The rules will be relaxed for conferences with 9 or more teams, which is likely the SEC and B1G this season (unless Indiana AND Ohio State trip up here significantly).It's still a rule, as of yesterday, for anyone we have played 2 or 3 times.
Building the brackets: A deep dive on the NCAA tournament selection and seeding process - NCAA.org
How do teams get selected and seeded for the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Basketball Championships? Take a deep dive into the March Madness selection process,www.ncaa.org
They *can* be relaxed if a conference has 9 or more teams in the NCAA tournament. But teams can be moved up or down a seed line to meet bracketing principles.
Week of 3/10 Bracketology
- Status
I thought they changed the rule that if you played a team 3 times in the year, you could not play them again until the EE. Less than, because of the bigger conferences, conference affiliation does not matter like it used to.
We would have rolled Marquette with the way we were playing and the way they were playing at that point. The only teams we had trouble with were UConn obviously and Purdue.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Really wish there was a way we could win the BTT and remain a #6 seed rather than a #4/5 seed. 
(Assuming a #3 seed is indeed completely off the table.)
(Assuming a #3 seed is indeed completely off the table.)
Pretty wild how the B1G seeding is playing out
MSU as a 2 seed. Then a legitimate chance that 7 B1G teams are 4/5 seeds. Then that might be it if tOSU and Indiana don't make it.
MSU as a 2 seed. Then a legitimate chance that 7 B1G teams are 4/5 seeds. Then that might be it if tOSU and Indiana don't make it.
Why Illinois Basketball's Impressive NET Ranking is So Important
The Illini sit at 15th in the NET, and may climb even higher with an impressive weekend in the Big Ten Tournament
www.si.com
Committee analysis part 2:
Okay, so we have our initial list of 118 (I missed 4 in my first post, CCSU, Chattanooga, SEMO and Towson all won their conferences and not the auto bid).
Those 118 range from NET 1 to NET 297 (some of these auto bid profiles get pretty gross). The 12-person committee has 3 jobs to do initially:
- Nominate up to 24 teams that should be in the at-large field, no questions asked.
- Nominate a list of teams that should continue to be "under consideration" for an at large bid.
- Determine auto bids that are not in the at large consideration pool, for sorting at the bottom of the bracket
Any team that makes at least 9 ballots in the at-large list get put into the at-large pool (they are "IN"). Any team that makes at least 4 ballots in either at-large or under consideration remains under consideration. Any team that has an auto bid that doesn't make either list goes into the "auto bids" bucket. All other teams are removed from consideration for now, but can be voted back in.
For my purposes, I'll do what I consider to be the 24 best profiles as an initial at-large pool, and put the single-bid auto bids into the auto bids bucket, and choose the bottom 16 teams from the remaining consideration pool to remove from consideration.
So here's the nitty gritty on the top 24 at-large profiles, team names removed for blind analysis, they are not ranked in any order at this time, yellow is auto bid, blue is conference regular season champ:
Here are the auto bids that are not under at-large consideration (aka would be single bid leagues), still blind:
And 16 teams with a team sheet that shouldn't be under at-large consideration:
- Southern - 1-8 against the top 250, only here because they won their conference
- SEMO - 2-6 against the top 250, only here because they won their conference
- CCSU - 2-2 against the top 250, 5 losses outside 300, only here because they won their conference
- Towson - 1-3 against the top 150, 2 losses outside 300, more respectable than the prior 3 but not in the at-large ballpark
- Chattanooga - 0-3 against Q1, 2 losses outside 300, avg NET win was 232
- Providence - 12-20 overall record, 3-17 against Q1/Q2
- St. Bonaventure - NC SOS in the 300s, 1 loss outside 300, avg NET loss was over 100
- Oklahoma State - 15-17 record, 7-13 in conference, 1-13 against Q1
- Minnesota - 15-17 record, 7-13 in conference, 0-2 against Q3 despite 7-8 against Q1
- UNLV - 3-13 vs Q1/Q2, 1 Q4 loss
- Northern Iowa - 2-6 vs Q1/Q2, 1 Q4 loss, avg NET loss was over 100
- Florida State - 8-12 in a bad conference, 3-12 vs Q1/Q2
- LSU - 1-15 vs Q1, 14-18 overall
- Georgetown - 342 NC SOS, 1-8 vs Q1, 3 Q3 losses
- South Carolina - 12-20 overall, 1-16 vs Q1, 1 Q4 loss
- Oregon State - 2 Q4 losses, 1-7 vs Q1
So the field is organized, split into 3 pools, and 16 teams have come off the board, leaving 102 (which, again, is still 34 too many).
