American Athletic Conference

[ShockingButTrue]

Call me whatever you want, I'm just tired of us playing the victim card. I'm the same way in other aspects of my life, I'd rather prove the haters wrong instead of complaining about the disrespect. Honestly I'd just rather act like we belong instead of complaining we aren't getting the credit. To answer your question though, I think next year is when the under-seeding changes. The committee got way too much heat this year so if the shockers can get a few high quality wins in the non-conference and crush the MVC circuit again (although hopefully we get into the AAC this year), they'll get a seed worthy of their record next year. You might be right though. Maybe they do get screwed again, but even if that is the case they'll be good enough to go out and prove it. I hope they get another bracket stacked with blue bloods to make the ride even sweeter.

Jamar? Is that you?

#ChokingChickens

[GottliebHater]

One of my buddies made a suggestion that will not get implemented, but is a fun thought experiment.

First, the committee pick the teams in the field. Next the committee picks the four “1 seeds” in order. Here is where the idea kicks-in:

The four “1 seeds” draft for teams in their region.

It would be a reverse draft

The draft would start with the 16 seeds, followed by the 15 seeds, and so on

It would be on a S-Curve; therefore, the number one overall seed would get the first pick on the most important seeds (16, 8, 4, 2)

This will tell us how the “market” would seed each team. Could you imagine a made for TV event that worked like this… It will never happen, but it is fun to consider.

Can you imagine the story lines?

It would be interesting, although there would have to be paramters set. Otherwise, you would have some awful teams in the 8-9 matchups. Im not sure how it would play out with their personal interests as their number one priority.

[Kel Varnsen]

One of my buddies made a suggestion that will not get implemented, but is a fun thought experiment.

First, the committee pick the teams in the field. Next the committee picks the four “1 seeds” in order. Here is where the idea kicks-in:

The four “1 seeds” draft for teams in their region.

It would be a reverse draft

The draft would start with the 16 seeds, followed by the 15 seeds, and so on

It would be on a S-Curve; therefore, the number one overall seed would get the first pick on the most important seeds (16, 8, 4, 2)

This will tell us how the “market” would seed each team. Could you imagine a made for TV event that worked like this… It will never happen, but it is fun to consider.

Can you imagine the story lines?

That idea sounded familiar. Here's an article that breaks it down in some detail: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...ege-basketball

[proshox]

That idea sounded familiar. Here's an article that breaks it down in some detail: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...ege-basketball

Similar concepts for sure...

[Stickboy46]

One of my buddies made a suggestion that will not get implemented, but is a fun thought experiment.

First, the committee pick the teams in the field. Next the committee picks the four “1 seeds” in order. Here is where the idea kicks-in:

The four “1 seeds” draft for teams in their region.

It would be a reverse draft

The draft would start with the 16 seeds, followed by the 15 seeds, and so on

It would be on a S-Curve; therefore, the number one overall seed would get the first pick on the most important seeds (16, 8, 4, 2)

This will tell us how the “market” would seed each team. Could you imagine a made for TV event that worked like this… It will never happen, but it is fun to consider.

Can you imagine the story lines?

To make it more entertaining, have the coaches of the 1 seeds draft teams to go in ever one else's region but their own. Cut throat

Or make a hybrid. Draft style format, each coach selects seeds 2-16 for a region. Then label 1 through 4 and each coach draws a number out of a hat and gets that region.

Might make then select fairer. If you make it a hard region, you could end up with it. If you make it easy, someone else might get it.

[WuDrWu]

I thought this was interesting, if somewhat meaningless, but it does I think give backing to the argument that WSU outplays it's seed regularly.

Under HCGM, WSU has played 16 NCAA games in 6 seasons, going 10-6, and his teams have led ALL 16 games at some point in the 2nd half. Not just like 2-0, but deep into games, they've led every single effing game. And that's as a seeded underdog in 10 of the 16 games.

Every single game.

59-57 under 2 to go against VCU
58-57 5:33 against Louisville
71-70 1:41 against Kentucky
38-37 16:01 against Notre Dame
43-42 9:30 against Miami
37-36 14:05 against Kentucky

When you really stop to analyze the data, WSU has actually been a little, if not a lot, unlucky. 10-6 could easily be say, 15-5?

And that's not factoring in ku kind of luck either.

