Bracketology 2024

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,915
So the basketball tourney gets 64 teams in the tournament and everyone is complaining about who got in and who didn't. Guess we will have the same discussions when the football playoff selections are made even with more teams allowed. It keeps jobs for sports writers to pontificate about , fans to argue over and merchandise to be sold.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
This is all correct and Withers certainly was the most glaring at the most critical time, but there was plenty of blame to go around for UNC. Yes, Bama did a nice job on RJ, but Ingram and Ryan had been doing a spectacular job for most of the game. Down the stretch, they didn’t touch it (maybe credit Bama here too).
Unc came out of the locker room flat (collectively) and Bama erased 8 points in a hurry. UNC missed bunnies and jacked threes (with the guys who hadn’t been hitting) and couldn’t get going.
Bama cooled off and they played back and forth but UNC really got going on the inside and taking the ball to the basket. Davis could t hit crap from the floor but was scoring at the line. There was a point with about 5 minutes left UNC goes up 5 and doesn’t get back on D. Lead is cut to three and UNC’s next four possessions are two missed threes, a missed point blank dunk by bacot and a turnover by bacot. Bama is up five with a couple
Minutes to play when UNC could’ve put it away.
All true. It was clear UNC was not going to his 3s in the 2nd half like they did in the first half. No one keeps a 61% from three at a very high volume.

I was yelling at the TV for Davis to drive to the basket in the 1st half and all the second half. Most of his drives resulted in foul shots or baskets. Now Bama did a very good job of not allowing him to turn the corner with hard defensive hedges and switching on the outside.

Ryan played out of control on offense during UNC’s 2nd half lull on offense.

Carolina could have wind the game for sure. Bama made the plays at crunch time and Carolina didn’t.

It was a very good Seeet 16 game.
 

ESPNjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,531
Dude, if you have read the posts many have clearly explained the issue. It is not the media’s bias that hurts the ACC.

The “NET System” is flawed and the ACC hurts itself badly with having 20 conference games.

As ESPNJ pointed out the OOC games Nov-Dec establish teams NET rankings. Once they are set it’s hard to move up in NET rankings in Conference games. Bad system. Bad ACC decision to play 20 conference games. The Committee does not care about a conference win vs an OOC win. Early season OOC wins very much influence NET which influences the committee and who gets selected.

You don’t have to like the system but understanding it is critical, especially for the Conference Leadership. The ACC leaders don’t seem to understand how the system works.
I think the NET is fine. The Quads (random lines in the sand) and the extra counting of OOC SOS are the issues. The "human element" also adds subjectivity. It is never going to be perfect and it isn't bad as it is. It could be better since it puts too much weight on Nov-Dec.

I would like to see them look at the last 10 or whatever number of games in place of the extra counting of OOC SOS. I doubt they will listen to me.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
Dude, if you have read the posts many have clearly explained the issue. It is not the media’s bias that hurts the ACC.

The “NET System” is flawed and the ACC hurts itself badly with having 20 conference games.

As ESPNJ pointed out the OOC games Nov-Dec establish teams NET rankings. Once they are set it’s hard to move up in NET rankings in Conference games. Bad system. Bad ACC decision to play 20 conference games. The Committee does not care about a conference win vs an OOC win. Early season OOC wins very much influence NET which influences the committee and who gets selected.

You don’t have to like the system but understanding it is critical, especially for the Conference Leadership. The ACC leaders don’t seem to understand how the system works.
If it’s a flawed NET ranking, why did the tournament skip Wake and Pitt to put UVA and South Carolina in the tournament? With South Carolina as a 6 seed?

It’s humans making the selections and the seeds

Maybe the ACC needs more out of conference games. Maybe NET should put more weight on the end of the season.

But, people did this. Conference perceptions and school perceptions and politics were a factor.
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,286
The NET is just a tool, no more, no less. It is used to provide a test for teams to be invited to a tournament. So far, so good. Most tools require calibration - tweaking to make sure they are measuring accurately. Additionally, some tools use automation in place of human effort. In my world, those tools require validation to provide assurance that their results are valid. IMPO, the NET pretty obviously needs some calibration and validation to improve its output. Either that or there needs to be a good bit more accountable human interaction in the selection process.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
If it’s a flawed NET ranking, why did the tournament skip Wake and Pitt to put UVA and South Carolina in the tournament? With South Carolina as a 6 seed?

