My idea for a new seeding system

[TheWayITellEm]

I'm tired of the Big Ten rarely getting a 1 or 2 seed. Because of how many of their teams battle. While Arizona, Duke, Gonzaga, Kansas, Kentucky, and Villanova (and usually North Carolina) are always guaranteed an easy path to at least the Sweet-16 and usually the Final 8.

I'd have a seeding system that somehow evens it out a little for each conference.

 

[IUHusker]

I thought this was going to be about how we could start “generating” some better in-state recruits….

 

[schuele]

Why not just create a basketball version of the old Rose Bowl? Then a Big Ten team can go home with a trophy more than once every 20 years.

 

[HUSKERFAN66]

I thought this was going to be about how we could start “generating” some better in-state recruits….

I thought was lawns

 

[SWIowahawks_rivals44758]

I'm tired of the Big Ten rarely getting a 1 or 2 seed. Because of how many of their teams battle. While Arizona, Duke, Gonzaga, Kansas, Kentucky, and Villanova (and usually North Carolina) are always guaranteed an easy path to at least the Sweet-16 and usually the Final 8.

I'd have a seeding system that somehow evens it out a little for each conference.

The Big Ten had a one seed and a couple two seeds last year. No Sweet 16’s. Also lost to 11 and 12 seeds and Illinois trailed a 13 seed for 59.5 minutes this year. But yeah, let’s complain about seeding.

 

[schuele]

The Big Ten had a one seed and a couple two seeds last year. No Sweet 16’s. Also lost to 11 and 12 seeds and Illinois trailed a 13 seed for 59.5 minutes this year. But yeah, let’s complain about seeding.

Arizona hasn't been a #1 seed since 2014.

So in GooberLand, apparently "always being a #1 seed" means every 8 years.

 

[SWIowahawks_rivals44758]

Let’s not overlook the SEC. They have had 2, 2, and 3 seeds bounced before the Sweet 16. Arkansas makes it with beating a 13 and 12 seed.

 

[schuele]

Let’s not overlook the SEC. They have had 2, 2, and 3 seeds bounced before the Sweet 16. Arkansas makes it with beating a 13 and 12 seed.

Next year Wisconsin should be named a #1 seed before season even starts, the regional will be in Madison and the other 15 teams will all be from the Patriot and Ivy Leagues.

#EntitledBlowhardsForever

 

[TruHusker]

Nothing like a solid plan that you hope to "somehow" make it come out. That won't be controversial at all, just make it come out how you want. What could go wrong?

 

[schuele]

Nothing like a solid plan that you hope to "somehow" make it come out. That won't be controversial at all, just make it come out how you want. What could go wrong?

We can call it Outcome-Based Bracketology.

Where everyone gets to be above average.

 

[schuele]

Good finish coming up between Arizona, who always gets to be a #1 seed every eight years, and TCU.

 

[Charlie Marlow_rivals363743]

 

[PeliniTheCrutch_rivals294365]

I guess I’m still waiting for the actual idea?

Not anticipating anything worth a darn, but at least post what the title says.

 

[Redscarlet]

The Big Ten had a one seed and a couple two seeds last year. No Sweet 16’s. Also lost to 11 and 12 seeds and Illinois trailed a 13 seed for 59.5 minutes this year. But yeah, let’s complain about seeding.

Actually the Big 10 had 2 #1 seeds and one #2 seed and only Michigan made it to the sweet 16..

 

[tro80]

Yeah, I'm tired of 7 or 8 Big Ten teams always getting bounced in the first and second rounds also. There should be a double bye to the S16 for all Big Ten teams.

 

[SWIowahawks_rivals44758]

Actually the Big 10 had 2 #1 seeds and one #2 seed and only Michigan made it to the sweet 16..

You’re right. Forgot about Michigan. So four of the top 8 seeds. Then Purdue lost first round as a four seed. Probably the worst tournament showing possible.

 

[Redscarlet]

I'm tired of the Big Ten rarely getting a 1 or 2 seed. Because of how many of their teams battle. While Arizona, Duke, Gonzaga, Kansas, Kentucky, and Villanova (and usually North Carolina) are always guaranteed an easy path to at least the Sweet-16 and usually the Final 8.

