Bracketmatrix.com


(gpropes) #1

That’s a site that compiles all of the projected brackets and creates a composite seeding. They re-run the numbers every day.

As of this morning, Houston is a 7 seed.

www.bracketmatrix.com


#2

Wow! I’m shocked at how many brackets have us as a 10 seed and even one that has us as an 11 seed. What the heck!


(Brad) #3

I’m shocked that it is February 2018 and we’re shocked that people are only putting us as 11 seeds. I’m dreaming.


#4

Haha! Me too!


(Jimmy Morris) #5

I was taking a closer looks at the CBS bracket to figure out how we could still be only a 9 seed. Only one team behind us has a longer winning streak and none of the seeds 3 through 8 have as good a record as us against tier 1 teams. The only thing standing out, is that we are the ONLY team in the top 9 seeds that has a single tier 4 loss.

According to this “expert” (the RPI guy), one tier 4 loss outweighs AT LEAST four tier 1 wins because even being 2-3 against tier 1 is still better than 1/3rd of the teams ranked ahead of us. It’s silly enough that I tweeted him about it.


#6

The consensus bracket is pretty good. Over the last 5 years, only 6 individuals have done better than the consensus on average:

Bracketville - has us a 6 seed in Dallas
SyracuseFan7 - has us a 5 seed
Jabes Blog - not released yet
Warren Nolan - not released yet
Wild Bill - has us a 7 seed in Nashville
Inside the Hall - will update today, last bracket on Feb 13 before big wins had us an 11 seed


#7

I mentioned this in another thread, but Jerry Palm at CBS is pretty bad at this. Bracketmatrix tracks the bracketologists and he’s close to the bottom. He was probably decent 10 years or so ago, but he seems unwilling to change how he projects based on how the committee changes their approach or indicates they will change their approach. For example, I don’t think he even switched up his bracket to match the committee’s when they gave that top 16 preview a little over a week ago. That’s like finding out the answers to a test but picking something different because you disagree with the teacher.

I’ve noticed over a couple of years with some of the controversial teams he seems to give substantially more weight to a bad loss than the committee actually does. The committee used to almost cancel out good wins with bad losses, but over the last several years good wins seem to help much more than bad losses hurt.


#8

The bracket that has us an 11 looks like it is probably run by a kid in high school or something. I wouldn’t stress about that. There are plenty of bad brackets, but overall the composite should get pretty close.


#9

Historical seed performance.

8-9 game is a toss up. 8 seed wins 53% of those games.

Overall, 8 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 10.5% of the time. 9 seeds make it 4.5% of the time. This is not the line we want to be on.

==========
7 seeds beat 10 seeds 61% of the time.

7 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 18.5% of the time.
10 seeds make the sweet 16 about 17% of the time (they have a better record vs the 2 seed than does the seven)

============
6 seeds beat 11 seeds about 64% of the time

6 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 33% of the time
11 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 13% of the time

Notice the big jump in Sweet 16 appearances going from 7 to 6.

=============
5 seeds beat 12 seeds 67% of the time.

5 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 32.5% of the time.
12 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 13% of the time.

=============
4 seeds beat 13 seeds about 81% of the time.

4 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 49% of the time.
13 seeds make the Sweet 16 about 4.5% of the time.

=============

Sweet 16 chances by seed

4 = 49%
5 = 32.5%
6 = 33%

7 = 18.5%
8 = 10.5%
9 = 4.5%
10 = 17%
11 = 13%
12 = 13%
13 = 4.5%


(Brad) #10

Where’d you get those percentages Red?


#11

http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml


#12

That’s like finding out the answers to a test but picking something different because you disagree with the teacher.

That made me almost choke on my coffee. Good one.


#13

Houston now on the 6 line at BracketMatrix:

http://www.bracketmatrix.com

Note: the committee has a history of seeding American teams worse than the BracketMatrix consensus:

2014
Louisville - 4 instead of 3
Cincy - 5 instead of 4
UConn - 7 instead of 5
SMU - out instead of 11

2015
SMU - 6 instead of 5
Temple - out instead of 11

2016
UConn - 9 instead of 8

2017
SMU - 6 instead of 5

The only American teams ever given more credit by the committee than by BracketMatrix:

2015 - Cincy got an 8 instead of a 9
2016 - Cincy got 9 instead of 10
2016 - Temple got in instead of NIT
2016 - Tulsa got in instead of NIT

Basically, take our BracketMatrix seed and add 1.


#14

Sign us up!


#15

If we continue to play well the balance of the conference schedule and the AAC tournament, our seeding will improve as others ahead of us are likely to fall. A 27-5 or 26-6 record would be hard to ignore.


(Nick K) #16

vs Texas…you forgot to mention that little tidbit. Best bracket yet.
in dallas vs the short horns would be the best way to go back to the tourney.
next round vs clemson would be tough but there would be plenty of coogs in the house if we get the dallas location.


#17

As much as I would love to stomp tu into oblivion, we better bring our outside shooting touch if we play them. With our lack of size, we won’t be getting many shots up in the paint against Mo Bamba.


(Brad) #18

I’d like to see any teams big man gaurd Devin Davis.


(Jerrycoog) #19

Fox has us as a #6 facing Buffalo in the first round.


(PMM) #20

Fact is tu should NOT be in the tournament !!