But again this post is long enough, so I'll continue with another later.
Okay, so we have our initial list of 118 (I missed 4 in my first post, CCSU, Chattanooga, SEMO and Towson all won their conferences and not the auto bid).
Those 118 range from NET 1 to NET 297 (some of these auto bid profiles get pretty gross). The 12-person committee has 3 jobs to do initially:
- Nominate up to 24 teams that should be in the at-large field, no questions asked.
- Nominate a list of teams that should continue to be "under consideration" for an at large bid.
- Determine auto bids that are not in the at large consideration pool, for sorting at the bottom of the bracket
Any team that makes at least 9 ballots in the at-large list get put into the at-large pool (they are "IN"). Any team that makes at least 4 ballots in either at-large or under consideration remains under consideration. Any team that has an auto bid that doesn't make either list goes into the "auto bids" bucket. All other teams are removed from consideration for now, but can be voted back in.
For my purposes, I'll do what I consider to be the 24 best profiles as an initial at-large pool, and put the single-bid auto bids into the auto bids bucket, and choose the bottom 16 teams from the remaining consideration pool to remove from consideration.
So here's the nitty gritty on the top 24 at-large profiles, team names removed for blind analysis, they are not ranked in any order at this time, yellow is auto bid, blue is conference regular season champ:
Here are the auto bids that are not under at-large consideration (aka would be single bid leagues), still blind:
And 16 teams with a team sheet that shouldn't be under at-large consideration:
- Southern - 1-8 against the top 250, only here because they won their conference
- SEMO - 2-6 against the top 250, only here because they won their conference
- CCSU - 2-2 against the top 250, 5 losses outside 300, only here because they won their conference
- Towson - 1-3 against the top 150, 2 losses outside 300, more respectable than the prior 3 but not in the at-large ballpark
- Chattanooga - 0-3 against Q1, 2 losses outside 300, avg NET win was 232
- Providence - 12-20 overall record, 3-17 against Q1/Q2
- St. Bonaventure - NC SOS in the 300s, 1 loss outside 300, avg NET loss was over 100
- Oklahoma State - 15-17 record, 7-13 in conference, 1-13 against Q1
- Minnesota - 15-17 record, 7-13 in conference, 0-2 against Q3 despite 7-8 against Q1
- UNLV - 3-13 vs Q1/Q2, 1 Q4 loss
- Northern Iowa - 2-6 vs Q1/Q2, 1 Q4 loss, avg NET loss was over 100
- Florida State - 8-12 in a bad conference, 3-12 vs Q1/Q2
- LSU - 1-15 vs Q1, 14-18 overall
- Georgetown - 342 NC SOS, 1-8 vs Q1, 3 Q3 losses
- South Carolina - 12-20 overall, 1-16 vs Q1, 1 Q4 loss
- Oregon State - 2 Q4 losses, 1-7 vs Q1
So the field is organized, split into 3 pools, and 16 teams have come off the board, leaving 102 (which, again, is still 34 too many).
But again this post is long enough, so I'll continue with another later.
I said that in my post. The wording is "can", not "will".
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I'm still skeptical of that if we are facing an Auburn or Duke in the Sweet Sixteen, and I would MUCH rather take our chances vs. any of the #2/3 seeds. As an example, we shot over 30% at Wisconsin and got throttled. I could see your same statement being more true if we bumped that up to about 34%, however. These are our results vs. major conference competition when we shot over 34% from three:
Over 50%
W 95-74 at Minnesota
W 109-77 at Oregon
40 to 50%
W 90-77 vs. Arkansas (Kansas City, MO)
34 to 40%
W 83-78 vs. UCLA
W 93-73 at Michigan
W 88-80 vs. Purdue
W 94-69 at Indiana
In short, your point is a good one ... if this team hits open threes at an even somewhat decent rate, we are VERY difficult to beat. If we hit them at an exceptionally good rate (which you'd think we'd be due for!!), we are truly Final Four good. The problem, of course, is that better defenses will limit our threes.
skyIdub
"I can't tell you. Secret."
Agreed.
If we shoot 34% or better we are beating all comers.
But 30% with our volume and a good night from Tomi, Rez, and KJ….ill take my chances with anybody.
The wording is can, but it will be used. The real trick will be to see if the committee can avoid setting up an SEC-SEC first round matchup.
