Indiana Blue

March 10th, 2014 at 12:29 PM ^

has some numbers from before the weekend.  It also had Wisconsin as a 1 seed 5 times - preNebrasketball.  Once these get updated there will some slight modifications.

I think the seeding all depends on the conference tournaments.  Obviously WSU is done and a #1, but I think results of the tourneys will have a huge influence .... including a potential 1 seed for Michigan if we win the B1G tournament ...

Go Blue!


March 10th, 2014 at 11:30 AM ^

BTT finals appearance locks up a 2-seed. Fall in the semi-finals and it depends on how Kansas, Wisconsin, Duke, Syracuse, and Virginia perform. Drop a game in the quarterfinals and it's a 3-seed.


March 10th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^

Granted, UM has been playing some really good basketball lately but Florida has been quite impressive over the past several months (I believe they have won 23 straight games). They get scoring from every position and can play multiple styles of basketball. Overall, you are right, though - that would be a very nice set up for UM. The Midwest bracket, on the other hand, looks brutal.


March 10th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^

A home win vs Kansas and no other impressive wins during that streak.  Florida is pretty much the same team we pummeled last year (and they had plenty of hype last year as well).  It's going to be an interesting year in watching these teams like Florida, Wichita, etc. that haven't played a tough game for months.  


March 10th, 2014 at 12:00 PM ^

for strength of schedule, so that's mostly moot. 

And before talking about shit conferences - while it's not everything, which conference has more NCAA Championships in the last 10 years, the SEC or B1G? The Big Ten has made it there 4 times in the last 10 years which is really good probably, except winless in those attempts. Big Ten is clearly better as a whole, by far, but that doesn't mean Florida can't be the best team in the country.


March 10th, 2014 at 12:04 PM ^

So me saying I wouldn't mind Michigan being in the same region as Florida equates to "weird homerism"?  Got it.

I think Michigan matches up very well with teams that play smaller lineups, like Florida does.  It is the teams will large, athletic PF's that give UM the most trouble (think Ashley from Arizona).  Much like last year, I like the way Michigan matches up with Florida.


March 10th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^

Seth Davis seems to believe that if UM wins the BTT they will get the final 1 seed.  I honestly believe Michigan has already wrapped up a 2 seed and can only go up from here.  On a side note, there is no way 4 teams out of the SEC make the tournament.  I can't believe Lunardi has Arkansas in the field still, especially after they lost by 25 to 13-18 Alabama.


March 10th, 2014 at 11:51 AM ^

A few sites are going with only three teams from the SEC, which makes a little more sense to me. I don't even know that Arkansas is in "first four out" territory at this point - they might be further away than that now. At any rate, It's probably Florida, Kentucky and Tennessee and that's all from the SEC - a 1, 7 and 12-seed respectively, per TeamRankings. 

Maison Bleue

March 10th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^

I thought the same about Arkansas, but then I started looking at teams behind them. The only team that makes a real case(at the moment) is Minnesota. But the Razorbacks have a better record(in a bad conference, I know), a better record against RPI top 50(Ark 4-3/Minn 3-8), and they beat the Gophers head to head on a nuetral floor earlier in the year. Hard to argue that.

Maison Bleue

March 10th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^

I agree, but the mid-major teams Lunardi has in is whole different issue with me. I am not sure how he doesn't have the two teams you mentioned, winning their respective conferences. It seems he is bringing subjective opinion to braketology, where I thought it based more on numbers, rank, SOS, etc...

His three * New Teams To The Bracket in the this edition are all pretty much WTF?


March 10th, 2014 at 2:09 PM ^

They lost to Milwaukee this weekend. They're 62 at Sagarin, 61 an kenpom, they're NIT bound.

And he doesn't have Southern Miss because Louisiana Tech is the #1 seed in that tournament and his rule is to use the highest remaining seed for the autobid.

I don't like Arkansas either--I actually think Utah is better, to name one among many.


March 10th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^

A couple thoughts. 

1) If that bracket was accurate (spoiler: it won't be), Kansas would probably become the first team to play the Wolverines in consecutive NCAA tourney games. 

2)Being in Milwaukee with Wisconsin would suck as we would be playing against the crowd.

3)How does Lunardi determine his autobids? EMU is nowhere near the top seed remaining in the MAC. His system is screwy to say the least. 


March 10th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^

That's not true.  Michigan played UNC in the tournament 3 years in a row - lost in the 2nd round in '87, lost in the Sweet Sixteen in '88 and won in the Sweet Sixteen in '89 on the run to the NC.  We also played Temple in back to back years with the Fab 5 - won in the 1st round in '92 and won in the regional finals in '93.


March 10th, 2014 at 12:15 PM ^

Yeah but UNC had to play NCAA games in between those matchups (first two round games in 88 and 89) so it wasn't consecutive. Similarly Temply played 3 games in between 92 and 93 matchups. Kansas would have lost to us last year and then would play the "Wolverines" of Utah Valley immediately in the next game. It's a completely meaningless, arbitrary point, but I thought it was mildly interesting. 


March 10th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^

Don't like that draw at all. Besides Eastern there isn't a single gimme in there. OKSt just pushed ISU to the brink in Ames where we lost. UVA won the ACC. And Florida's been #1 for a while (yes in a weak conference), but realistically UNC could upset them and be a tough out in the elite eight. I really hope the regions are more balanced than this.


March 10th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^

they used to put things into consideration like not having early games that are rematches from the regular season, or giving consession to conference champs for better regional placement / spreading out the major conf. champs, etc. Now they're not supposed to do that and are going off straight seeding. 

I still highly doubt they'd do that overall, anyway, as these are just projections. 

Maison Bleue

March 10th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^

I is confuzed. I don't really understand how he is predicting Michigan to play EMU in the first(second) round. EMU? LOL WUT? Since when does Lunardi pick underdogs to win conference tournaments? I guess I always thought his picks were based on the assumption that the highest ranked (RPI, AP, BPI, etc...) team in the conference, wins the conference auto-bid. 


March 10th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^

One win locks up a 2 seed and maybe even not that.  No way we need to win the BTT to hold onto 2. 

EDIT:  Also it would be total BS if the B1G season champ got stuck with #1 Florida.  We (or some other team if it hadn't been us) deserves a Villanova or WSU.  I know UF has played a weakass schedule, but that would still be baloney.


March 10th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^

How do they put Eastern Michigan in? There is no way Eastern Michigan will beat Western Michigan or Toledo. WMU is playing some good basketball as of late plus they have the #1 seed in the MAC tourney so i think it might be looking good for them to win it. GO BRONCOS


March 10th, 2014 at 12:54 PM ^

Lunardi normally goes with either the leader of the conference standings or the highest RPI rating if ties are in place.  As you said, WMU is the #1 seed in the MAC tourney, so my guess is this is supposed to be Western instead of Eastern.