It’s humans making the selections and the seeds

Maybe the ACC needs more out of conference games. Maybe NET should put more weight on the end of the season.

But, people did this. Conference perceptions and school perceptions and politics were a factor.
UVA had no Quad 3 or 4 losses. Pitt had 2 and Wake had 1. Does that justify it? Not by it's self. Pit had a very bad OOC schedule. Some of that was bad luck in 3 of the P6 teams they played ended up as last place Conference teams. That mattered as well as they lost to Missouri 0-18 in conference.

The committee clearly could have interchanged UVA, Wake and Pitt. All would have been in the play in game though. I would have preferred Pitt over wither Wake or UVA.

The Quad system, as ESPNJ pointed out has arbitrary lines for what a Quad win./loss is location dependent. Having conference teams NET rankings basically set by 1 January is stupid.

There must be a better way. The ACC Leadership better figure out how to make the current system work for the Conference. The media is not the problem.
 

gtbeak

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
529
If it’s a flawed NET ranking, why did the tournament skip Wake and Pitt to put UVA and South Carolina in the tournament? With South Carolina as a 6 seed?

It’s humans making the selections and the seeds

Maybe the ACC needs more out of conference games. Maybe NET should put more weight on the end of the season.

But, people did this. Conference perceptions and school perceptions and politics were a factor.
South Carolina absolutely belonged. They won at a very high level all season.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
South Carolina absolutely belonged. They won at a very high level all season.
Here’s the NET rankings (through March 17, selection Sunday)

Pitt is 40th
Wake is 43rd
South Carolina is 51st

NET didn’t exclude Pitt and include South Carolina.

 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,260
It looked like they kept trying to run a screen for Davis to drive the lane and either score or draw a foul. They ran it so many times that Bama finally rolled the big center to protect the rim. Becot was not open for a pass from him either. I guess the strategy was put the ball in Davis' hands and let him make a play. It worked a few times. That 3 by Withers? was not a good decision at that point in the game. UNC did not execute very well the last minute. It was a fun game to watch. That center for Bama had a heck of a game on both ends of the court.
In a lot of ways UNC runs a similar system to ours. Offense is initiated with a high screen and passes come off penetration and kick. They run a few more wrinkles including bringing RJ up the lane through a pin down screen to get him the ball top of the key and then run the high screen with the pin down guy then replacing him at top of the key for a shot. Worked several times yesterday but they quit running it. Anyway RJ went all hero ball last 2 minutes and UNC didn't have a set or at least didn't run a set to force ball movement where they wanted it. Nothing to move Ryan in particular. So you got RJ or the Withers nonsense.

FWIW Bama had their center in the lane pretty much the whole game. He was playing Cadeau or Trimble and just ignoring them on the perimeter. It made the UNC offense really hard to run as we know from when teams ignore our 4 in the corner. Nelson was doubling Bacot most every time he got the ball. Cadeau was pretty funny watching him on the perimeter either holding the ball waiting on a defender or wandering into the paint trying to find someone to pick and clogging things up even more. UNC tried a couple of different lineups and options but never found anything or anyone that really hurt Alabama for playing this scheme.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
Here’s the NET rankings (through March 17, selection Sunday)

Pitt is 40th
Wake is 43rd
South Carolina is 51st

NET didn’t exclude Pitt and include South Carolina.

Looks like the one difference is Pitt lost to Missouri (NET 158) at home and USC-E beat Missouri both at home and away. Not much difference. USC-E seemed significantly overseeded. They look like a bubble team. Pit also looks like a bubble team. I would have put Pitt in over UVA in the ACC.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
In a lot of ways UNC runs a similar system to ours. Offense is initiated with a high screen and passes come off penetration and kick. They run a few more wrinkles including bringing RJ up the lane through a pin down screen to get him the ball top of the key and then run the high screen with the pin down guy then replacing him at top of the key for a shot. Worked several times yesterday but they quit running it. Anyway RJ went all hero ball last 2 minutes and UNC didn't have a set or at least didn't run a set to force ball movement where they wanted it. Nothing to move Ryan in particular. So you got RJ or the Withers nonsense.

