Polls & Bracketology - Illinois #12 in AP Poll

Status
Not open for further replies.
#126      
IlliniFaninHoosierLand
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I got myself curious asking about our chances of getting into the Chicago Regional, so I decided to look back at the placement of "protected" (i.e., top 4) seeds since 2000. In the 20 seasons where the NCAAT had normally distributed sites, there were really only five seasons where one or more teams were placed in a Regional that was an undisputed, absolute homecourt advantage (this is just fun trivia...):

2000: #1 Michigan State in Auburn Hills, MI (Detroit)
2003: #1 Texas in San Antonio, TX
2005: #1 ILLINOIS in Rosemont, IL (Chicago)
2008: #1 North Carolina in Charlotte, NC and #2 Texas in Houston, TX
2017: #1 Kansas in Kansas City, MO

There were about nine other years where a top seed a "moderate" homecourt advantage, like Louisville in Indianapolis, IN or something.

It seems we should be hoping for Purdue to fall off of the 1-line, right? If they get Chicago as a 1 and we are, say, a 4-seed, they will ship us off to a different region. However, if Gonzaga is the 1 in Chicago, we could still be a 2-, 3- or 4-seed in the same region. Again, for fun, I found the following examples over that timeframe where I would consider the higher seed to have been "screwed" by being put in a market CLEARLY more favorable to a team seeded lower than them ... so there's hope! :LOL: Roughly in order of how bogus the draw was...

2019: #1 North Carolina placed in Kansas City, MO with #4 Kansas
2003: #1 Oklahoma placed in Albany, NY with #3 Syracuse
2008: #1 Memphis placed in Houston, TX with #2 Texas

Bottom line, after all of that pointless babbling, I REALLY want to play at the United Center if we get that far. If we are in the Sweet Sixteen or Elite Eight at the UC ... wow, the atmosphere would be insane.
Click to expand...

Unless something crazy happens, Gonzaga will be the 1 seed in the West.
 
#127      
The Galloping Ghost
Bigtex said:
Rutgers had a poor pre conference showing.
Preseason lost at DePaul, at umass, vs Lafayette.

Also lost at minnesota, northwestern, Penn st, and lost at home to Maryland.
Click to expand...
Yup, which is why they most likely miss the tournament. Despite that, they still have a decently simple path towards getting their NET in the top 75, which pushes their game into a Q1 and helps our resume.
 
#128      
Navy_illini
Remember first round games can be played anywhere and is not dependent on region sometimes the underdog has the home court in round 1 or 2
 
#130      
Piotyr
Typically the committee will assign regions and pod locations in order of seeding teams. So, for example, if the top 16 seeds were as such (taken from Joe Lunardi's current seed list before tonight's games):

1. Gonzaga
2. Auburn
3. Arizona
4. Kentucky
5. Kansas
6. Baylor
7. Purdue
8. Duke
9. Providence
10. Illinois
11. Texas Tech
12. UCLA
13. Villanova
14. Tennessee
15. Wisconsin
16. Houston

As #1, Gonzaga gets West region (San Francisco), and closest pod (Portland, OR).
#2 Auburn gets closest region, which probably works out to Midwest (Chicago), and closest pod (Greenville, SC)
#3 Arizona gets next closest region, South (San Antonio, TX), and closest pod (San Diego, CA)
#4 Kentucky gets remaining region, East (Philadelphia) and closest pod (Indy, IN)
#5 Kansas gets closest available pod (FT Worth, TX)
#6 Baylor gets closest available pod (Ft Worth, TX) -- no more TX pod
#7 Purdue gets second Indy spot
#8 Duke gets second Greenville, SC spot
#9 Providence gets closest between Pittsburgh or Buffalo (both are similar, so maybe Buffalo?)
#10 Illinois gets Milwaukee, WI
#11 Texas Tech gets...second San Diego spot
#12 UCLA gets second Portland spot (one spot away from San Diego, which is sad for them)
#13 Villanova gets Pittsburgh
#14 Tennessee gets second Pittsburgh spot
#15 Wisconsin lucks out and gets Milwaukee
#16 Houston gets the last spot, which is Buffalo, too bad, so sad.
 
