Jump to content
Buffalo Bulls - UB Fan Forum

Predicting UB’s NCAA Tournament Seed


Recommended Posts

LINK: Big 4 Basketball Update: Buffalo earns six seed, awaits Arizona State/St. John’s winner

The Bulls deserved a five seed but in the end, it won't make much of a difference. I would almost rather them be a six taking on Arizona State/St. John's than be a five taking on Murray State. Ja Morant is the real deal and I'm glad UB avoided him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end, the "metrics" mattered more to some people more than the committee. Whether it's NET, Kenpom, RPI, or whatever one they choose to look at, the selection committee picked who they wanted. St. John's having a 73 NET is ridiculously low, in addition to at 78 KenPom. There are 27 teams with better Kenpom rankings than them (including Toledo and San Francisco), yet they got in to the tournament. Heck, even Arizona State's NET and KenPom are behind Toledo's. So in the end, how much do these ratings matter, at least with regard to who gets selected?  Our 6 seed matches our KenPom perfectly and is 2 lines lower than our NET and 3 lines lower than our RPI. There are numerous ratings calculators. In the end, they choose who they want and seed teams where they want. Marquette stunk down the stretch and outside of their head-to-head win versus us, never should've been ranked higher than us. 

According to KenPom, TTU is the top 3 seed, while they are the 2nd best 3 seed in the NET (behind only Houston who has the #4 overall NET, yet received a 3 seed).

No matter what, "metrics" are out the window now. Just beat the guys in the other jersey and live to play another day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ubbulls08 said:

Texas Tech

Michigan

Not an easy bracket. And the location is brutal. Better for everyone in the bracket that isn't Buffalo.

I'm pissed with this, tbh. I feel there is so little respect for a team like UB, and it's what will cost us Oats this year or next. He sees the lack of resources and the lack of national respect more than we do. 

This is a crap seeding.

 

6 seed... So 21-24 overall seed. Could be a 5, but doesn't seem out of line, or particularly disrespectful.  

 

As for bracket locations, I'm out in the LA area, so Anaheim would be sweet. I also have a business trip Wed/Thur in Ft Worth TX... Hmmmmmmm.....

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some other random selection sunday notes.

- Toledo ended up a 6 seed in the NIT

- Central Michigan and Kent State end up in the CBI and cit

- Bowling Green appears to have turned down a bid likely to CBI/cit. 

- I forgot about Furman and their crazy ranked start like ours. They ended up in the NIT as well

- West Virginia amazingly is in the CBI. I guess if you're a name school you're in. Although as weird of a season as they had (0-10 overall on the road 10-6 at home), they did beat Kansas and actually had decent run in the conference tournament beating TT.

It's almost amazing to see a team like that accept a bid but smaller schools like Bowling Green opt out (I know we did it too years back). But I imagine Huggins would like to give his group some more work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, xDerekRx said:

- West Virginia amazingly is in the CBI. I guess if you're a name school you're in. Although as weird of a season as they had (0-10 overall on the road 10-6 at home), they did beat Kansas and actually had decent run in the conference tournament beating TT.

 

After a nice little run in the conference tournament, Huggins said he wanted to reward his guys for playing hard and wanted them to play in the CIT or CBI (he knew they would not get an invite to the NIT).  The CIT or CBI is a tournament (I forget which one) where you pay for games.  Huggins said this before the loss to Kansas, so he was already planning on it and, thus, I assume the AD had already made the phone calls.

Huggins (though he recruited certain guys) felt that some of the guys didn't want to put in the required effort and once they left the team, he was able to get the others to buy in.  This is why he felt they played much better towards the end of the year.  He wants/wanted to reward them with more games and so this is it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to rant a bit about the seeding for UB.

It is outrageous that they are a 6 seed.   Three losses and a 6 seed?  And the selection committee chair said that they had no issues in seeding UB as a 6.   This tells me that if UB won ALL OF THEIR GAMES they would only have been a 4, at best.  After all, the wins vs. BGSU and NIU wouldn't have been worth that much.  Certainly Marquette on the road would have been worth something.  But I can't see, with what I see now, that UB would be better than a 4.

UB's RPI was a 9.   A 9...and they are still a 6 seed.

