big bump on the matrix

[Chris02M]

sorry if already posted but our friend Lunardi updated his bracket. Somehow, even though we beat Clemson since his last update, we are now in the next 4 out. Louisville, Marquette, Ok State and ND are his first 4 out.

That means we are in good shape since he always misses on bubble teams

 

[MSOrange]

sorry if already posted but our friend Lunardi updated his bracket. Somehow, even though we beat Clemson since his last update, we are now in the next 4 out. Louisville, Marquette, Ok State and ND are his first 4 out.

I'll make sure I bring that up when I see him in hell.

 

[Madbiker]

Not that you can compare teams from one year to another, but we didn't have 3 top 10 wins, did we?

Assuming you're going by RPI, Bama has Rhode Island (16), Auburn (8), Tenneesee (10), and Texas A&M (24), all at home. They also have Oklahoma (37) at home, and @ Florida (39)

I'm gonna use ESPN for last year's RPI, I think it's close enough. We had Duke (6), Florida State (13), and Virginia (22). Virginia may have been ranked higher when we played them , but A) committee doesn't care about rankings, and B) really doesn't care about your ranking in the middle of the season.

Hell, Bama has more top 10 tens this year than we did.

Maybe I didn't express my point clearly. Yes 'Bama has 4 top 25 wins but they also have 3 bad losses to teams with high 100's RPI and 14 total losses. My point was last year the media and the committee focused on bad losses and they offset any good wins. While this year (at least in 'Bama's case) they are ignoring the bad losses and only focusing on the good wins. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency year to year.

 

[shandeezy7]

Maybe I didn't express my point clearly. Yes 'Bama has 4 top 25 wins but they also have 3 bad losses to teams with high 100's RPI and 14 total losses. My point was last year the media and the committee focused on bad losses and they offset any good wins. While this year (at least in 'Bama's case) they are ignoring the bad losses and only focusing on the good wins. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency year to year.

Technically, the committee isn't doing anything yet (at least anything that is publicly available). These are all bracket "experts" projecting what the committee will value. It's very possible that this year's committee will value the exact same things that last year's committee did.

 

[Knicks411]

Maybe I didn't express my point clearly. Yes 'Bama has 4 top 25 wins but they also have 3 bad losses to teams with high 100's RPI and 14 total losses. My point was last year the media and the committee focused on bad losses and they offset any good wins. While this year (at least in 'Bama's case) they are ignoring the bad losses and only focusing on the good wins. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency year to year.

Fair, i was just more pointing out that we didn't have 3 top ten wins last year. That's all.

I'm not sure they are ignoring those bad losses though, most people barely have them in the field, if that, no?

That said, yeah, it's def not going to be exactly the same criteria every year.

 

[jncuse]

Maybe I didn't express my point clearly. Yes 'Bama has 4 top 25 wins but they also have 3 bad losses to teams with high 100's RPI and 14 total losses. My point was last year the media and the committee focused on bad losses and they offset any good wins. While this year (at least in 'Bama's case) they are ignoring the bad losses and only focusing on the good wins. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency year to year.

#2 highlighted below was the biggest reason we were left out. I guess I am just not seeing any inconsistency
Note - The following is for Syracuse 2017

1, Syracuse 3 bad losses vs Alabama 2 bad losses - A loss to a 100-135 team on the road is no longer a bad loss, but a loss to a team outside of the top 75 at home is a bad loss. Alabama's loss at Ole Miss and Vanderbilt are not considered bad losses, but their loss at home is considered a bad loss.

2. Syracuse 2 road/neutral wins vs Alabama's 5 - 5 is not great, but 2 was the worst ever for any team seeking an at-large bid.

3. Syracuse 4 top wins = RPI 10,15,19, 43
Alabama's 4 top wins = RPI 8,10,16,24
reason

4. NCSOS
Syracuse 157
Alabama 28


If I look at that as a committee member I say yes to Alabama. The bigger issue is the garbage spewed out by the RPI formulations that says the SEC is so dominant this year, and the reliance on NCSOS despite being a garbage indicator. But they do rely on them, and on all counts I would need to take Bama by slight margins.

 

[CusefanATL]

The Bracket Project's Bracket Matrix - 2018

all of a sudden first team out

 

[NineOneSeven]

Usc and providence going to knock us out for second year in a row?

 

[SwagSocks]

Can someone explain to me why Louisville is still in more brackets than us? We beat them at their court and they don't have any impressive wins

 

[Sherman20]

No way Louisville can be ahead of most of these teams. They are 4-12 in Q1 and Q2. It’s not close to being a tourney resume. I think all these bracketoloists are way off having Louisville anywhere near the bubble.

 

[Tom W.]

Can someone explain to me why Louisville is still in more brackets than us? We beat them at their court and they don't have any impressive wins

The only thing I see is no bad losses for Louisville. But Cuse with more top 50 and top 100 wins, and better SOS and RPI metrics. Louisville with better advances metrics (KP, Sag, BPI). Really close resumes. I sure am glad we have the head to head win on their court.

On my board, (TCW Bracketology) I have Louisville first four out, and Cuse last team in. So there isn't much separation there. ACC tournament will be big for both of these teams.

 

[Chris02M]

we may be a ble to sneak in by just beating wake they have to beat fsu and uva to get in for me

 

[jncuse]

Syracuse is ahead of Louisville on the current matrix... Syracuse 51, Marquette 40 something, and Louisville 33.