Bracketology and Team Resumes

[realTomCrean 2,766]

2 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Depends on what this years committee values more.   It changes yearly with the turnover of committee members.  I’ve seen teams get left out with a bunch of Q1 wins and I’ve also seen them left out for having bad losses.  That doesn’t help you sorry but it’s a moving target.  Us that project this has to take clues from the committee revealing their top 16 in February and project from there.  The year IU got  a 4 seed I projected it when most on this board thought 5 of 6 seed and it was because during their top 16 reveal earlier in the year they valued high end road wins for teams.  Ius road win at Xavier that ended up a 3 seed moved IU up some seed lines.  I personally haven’t went back and looked at what this years committee has valued.   I will do that when it gets closer to Sunday 

So a recent win @ Mich St (the best win in B10 conference play) could potentially move us up a seed line, or at least out of Dayton you think?

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

6 minutes ago, realTomCrean said:

So a recent win @ Mich St (the best win in B10 conference play) could potentially move us up a seed line, or at least out of Dayton you think?

Probably not but possible.  That win gets them in the conversation to be out of Dayton however the only other win against the field would be Purdue which is 2 solid wins or if you think a 17-14 Ohio st team is in the field then add 2 more wins.  This is where Oklahoma probably has the advantage over IU in that Oklahoma has at least 6 wins against teams currently safely projected in the field and another over Arkansas.  That would be hard to overlook.  If iu loses to Oregon they will be in the Last 4 in or if enough bid stealers happen they will be out however if they win against Oregon they will be clear of Dayton in my opinion 

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

13 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

You could argue IU  is already ahead of Oklahoma 

With Oklahoma's non-conference schedule and number of quad 4 games, I would argue that IU should be ahead of them.

To my completely inexperienced eye, this year there seems to be more seperation of who would currently be in compared to who would not be.  The last two in seem to be Xavier and Ohio State.  The three in just ahead of them -- in some order -- are Indiana, Oklahoma San Diego State.  Boise State, North Carolina, and Texas on the first four out list.    The bracket matrix seems to reflect this....in 97 brackets:

Oklahoma is in the tourney in every bracket;  IU and San Diego State are in all but 1.  Xavier makes it in 89 of the 97, Ohio State in 79 of the 97.

Of the teams on the outside, UNC is only in 10 of them, Boise State 8, and Texas 2.

Of the three teams just outside.......UNC's draw was not great in the ACC tournament because they desperately need Q1 wins (they are 1-11).  They would have to win two games before get a Q1 and then it would likely have to beat Duke.

Boise State and San Diego State play each other in the MWC so it's not possible that they both win.

Texas is in the play in games in the SEC tournament and opens against Vanderbilt.  If they win, they play Texas A&M.  My gut says a win over Vanderbilt probably isn't enough, because if they beat Vandy and lose to Texas A&M, their record would only be 18-15.  So I think they would need two wins.

Just my guy, but bid stealers aren't likely to come from the bottle group -- I guess potentially Boise State beats San Diego State and they both get in but at the point I think Boise State is just sneaking in and replacing Xavier or Ohio State but would still be below IU.  Seems the most likely route of bid stealers are going to come from conference champions but there really aren't that many likely ones short of a Georgetwon like winning the Big East tournament ones.  If Memphis doesn't win the American tournament, they someone steals a bid.  If, say Colorado State wins the MWC they could steal a bid for the MWC but that could be at the expense of another MWC team.  I'm not sure VCU would be in the tournament if they lose the A-10 tournament.  Drake would have likely been in even with a loss of the MVC tournament but they held court.

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

1 minute ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I would argue that IU should be ahead of them.

Their 7 wins against the field would be hard to overlook compared to IUs 2 wins or if you count Ohio State 4. 
 

 

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

5 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Their 7 wins against the field would be hard to overlook compared to IUs 2 wins or if you count Ohio State 4. 
 

 

Also for me their non sos are basically the same so I would give the edge to Oklahoma over IU at this point in time 

Non con Sos 

Oklahoma-160

Iu-161

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

18 hours ago, Uspshoosier said:

Also for me their non sos are basically the same so I would give the edge to Oklahoma over IU at this point in time 

Non con Sos 

Oklahoma-160

Iu-161

Is that net non-con?  Pom tells a different story.  Oklahoma 321, IU 133.  RPI says it’s Oklahoma 304, IU 29.