I'd have a seeding system that somehow evens it out a little for each conference.

You have amnesia.. Remember last year…

 

[GeorgeFlippin]

Sowing the seeds of discontent?

 

[schuele]

I guess I’m still waiting for the actual idea?

Not anticipating anything worth a darn, but at least post what the title says.

Basically the greatest, grandest, most fantabulous basketball conference in all of human history needs to be graded on a curve, so it can get more teams to the second weekend.

 

[T...Chafes]

Wait, so let me get this straight...B1G basketball teams always get screwed out of the top seeds in the tourney. But yet never seem to make it to the finals or get very far (and prove they should be higher seeds)?!?

Maybe if the B1G started doing well/better in the tourney, they would get more respect come seeding time....

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

OP’s plan:

 

[HUSKERFAN66]

Maybe the b1g should start by having competent officials that don't show favoritism. Translate to not getting those calls in the tournament??

 

[BetterRed1]

Brad Davison sucks.

 

[Rcnut223]

How about the committee skipping the Big all together . Just a waist of time worrying about the seeding if there going to all lose anyways.

 

[artguy68]

This is the age where everything is either a conspiracy or unfair.

 

[SWIowahawks_rivals44758]

Wait, so let me get this straight...B1G basketball teams always get screwed out of the top seeds in the tourney. But yet never seem to make it to the finals or get very far (and prove they should be higher seeds)?!?

Maybe if the B1G started doing well/better in the tourney, they would get more respect come seeding time....

I quickly looked yesterday back to 2000 because everyone points to that date since MSU won it all. I only looked at the finals as it was easiest.

The Big Ten has played in 7 championship games with 6 different teams making it. (Michigan twice).

The Big 12 has played in four. Kansas twice and Baylor/Texas Tech the last two years.

The SEC has only had Kentucky and Florida make it. (Can’t remember how many times)

The ACC has done well but I can’t quite remember the numbers and I’ve got to get to work.

Overall the Big Ten hasn’t been bad in the tournament (outside last year and this far this year). 6 teams (not Purdue….yet) is a lot of parody that doesn’t get discussed.

 

[pgainey]

I wish there was some mechanism - beyond conf tourneys - to get more mid majors in the field

maybe more play in games

michigans advance is going to justify the 17-14 power 5 teams getting bids over 23-25 win mid majors.

 

[Anon1727835823]

I wish there was some mechanism - beyond conf tourneys - to get more mid majors in the field

maybe more play in games

michigans advance is going to justify the 17-14 power 5 teams getting bids over 23-25 win mid majors.

There are what, 4 playins now? Winner gets to play a #1 seed. Do they play those at the school, or tourney venue? What if they did it for the top 2 seeds get to play against the winner of a playin, and they'd play at the higher seed's home court.

 

[schuele]

I wish there was some mechanism - beyond conf tourneys - to get more mid majors in the field

maybe more play in games

michigans advance is going to justify the 17-14 power 5 teams getting bids over 23-25 win mid majors.

I enjoy seeing mid-majors in the tournament too, but I'm not sure it needs more of them. If you look at the NIT results, St. Bonaventure is really the only mid-major making a great case for itself, winning on the road over Colorado and Oklahoma. Otherwise power conferences have mostly won in the NIT, even when playing on the road. BYU is still alive, but with wins over other mid-majors.

Maybe the NIT isn't a good measuring stick, but mid-majors haven't torn it up there.

 

[pgainey]

I enjoy seeing mid-majors in the tournament too, but I'm not sure it needs more of them. If you look at the NIT results, St. Bonaventure is really the only mid-major making a great case for itself, winning on the road over Colorado and Oklahoma. Otherwise power conferences have mostly won in the NIT, even when playing on the road. BYU is still alive, but with wins over other mid-majors.

Maybe the NIT isn't a good measuring stick, but mid-majors haven't torn it up there.

you are correct -- but looking at the numbers historically over 80% of the final four has been comprised of 4 seeds or better and almost 90% of 6 seeds or better

getting a bid means dollars for the conference and more with each win -- that money is more valuable to a mid major conference if they happen to get a 2nd or 3rd team in as a 12 seed than a power 5 conference's 8th or 9th team .

