One game left and I expected Villanova's seeding & location situation to be very clear. Unfortunately it is not. I can ONLY say with CERTAINTY that Villanova will be either a #1 or #2 seed and that as a #1 seed will not be in Chicago.
A see three factors in play still and two of them are so subjective and Committee preference oriented that lots of options exist.
The factors: Pure data driven analysis. (This is the most objective of the three but still open to subjective debate.)
(I am using the ESPN RPI data.) bad loss column outside top 50 is the first number outside top 100 is 2nd number. I also note that the Committee does not get a "Top 25" sheet and that is subjectas teams fall in and out. For example Seton Hall is 23 today. If they win, they move up. Lose and maybe they drop back. St. Joe's is 27...two wins gets them up...However, they can look at the who you beat on your schedule.
1) Six teams have potential colorable arguments for a #1 seed. One of them (UVA/NC)has to lose today but...
Kansas RPI 1, KenPom 2, SOS 10 v. Top 25 8-3 v. Top 50 14-3 Bad losses 0/1
Villanova RPI 4, KenPom 4, SOS 23 v. Top 25 3-3 v. Top 50 7-4 Bad losses 0/0
Virginia RPI 2, Kenpom 1 SOS 4 v. Top 25 8-2 v. Top 50 10-2 Bad losses 4/0
No. Carolina RPI 5, Kenpom 5 SOS v. Top 25 3-3 v. Top 50 6-5 Bad losses 1/0
Michigan St. RPI 14, Kenpom 3 SOS 85 v. Top 25 4-1 v. Top 50 6-4 Bad losses 0/1
Oregon RPI 3, Kenpom 13, SOS 5 v. Top 25 6-1 v. Top 50 11-3 Bad losses 1/2
Other Factors: UVA and Michigan State did not win their regular season conference titles....
Looking at all this:
a) Kansas is the overall #1 seed in Chicago period......
b) UVA probably has the next best quality resume with small blemishes for finishing behind NC in the ACC and some bad road hiccups in January....but they have also beaten N.Carolina, Villanova, West Virginia, and Louisville and Miami twice each...IF UVA wins tonight..they probably are the second #1 seed...
c) As of this minute Villanova is probably the third #1 seed....the only resume blemish is the comparative lack of top quality victories...
d) North Carolina and Michigan State need to win their conference tournaments to get a #1 seed. Carolina has a similar lack of top quality wins as Villanova and Michigan State finished two games in back of a nothing special Indiana team in the B1G race. the Spartans also have the weakest SOS of the contenders by far.
e) the "stealth team is Oregon....currently on nobody's #1 seed line but that blind resume actually looks like the fourth #1 seed in the West....they must beat Utah tonight and probably need two of Villanova, North Carolina or Michigan State to lose. It really comes down to PAC 12 perception...Oregon has piledup wins out west against teams generally in the 15-50 range but has not even faced a top 8 type opponent.
Subjective Factor 1
Conference Tournament Results.....
This is always an x factor.....
a) some years the Committee locks in to the body of work of the top teams and is not overly influenced by the conference tourney results...if that is the case Villanova is already locked into a #1 seed regardless of tonight...(example 2006 Villanova and UConn were not penalized for BET losses to Pitt and Syracuse before even reaching the finals)...if this is the case in 2016 then Kansas and Villanova/UVA are #1 seeds already....
b) some years the Committee seems to get conference tourney crazy and over reacts to the results. Given that most of the favorites are still playing I don't see this one happening this year...if it did in the most extreme some outlier such as a West Virginia win over Kansas with a series of other losses brings WVU into play.....a moderate version of this could bump Villanova off the #1 line if Seton Hall wins tonight.
c) they want to see how a certain handful of teams perform....my guess is that this factor may be in play for North Carolina tonight and definitely for Michigan State....under this theory Villanova's #1 seed status could be in jeopardy with a loss to Seton Hall and tourney wins by Carolina, Michigan State and maybe Oregon...
Subjective Factor 2 Geography
Theoretically a pure "s" curve is developed with each #1 seed going to the closest "as the crow flies" location left on the Board as its name comes up..... the #2 seeds just follow the s curve with the 5th overall team playing against the weakest #1 seed and weakest #2 seed playing the top overall #1 seed...
However, the Committee has sometimes looked at the convenience factor for both teams if next to each other on the s curve....this is the heart of the Villanova/UVA to Philly debate...quite frankly it could go either way on that point if UVA is the overall number 2 team and Villanova is overall number 3.
As to #2 seeds, in recent years the Committee has tried not to follow a pure s curve and sent teams all the way across the country, preferring to keep them near home....under this theory if Villanova fell to the #2 line it definitely would not get sent West (and Oregon would not go East)...
However, would the Committee give Philly to a #2 seed Villanova (behind UVA)....that is a super subjective argument....on one hand it appears to reward Villanova and penalize UVA....which gets us to the next subjective point...if Villanova lost tonight and it was a close call for the last #1 seed or a top #2 seed, would keeping Villanova in Philly as a #2 seed be the "compromise".....this could actually play out if Oregon is competition for that last #1 seed...give it to the Ducks and keep Villanova at home....
Bottom line:
Villanova may already be locked in as a #1 seed....
A win tonight locks a #1 seed up (if there is still doubt)
Philly as a #1 seed is too close to call if Villanova and UVA win tonight
Lose tonight....Philly as a #2 seed is possible but would cause quite a discussion.....
As for rooting interests....
1) For Villanova
2) Against Michigan State and Oregon....
3) If Villanova wins for North Carolina
4) If Villanova loses for Virginia......
Although my brother is a UVA grad (who also is a big Villanova fan) so i have to root for UVA tonight regardless....
