Ill take the rational explanations, but good lord.
Big 12 champ 3
ACC 4
SEC 2
AAC 2
Big Ten 1
Big 12 champ 3
ACC 4
SEC 2
AAC 2
Big Ten 1
Why TF was Oregon a 7 seed?
- Thread starter kwik44
- Start date
Good question, didn’t know they were Pac12 regular season champ. Oregon State beat them in the conf tourney *semis.
*corrected.
*corrected.
Last edited:
They won 11 of their last 13 coming into the tournament going back to Feb. 6. They had a long COVID delay from Jan 9-Feb 4 with one loss in the middle and they lost their first game out of the gates, but righted the ship quickly.
I think the lack of a normal pre-conference season really hurt the committee‘s ability to really measure conferences against each other. I don’t know if it would have changed Iowa’s seeding much, but there have clearly been some traps in the lower tiers of seeding. Oregon really had no OOC games of note. They lost to Mizzou, beat E. Washington and beat a mediocre Seton Hall team. other than that, they didn’t get a chance to show much.
I think the lack of a normal pre-conference season really hurt the committee‘s ability to really measure conferences against each other. I don’t know if it would have changed Iowa’s seeding much, but there have clearly been some traps in the lower tiers of seeding. Oregon really had no OOC games of note. They lost to Mizzou, beat E. Washington and beat a mediocre Seton Hall team. other than that, they didn’t get a chance to show much.
The committee has a lot of rethinking they need to do about their preconceived biases and the so called "eye test" before they reconvene for next year's tournament.
They are showing how poorly seeded this year's tournament really was (even though it's not like they can predict all these upsets or that they put those teams in a position to score up$et$ for any rea$on in particular................)
Loyola is another one that got underseeded because of presumptions about the strength of the MVC, despite Loyola being top 10 in the NET rankings.
We're talking about a team that is probably better than Drake in 2008, and they were a 5........
Semies. They beat Colorado in the Finals.
A
anon_ts5cfra6drv7r
Guest
I’m not going to call all conspiracy because to be the best you need to play/beat the best, whoever is in front of you. However the ncaa committee sure matched up a lot of teams with awful matchups to produce a lot of “upsets” that really probably weren’t as bad as the seeding suggested. Was it to boost ratings/storylines after taking last year off? Could be.
A 4.
PAC next year will be overseeded and Big10 under because that is how this seems to work
I think the PAC has done poorly in recent years, the games are on so late that a lot of people don't see them, and the raters fell in love with the BiG early (and to a lesser extent the B12).
With all the upsets and close games it’s apparent the committee didn’t do a good job of seeding.
This is precisely what needs to change and why they need to use analytics to seed teams. I don't care if they select the last 4/6/8 at-large teams based on ratings possibilities, like including MSU this year (MSU should have been a 13-16 seed), but if they do they need to seed more closely based on analytics. That would make for a better tournament. This year is crap with this many seeding mistakes.
It may also be time to get rid of the no two teams from the same conference being seeded #1 and #2 in a region. They are letting conference affiliation get in the way of more properly seeding teams.
Good question, but it sure ****ed us royally, didn't it? They are all tall, big, athletic guys that can all handle and jump and dunk and shoot 3s. Duarte can make contested shots when things fall apart. Where are the weaknesses? I think we just played a top 5 team in the 2nd round. Houston is 5 seeds better than these guys? LMFAO
In fairness, that game did have a team that deserved to be a 2 seed and a team that deserved to be a 7 seed, so it pretty much evened out...
They have a 5 star McD’s all American sophomore center that tore his ACL in December too that they beat out KY and KS for. Add him in and they would’ve been absolutely nasty and maybe the favorite to win it all...
Imagine a front line of him, Omoruyi and Duarte? Off the charts ridiculous...
I think we’re in a different age of college basketball now. Gone are the days where top seeds can just roll to the Sweet 16 without breaking a sweat; even many 16 seeds are scrappy enough to give 1 seeds pause these days. 15-over-2 upsets used to be incredibly rare, more than half of the 9 upsets have occurred over the past 10 years.
They need to make up their minds on what they want the bracket to be. Either make it a true Regional tournament (East, West, South, Midwest)......or seed every team 1-68, conference affiliation be damned.
There's too much picking and choosing and adjusting when to bend their own rules when it comes to seeding teams, right now.
Either come to a consensus 1-68, or stop pairing Virginia in the West region and Wisconsin in the South and Colorado in the East...................
Absolutely. They've been throwing teams all over the country for decades now so they need to just make the switch to seeding 1-68 with maybe some tweaks here and there for interesting matchups, but only switching teams that are ranked within one seed line of one another, like a 4 switching with a 5 to let the teams be closer to their regional locations or if the matchup is particularly intriguing. I don't understand how they're making the pairings at all right now. It doesn't seem like they do, either.
The data points were not good this year, teams played in neutral sites all year given no crowds, pre-conference schedules all screwed up.
Most sites like Ken Pom were subpar due to poor data, or inability to factor the differences this season presented.
Did the best they could with bad information. Clearly a couple conferences got extra points on reputation alone.
Well, if I was watching the game as a neutral observer, I’d say Iowa was the 7 and Oregon was the 2...😉 Oddly enough, the boyz at Vegas were way off on the spread though.
Hindsight being 20/20, it now seems Iowa was overrated, and Oregon underrated.
I think that was because Iowa improved it's defense the last 10 or 12 games of the season, Oregon lost the last game they played, and had the 1st Rd forfeit.
Anyway, stats don't lie and they said during hte game that Iowa had the 242nd rated 3 pt FG% defense. It showed.
