2016 Bracketology

[Kel Varnsen]

The Committee IMO was not trying "...to prove KU was superior"; my point is the Committee did not think they would be putting KU at risk by establishing such a second round match-up for the mighty Beakers.

Edit - further explanation can be had by googling Bill Self's comments prior and post the game. Self clearly did not believe the Shockers warranted a 9 seed.

Huh? We were a 7 seed last year.

Self pre-game:

How disrespectful!

[Heinro]

Any protection of any team is beyond a ridiculous conspiracy. I think there are either 2 options. First, you think it is purely random, which in my opinion it is. Or, they set up games to make more $. This is at least a realistic argument and it would be hard to argue that money couldn't perhaps influence the bracket. Either it be our match up with Kentucky or KU. But to say they were think about what risk KU may be facing is comical.

[Kel Varnsen]

I mean, if the NCAA committee is trying to set up an easy/hard path for a team, they're acting against their own self-interest, which is $$$. Do you actually think a committee with no KU AD or President on it (and maybe one Big 12 person) is trying to set that up?

[MadaboutWu]

Huh? We were a 7 seed last year.

Self pre-game:


How disrespectful!

Fortunately Self did a great job communicating his respect to his players, especially Kelly Oubre.

[Shocker1976]

Any protection of any team is beyond a ridiculous conspiracy. I think there are either 2 options. First, you think it is purely random, which in my opinion it is. Or, they set up games to make more $. This is at least a realistic argument and it would be hard to argue that money couldn't perhaps influence the bracket. Either it be our match up with Kentucky or KU. But to say they were think about what risk KU may be facing is comical.

Nothing is random about the NCAA Tournament; if the NCAA wanted a random tournament they would not seed teams but assign games by randomly drawing schools from a hat and assigning these teams to play at random geographical sites.

The NCAA Tournament is big business and big business is always about money first and foremost. The establishment and conduct of the tournament exhibits IMO a clear bias toward ensuring maximum revenue is generated for the television media, the NCAA and then the participating schools.

IMO for you to think the NCAA does not engage in "risk assessment" is not comical but naïve.

[Shocker1976]

I mean, if the NCAA committee is trying to set up an easy/hard path for a team, they're acting against their own self-interest, which is $$$. Do you actually think a committee with no KU AD or President on it (and maybe one Big 12 person) is trying to set that up?

Regarding ''...easy/hard path for a team" - just what do you think a seeded tournament bracket does for the higher seeds?

Regards "$$$" - why do you think the higher seeds play at tournament sites close to their home and fan bases?

Are you naïve or are you really Forrest Gump?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Regarding ''...easy/hard path for a team" - just what do you think a seeded tournament bracket does for the higher seeds?

Regards "$$$" - why do you think the higher seeds play at tournament sites close to their home and fan bases?

Are you naïve or are you really Forrest Gump?

@Kel Varnsen is saying that they seed the field so that the best teams have the best chance of making it the farthest. Changing around seedings from the "true" rankings as to set up specific matchups actually partially defeats the point, as you no longer have the best teams getting the easiest paths.

If the goal is for #2 seeded KU to have an easy path, it would be counterproductive to put WSU as the corresponding 7 seed if you thought WSU was good enough to deserve a 5 or 6.

[ShockdaWorld]

I think if the money was the reason for the matchups, it would more than likely not be swayed toward who the committee thought were "good", but who they thought were the most marketable, or would draw the biggest ratings. I don't believe either one of these to be true.

[im4wsu]

I think if the money was the reason for the matchups, it would more than likely not be swayed toward who the committee thought were "good", but who they thought were the most marketable, or would draw the biggest ratings. I don't believe either one of these to be true.

I don't believe the "money is the reason for matchups" solely because the advertising slots are sold months in advance of the tournament selection and seeding process. The networks make no additional money from a KU-WSU matchup than they do for a KU-Prairie View matchup -- at least not on the day or in the year the games is played. How much carryover effect there might be to the next year is anyone's guess, but I sriously doubt whether one or two or five or ten games have much impact on that, either.

[Shocker-maniac]

Typically contracts with advertisers guarantee a certain level of viewership. I do not know if that is the case for the NCAA tourney, but usually the TV events that charge the higher rates do provide guarantees.

[Shocker1976]

@Kel Varnsen is saying that they seed the field so that the best teams have the best chance of making it the farthest. Changing around seedings from the "true" rankings as to set up specific matchups actually partially defeats the point, as you no longer have the best teams getting the easiest paths.

If the goal is for #2 seeded KU to have an easy path, it would be counterproductive to put WSU as the corresponding 7 seed if you thought WSU was good enough to deserve a 5 or 6.

JH4P your first paragraph is a nice explanation of why the NCAA uses seeded regional tournament brackets - that is, to provide an easier pathway to the FF for the higher seeds.

Risk assessment comes into play regards why WSU would receive a 7 seed when they "...deserve a 5 or 6." What is the risk to the NCAA, only that KU the 2 seed would face a tougher opponent in their second round. What is the benefit to the NCAA by seeding WSU 7 and providing an opportunity for a KU vs WSU in the second round:

1. Provide the viewing public with a game that has nationwide appeal, which proved to be the case as others have posted on Shockernet regards the viewership for the game.

2. Should WSU win the game and move on the Sweet Sixteen, greater national interest in the game by the national audience; could those under dog Shockers be on their way to another FF?

[AZ Shocker]

Yes there are "guarantees". And yes it's about expected viewership.

[Shocker1976]

I don't believe the "money is the reason for matchups" solely because the advertising slots are sold months in advance of the tournament selection and seeding process. The networks make no additional money from a KU-WSU matchup than they do for a KU-Prairie View matchup -- at least not on the day or in the year the games is played. How much carryover effect there might be to the next year is anyone's guess, but I sriously doubt whether one or two or five or ten games have much impact on that, either.

Please pay a visit to the W. Frank Barton School of Business next time you are on campus and ask one of the faculty members to explain to you how television and radio networks sell their advertising time for sporting events. After you have this conversation, you will no longer have "...serious doubts".

[im4wsu]

Please pay a visit to the W. Frank Barton School of Business next time you are on campus and ask one of the faculty members to explain to you how television and radio networks sell their advertising time for sporting events. After you have this conversation, you will no longer have "...serious doubts".

Notice I said no effect this year, unless you happen to believe that the pricing for the ads for the Sweet 16 ganes are not set until after the round of 32 is complete. I'm certain tat those wise professors will agree with me on that.

[Shocker1976]

Notice I said no effect this year, unless you happen to believe that the pricing for the ads for the Sweet 16 ganes are not set until after the round of 32 is complete. I'm certain tat those wise professors will agree with me on that.

As I suggested, have that conversation and learn!

The following link will provide some help until you meet with "those wise professors."

http://www.kantarmedia.com/us/newsroom/press-releases/march-madness-generated-1-15-billion-in-ad-revenue-in-2013