FWIW Bama had their center in the lane pretty much the whole game. He was playing Cadeau or Trimble and just ignoring them on the perimeter. It made the UNC offense really hard to run as we know from when teams ignore our 4 in the corner. Nelson was doubling Bacot most every time he got the ball. Cadeau was pretty funny watching him on the perimeter either holding the ball waiting on a defender or wandering into the paint trying to find someone to pick and clogging things up even more. UNC tried a couple of different lineups and options but never found anything or anyone that really hurt Alabama for playing this scheme.
If you look at the minutes played Cadeau played a total of 13 minutes, very few in the 2nd half. Trimble played 11 minutes total. Davis never could get the 5th guy who could match up defensively on Alabama and provide any type of offense. UNC had 5 guys play between 4 and 15 minutes. Of the other 4 only Bacott played less than 37 minutes and he played 34. His limit was his 3rd foul.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
Looks like the one difference is Pitt lost to Missouri (NET 158) at home and USC-E beat Missouri both at home and away. Not much difference. USC-E seemed significantly overseeded. They look like a bubble team. Pit also looks like a bubble team. I would have put Pitt in over UVA in the ACC.
Six seed seems high for a bubble team—I don’t think they were one of the last four in.

I’m not arguing who should be in or where. I’m just saying we can only blame the algorithm so much—maybe it’s not a great formula, but the committee didn’t use it that much.
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,915
In a lot of ways UNC runs a similar system to ours. Offense is initiated with a high screen and passes come off penetration and kick. They run a few more wrinkles including bringing RJ up the lane through a pin down screen to get him the ball top of the key and then run the high screen with the pin down guy then replacing him at top of the key for a shot. Worked several times yesterday but they quit running it. Anyway RJ went all hero ball last 2 minutes and UNC didn't have a set or at least didn't run a set to force ball movement where they wanted it. Nothing to move Ryan in particular. So you got RJ or the Withers nonsense.

FWIW Bama had their center in the lane pretty much the whole game. He was playing Cadeau or Trimble and just ignoring them on the perimeter. It made the UNC offense really hard to run as we know from when teams ignore our 4 in the corner. Nelson was doubling Bacot most every time he got the ball. Cadeau was pretty funny watching him on the perimeter either holding the ball waiting on a defender or wandering into the paint trying to find someone to pick and clogging things up even more. UNC tried a couple of different lineups and options but never found anything or anyone that really hurt Alabama for playing this scheme.
I live in CH so I see a lot of their games. The line up on the floor at the end of that game was not seen very often this year and I was surprised who was out there at such a critical time in such an important game. If you want a shooter out there for offense then run something for a kick out after penetration. Davis tried to carry the team unless Hubert called his number to take a shot. I felt like he wanted to get fouled if he didn't score. Cremins did that at times with Harpring and Price. You just knew who was going to take the shot.
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,260
If you look at the minutes played Cadeau played a total of 13 minutes, very few in the 2nd half. Trimble played 11 minutes total. Davis never could get the 5th guy who could match up defensively on Alabama and provide any type of offense. UNC had 5 guys play between 4 and 15 minutes. Of the other 4 only Bacott played less than 37 minutes and he played 34. His limit was his 3rd foul.
Cadeau 13, Trimble 11 and then throw in Wojcik who had 15 min and you pretty much get 40 for that spot. While it doesn't show in the box score Wojcik actually kept the floor spread more than the other 2 but that is not a statement of strong support. As golftime said, he ain't who you usually see at the end of the game and just shows this spot was a problem spot especially offensively that the last couple of coaching staffs identified and decided to focus on and stress in an atypical way. None of these guys could make a difference individually and Hubert never came up with a scheme to move them around and at least make Nelson have to move around with them and pay attention to them.

I still have no idea why Withers was anywhere near on the court at the end. He was brutal.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
Six seed seems high for a bubble team—I don’t think they were one of the last four in.

