The Annual NCAA Tournament Seeding Thread

[Joneslab]

And the NET rankings were unchanged for UK after yesterday. We're still 20th.

We have a very good road record though and I believe that may offset the NET. If we win two next weekend and Hagans is back I think we'll be a 2.

[teamchemistry15]

The manner in which Crazzed responds is merely his opinion.

I know he gets criticized for being eternally negative. Would he receive the same criticism if he were eternally positive?

There's a difference in being positive/negative and being flat out over dramatic and unrealistic. There's a bunch in our fan base like that, but Crazzed seems to be one of the few on here, and he's the most vocal so he catches the most heat.

[KCKUKFan]

A 2? I thought we were doomed to a 5.


*eye roll*

[Joneslab]

[JFCats22]

^
Yikes, that bracket would be very difficult for UK.

Then you see Duke's bracket...ridiculous.

I'd volunteer to be a 9 seed in the Gonzaga bracket...thankfully this isn't what it will look like next Sunday.

[GOCAT15]

[Lighthouse]

^ I like this one a lot better. As Crazzed said, the first one is ridiculous!

[Joneslab]

I feel like the ACC, Big 10, and especially Big East tournaments will all be weighted very heavily. The SEC Tournament hardly at all.

I can see both Florida St. and Duke jumping Kentucky if they win the conference tournament. Luckily they're both on the same side of the bracket so they can't both make it to the title game. Louisville or Virginia could however meet Florida St., and while I don't see Virginia as a 2, Louisville isn't out of the question.

In the Big East, Creighton, Villanova, and Seton Hall could really all make a push for a 2. We probably don't want Villanova and Creighton to meet in the finals because in a situation like that they could both end up as 2 seeds.

Of course this is even assuming that anyone thinks seed matters a whole lot. I don't think it does this year. The impact is at best negligible in a year where there are so many similar teams.

[JFCats22]

Lunardi has to be trolling BBN with this, right? Says UK could fall to a 5 seed based on SECT performance

How could they possibly fall from a 2 (where he has them now, which I don't think is right anyways) all the way to a 5???

https://twitter.com/michaeleaves/status/1237233540934307840?s=20

[Joneslab]

Lunardi has to be trolling BBN with this, right? Says UK could fall to a 5 seed based on SECT performance

How could they possibly fall from a 2 (where he has them now, which I don't think is right anyways) all the way to a 5???


https://twitter.com/michaeleaves/sta...934307840?s=20

I believe Lunardi misspoke. He seems surprised that that came out of his mouth and looks vaguely befuddled at himself when he says it.

He was just on the other night talking about how the committee doesn't really weight conference tournaments that much.

[Joneslab]

Also, he's making a point about the weakness of the SEC and how much the committee factors that in.

If they don't buy the SEC whatsoever, and I mean if they put it on the level of basically a mid-major, then UK could be a 4/5.

If they think it's okay and pretty much where it's been about 80% of the time in the last three decades, then UK should be a 2/3.

Because of Evansville and Utah and the really bad schedule we had early + the way we handled that schedule, to buy Kentucky as a top 3 seed you have to make the argument that UK's a better team now than they were three months ago. The problem comes in when you don't believe the league is worth anything, therefore you don't believe there's been any improvement.

Part of me can see the committee taking that stance because they've done it before. See 2011 and 2014.

But I think what will ultimately happen is that they'll look at all these other teams around Kentucky who have lost to middling teams, they'll look at Kentucky's road record relative to that same group of teams, and UK will come out on the 2/3 line.

[Joneslab]

Also, Quad 1 wins seems to be the thing the committee talks about most after the fact.

Kentucky has 9. That's firmly in 2/3 seed territory when you pair it with overall record.

The Big East teams almost all have 10, so I would imagine all three (Villanova, Seton Hall, Creighton) will be on the 2/3 line.

Kansas and Baylor have 12 and 11 Quad 1 wins respectively. Those are two one seeds, probably.

Interestingly the ACC contingent--Florida St., Duke, Louisville--don't have as many as UK right now, but of course they have a better shot at changing that during the ACC Tournament.

Wisconsin, the Big 10 winner, has 9 Quad 1 wins like Kentucky.

That's not close to the resume of a 5-seed for Kentucky. To put Kentucky at a 5 you just have to completely discredit probably half of those Quad 1 wins, and that would be extremely rare for the committee to do something like that.

[Joneslab]

Lunardi explains:

Joe Lunardi‏Verified account @ESPNLunardi 25s25 seconds agoLet's try this one last time. As the one who has UK as a 2, obviously I'm not moving them 3 lines. However, with the national consensus having them has a high 4, it wouldn't take much (early SEC loss? key player absence?) to slide one line. The question was: What is their range?

[JFCats22]

Lunardi explains:

Joe Lunardi‏Verified account @ESPNLunardi 25s25 seconds agoLet's try this one last time. As the one who has UK as a 2, obviously I'm not moving them 3 lines. However, with the national consensus having them has a high 4, it wouldn't take much (early SEC loss? key player absence?) to slide one line. The question was: What is their range?

This makes more sense. I don't think UK is currently a 2 (Bracket Matrix has them as the top 4 seed). If they lose the first game or if there are more Hagans shenanigans I can easily see the NCAA dropping UK down.

[Joneslab]

I thought UK could be a 2 in 2011 but ended up as a 4. Most shocking Selection Sunday that I've personally witnessed.

That team finished the season winning 8 of their last 9 and winning the SEC Tournament. BUT they were 25-8 going into the SEC Tournament. This team has a better overall record. The SEC was probably similar; I think there were 5 SEC teams in the dance in 2011, but all but Florida and Kentucky were essentially on the bubble.

So it's possible that UK drops to a 4/5 (as the committee has explained a zillion times, single seed-line drops are often inconsequential to them and generally balanced out by venue), but it would still be a shock considering Kentucky's

(1) Quad 1 wins
(2) Road wins and
(3) Record since January 18th