Monday, March 10, 2014

March 10 Update: Conference Summaries

ACC Teams:
(1) Notre Dame
(2) Duke
(4) Maryland
(4) North Carolina State
(5) North Carolina
(6) Syracuse
(10) Georgia Tech
(12) Florida State

I'm fairly pleased with how S-Factor has modeled the ACC this year. I think North Carolina State and Syracuse continue to be rated more highly in the S-Factor than they will be on Selection Monday, but I think these eight teams will all be selected and seeded roughly where I have them. 

AAC Teams:
(1) Connecticut
(3) Louisville

The talent is spread out widely in the AAC, from the best team in the country to some of the lowliest, which has made this season completely predictable and boring in the AAC as well as made it hard to evaluate.  Connecticut, Louisville and Rutgers have all been rated too low all year. Connecticut will be the top 1 seed, Louisville will probably be a 2 seed, and I'd wager that Rutgers makes it into the tournament. South Florida has a shot at it too, though the best thing the Bulls have got going for them is their 14-game non-Louisville non-UConn winning streak.

Atlantic 10 Teams:
(5) Dayton
(8) Fordham
(11) St. Joseph's

Fordham definitely stole a bid from a bubble team, but I can't help but feel that all they did was knock St. Joseph's out of the field.  You can probably add two to the numbers in those seed indicator parenthesis and end up with a better prediction than what S-Factor is giving. 

Big East Teams:
(7) DePaul
(9) St. John's

The Big East today comprises the mediocre core that's missing from the American Athletic Conference.  They are the creamy nougat center to the AAC's hollowed out milk chocolate shell.  I think the S-Factor has ranked the Big East teams appropriately this year, and only these two are getting in.

Big Ten Teams:
(3) Nebraska
(4) Penn State
(4) Iowa
(5) Purdue
(6) Michigan State

The S-Factor got a little exuberant about the Big Ten tournament victories of Iowa and Nebraska, especially Nebraska.  I appreciate the fact that it ranks Minnesota as the second team out, firmly on the bubble, but on the outside of it.  If the selection committee decides that the third-ranked conference ought to get half of their teams in the field regardless of whether or not those teams beat anyone noteworthy, well, there's not much I can do but learn and tweak the model for future years.

Big 12 Teams:
(2) West Virginia
(2) Baylor
(6) Oklahoma State
(8) Texas
(10) Iowa State

My one saving grace as a Sooners fan when looking at these models is that the S-Factor has really been hammering Big 12 teams this year as a group, and that maybe because of this fact Oklahoma is being unfairly punished in its rankings.  But teams with RPI rankings near 60 don't often get at-large bids. 

Conference USA Teams:
(7) Middle Tennessee State
(8) Southern Miss

I'd be surprised if Southern Miss gets a bid without winning the Conference USA tournament. The S-Factor gave the CUSA teams too much credit this year, though I'm digging the seed it is giving MTSU. 

MAC Teams:
(8) Bowling Green

Bowling Green is not MTSU.  This seed feels too generous.
PAC 12 Teams:
(1) Stanford
(7) California
(7) Oregon State
(9) Arizona State
(9) USC

The S-Factor still shows Stanford as the final #1 seed despite Stanford losing in the PAC 12 tournament semifinals (that still feels weird to type).  I'm pretty comfortable with how the S-Factor treated PAC 12 teams this year.

SEC Teams:
(1) Tennessee
(2) South Carolina
(3) Texas A&M
(3) Kentucky
(9) LSU
(10) Georgia
(10) Vanderbilt

It's weird to say a 62nd ranked team ought to leapfrog over a bunch of qualified teams to get a spot in the tournament, but that's how I feel about Florida.  The S-Factor thinks this is weird to say too, so it has not made this maneuver. 

West Coast Teams:
(5) Gonzaga
(6) BYU
(12) St. Mary's

I've ranted before about the S-Factor's generosity towards WCC teams, but at least St. Mary's last loss of the non-WNIT season hasn't yet been factored in, so they'll fall out.  As for those other two WCC teams, feel free to add two to those seed indicator numbers.

No comments:

Post a Comment