Duke will probably have Flagg back by the tourney, but not Makiq Brown, who re-dislocated his shoulder today.
He dislocated it about a month ago and came back after only 3 weeks in their UNC game.
Maybe he defers surgery (imo bad idea) and comes back in another 3-4 weeks, I dunno.
My youngest had labrum repair surgery Dec 2023 and got done w PT about April 2024.
He just re-dislocated it a couple weeks ago raising his arm quickly for a rebound. Crazy.
Next surgery will be to do a bone graft in place of the labrum to hold the ball in the socket.
Without surgery, the dislocations will happen easier and more frequently, and
most importantly, will do bone damage that make repair less likely to be successful and
increased issues with arthritis in the future. Never knew the severity of dislocations before this.
He dislocated it about a month ago and came back after only 3 weeks in their UNC game.
Maybe he defers surgery (imo bad idea) and comes back in another 3-4 weeks, I dunno.
My youngest had labrum repair surgery Dec 2023 and got done w PT about April 2024.
He just re-dislocated it a couple weeks ago raising his arm quickly for a rebound. Crazy.
Next surgery will be to do a bone graft in place of the labrum to hold the ball in the socket.
Without surgery, the dislocations will happen easier and more frequently, and
most importantly, will do bone damage that make repair less likely to be successful and
increased issues with arthritis in the future. Never knew the severity of dislocations before this.
I watched Auburn vs Alabama a cpl days ago, and they are good, but (imo) if our boys are on their game, they can beat either.
I think Texas A&M beat Auburn recently, and they will be a 2 seed, so that will be a 6 bracket to avoid!
I think Texas A&M beat Auburn recently, and they will be a 2 seed, so that will be a 6 bracket to avoid!
Texas is trying to get on the last 4 in line. TAMU might drop a line if this continues
Let's stop being scared of Auburn. If we play on our best game, we beat them. They are 6-3 in their last 9. In that stretch Torvik has them at #5 - i.e. playing like a 2 seed.
This has been a season of 2 Illinois teams. Good Illinois and Bad Illinois.
I think if we get to the S16 we can beat a 1 or 2 seed with Good Illinois, and probably can't beat either with Bad Illinois.
If we match up with a 3 seed in the second round, we're going to need Good Illinois, and are probably done if Bad Illinois shows up.
If we match up with a 5 seed in the 2nd round (i.e. we are a 4-seed), we might be able to eke out a victory even if Bad Illinois shows up.
What's more, our odds of getting bounced in the first round with a Bad Illinois showing are far less with a 4 seed than with a 6.
Let's get the highest seed possible, hope Good Illinois shows up every game, and ride this out for as long as possible.
This has been a season of 2 Illinois teams. Good Illinois and Bad Illinois.
I think if we get to the S16 we can beat a 1 or 2 seed with Good Illinois, and probably can't beat either with Bad Illinois.
If we match up with a 3 seed in the second round, we're going to need Good Illinois, and are probably done if Bad Illinois shows up.
If we match up with a 5 seed in the 2nd round (i.e. we are a 4-seed), we might be able to eke out a victory even if Bad Illinois shows up.
What's more, our odds of getting bounced in the first round with a Bad Illinois showing are far less with a 4 seed than with a 6.
Let's get the highest seed possible, hope Good Illinois shows up every game, and ride this out for as long as possible.
I think we are a high 6 low 5 right now. Two wins could get us to the 4 line with teams above us losing. The gap between 4-7 is narrow. We play the way we have been playing the last three games especially with MJ, we can beat anyone.
I really like the fact that IU is situated right next to the pitchfork
Texas just kicked IU out of the tourney.
The Big Ten may only get 8 teams in the tournament and make the option moot.
So, what does this win do for the Illini? 7 down to a 6th seed? 6 down to a 5th seed? Or a solidification of a 6/7th seed?
OrangeBlue98
Iowa is not in a great spot right now (LvilleILL1)
- Des Moines, IA
Our floor is a 6. Only going up from here.
I don't think this game moves the needle at all. Iowa is awful and we did what was expected. To me, the only way that we get past 6 is to win two more games. If we combo wins against Maryland and Purdue/Michigan, a 5 is arguable.
I think it would be very hard for the committee to give Purdue a 4 seed (which is what Lunardi has them as) if we beat them twice. There are also 3 teams projected as 3 seeds that are debatable. There is a world where if we make the B1G tournament finals we are a 4 and if we win it we are a 3. Just like last year.
sacraig
- The desert
He isn't. Never has.
- Status