W-14 BP68

Watching some of the college football yesterday, I couldn't help but be amused by the weird constructs that we create as fans to define what we think is "better" or "deserved" in ranking teams or giving them rewards. It was considered by many unjust that a 12-0 Ohio State team was ranked ahead of an 11-1 Auburn team because Auburn played the tougher schedule. Putting aside the fact that Ohio State's schedule wasn't really that much worse (the win over Wisconsin is very underrated since the polls have them way below the 8-10th in the country that most computers have them), it's an interesting argument that we apparently only use with the SEC.

If a 1-loss SEC team has to get in over a 0-loss Big Ten team, why can't we use the same argument for a 2-loss Pac-12 team? By basically every metric, the Pac-12 was the best league this year, and Stanford's resume was far more impressive than Auburn's. Stanford beat four teams in the Sagarin PREDICTOR Top 10, compared to only one apiece for Ohio State and Auburn.

And that of course brings us to the issue that the best SEC team by far was left out. Alabama was a 10 point favorite in Vegas at Auburn, after all, and only lost on the play of the century. When I brought this up on twitter yesterday I was deluged with "HEAD TO HEAD IS THE ONLY FAIR WAY TO DECIDE! DECIDE IT ON THE FIELD!" But as I pointed out, this is a very American way to think - and it's not obviously correct. If you look at European sports, you almost never see head-to-head as a tiebreaker. They prefer to look at the whole performance, and use score differential or goal differential as a tiebreak. And it makes more sense - why judge teams on one game when you can judge them on eight? Alabama was blowing out SEC opponents all year while Auburn was squeaking by mediocre teams. That should matter. There's no reason why squeaking by a team at home should be proof of your superiority. Only in America do we take it as a given that head-to-head has to (without debate) put Auburn into the SEC title game over a far superior Alabama team.

I didn't mean to ramble on that for so long, but it was to remind you that the way college basketball puts teams into the bracket in March is different from how college football rates its teams. But it's still a specific, complicated code. The Selection Committee doesn't just pick the 37 best teams or the 37 best resumes - we have a complicated system of what is "fair" and "deserved". It's not as dumb as how the college football pollsters think, but it's still not totally rational either. And at this point, all I'm trying to do is project where various teams are going to be in March, and then try to apply that code to figure out where the Selection Committee would put teams if that came to pass.

So this means that just because a team is ranked #1 right now,  I'm not going to put them #1. In fact, I think we all know that the #1 on Monday (Arizona) is a bit silly. I'm sure that not a single person voting Arizona #1 thinks they're actually the best team in the country… but they were #2 and didn't lose while #1 did, and so apparently federal law forbids any possible scenario on Monday but putting Arizona #1. During the game against UNLV, with Arizona trailing the 16 point underdog in the second half, the announcers repeated matter-of-factly that a win would make Arizona #1 on Monday. Everybody knows how the formula works. And for the millionth time, this is why you shouldn't view the Top 25 polls as a measure of how good teams are.

The new #1 overall team in my bracket, however, is Kansas. Nobody would argue that Kansas has been the best team in the country so far. In fact, if I was going to pick a team that has played best so far this season it would probably be Ohio State or Oklahoma State (some computer ratings argue Louisville, but with a bad schedule strength it's hard to tell). But squads like Kansas and Kentucky are very young and should improve a lot as the season goes along. Duke and Michigan State are also teams that are still figuring things out but should also be playing a lot better in a month or two.

Of the 1 seeds, the one I'm most concerned about is Michigan State. And not because I don't think Michigan State will be one of the four best teams in the country by February (I do), but because the Big Ten is once again the best conference in the country and there have emerged three really strong contenders. Ohio State was supposed to challenge Michigan State, but Wisconsin and Iowa have surpassed expectations so far and both look like legitimate contenders. MSU is still my pick, but Ohio State is sitting there at a 2 seed and both Wisconsin and Iowa are sitting at 3 seeds.

At the bottom of the bracket, I really struggled to figure out the last team for my bracket. I knew that I wanted to drop BYU out (not because they're not good enough, but because their resume looks like it won't be strong enough) and wanted to put Missouri in after their big win against UCLA. But that last spot was very confusing. I strongly considered St. Mary's before deciding to drop Maryland for LSU.

So if you're scoring at home, Missouri, LSU and Stephen F Austin moved into the bracket (Stephen F Austin as Southland's automatic bid winner), while Maryland, BYU and Northwestern State dropped out.

Please remember that the following is a projection of Selection Sunday and not a list of where teams would be seeded if the season ended now. There is a difference.


1. KANSAS (BIG 12)
1. MICHIGAN STATE (BIG TEN)
1. KENTUCKY (SEC)
1. DUKE (ACC)

2. ARIZONA (PAC-12)
2. Ohio State
2. LOUISVILLE (AAC)
2. Florida

3. Oklahoma State
3. Wisconsin
3. GONZAGA (WCC)
3. Iowa

4. GEORGETOWN (BIG EAST)
4. UConn
4. Villanova
4. NEW MEXICO (MWC)

5. Pittsburgh
5. WICHITA STATE (MVC)
5. Creighton
5. VCU (ATLANTIC TEN)

6. North Carolina
6. St. Louis
6. Syracuse
6. Michigan

7. Virginia
7. Baylor
7. Indiana
7. Marquette

8. Iowa State
8. UMass
8. UCLA
8. Memphis

9. Colorado
9. Boise State
9. Oregon
9. Notre Dame

10. Tennessee
10. Cincinnati
10. Florida State
10. San Diego State

11. HARVARD (IVY)
11. Stanford
11. Dayton
11. Clemson

12. Minnesota
12. Butler
12. Missouri
12. LSU
12. NORTH DAKOTA STATE (SUMMIT)
12. DREXEL (COLONIAL)

13. MANHATTAN (MAAC)
13. LOUISIANA TECH (CONFERENCE USA)
13. WEBER STATE (BIG SKY)
13. NEW MEXICO STATE (WAC)

14. WISCONSIN-GREEN BAY (HORIZON)
14. BELMONT (OVC)
14. TOLEDO (MAC)
14. UC IRVINE (BIG WEST)

15. GEORGIA STATE (SUN BELT)
15. BOSTON UNIVERSITY (PATRIOT)
15. MERCER (ATLANTIC SUN)
15. DAVIDSON (SOCON)

16. STEPHEN F AUSTIN (SOUTHLAND)
16. VERMONT (AMERICA EAST)
16. NC CENTRAL (MEAC)
16. BRYANT (NEC)
16. HIGH POINT (BIG SOUTH)
16. SOUTHERN (SWAC)

Teams seriously considered that just missed the cut:
SMU, Maryland, Providence, Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas, Indiana State, Utah State, Arizona State, California, Arkansas, Ole Miss, BYU, St. Mary's

Other teams with a decent shot, but that need to improve their resume:
Boston College, Wake Forest, George Washington, Richmond, St. John's, Xavier, Purdue, Kansas State, West Virginia, Southern Miss, UTEP, Colorado State, UNLV, Utah, Alabama, Vanderbilt

Other teams I'm keeping my eye on, but that need to dramatically improve their resume:
Central Florida, South Florida, Temple, Georgia Tech, Miami (Fl), NC State, George Mason, La Salle, Saint Joseph's, DePaul, Seton Hall, Nebraska, Penn State, Delaware, Charlotte, Middle Tennessee, UAB, Iona, Ohio, Drake, Missouri State, Northern Iowa, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, South Carolina, Texas A&M