I know I’ve said it so much, but I hate NET.  How can these ratings differ so much?  I trust the POM sos values myself but are those even on the team sheets?  How can Oklahoma’s non con sos be 321 in pom and 161 in NET?  I understand small differences but that literally makes no sense — particularly when NET has over half of Oklahoma’s non con games in Q4.

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

@Uspshoosier

how much weight is given to quad 1A wins?

also, your thoughts on whether UCSD will get an at large if they don’t win the big west tourney?  They look like such a tweener to me….i could see them getting one of the play in bids but could actually then lose that spot to another bid stealer.  I’d see them as last four in but more at the bottom of that list.

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

2 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Is that net non-con?  Pom tells a different story.  Oklahoma 321, IU 133.  RPI says it’s Oklahoma 304, IU 29.

I know I’ve said it so much, but I hate NET.  How can these ratings differ so much?  I trust the POM sos values myself but are those even on the team sheets?  How can Oklahoma’s non con sos be 321 in pom and 161 in NET?  I understand small differences but that literally makes no sense — particularly when NET has over half of Oklahoma’s non con games in Q4.

That non con is the one on the team sheets. Ken Pom non con is not on the team sheets 

IU is 159 today and Oklahoma is 161.  Oklahoma overall sos is 15.  
 

i don’t worry about the why I just go by what’s on the team sheets.   Now each individual committee can view kenpom sos and use it for their argument however Ken Pom sos isn’t on the team sheets 

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

1 minute ago, RaceToTheTop said:

@Uspshoosier

how much weight is given to quad 1A wins?

also, your thoughts on whether UCSD will get an at large if they don’t win the big west tourney?  They look like such a tweener to me….i could see them getting one of the play in bids but could actually then lose that spot to another bid stealer.  I’d see them as last four in but more at the bottom of that list.

Q1A are viewed pretty heavily. It shows teams have the ability to beat high end teams.   Q1a helps separate teams at the top of the seed list when deciding between 1 and 2 seeds and if a bubble team has those wins and others don’t then that will play a factor. 
 

I love UCSD but they are a typical mid major team that doesn’t get the opportunities like ISU was last year.  My opinion they should be in even with a loss but history tells me they would be in trouble.  Only thing that might be going for them is that 7 of the 12 committee members are from low or mid major schools 

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

15 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Q1A are viewed pretty heavily. It shows teams have the ability to beat high end teams.   Q1a helps separate teams at the top of the seed list when deciding between 1 and 2 seeds and if a bubble team has those wins and others don’t then that will play a factor. 
 

I love UCSD but they are a typical mid major team that doesn’t get the opportunities like ISU was last year.  My opinion they should be in even with a loss but history tells me they would be in trouble.  Only thing that might be going for them is that 7 of the 12 committee members are from low or mid major schools 

IU having three of their four quad 1 wins being Q1A should help then.

michigan currently at net 28 — assuming they stay at 40 or better IU should only have q1 losses.

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

1 minute ago, RaceToTheTop said:

IU having three of their four quad 1 wins being Q1A should help then.

michigan currently at net 28 — assuming they stay at 40 or better IU should only have q1 losses.

If they fall to 31 that will be a Q2 loss 

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

28 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

If they fall to 31 that will be a Q2 loss 

Yes, it was a typo.  :)

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,310]

UNC really gonna get in for beating a bunch of under .500 teams.

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

1 minute ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

UNC really gonna get in for beating a bunch of under .500 teams.

They got to beat Duke in the semis to have a chance in my opinion 

[str8baller 7,635]

6 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Is that net non-con?  Pom tells a different story.  Oklahoma 321, IU 133.  RPI says it’s Oklahoma 304, IU 29.

I know I’ve said it so much, but I hate NET.  How can these ratings differ so much?  I trust the POM sos values myself but are those even on the team sheets?  How can Oklahoma’s non con sos be 321 in pom and 161 in NET?  I understand small differences but that literally makes no sense — particularly when NET has over half of Oklahoma’s non con games in Q4.

NET using a more ELO style system doesn’t bother me too much since winnings should matter. But their SoS shouldn’t diverge from a pure predictor model that much.  
 

But nothing surprises me with the NCAA. 