#131      
DMWSuperFan
The Galloping Ghost said:
Rutger jumped 11 spots after they beat #24 MSU (111 to 100), 8 spots after they beat #17 OSU (99 to 91), and 13 spots after they beat #23 Wisky (94 to 81).
Click to expand...
this part is what confuses me when northwestern jumps up 9 spots for beating Nebraska #176 at home when already at 78.
 
#133      
Piotyr
Updating the T-Rank/WAB bracket exercise from Friday:

Then:
1 seeds: Kansas*, Arizona*(+1), Gonzaga*, Auburn*
2 seeds: Purdue*(-1), Kentucky, Baylor(+1), Houston*
3 seeds: Duke*(-1), Villanova*, Wisconsin, Texas Tech
4 seeds: Tennessee, UCLA, Illinois, Texas(+1)
5 seeds: Providence(-1), LSU(+1), St. Mary's, Arkansas(+2)
6 seeds: Michigan State(-1), Wake Forest(+1), Marquette, Ohio State(-1)
7 seeds: Alabama(+1), Boise State*, Iowa(+2), Connecticut(+2)
8 seeds: Indiana(-1), Iowa State(-2), Xavier(-2), Wyoming(+1)
9 seeds: Murray State*(-1), USC(-1), Michigan(+3), TCU(+1)
10 seeds: San Francisco(-2), North Carolina, Loyola IL*(-1), Oklahoma(+2)
11 seeds: Colorado State, SMU(+2), Seton Hall(+1), North Texas*(-1)
12 seeds: St. Louis*(-1)
Last 4 in: Oregon(-2), San Diego State, Davidson(-1), Notre Dame
First 4 out: West Virginia(+1), Florida(-2), Miami FL, Belmont
Next 4 out: UAB(-1), Mississippi State, BYU, Fresno State
Click to expand...

Today:
1 seeds: Baylor* (+1), Arizona*, Kansas, Auburn*
2 seeds: Purdue*, Gonzaga*(-1), Kentucky, Villanova*(+1)
3 seeds: Duke*, Houston*(-1), Tennessee(+1), Texas Tech
4 seeds: Illinois, Texas, UCLA, Wisconsin(-1)
5 seeds: Ohio State(+1), LSU, Michigan State(+1), Providence
6 seeds: Alabama(+1), Arkansas(-1), St. Mary's(-1), Xavier(+2)
7 seeds: Iowa, USC(+2), Colorado State*(+4), North Carolina(+3)
8 seeds: Connecticut(-1), San Francisco(+2), Iowa State, Murray State*(+1)
9 seeds: Wake Forest(-3), Loyola IL*(+1), Indiana(-1), Wyoming(-1)
10 seeds: Boise State(-3), Michigan(-1), Marquette(-4), North Texas*(+1)
11 seeds: Memphis(+4), Notre Dame(+1), Seton Hall, TCU(-2)
12 seeds: Davidson*
Last 4 in: SMU(-1), Oklahoma(-2), Miami FL(+1), Virginia Tech(+3)
First 4 out: San Diego State (-1), Belmont, BYU(+1), Florida
Next 4 out: VCU(+1), Oregon(-2), South Dakota St(+1), Chattanooga(+1)
Off the board: St. Louis(-3), West Virginia(-2), Mississippi State(-1), Fresno State(-1)
Not yet realistic but on some people's bubble lists: Virginia, Rutgers, Creighton, Washington State

Notes:
- Marquette takes a dive losing 3 of 4, one a bad loss to Butler.
- North Carolina and Colorado State are way up by posting convincing wins, strengthening their T-Rank to make a significant jump.
- Gonzaga will continue to tread water in WAB, so any team that puts together a series of good wins is going to pass them (see Baylor). However, in reality, they'll still probably be safe for a 1 seed if they win out. Lose a game, however, and they probably lose the 1 seed chance all together.
- Houston had 2 bad losses, which took a massive hit to their WAB, but their T-Rank is still 2, so a 3 seed seems about right. Could see them slip to a 4 in the right situations.
- There are some tenuous mid major cnoference leaders who are on or near the bubble, and should they lose in their conference tournament, could steal an at-large spot from one of the last 4 in (namely Murray State, Loyola, North Texas and Davidson).
- Other potential one bid teams in the next 4 out right now, like South Dakota St and Chattanooga, are effectively dangerous 13 seeds if they get their conference's auto bid, because if they don't they'll take a bad loss and not get an at large.
 
