Monday, March 13, 2017

Day After Analysis - How Did I Do?

A few thoughts before posting a breakdown of my bracket, and how it compares to the actual teams selected and seeded by the NCAA

  • One of my best years ... but ... I also think this is one of the most cut and dried years for selecting teams and seeding that I can recall. 
  • I have a few beefs with the committee, but for the most part, this was a hard bracket to screw up.  My biggest complaint is the seeding of the Big Ten Teams ... it makes no sense.  I'll probably have a post on that later, but suffice it to say there seemed to be no rhyme or reason to how Big Tens team were placed into the field ... Minnesota was a 5 Seed, despite a 4th place finish in the Big Ten and getting knocked out of the Tournament in their first game.  Wisconsin is an 8 Seed, despite a better record, 2nd place regular season finish, 2nd place tournament finish and beating Minnesota twice including on their court.  Makes no sense.
  • The Decision to include K-State over Syracuse doesn't make a ton of sense to me ... Syracuse and K-State each had the same number of wins vs Top 25, but Syracuse had more wins vs. top 50, top 100 and top 150.  Syracuse was 10-8 in the toughest conference in the country, while K-State finished below .500 in conference play.  Finally, Syracuse was playing better down the stretch ... having won 7 of their last 12.  K-State on the other hand, had was 5-7 over their last 12 games.  Both teams were flawed, but Syracuse appeared to do more to warrant inclusion that K-State.  Particularly curious when you consider Syracuse's INCLUSION last year.
Now ... without further ado, is the final break down and scoring of this year's projections.

To see how my work stacked up against other 'Bracketologists' be sure and check out 'The Bracket Project - Ranking the Bracketologists' starting later today or tomorrow at

Now ... time to start filling out the brackets!

No comments:

Post a Comment