TO9 Top9: Feb. 12, 2017
Yesterday, the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee gave a glimpse of what the real thing might look like four weeks from today. The Bracket Preview was an unprecedented move, one intended to give fans and programs a transparent look into the process and get an idea of where the top 16 teams stood in the pecking order as the season comes down the final stretch.
The half-hour special on CBS was actually met with a bit of backlash from some, citing it as a money grab and a cheap way to get a slight boost in ratings. There is also the possibility that the Bracket Preview opens the committee up to more scrutiny as teams move in the bracket between now and Selection Sunday.
Honestly, I totally agree with these criticisms. And at the same time, I absolutely love that the NCAA decided to air the Bracket Preview. There is no denying how successful the College Football Playoff rankings have been in drumming up interest and conversation in that sport in November and December. The NCAA knows that college basketball rules the sports industry during the tournament in mid-March through early April and is now doing its best to get a slightly bigger share of the month-long time period after the Super Bowl and before the tournament starts. I’m not sure how successful they’ll be, but it’s a start.
As for the extra criticism of the committee, well, everyone is going to hate on the committee no matter what once Selection Sunday comes. And, once the games start on Tuesday, everyone will forget all about it.
Getting to the actual bracket reveal, I thought committee chair Mark Hollis did a really good, succinct job of summing up the reasoning for why each team was placed in a particular region. I did not, however, think they did the best job of actually seeding the teams. Here were a couple thoughts I had while watching the special:
No respect for Gonzaga — It was clear that the committee is still not too impressed with Gonzaga. Yes, they put the Bulldogs on the top line, but as the fourth overall 1-seed. Their weak conference schedule is clearly really dragging down their résumé. I think the committee strategically placed Gonzaga fourth in the event that they run the table but end up placing them on the 2-seed line on March 12. This way, no one can be too surprised that they only dropped an overall seed or two. Bottom line, this decision is no harm no foul at the moment, as the Zags get in their preferred region (the West) anyway, but it is something to monitor as the season winds down.
No respect for the Big Ten — Alright, alright, I can’t fault the committee for being down on the Big Ten. The conference has no real powerhouses and their national championship drought has a good chance of continuing to a 17th season. But I think Wisconsin (or perhaps Purdue) have at least done enough to be among the top 16 tournament seeds. Due to the down year for the entire conference, it is hard to look at Wisconsin’s résumé and find many good wins, but they have largely avoided bad losses and I think they have done enough to be in the Bracket Preview
Good wins valued more than bad losses — Related to the Wisconsin snub, I think it was pretty clear that the committee tried to value good wins over bad losses. I think Wisconsin should have been in the field replacing Butler, a team that was teetering on the edge of the AP Top 25 (before their road loss to Providence yesterday). Butler has one of the most confusing profiles — a few huge wins but a few baffling losses, including a really damaging one to Indiana State. But it appears the committee gave a little more weight to their wins than their losses.
ACC absent from the top line — Even though the ACC is one of the better conferences we have seen in the past few years, it has become clear that it will be difficult for any of their teams to end up on the top seed line. Barring a slip-up from the current top 4 teams, I don’t think an ACC school will be able to wrestle a 1-seed away from Villanova, Kansas, Baylor, or Gonzaga. However, the depth of the conference was still on display, as five teams landed in the Bracket Preview. As Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State, and Duke continue to cannibalize each other, they are simultaneously preventing anyone in the conference from getting a 1-seed.
In light of the Bracket Preview, I thought it made sense to audible a bit with the TO9 Top 9 and reveal my own version of the mid-season tournament seeds. Thus, “Top 9” will be a bit of a misnomer this week. Note that my bracket preview does take into account games through Sunday, February 12, 2017. This means that Syracuse’s awful loss to Pittsburgh was, in fact, contemplated in the rankings. This also means that Syracuse was nowhere close to making this bracket preview. Feel your team should have been ranked higher than they were? Reach out to me on twitter @TO_OTCS.
Without further ado, here is the TO9 Top 9, bracket preview edition (as of Sunday, February 12, 2017):
1-seeds: Villanova (1), Gonzaga (2), Kansas (3), Baylor (4)
2-seeds: Louisville (5), North Carolina (6), Oregon (7), Virginia (8)
3-seeds: Florida State (9), Arizona (10), Kentucky (11), West Virginia (12)
4-seeds: Florida (13), UCLA (14), Duke (15), Wisconsin (16)
Just missed: Purdue, Cincinnati
Some thoughts on my own bracket preview:
What to make of the Pac-12 top-3 — I really struggled with where to place Oregon, Arizona, and UCLA. Over time, I have soured more and more on the overall strength of the Pac-12. As the Ducks, Wildcats, and Bruins play musical chairs at the top of the conference, I’m finding it hard to compare them to other schools outside of their conference. I feel pretty good about the order of those three teams, but slotting them into the tournament field and comparing them to others is proving to be difficult.
Can Cincinnati end up in the top-4 seeds? — Going into the official NCAA Bracket Preview, the Bearcats had one of the longest winning streaks in the nation. Since then, however, Cincinnati took a road loss at SMU. This was a major opportunity missed. Cincinnati has very few losses, but their schedule is practically devoid of any good wins. Without any big opponents down the stretch, coupled with the SMU loss today, I don’t see how the Bearcats can get up into a top-4 seed (even if they run the table).
Interesting mix of résumés — The top four teams have clearly separated themselves from the rest of the pack. After them, though, it feels like every team falls into one of two buckets — teams with big wins but bad losses or teams with no big wins but no bad losses. Yes, it feels like this is the case every year, but it feels even more pronounced this year. As mentioned earlier, it looks like the committee places the most importance on big wins, but it will be noticed if the committee doesn’t stick to its guns a month from now.
Lots of opportunities for movement — As in any other year, there are some massive opportunities for most teams to move up multiple seed lines over the next four weeks. Perhaps most intriguing are the situations for Duke and Kentucky, the teams considered to be the (practically consensus) top two coming into the season. With multiple freshmen having major roles on both teams, either team could gel down the stretch or come unglued.
