I think this year especially, there is a bigger drop off between 1 and 2/3 seeds (Kansas/Baylor/Gonzaga/Duke vs SDSU/Dayton/Louisville/Maryland type teams). I’d much rather play the 2/3 seeds than a team like Kansas in the Sweet 16, which is the risk if you’re a 4/5 seed. I also think this year the 3 seeds may not be significantly better than the 4/5 seeds so the second round won’t be as difficult as it might be other years. Some years there is a clear gap between the top 10-12 teams and the rest of the field. This isn’t one of those years
3 Likes
If this current Michigan team is playing at this form, and is a 6 seed, I pitty the 3 seed it faces.
The Wolverines are playing like a high 3 seed in a 6’s clothing.
8 Likes
But like… statistically. People are going to remember 12-5 upsets more because they’re obviously “bigger.”
San Diego State losing at home to a Northwestern/Nebraska level UNLV team pushes them off the 1 seed, right? Or is UNLV more liked by NET than it is by Kenpom?
I don’t think we’re just playing like a 3 seed. I think we are a team at the level of a 3 seed.
If Livers has another setback, I don’t see it as such. Otherwise, I agree with you.
1 Like
11 over 6 is more statistically likely, but 12 over 5 over-indexes.
And in addition to that, it’s not that 12 over 5 gets remembered because it’s bigger, it’s because there’s at least one on a more consistent basis each year (for whatever statistical fluky reason).
1 Like
I don’t think you can really say that definitively.
I don’t think the debate of 6vs5 is really relevant. The only thing that matters is who else is in the region. Give me a 5 seed with Auburn as the 4 and SDSU as the 1, rather than 6 seed with Louisville as the 3 and Duke as the 2.
On the flip side, I’ll take a 6 seed with FSU as the 3 and Dayton as the 2, rather than a 5 with WVU as the 4 and Baylor as the 1.
5 Likes
I mean, just statistically there’s a 11% chance a 6 seed makes the Elite Eight, and only a 6% chance a 5 seed makes it. Of course everything is situational, but chances are we’re better off as a 6.
1 Like
Yeah that’s what I was gonna say. I guess if we’re talking final four a 6 may be better. But I feel like a 5 or 4 gives us a really good shot at the Seeet 16. And then if our 1 seed is anyone besides Kansas…
Haven’t seen many brackets updated today, but Palm has U-M as a 5 seed.
From a U-M perspective, the East region with SDSU sounds juicy. Kind of the opposite of typical years where it is better to get shipped west because there are fewer great teams on the West coast.
7 Likes
East region with Maryland as the 2 and SDSU as the one is my dream scenario.
3 Likes
Sounds about right. I posted this in another thread but I couldn’t figure out why certain teams were projected ahead still. The quality of wins wasn’t there and a few of them had 7-8 losses as well. Hopefully a 5 or 6 at worst is accurate and hopefully climbing.
Pretty sure it has to do with the net, net doesn’t like us nearly as much as the other teams around that seed line. Think it has a lot to do with the SOS metric being used in the net being based on rpi which hates us.
That’s what I’m trying to figure out. I have to look at how they base their rankings because some of the teams ranked ahead didn’t add up to me.
Sly my man, you are trying to figure out what people think who are trying to figure out how people think. 
Just sit back and enjoy the ride.
8 Likes
NCAA: RPI is outdated and easy to game, let’s replace it with our own metric
Also NCAA: Let’s use the RPI for our SOS calculation
9 Likes
There is one bracket on Bracket Matrix that still doesn’t list Michigan and it’s driving me insane.
2 Likes
When the Matrix updates next Michigan will be in all brackets as the lone holdout to this point, RealTimeRPI, finally included Michigan (as a 10-seed) in their bracket today. Obviously using the RPI as your only selection criterion is beyond stupid. You’ll no doubt be shocked to hear that they are consistently one of the worst ranked participants in the Matrix.
3 Likes