(02-11-2017 01:40 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Nothing surprising to anyone who has looked at what media "bracketologists" have been predicting.

They presented the teams seeded 1-16 as of today (in parenthesis below) and a projection of where they would go in the bracket if it were issued this morning.

EAST REGION

1. Villanova (1)
2. Louisville (7)
3. Kentucky (12)
4. UCLA (15)

MIDWEST REGION

1. Kansas (2)
2. Florida State (6)
3. Arizona (9)
4. Duke (16)

SOUTH REGION

1. Baylor (3)
2. North Carolina (5)
3. Florida (11)
4. Butler (13)

WEST REGION

1. Gonzaga (4)
2. Oregon (8)
3. Virginia (10)
4. West Virginia (14)

https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/830473551991992323

(02-11-2017 02:02 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  The key point here is that Gonzaga is barely a 1 seed. They have to win out and hope the other three all stumble (Villanova maybe more than once) to get the overall number 1 seed.

(02-11-2017 01:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As usual they are setting up those first round Sweet 16 games (UK / UL) (UNC / UF) a big game for Oregon, (KU / Duke). Now I ask you, does this sound like a committee seeding, or a network preference listing?

(02-11-2017 02:11 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 01:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As usual they are setting up those first round Sweet 16 games (UK / UL) (UNC / UF) a big game for Oregon, (KU / Duke). Now I ask you, does this sound like a committee seeding, or a network preference listing?

CBS and Turner are paying a billion dollars each year (eventually more, as the contract escalates) for this tournament, all the way through 2032. If your company had a business partner that paid you a billion dollars each year, you'd do your best to keep them happy, right?

(02-11-2017 06:05 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  I thought it was supposed to be a. "snake" (The weakest 4-seed in with the strongest 2-seed, etc.)

(02-11-2017 06:31 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  I forgot that aspect guy. But: all else being equal, it's USUALLY a "snake", correct?

(02-11-2017 02:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 02:11 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 01:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As usual they are setting up those first round Sweet 16 games (UK / UL) (UNC / UF) a big game for Oregon, (KU / Duke). Now I ask you, does this sound like a committee seeding, or a network preference listing?

CBS and Turner are paying a billion dollars each year (eventually more, as the contract escalates) for this tournament, all the way through 2032. If your company had a business partner that paid you a billion dollars each year, you'd do your best to keep them happy, right?

Absolutely, I just wanted folks to get it straight right from the get go this year that the NCAA may make the announcements, but seeding is not about relative strength, but rather positioning for ratings.

Quote: Is the Big Ten having a bad year?

(02-12-2017 12:21 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why is WV in the west & UCLA in the east? UCLA couldn't play Oregon until the Elite, if then.

(02-11-2017 05:13 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I actually do disagree about seeding being for rating. While the networks have preferences, the most important thing for the value of the tournament and other sports properties is to maintain an image of fair competition (or at least relatively close to that). If any committee members came out in public and said they were encouraged (directly or indirectly) to help set-up certain match-ups, the tournament would risk loosing a bit of legitimacy and that worry is far, far worse than not having a specific match-up a network wants in a particular year.

I think the committees value things differently than the polls and randomness dictates we are going to get some good match-ups. I am not saying the members completely lose sight of the idea there might be a good match-up sometimes or that they don't come with their own biases, but I would be stunned if they ever made a decision because they thought it would make CBS/ESPN/etc happy.