I’m not arguing who should be in or where. I’m just saying we can only blame the algorithm so much—maybe it’s not a great formula, but the committee didn’t use it that much.
If you go line by line 1-68 they clearly used it as a tool. It is not "The Law" but it carries outsized influence. As I said USCE seemed way overseeded. It would be interesting to have heard the discussion on that one.

You understand the main flaw with the system I assume. It is not in getting the final 4-6 teals in/out or making a seeding error. The flaw is the rankings can't change much post 1 January when conference play are the only games played from that point on. That is a very flawed system. If a conference has 5-7 top 25 NET teams on 1 Jan then their teams rarely get a bad loss (Quad 3 or 4) and it's easy to pick up a good win (Quad 1 or 2). The system becomes biased at that point based on less than 1/3rd of the season.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
Cadeau 13, Trimble 11 and then throw in Wojcik who had 15 min and you pretty much get 40 for that spot. While it doesn't show in the box score Wojcik actually kept the floor spread more than the other 2 but that is not a statement of strong support. As golftime said, he ain't who you usually see at the end of the game and just shows this spot was a problem spot especially offensively that the last couple of coaching staffs identified and decided to focus on and stress in an atypical way. None of these guys could make a difference individually and Hubert never came up with a scheme to move them around and at least make Nelson have to move around with them and pay attention to them.

I still have no idea why Withers was anywhere near on the court at the end. He was brutal.
Cadeau normally gets 24 minutes, Trimble gets 17 and Wojoik get 8 per game. Big change. My guess is Weathers was in to play defense on Nelson as Withers is 6'9" and much more mobile than Bacot and Bacot having foul trouble. If that was his strategy it failed! I would have had Trimble in the game. He is a very good defender and a decent 3 point shooter.

UNC is losing a lot of talent. Of course they will do very well in the Portal.
 

57jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,478
If you go line by line 1-68 they clearly used it as a tool. It is not "The Law" but it carries outsized influence. As I said USCE seemed way overseeded. It would be interesting to have heard the discussion on that one.

You understand the main flaw with the system I assume. It is not in getting the final 4-6 teals in/out or making a seeding error. The flaw is the rankings can't change much post 1 January when conference play are the only games played from that point on. That is a very flawed system. If a conference has 5-7 top 25 NET teams on 1 Jan then their teams rarely get a bad loss (Quad 3 or 4) and it's easy to pick up a good win (Quad 1 or 2). The system becomes biased at that point based on less than 1/3rd of the season.
The whole system stinks. I think they should hire you, Root4GT, and me to organize the damn thing.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,040
The whole system stinks. I think they should hire you, Root4GT, and me to organize the damn thing.
LOL - then we would be to blame when, pick a conference's fans got butt hurt when their conference only got 5 teams in. More fun as an Old Fart to find fault than actually find a solution. Gosh I would make a good Congressman! :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

Obviously I don't like the metric system as used. Still the Committee did a decent job this year. If the major complaints are USCE was overseeded, Miss St shouldn't have been in, Pitt got screwed and the Big East got screwed with only 3 teams then all those issues are at the very margins of the Tournament. 🍻
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,260
Cadeau normally gets 24 minutes, Trimble gets 17 and Wojoik get 8 per game. Big change. My guess is Weathers was in to play defense on Nelson as Withers is 6'9" and much more mobile than Bacot and Bacot having foul trouble. If that was his strategy it failed! I would have had Trimble in the game. He is a very good defender and a decent 3 point shooter.

UNC is losing a lot of talent. Of course they will do very well in the Portal.
I thought Bacot was the one who jumped off of Nelson and doubled the guard on the play Nelson made the 3? May have been Ingram but I was thinking it was Bacot as I screamed at the TV about overhelping. Ball goes to a wide open Nelson and Withers is way late on rotating over putting himself in terrible position and then fouling but not fouling hard enough to stop a 3 pt play. Horrendous defense on at least 3 levels.

I agree UNC is among many with a lot of roster reconstruction to do. Good freshman class and Washington has potential. But they need some players.
 
Top