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

https://x.com/davidworlock/status/1899933973104439594?s=46

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

https://x.com/davidworlock/status/1899939000535691664?s=46

[RaceToTheTop 31,331]

3 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

UNC really gonna get in for beating a bunch of under .500 teams.

I don’t know about that.  They are 1-11 in quad 1.  I don’t think a win in their next game against wake forest moves the needle much unless ohio state lost to Iowa — could move them ahead of the buckeyes.  I think Texas’ win over vandy might move them ahead of UNC as well.

[realTomCrean 2,766]

Tried to use the newest GPT 4.5 model, fed it the file from the link @Uspshoosier provided earlier. Also downloaded current NET rankings for GPT to use as reference. AI will take a lot of jobs, but college basketball analysis is not one in the near term. Here’s the response: 

 

Indiana’s Bubble Breakdown (March 12, 2025):

 

As Selection Sunday looms, Indiana is squarely on the bubble. At 19-13 overall and NET-ranked 49th, the Hoosiers boast a spotless record against weaker competition—no Quad 3 or Quad 4 losses, which the selection committee values highly. However, IU’s Quad 1 struggles (just 4-12) remain a glaring concern. Typically, bubble teams with fewer than five Quad 1 wins or a sub-30% win rate in these key matchups face an uphill battle, historically getting snubbed around 60% of the time.

 

IU’s strength is consistency against mid-level teams, evident by a strong 6-1 Quad 2 record. But here’s the bottom line: the Oregon game is critical. A win would not only push their Quad 1 victories to five but also reinforce their resume by demonstrating they can compete in high-pressure tournament conditions.

 

Indiana’s best-case scenario for securing a bid? Simple: beat Oregon and ideally notch another win in the Big Ten Tournament. A loss, however, puts IU’s fate firmly in the hands of other bubble teams. Teams like Texas (NET 45, 6-4 Quad 1), Oklahoma (NET 58, 6-9 Quad 1), UNC (NET 52), and Boise State (NET 40) are all competing for similar spots. IU fans should hope for early exits by these teams to minimize direct comparisons.

 

In short, IU controls its destiny—barely. A victory over Oregon likely locks them in. A loss leaves them at the mercy of Selection Sunday’s unpredictability, sweating until the bracket is revealed.

It is the most advanced reasoning model, but can’t track simple numbers like NET rankings. USPS you are safe in being the most trusted analysis! 

[Uspshoosier 54,565]

9 minutes ago, realTomCrean said:

Tried to use the newest GPT 4.5 model, fed it the file from the link @Uspshoosier provided earlier. Also downloaded current NET rankings for GPT to use as reference. AI will take a lot of jobs, but college basketball analysis is not one in the near term. Here’s the response: 

 

Indiana’s Bubble Breakdown (March 12, 2025):

 

As Selection Sunday looms, Indiana is squarely on the bubble. At 19-13 overall and NET-ranked 49th, the Hoosiers boast a spotless record against weaker competition—no Quad 3 or Quad 4 losses, which the selection committee values highly. However, IU’s Quad 1 struggles (just 4-12) remain a glaring concern. Typically, bubble teams with fewer than five Quad 1 wins or a sub-30% win rate in these key matchups face an uphill battle, historically getting snubbed around 60% of the time.

 

IU’s strength is consistency against mid-level teams, evident by a strong 6-1 Quad 2 record. But here’s the bottom line: the Oregon game is critical. A win would not only push their Quad 1 victories to five but also reinforce their resume by demonstrating they can compete in high-pressure tournament conditions.

 

Indiana’s best-case scenario for securing a bid? Simple: beat Oregon and ideally notch another win in the Big Ten Tournament. A loss, however, puts IU’s fate firmly in the hands of other bubble teams. Teams like Texas (NET 45, 6-4 Quad 1), Oklahoma (NET 58, 6-9 Quad 1), UNC (NET 52), and Boise State (NET 40) are all competing for similar spots. IU fans should hope for early exits by these teams to minimize direct comparisons.

 

In short, IU controls its destiny—barely. A victory over Oregon likely locks them in. A loss leaves them at the mercy of Selection Sunday’s unpredictability, sweating until the bracket is revealed.

It is the most advanced reasoning model, but can’t track simple numbers like NET rankings. USPS you are safe in being the most trusted analysis! 

Not even accurate in their numbers. lol.   Net is 52 they are 19-12 overall. 4-12 in Q1 and 6-0 in Q2.