Is the Committee so dumb that they think there is much difference between a Q1 win over a Net 50 team as opposed to a Q2 win over a Net 51 team on a neutral court? Do they consider a Q1 win on the road over a Top 10 Net team the same as a Q1 win at home over a Net 25 team? I would hope not. This Q1 to Q4 Net ranking can be rigged by schedule much like the RPI could be back in the dark ages. Coach K was a master at doing it. I prefer evaluating teams by objective measures that have been validated over years of data like KenPom. I miss Sagarin Predictor but I guess he doesn't do that anymore. Now that everybody knows about these my huge advantage in picking NCAA pools has gone away. One year in a rather large pool I came in first and my wife (with a lot of help from me) came in second. Those days are long gone. Funny but true story. Way back in 1982 my not then wife took a job in Austin, Texas with a geotechnical consulting firm that had their own drill crews for subsurface investigation. The drillers had a long standing college football pool every fall weekend and asked my bride-to-be to participate thinking it would just make it a bigger payday for the winner. Every Thursday night I would get a call from her asking for my picks. Now because I had no emotional attachment to any of these teams I was able to make rational picks for her. She won the first three or four pools and then they told her that they no longer did that. Of course they were lying. They just wanted her out. And they must have been embarrassed that a "skirt" knew more about college football than they did.
The other #2 seeds: 2-Kansas, 2-Tennessee and 2-Marquette. They all seem hard for Florida. South Carolina is also a 7-seed as of this moment.
All this is why I’ve failed against the NET system for years. From a statistical standpoint, it borders on moronic. I could have 3 home wins against teams 26-35. But the home team that gets one win over the 25th team gets some magical extra credit and is looked at more favorably by their system. There are 340 D1 teams or whatever the number is now, the differences between 25 and 35 are tiny, And that holds true across all their metrics, it’s far too rigid on what’s good and bad. Give me an actual computer model any day.
This is where it gets fun, talking about seeding and matchups instead of worrying about just getting in. Doesn't the NCAA bring in Refs from other regions? I wouldn't think they would get home-cooked ACC refs to screw like they did at Wake.
First of all refs are not tied to conferences. IIRC Doug Shows and Ted Valentine were two of the refs at the Wake Forest game. Those two idiots call lots of SEC games and I cringe every time I see them on the floor. Shows is just a showboat that thinks that people are at the game to see him. Valentine is just incompetent
Alabama loss didn’t hurt seeding at all. Goal for the next two games is to get to 10 SEC wins. Anything less will be a monstrous failure.
Would be an interesting pairing with a rematch in our first game. But hard to believe that Texas A&M would still a 10-seed at this point.
Big difference between a #6 and #7. a 7-2 matchup would likely be very much a crowd disadvantage, but a 6-3, not so much. Once you get to the second weekend, you still wouldn't see a top seed until the elite 8, so again the crowd disadvantage wouldn't be so great.
I thought it was moron too, but it was actually Maroon, which spurred my comment about the Moline Maroons.
One more victory assures a winning SEC record. Like others, I hoped for 10-8 or better and felt that would be enough to earn a tourney bid. The Gator boyz have a legit chance to do better now. Mizzou is winless in the SEC. Every team has pride and sometimes a wounded cat is dangerous. Let's take care of buziness on Wednesday and get that 10th win, with a chance then for three more.