Last edited:
#134      
DMWSuperFan
The Galloping Ghost said:
Yup, which is why they most likely miss the tournament. Despite that, they still have a decently simple path towards getting their NET in the top 75, which pushes their game into a Q1 and helps our resume.
Click to expand...
Something seems odd that Dayton is at 59 with 3 Q4 losses and 3 Q1 wins, but Rutgers is 81 with 1 Q4 loss and 5 Q1 wins, which happens to be more than MSU and OSU and tied with us. Unless they factor in kenpom or some advanced analytics, I don’t see any way to suggest that Dayton should be over 20 spots above Rutgers.
 
#135      
Piotyr
DMWSuperFan said:
Something seems odd that Dayton is at 59 with 3 Q4 losses and 3 Q1 wins, but Rutgers is 81 with 1 Q4 loss and 5 Q1 wins, which happens to be more than MSU and OSU and tied with us. Unless they factor in kenpom or some advanced analytics, I don’t see any way to suggest that Dayton should be over 20 spots above Rutgers.
Click to expand...
They incorporate efficiency margin into the NET rankings, and not wins/losses against quadrants. Rutgers has taken numerous bad losses this year beyond just the awful Q4 loss. They also have 2 Q3 losses and some lower end Q2 losses. Not all losses are created equal.

Rutgers is still either behind or much closer to Northwestern in terms of bid chances than actually having an at-large chance right now. They still have the schedule to work their way into bid worthiness, but they clearly aren't there yet.
 
#136      
DMWSuperFan
Piotyr said:
They incorporate efficiency margin into the NET rankings, and not wins/losses against quadrants. Rutgers has taken numerous bad losses this year beyond just the awful Q4 loss. They also have 2 Q3 losses and some lower end Q2 losses. Not all losses are created equal.

Rutgers is still either behind or much closer to Northwestern in terms of bid chances than actually having an at-large chance right now. They still have the schedule to work their way into bid worthiness, but they clearly aren't there yet.
Click to expand...
I mean, losses to lipscomb (281), Austin peay (276), and Umass Lowell (240) seems like a pretty awful start of the year for Dayton (all at home), but yeah, I guess they should be higher than Northwestern too.
 
#137      
Saturdaze
IlliniFaninHoosierLand said:
Unless something crazy happens, Gonzaga will be the 1 seed in the West.
Click to expand...
It’s ridiculous but will probably be the norm until Few retires. Gonzaga has figured out how to game the system.

They’ll play a couple highly promoted neutral site games and advertise this false idea that they’re willing to play a tough schedule When the reality is their non-conference strength of schedule is only 64 in NET and 139 in RPI.

To date they’ve only played 3 road games all year, and will play all year avoiding challenges like playing at Mackey, or the RAC, etc.

Their non-conference consisted of 4 Q1 neutral site games, 1 Q1 home game, and 8 Q4 games. Illinois has played 4 Q4 games total all year. Nothing was stopping Gonzaga from stepping up and scheduling a better non-con.

Few knows what he is doing just tying to rack up the Q4 W’s, and schedule a couple heavily promoted non-cons to get the critics off his back.
 
Last edited:
#139      
DMWSuperFan
Saturdaze said:
It’s ridiculous but will probably be the norm until Few retires. Gonzaga has figured out how to game the system.

They’ll play a couple highly promoted neutral site games and advertise this false idea that they’re willing to play a tough schedule When the reality is their non-conference strength of schedule is only 64 in NET and 139 in RPI.

To date they’ve only played 3 road games all year, and will play all year avoiding challenges like playing at Mackey, or the RAC, etc.

Their non-conference consisted of 4 Q1 neutral site games, 1 Q1 home game, and 8 Q4 games. Illinois has played 4 Q4 games total all year. Nothing was stopping Gonzaga from stepping up and scheduling a better non-con.

Few knows what he is doing just tying to rack up the Q4 W’s, and schedule a couple heavily promoted non-cons to get the critics off his back.
Click to expand...
Let’s throw in that Santa Clara gets a Q4 win and against #242 and jumps 18 spots to 88, so has climbed into Q1 status for a road game now at 72 despite only 1 Q1 win - so Gonzaga sneaks in a few Q1 wins somehow from conference opponents just above 75
 
#141      
Ramrod2010
chrisRunner7 said:
Lol, Piotyr and Nightman, you have both caught tournament fever already... but I am right there with you.

