Bama or UF was the only real discussion about a #1 seed after Bama beat Auburn on the Barners home floor. UT finished two games behind UF in the regular season and beat us when Walter Jr went out late in the first half of a close game and we never recovered.
More than that, they are behind us in every single metric or resume category used by the committee, and some significantly. They could blow us out and they still wouldn’t sniff us on most of those, let alone pass us.
Well, they were in the discussion I listened to on Sirius XM just a few days ago. They are a top 10 team and the discussion was about the 4th #1 seed - something that should have been obvious for FL, but there was legit discussion about it.
Cause it’s a talk radio show. What else are they gonna do? But anyone who follows the actual criteria used by the committee or the more respected bracketeers knows that they have been a distant 5 (or 6) for weeks now. They are 5th in KenPom, 7th in Q1A record, 5th in wins above bubble, 5th in strength of record, 5th in BPI, 5th in KPI, 6th in Torvik. You name it. And they are so far behind us in most of those that they could not catch us even with a blowout.
I agree that MI st shouldn't catch the Gators or even be considered close. All the metrics you provided, though, suggest that they are a top 10 team deserving of consideration for a top seed - i.e. part of the discussion. For the sake of context, the discussion included Duke, Aub, Houston (pretty well fixed, even though Aub is BS and should move down) then for the last #1 seed, the "discussion" should include FL, AL, TN, MIst. At the time of the previously-mentioned broadcast, I felt that FL should be the obvious choice. There was, however, some discussion and I agree with you that it was mostly for the sake of radio. Considering the records, though, there's a place where MIst could have snuck in there.
There's a case for MIst being above TN. Both are very good teams. FL being part of these discussions is delicious.
Looking back on the discussion, I'm pretty sure @tilly was suggesting that the metrics favoring Auburn were flawed (I may have agreed ). Tilly was out ahead on this.
Aren’t they the same metrics favoring us over Tennessee right now? Those metrics reflect the date available to that point, then correct for new data. That’s why Auburn has come back down to earth over the last week—and why we have taken a leap.
Lets go ahead and toss Duke and their crappy conference into this discussion. We should be the #1 overall seed. No one has better wins than us, and we have no terrible losses If we win today, I think it will only be preconceived notions that make us anything less than the #1 overall seed. A win today should absolutely seal the deal for us. We are the best team in the country.
The metrics have at least two functions. The one you and I have been debating is assessing resumes. This metric only has a retrospective function, looking at past body of work, so it doesn’t really prove right or wrong. The Gators improved their own standing in this metric by collecting this great win. The other function is a predictive one, and here your question is more relevant but still not easy to answer, as outcomes are probabilistic. The simplest way people answer your question is by seeing if the favored team won. In this case, yes Florida was favored, so this would go as a success for most metrics as measure by prediction tracker for example. The best any system seems to do for predicting sports win/loss outcomes is around 70%. The betting line, not surprisingly, is the most accurate predictor in the long run.
When it comes to seeding, though, you can’t have it both ways. Our poor non-conference schedule has impaired our resume, like Duke’s conference schedule has, but Duke is well ahead of us in all the predictive metrics. Conversely, while Auburn has come back to the pack in the predictive metrics, its results based metrics are all clearly the best. And then Houston is about even with us in results, but ahead of us in the predictive. I think winning the SEC tourney in conjunction with our metrics definitely should put us in the conversation, but we just can’t overcome the non-conference schedule. And ultimately your seeding is a reward for your overall resume, not a measure of the best team or the one most likely to win the tournament.
But we dominated our poor OOC Schedule. I think the metrics are off is the point I am making. If we beat Tennessee today, it will be what, Our 5th top 7 win? Has anyone ever done that? Now roll that over to our record against teams ranked in the top 7 and I think we are 5-1, with the only loss being in a road game that was close until Walt got hurt. I'm sorry "predictive" metrics shouldn't override head to head unless their is a large separation. We have a better record than Auburn. We whipped them on their court...shorthanded. Anyone who has objectively watched Florida and Auburn can not say they are better than us. I mean is the Duke loss really that meaningful, considering we dont know how good Duke really is with the crappy schedule they played? Remember we went 4-0 against that same ACC ourselves. We are the best team. I agree with you that all of this is the case. I just think the predictive metrics are highly restricted and we are seeing that play out.
I hear you, and I’ve been making this argument that Florida should be seeded above Duke for the same reason. I would say that there has to be some point where predictive ratings do make a difference. It was wrong in the past when the KenPom #7 team would face a 1 seed in the first weekend. Still, this idea that we “might” be the 4th #1 is plain BS. We might be the second #1 seed.
All this yapping about how the Gators are the 4th 1 seed. No boys, this team WILL BE the top overall seed. Mark it down now.
