple was the highest 5-seed, so they were placed in the closest pod to them amongst Nashville, Albuquerque, and Portland. So you are rewarded with the higher seed with a better location, not a better opponent.
March 12th, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^
I think...and I could be wrong.
I think we were the last 3-seed and FSU jumped us when they beat Carolina and we ended up as the top 4-seed.
FSU for that very nice thing they did in jumping us. We now have an easier road to the Sweet 16.
Not sure I agree with you on that one. Ohio U and Temple are a much harder match-up IMO than St. Bonaventure and Cinn/Texas.
Cincy is on fire since the whole fighting scandal, and second Yancy Gates would kill us inside. Temple is smaller and we can compete a lot better against them IMO.
Fruitlessly was exactly how you should be searching for "actual" seeds. But still I could only find 24... sorry.
Yah, I was hoping this was a thread about gardening.
As you get to lower seeds -- 4, 6, etc. -- the ranking of seeding (high 4 v. low 4 etc.) becomes subject to many other extra factors, primarily avoiding having conference teams play each other. Teams even get different seeds entirely -- bounced up or down -- because of the matchup issues . I think that was the explanation with BYU getting a 14, because they had matchup issues with conference affiliates.
But really, a high 4 versus low 4? Does it matter? (Esp where 3 of the 4 are B1G teams -- how weird is that -- and we know we would rank higher than UW and IU, based on conf standings.)
you'll see a blockbuster collection of tranditional powerhouses and it's wonderful to see Michigan included. Then, systematically, beginning at 17 and lower the list downgrades into a mish-mash of mid-majors, one-hit-wonders, also-rans and fading stars. It's good to return back toward the top.
FWIW, according to CBS sports rankings of the most difficult tournament teams to beat, UM should have been a #3 seed (ie top 12), Georgetown a #5 (ie not in top 16).
MSU should have been the second to worst #2 seed, not a #1.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketba…
available here:
How are they considered 29 overall and an 8 seed? Whether we should have been a 3/4 is where we all probably figured we would be. Creighton fans were probably hoping for at least a 6 seed. I think it is criminal to say to a team that the are ranked 29th among the field, and then give them an 8 seed and a potential second round matchup with UNC. Not to mention they beat San Diego State at their place this year and SDSU got a 6 seed. Creighton's seed is criminal, IMO.
kenpom 34 (offense 5, defense 183), 28-5 against strength of schedule 103 with a substantial amount of close-game luck.
I'd say their seed was about right. San Diego St.'s was high but I'm not sure why that's relevant.
Because Creighton beat SDSU on SDSU's home court, and they have similar records with a near similar SOS. Creighton also won their conference tourney, and SDSU did not. SDSU is a 6, and Creighton is an 8. How is that not relevant?
March 12th, 2012 at 10:18 PM ^
They got SDS wrong. That doesn't mean they also got Creighton wrong.
March 12th, 2012 at 10:57 PM ^
I don't know. I just felt like an 8 was a little low. They did have several close games toward the end of the year, but I think capping off their conference tourney should have gotten them to at least a 6 or 7.
Just because you pulled an upset doesn't make you a cinderella team. You actually have to go on a run, which means getting to the sweet 16.