Btw, I thought that surely Auburn, Alabama would be closer to San Antonio than Chicago... oops, wrong.
Click to expand...
Maps are silly and make no sense.
 
#142      
Fighter of the Nightman
Piotyr said:
Typically the committee will assign regions and pod locations in order of seeding teams. So, for example, if the top 16 seeds were as such (taken from Joe Lunardi's current seed list before tonight's games):

1. Gonzaga
2. Auburn
3. Arizona
4. Kentucky
5. Kansas
6. Baylor
7. Purdue
8. Duke
9. Providence
10. Illinois
11. Texas Tech
12. UCLA
13. Villanova
14. Tennessee
15. Wisconsin
16. Houston

As #1, Gonzaga gets West region (San Francisco), and closest pod (Portland, OR).
#2 Auburn gets closest region, which probably works out to Midwest (Chicago), and closest pod (Greenville, SC)
#3 Arizona gets next closest region, South (San Antonio, TX), and closest pod (San Diego, CA)
#4 Kentucky gets remaining region, East (Philadelphia) and closest pod (Indy, IN)
#5 Kansas gets closest available pod (FT Worth, TX)
#6 Baylor gets closest available pod (Ft Worth, TX) -- no more TX pod
#7 Purdue gets second Indy spot
#8 Duke gets second Greenville, SC spot
#9 Providence gets closest between Pittsburgh or Buffalo (both are similar, so maybe Buffalo?)
#10 Illinois gets Milwaukee, WI
#11 Texas Tech gets...second San Diego spot
#12 UCLA gets second Portland spot (one spot away from San Diego, which is sad for them)
#13 Villanova gets Pittsburgh
#14 Tennessee gets second Pittsburgh spot
#15 Wisconsin lucks out and gets Milwaukee
#16 Houston gets the last spot, which is Buffalo, too bad, so sad.
Click to expand...
Super helpful, thanks for posting! In such a scenario, does the consideration of region stop after the 1-seeds? In other words, can 2-, 3- and 4-seeds wind up in any old region, or would they try to match #1 (1-seed) with #8 (2), #2 (1-seed) with #7 (2-seed), etc.?

We are the second 3-seed in that list, and theoretically would get the region with Arizona if such a system were used to a T. So, we'd theoretically want to get in with Auburn's group to have a path through Chicago. This all might be pointless, and maybe they just put the non-1 seeds in regions with other considerations as top of mind (e.g., separating Purdue and Illinois or something).

Either way, as far as not "punishing" a 1-seed, I think we have a decent shot at the Chicago Region if we can stay above the 4-seed line, where we would theoretically face a 1-seed in the Sweet Sixteen. I don't see why they would have a problem with putting a 2-seed or 3-seed Illinois in Chicago, as we wouldn't see the 1-seed until the Elite Eight anyway, and at that point it is what it is.
 
#143      
altgeld88
skyIdub said:
rigged-conspiracy.gif
Click to expand...
Hey, now. Don't take your hands off the stick while you're flying low to evade Central American military radar.
 
#144      
Fighter of the Nightman
By the way, here is how our Tournament resume looks heading into tonight's huge matchup with Rutgers at the Trapezoid of Terror:

Record: 18-6
NET Rank: #13
SOS Rank: #8
Q1 Wins: 5 (at #19 IOWA, vs. #21 WISC, vs. #27 MSU, at #45 IND, at #66 NU)
Q2 Wins: 5 (vs. #36 MICH, vs. #55 ND, vs. #61 KSU in KC, vs. #66 NU, at #103 MINN)
Q3 Losses: 0
Q4 Losses: 0

Some Things We Should Root For:
- Unless it interferes with a double bye in the BTT or winning the Big Ten ... we want RU to win enough to get into the top 75. It would both turn our home win vs. them into another Q2 win AND make any potential victory tonight into a Q1 win!
- Again, unless it interferes with our Big Ten goals, it would be great for Michigan to sneak into the top 30 somehow ... no matter how much it might make you puke, it would give us another Q1 win vs. them at home already!
- NU to stay in the top 75, as that road win in Evanston is deceptively huge for our resume.
- KSU to do well ... if they moved into the top 50 somehow, it would turn into a Q1 win since it was at a neutral site in Kansas City.