[Kel Varnsen]

I thought this was interesting, if somewhat meaningless, but it does I think give backing to the argument that WSU outplays it's seed regularly.

Under HCGM, WSU has played 16 NCAA games in 6 seasons, going 10-6, and his teams have led ALL 16 games at some point in the 2nd half. Not just like 2-0, but deep into games, they've led every single effing game. And that's as a seeded underdog in 10 of the 16 games.

Every single game.

59-57 under 2 to go against VCU
58-57 5:33 against Louisville
71-70 1:41 against Kentucky
38-37 16:01 against Notre Dame
43-42 9:30 against Miami
37-36 14:05 against Kentucky

When you really stop to analyze the data, WSU has actually been a little, if not a lot, unlucky. 10-6 could easily be say, 15-5?

And that's not factoring in ku kind of luck either.

And at some point, it will fall in our favor.

[Shock Top]

I thought this was interesting, if somewhat meaningless, but it does I think give backing to the argument that WSU outplays it's seed regularly.

Under HCGM, WSU has played 16 NCAA games in 6 seasons, going 10-6, and his teams have led ALL 16 games at some point in the 2nd half. Not just like 2-0, but deep into games, they've led every single effing game. And that's as a seeded underdog in 10 of the 16 games.

Every single game.

59-57 under 2 to go against VCU
58-57 5:33 against Louisville
71-70 1:41 against Kentucky
38-37 16:01 against Notre Dame
43-42 9:30 against Miami
37-36 14:05 against Kentucky

When you really stop to analyze the data, WSU has actually been a little, if not a lot, unlucky. 10-6 could easily be say, 15-5?

And that's not factoring in ku kind of luck either.

I knew it!!!

[Shock Top]

The good thing about Orlando is that since ICT flys direct there now (seasonally), they could probably set up some extra flights for tourney time.

[RoyalShock]

One of my buddies made a suggestion that will not get implemented, but is a fun thought experiment.

First, the committee pick the teams in the field. Next the committee picks the four “1 seeds” in order. Here is where the idea kicks-in:

The four “1 seeds” draft for teams in their region.

It would be a reverse draft

The draft would start with the 16 seeds, followed by the 15 seeds, and so on

It would be on a S-Curve; therefore, the number one overall seed would get the first pick on the most important seeds (16, 8, 4, 2)

This will tell us how the “market” would seed each team. Could you imagine a made for TV event that worked like this… It will never happen, but it is fun to consider.

Can you imagine the story lines?

If I'm understanding that correctly, wouldn't it be possible for WSU, or any other undervalued team, to be picked as the 15-seed having to play the 2-seed? That is how the 1-seed could try and take out the 2-seed in their region early. Or they could pick them as the 13 seed to take out the 4-seed. If that's how it could be done, you know it would. In that case, I'm not a fan.

[Cdizzle]

If I'm understanding that correctly, wouldn't it be possible for WSU, or any other undervalued team, to be picked as the 15-seed having to play the 2-seed? That is how the 1-seed could try and take out the 2-seed in their region early. Or they could pick them as the 13 seed to take out the 4-seed. If that's how it could be done, you know it would. In that case, I'm not a fan.

It is. And making the path difficult for the 2 seed could be tempting.

But if you think making WSU the 13 seed would be good so they would knock off the 4 seed, you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. You've now picked something close to a 4 seed as the 4 seed, and something you perceive as better than that 4 seed as the 13 seed, also on your half of your bracket. That isn't very logical.

[Stickboy46]

It is. And making the path difficult for the 2 seed could be tempting.

But if you think making WSU the 13 seed would be good so they would knock off the 4 seed, you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. You've now picked something close to a 4 seed as the 4 seed, and something you perceive as better than that 4 seed as the 13 seed, also on your half of your bracket. That isn't very logical.

That's why I think if they get to select teams for a region, but then its a random draw to see who gets what region, you probably would see a lot fairer choices.

[mini-shock]

As long as WSU gets in the Big Dance, you can put any number your want next the name. I could care less about seeding.

[WstateU]

As long as WSU gets in the Big Dance, you can put any number your want next the name. I could care less about seeding.

[SHOCKvalue]

As long as WSU gets in the Big Dance, you can put any number your want next the name. I could care less about seeding.

I know, right? Who needs those uppity types with their probabilities and statistics? Useless, every damn last one of them; especially that gall-darn @Jamar Howard 4 President: guy.