Review of the Top 16 Projection from 2/11/17

The committee released their top 16 teams on Saturday, and overall, for me, there wasn’t too many surprises. I accurately picked 15 of the 16 teams the committee would place into the field (I had Cincinnati in over Florida), and correctly seeded 12 of those teams, and the other 3 were missed by just one seed line (Louisville, Arizona, Butler). My initial reaction of my performance to mimic the committee was very positive. I then decided to compare this performance to my performance over the past three years (comparing the FINAL bracket in those years since there was no mid-season preview in the past), and here are the results:

2017: 15 out of 16 correct (3 points each), 12 teams seeded correctly (3 points each), 3 teams missed by one seed line (1 point each) = 84

2016: 15 out of 16 correct, 8 teams seeded correctly, 7 teams missed by one seed line = 76

2015: 15 out of 16 correct, 13 teams seeded correctly, 2 teams missed by one seed line = 86

2014: 15 out of 16 correct, 9 teams seeded correctly, 6 teams missed by one seed line = 78

My initial reaction is confirmed; this was a phenomenal job in mimicking the committee’s bracket. Recall that I have finished no worse than 6^th in the bracket matrix in 2014-2016, and given that my 2017 performance is on par with my 2015 performance (when I finished tied for 2^nd in the matrix), I am confident  that I am yet again in the top tier of bracketologists.

I only have two major issues with the committee’s decisions. The first one is actually immaterial given that it does not change where the team plays for their regional, but Gonzaga being the number four overall seed behind Baylor and Kansas is absurd. Gonzaga is undefeated and owns wins over Arizona (a 3 seed) and Florida (a 3 seed) on neutral courts, St. Mary’s (a 5 or 6 seed, only had one win over them before the bracket was released them promptly beat St. Mary’s by double digits at St. Mary’s Saturday night), and a neutral court win over likely NCAA tournament team Iowa State. Take the name Gonzaga off the resume, look at it, and you’ll see they have both proven themselves on neutral courts against NCAA tournament quality teams AND IS UNDEFEATED!

My second issue is with regards to Florida. Looking back over the past 3 years’ “Nitty Gritty” report that the committee uses to select and seed the field, I was warry that they would place Florida in the field. I did not, however, think that they would reward Florida a 3 seed. Florida is 20-5 overall on the season, has a top 10 non-conference strength of schedule, and was 4-5 vs. the top 50 and 12-5 vs. the top 100 heading into Saturday morning. The top 100 record is indeed impressive on the surface, but once you dig deeper, you notice that they have only beaten Kentucky at home and…that’s about it. Their other top 50 wins are against bubbly SEC teams and Seton Hall, who is also square on the bubble. They lost at home to Vanderbilt, who will not be making the NCAA tournament, but their other four losses are all quality (Gonzaga, Florida State, Duke, South Carolina).

 I think a team like Cincinnati was much more deserving. The Bearcats have just 2 losses on the season and have beaten NCAA tournament teams in Xavier (before the Edmond Sumner injury), SMU (will play them again today), and Iowa State. Cincinnati’s two losses are at Butler (a 4 seed prior to their loss to Providence on Saturday) and Rhode Island (probably one of the first four teams left out of the tournament right now). I was afraid the committee might give Florida credit for winning a lot of “neutral court” games in the non-conference as their arena was being renovated, and it appears that may indeed be the case.

Finally, I saw a lot of people on Twitter questioning how the Big Ten was left out of the top 16. The two teams that are just missing the cut (as I accurately predicted) are Wisconsin and Purdue. Wisconsin lacks a signature win (best win is Minnesota, a 7 to 9 seed) as they lost their two best non-conference games by double digits. That’s the risk you run when scheduling a very weak non-conference schedule; if you fail to pick up a win in the two opportunities you have, you will be punished. Now, Wisconsin does still have to play some teams that can make the NCAA tournament (Northwestern, Maryland, Michigan State, Michigan), and I do believe the Big Ten champion will end up with a 4 or 3 seed come Selection Sunday. Purdue has just been too inconsistent to be rewarded with a top 16 seed. The Boilermakers have good wins over Notre Dame on a neutral court, at Maryland, and against Wisconsin at home, but losses to Minnesota at home and on the road to Iowa and Nebraska (two teams that will not make the NCAA tournament) are blemishes that the other teams comparable to Purdue just do not have on their resume.

I will be posting my updated projection of the bracket later tonight, but wanted to get some of my thoughts out there on this first ever early look at the top 16 teams. Overall I think it’s a good thing for the committee to do. It gets people talking about college basketball and helps the bracketologists know just exactly what the committee values when ranking teams.