Michigan is very talented - but they squandered that talent for much of the season including the conf tourney but are now hot - really diminishes the regular season

obviously the current approach must yield the most dollars

 

[TruHusker]

So we need to add more teams when the outcomes are statistically very predictable?

In other words, the best teams win the most games by a wide margin when it is all done. Regardless of seating and league.

 

[pgainey]

So we need to add more teams when the outcomes are statistically very predictable?

In other words, the best teams win the most games by a wide margin when it is all done. Regardless of seating and league.

or give more 9-16 seeds to mid majors instead of power 5 teams that finish in the bottom half of their leagues

 

[TruHusker]

or give more 9-16 seeds to mid majors instead of power 5 teams that finish in the bottom half of their leagues

So, we reward lower level play with a higher seed? Does this really make sense?

When one looks back with any objectivity at seeds in football and basketball, they get it right more often than not. Basketball has its own differences but overall, the numbers hold.

 

[Redscarlet]

or give more 9-16 seeds to mid majors instead of power 5 teams that finish in the bottom half of their leagues

Get real..

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

So, we reward lower level play with a higher seed? Does this really make sense?

When one looks back with any objectivity at seeds in football and basketball, they get it right more often than not. Basketball has its own differences but overall, the numbers hold.

The number of 9-16 seeds that get to the final four is minuscule. I want to say 7 or 8 teams, that were seeded 9 or higher, that make the final 4 since they expanded it to 64 teams in the mid 80’s.
None have won a final 4 game and reached the title game and obviously none have won a title. So you really aren’t impacting the tournament at all.

 

[TruHusker]

The number of 9-16 seeds that get to the final four is minuscule. I want to say 7 or 8 teams, that were seeded 9 or higher, that make the final 4 since they expanded it to 64 teams in the mid 80’s.
None have won a final 4 game and reached the title game and obviously none have won a title. So you really aren’t impacting the tournament at all.

My point, I thought, but you said it better.

 

[king_kong_]

I'm not surprised the OP didn't actually include an idea since his low-output brain still has the training wheels on it

same guy who actively roots for his team to lose in the conference tourney asap despite the fact no national champion has ever lost sooner than the semis in their respective conference tourneys.

same guy who blew his B1G-loving wad during the participation trophy portion of bowl season did the same exact thing during rounds of 64/32.

very hilariously B1G of him, considering his beloved conference invented participation trophies and champions them nonstop.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

My point, I thought, but you said it better.

I read your post as one not in favor of giving more bids to mid majors. Mine was more of a reason to give mid majors more opportunities. My point was that 9th place Big Ten team is no more likely to make the final four than the 2nd or 3rd team from a mid or low major.
If that was your point also, my apologies.

 

[king_kong_]

you are correct -- but looking at the numbers historically over 80% of the final four has been comprised of 4 seeds or better and almost 90% of 6 seeds or better

getting a bid means dollars for the conference and more with each win -- that money is more valuable to a mid major conference if they happen to get a 2nd or 3rd team in as a 12 seed than a power 5 conference's 8th or 9th team .

Michigan is very talented - but they squandered that talent for much of the season including the conf tourney but are now hot - really diminishes the regular season

obviously the current approach must yield the most dollars

I'm not sure michigan is 'hot' more than they took advantage of a pillow-soft spot in the bracket

won their first round game as a favorite

beat the worst tournament coach/biggest choker in college basketball history in round 2 (rick barnes is 2-12-1 against the spread in the tourney after covering rd1 vs Longwood then losing to mich)

their first real test is upcoming against Nova. I think they'll get killed.

 

[pgainey]

I'm not sure michigan is 'hot' more than they took advantage of a pillow-soft spot in the bracket

won their first round game as a favorite

beat the worst tournament coach/biggest choker in college basketball history in round 2 (rick barnes is 2-12-1 against the spread in the tourney after covering rd1 vs Longwood then losing to mich)

their first real test is upcoming against Nova. I think they'll get killed.

You are probably right … regardless I don’t think an 8th place power 5 team who finishes 17-14 including 4-4 in their last 8 regular season games and is bounced in their first game of the conf tourney should get in … even if, on paper, they may be talented enough to make a run