PS: I invite thoughtful discussion but any unequivocal statements about "LOCKS" (except for Kansas) from TV talking heads is speculation mixed with opinion.
A see three factors in play still and two of them are so subjective and Committee preference oriented that lots of options exist.
The factors: Pure data driven analysis. (This is the most objective of the three but still open to subjective debate.)
(I am using the ESPN RPI data.) bad loss column outside top 50 is the first number outside top 100 is 2nd number. I also note that the Committee does not get a "Top 25" sheet and that is subjectas teams fall in and out. For example Seton Hall is 23 today. If they win, they move up. Lose and maybe they drop back. St. Joe's is 27...two wins gets them up...However, they can look at the who you beat on your schedule.
1) Six teams have potential colorable arguments for a #1 seed. One of them (UVA/NC)has to lose today but...
Kansas RPI 1, KenPom 2, SOS 10 v. Top 25 8-3 v. Top 50 14-3 Bad losses 0/1
Villanova RPI 4, KenPom 4, SOS 23 v. Top 25 3-3 v. Top 50 7-4 Bad losses 0/0
Virginia RPI 2, Kenpom 1 SOS 4 v. Top 25 8-2 v. Top 50 10-2 Bad losses 4/0
No. Carolina RPI 5, Kenpom 5 SOS v. Top 25 3-3 v. Top 50 6-5 Bad losses 1/0
Michigan St. RPI 14, Kenpom 3 SOS 85 v. Top 25 4-1 v. Top 50 6-4 Bad losses 0/1
Oregon RPI 3, Kenpom 13, SOS 5 v. Top 25 6-1 v. Top 50 11-3 Bad losses 1/2
Other Factors: UVA and Michigan State did not win their regular season conference titles....
Looking at all this:
a) Kansas is the overall #1 seed in Chicago period......
b) UVA probably has the next best quality resume with small blemishes for finishing behind NC in the ACC and some bad road hiccups in January....but they have also beaten N.Carolina, Villanova, West Virginia, and Louisville and Miami twice each...IF UVA wins tonight..they probably are the second #1 seed...
c) As of this minute Villanova is probably the third #1 seed....the only resume blemish is the comparative lack of top quality victories...
d) North Carolina and Michigan State need to win their conference tournaments to get a #1 seed. Carolina has a similar lack of top quality wins as Villanova and Michigan State finished two games in back of a nothing special Indiana team in the B1G race. the Spartans also have the weakest SOS of the contenders by far.
e) the "stealth team is Oregon....currently on nobody's #1 seed line but that blind resume actually looks like the fourth #1 seed in the West....they must beat Utah tonight and probably need two of Villanova, North Carolina or Michigan State to lose. It really comes down to PAC 12 perception...Oregon has piledup wins out west against teams generally in the 15-50 range but has not even faced a top 8 type opponent.
Subjective Factor 1
Conference Tournament Results.....
This is always an x factor.....
a) some years the Committee locks in to the body of work of the top teams and is not overly influenced by the conference tourney results...if that is the case Villanova is already locked into a #1 seed regardless of tonight...(example 2006 Villanova and UConn were not penalized for BET losses to Pitt and Syracuse before even reaching the finals)...if this is the case in 2016 then Kansas and Villanova/UVA are #1 seeds already....
b) some years the Committee seems to get conference tourney crazy and over reacts to the results. Given that most of the favorites are still playing I don't see this one happening this year...if it did in the most extreme some outlier such as a West Virginia win over Kansas with a series of other losses brings WVU into play.....a moderate version of this could bump Villanova off the #1 line if Seton Hall wins tonight.
c) they want to see how a certain handful of teams perform....my guess is that this factor may be in play for North Carolina tonight and definitely for Michigan State....under this theory Villanova's #1 seed status could be in jeopardy with a loss to Seton Hall and tourney wins by Carolina, Michigan State and maybe Oregon...
Subjective Factor 2 Geography
Theoretically a pure "s" curve is developed with each #1 seed going to the closest "as the crow flies" location left on the Board as its name comes up..... the #2 seeds just follow the s curve with the 5th overall team playing against the weakest #1 seed and weakest #2 seed playing the top overall #1 seed...
However, the Committee has sometimes looked at the convenience factor for both teams if next to each other on the s curve....this is the heart of the Villanova/UVA to Philly debate...quite frankly it could go either way on that point if UVA is the overall number 2 team and Villanova is overall number 3.
As to #2 seeds, in recent years the Committee has tried not to follow a pure s curve and sent teams all the way across the country, preferring to keep them near home....under this theory if Villanova fell to the #2 line it definitely would not get sent West (and Oregon would not go East)...
However, would the Committee give Philly to a #2 seed Villanova (behind UVA)....that is a super subjective argument....on one hand it appears to reward Villanova and penalize UVA....which gets us to the next subjective point...if Villanova lost tonight and it was a close call for the last #1 seed or a top #2 seed, would keeping Villanova in Philly as a #2 seed be the "compromise".....this could actually play out if Oregon is competition for that last #1 seed...give it to the Ducks and keep Villanova at home....
Bottom line:
Villanova may already be locked in as a #1 seed....
A win tonight locks a #1 seed up (if there is still doubt)
Philly as a #1 seed is too close to call if Villanova and UVA win tonight
Lose tonight....Philly as a #2 seed is possible but would cause quite a discussion.....
As for rooting interests....
1) For Villanova
2) Against Michigan State and Oregon....
3) If Villanova wins for North Carolina
4) If Villanova loses for Virginia......
Although my brother is a UVA grad (who also is a big Villanova fan) so i have to root for UVA tonight regardless....
PS: I invite thoughtful discussion but any unequivocal statements about "LOCKS" (except for Kansas) from TV talking heads is speculation mixed with opinion.
Last edited:
