Gators In The AP & Coaches Polls (3/10/2025) [Update at #147]

UUCP FTW

 

That is really old school.

 

Methinks this feeling on the forum is the norm.




Or should I say, NORM!!!

 

Yeah, if the NCAA selection committee got each and every 64 teams - I said 64 and not this current nonsense - perfectly seeded and matched, what fun would we have watching 4-#1 seeds playing in the NC weekend with no real upsets? Nothing makes college basketball, especially the tourney, so compelling than the old "what am I witnessing???" makeup. Otherwise, we have major league baseball.

 

"It don't matter" Joakim Noah

 

I’m with Jo on this one and agree Cleveland really sucks.

 

It USED to be. But then, along came Drew!

 

I think that was before Jo. Lol

Drew was trying to make it happen but even he packed up and left.

 

The only part I disagree with is your argument that our top wins being better than their top wins could just as easily be flipped to say their losses were better than our losses.

That reasoning doesn’t make sense to me. If we proved we could beat better teams at our best than they could at their best, then the quality of our wins should carry more weight than the quality of our losses.

In other words, you’re saying they were more consistent throughout the season, while we demonstrated a higher ceiling. If that’s the case, I’d take us over them when the win/loss records are otherwise equal, which they are.

 

Absolutely. It's kinda weird how many Gators strive for "objectivity," despite the fact that the Gators roasted those a$$es.

 

I see what you are saying, Kyle. Great wins feel like a pinnacle, and ours should feel great. Still, if we ignore bad losses, we will be led to some ironic outcomes. For example, Clemson lost to South Carolina (NET #87) and Georgia Tech (#114), but they won the games against their two toughest opponents, Duke (#1) and Kentucky (#12). If want to look past the body of work in favor of the highest heights achieved, Clemson deserves consideration as a #1 or #2 seed. Is that really the system we want?

 

It’s funny, davis, I’m often driven mad by people’s lack of interest in objectivity. I wonder why some posters visit Too Hot when all they do is defend their favorite politician no matter how dumbass their actions are.

Instead, focusing on roasting a$$es is actually exactly what I’m arguing for. Wins and losses are real outcomes, rather than picking and choosing whatever stats make your favorite team look good. It’s just that head to head isn’t so straightforward. E.g.:

Florida beat Auburn, so Florida > Auburn. But, so did Duke, so Florida and Duke > Auburn. Of course, Kentucky beat Florida and Duke, so Kentucky > Florida and Duke > Auburn. But Auburn beat Kentucky, so Auburn > Kentucky > Florida and Duke > Auburn?

Clearly, you can see the problem davis.

 

Most sports use a series of tie-breakers to determine the order in a standings. It usually goes something like 1) Overall record 2) Head-to-head. If one wants to argue Auburn's place in the SEC standings, then include that record. This arg, though, is about Auburn/FL in the ncaa seedings. In addition, FL has the best wins in the ncaa at Aub, at AL, vs. TN by 30 at home.

You see, Rade, I'm not merely hanging my hat on a single outcome.

 

Fanatics are fanatical. No room for objectivity in sports fandom. Back your team.

I’ll try to refrain from commenting on politics here, other than to say I agree we could use some objectivity on that front. Politics should not be like sports fandom, but unfortunately it is.

 

In my view, your point also validates @GatorRade ... Auburn is seeded against the field, not against Florida. The two teams might never play each other. So head-to-head doesn't matter unless they face off.

I do find the tie-breaker example meaningful. But less as a predictive measure in a future tournament.

 

I certainly don’t mean to demean the Gators’ amazing wins over Auburn, Bama, and Tennessee, davis. I just think if our task is to rank two teams, we should consider the overall body of work, giving credit for every good win and subtracting it for each bad loss. And when I do this, I find that Auburn also has an incredible list of wins.

Evan Miya has a more comprehensive and scientific system to carry out this task, which he calls win quality. Here’s a representation of it from a month ago:



Certainly Florida has closed the gap since then, but still his metric finds that Auburn’s overall win quality (and loss quality) is higher than ours.

EvanMiya CBB Analytics

Similar to my mini analyses, however, his metric finds that it is Duke that should be looking over their shoulder at Florida. Even if Auburn’s resume is out reach (and I’m not sure it is), I don’t see why Duke’s seed should be considered safe at all.

 

In a head to head match up between Florida and Auburn I like Florida. That being said I think the Auburn's losses are better than Florida's loses. After all Florida didn't lose any games to a team as good as Florida. Auburn did.

 

Interesting and reasonable points, but I don't agree with all. When determining the seeds 1 through 4, Auburn will be compared to Florida. I don't know all the math on it, but head-to-head can be a predictive measure. It is in the SEC football championship, where the team that won in the regular season wins the championship game most often.