Remaining Opportunities:
at #81 Rutgers (Quad 2)
at #27 Michigan State (Quad 1)
vs. #17 Ohio State (Quad 1)
at #36 Michigan (Quad 1)
vs. #86 Penn State (Quad 3 ... only TERRIBLE loss left on the schedule)
vs. #19 Iowa (Quad 1)

Assuming a PSU loss is avoided, I think a 4-2 finish keeps us firmly in the 3-seed camp, and a 5-2 finish likely gets us firmly in the 2-seed camp, depending on who the wins are against. Exciting stretch coming up!
 
#145      
Fighter of the Nightman
sacraig said:
I don't buy the "the committee is going to make..." arguments, in part because I don't believe we are remotely important enough for the committee members to know about the various narratives our fans care about.
Click to expand...
I mean, I would like to believe this in theory, but ... last year, we played a 24-5, #10 NET Loyola that was literally ranked #17 in the final AP Poll as an 8-seed?? I don't think the Committee cares especially about "Illinois," but I think they 100% take into account storylines as tiebreakers. They know it's about ratings at the end of the day.
 
#146      
727ill
Wanna hear something even crazier. Iowa has 0 Quad 1 wins but is a metrics darling.

However, they have a 17-2 record in the rest of the quadrants
 
#147      
Fighter of the Nightman
727ill said:
Wanna hear something even crazier. Iowa has 0 Quad 1 wins but is a metrics darling.

However, they have a 17-2 record in the rest of the quadrants
Click to expand...
Yeah, they are super confusing to me... not complaining, though, as they are one of our 5 Quad 1 wins and (hopefully) will be yet another one later this season. They don't have any bad losses, but I really don't understand how going 8-0 vs. Q4 teams, 4-0 vs. Q3 teams and 5-2 vs. Q2 teams vaults you into the top 20...
 
#149      
Piotyr
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Super helpful, thanks for posting! In such a scenario, does the consideration of region stop after the 1-seeds? In other words, can 2-, 3- and 4-seeds wind up in any old region, or would they try to match #1 (1-seed) with #8 (2), #2 (1-seed) with #7 (2-seed), etc.?

We are the second 3-seed in that list, and theoretically would get the region with Arizona if such a system were used to a T. So, we'd theoretically want to get in with Auburn's group to have a path through Chicago. This all might be pointless, and maybe they just put the non-1 seeds in regions with other considerations as top of mind (e.g., separating Purdue and Illinois or something).

Either way, as far as not "punishing" a 1-seed, I think we have a decent shot at the Chicago Region if we can stay above the 4-seed line, where we would theoretically face a 1-seed in the Sweet Sixteen. I don't see why they would have a problem with putting a 2-seed or 3-seed Illinois in Chicago, as we wouldn't see the 1-seed until the Elite Eight anyway, and at that point it is what it is.
Click to expand...
There are typically a few selection guidelines and rules with regards to region placement after the 1 seeds:
- The top 2 teams from the same conference will be placed in different regions (so, Purdue and Illinois, Baylor and Kansas, Auburn and Kentucky, Arizona and UCLA, etc) So there won't be a situation where both Purdue and Illinois are in the Midwest (unless someone like Ohio State/Wisconsin sneaks in between the two)
- The committee will take regional travel into account, so they will make a general effort to keep teams somewhat close by to their regional site when possible.
- Overall, they'll try to balance the regions among the top 4. It won't be perfect(i.e. the 1-8-9-16th best teams won't automatically be the same region top 4 seeds), but, take the West for example, if Gonzaga gets the region as assumed and UCLA is a top 4 seed, there's a good chance UCLA will be in the West region, but as the 12th ranked team, they'll probably put a better 2 seed in there (Baylor?) and a slightly better 4 seed (Tennessee) to keep the overall region balanced.
 
#150      
jrichisamazing
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Yeah, they are super confusing to me... not complaining, though, as they are one of our 5 Quad 1 wins and (hopefully) will be yet another one later this season. They don't have any bad losses, but I really don't understand how going 8-0 vs. Q4 teams, 4-0 vs. Q3 teams and 5-2 vs. Q2 teams vaults you into the top 20...
Click to expand...

Because of their fast paced run and gun style, Iowa is very good at blowing out inferior teams. And pretty much all of their losses were close and competitive, except Iowa St.

Compare that to Wisconsin, for example, who has some very close wins against some very bad teams and doesn't really blow anyone out. But a lot of that has to do with their playstyle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back