Mississippi State and Wisconsin...both with 10 losses...are a 5 seed.

I know there are arguments for both teams, but 10 losses is 10 losses.  Those teams have plenty of opportunities (especially at home) for those Quad 1 wins.   Wisconsin's 1st two road games were losses this year. 

 

If UB had their profile, but were in the AAC, they would have a 3 or 4 seed...I am convinced.

 

This whole NET ranking, RPI, seeding, etc. is a very complex and highly coupled set of non-linear equations.  At least 350 of them (one for each team) and there are many, many solutions.  However, the solution is dependent on the initial condition.   And we all know the initial condition (i.e. how the schools are ranked initially) has almost everything to do with the name on the jersey and the conference you represent.  UB's initial condition (in the MAC) will NEVER BE GOOD ENOUGH to get them (or anyone else in their conference) a higher seed.  At the end of the day, they need a better initial condition.  The only way to do that is a better conference.

The system is set up only for the power conferences.  The mid-majors and below have to fight for the scraps...and be happy for it when a team like Belmont gets in over someone like NC State.  Sure...the committee cited quad 1 and, in some cases, quad 2 records for the reasons that Indiana, NCST, etc. didn't get in.  But you can bet that the lobbying has already started to tweak the NET formula in favor of some of those teams.  After all, if it doesn't serve the NCST or Indiana of the world (two former tournament winners), then it isn't doing its job! (I say that sarcastically, full well knowing it is truth).

 

So...Bulls.  You were underseeded.  I can't believe you are a six.   You were slighted.  Go out there and show the world that you deserved more than a 6.  It is us against the world.  They don't believe in you.  No one believes in you...but yourselves and your city.  Show them why they were wrong and how wrong they were!!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, UB92 said:

I want to rant a bit about the seeding for UB.

It is outrageous that they are a 6 seed.   Three losses and a 6 seed?  And the selection committee chair said that they had no issues in seeding UB as a 6.   This tells me that if UB won ALL OF THEIR GAMES they would only have been a 4, at best.  After all, the wins vs. BGSU and NIU wouldn't have been worth that much.  Certainly Marquette on the road would have been worth something.  But I can't see, with what I see now, that UB would be better than a 4.

I'm over here in disbelief that garbage Oklahoma got a 9 seed.......and is even in the tournament at all. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, UB92 said:

After a nice little run in the conference tournament, Huggins said he wanted to reward his guys for playing hard and wanted them to play in the CIT or CBI (he knew they would not get an invite to the NIT).  The CIT or CBI is a tournament (I forget which one) where you pay for games.  Huggins said this before the loss to Kansas, so he was already planning on it and, thus, I assume the AD had already made the phone calls.

Huggins (though he recruited certain guys) felt that some of the guys didn't want to put in the required effort and once they left the team, he was able to get the others to buy in.  This is why he felt they played much better towards the end of the year.  He wants/wanted to reward them with more games and so this is it.

I actually think that's cool of Huggins to do so. I throw a little respect his way. I like to check in on these 2 tournaments to see how the MAC schools fair but I hope WVU ends up winning theirs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I know everyone is getting their seeding rant in but I still dont mind the 6. I find it fair if not slightly less than deserved. I think the 5 would have been the nice surprise. 

UB92 I know you are talking about wins, but even Id say I personally would look at more than just W/L totals. It probably hurts a bit that wins like the WVU didn't have the weight they could have had. And like you said conference absolutely plays into it. If we are even up one in the AAC (which is the conference that would make the most sense as far as jump goes one of these years) it would make a huge difference because of the conference opponents alone.

I don't know what would have happened if UB had won all of their games. I imagine beating Marquette on the road and perhaps not winning so many games with close scores in the MAC I could have seen a 3 seed. But I guess it depends. And probably not even worth stressing over. The way UB was moving up the rankings to 14, I dont doubt they could have moved into the Top 10 after Syr/Marquette and if they never lost might have been even in the 5-6 range. Then I think you are talking about a 3 seed.

As it stands and like others have said, a 6 seed puts us in the 21-24 range in the committees eyes and I don't think that's a terrible or disrespectful view of our team. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UB92 said:

Huggins (though he recruited certain guys) felt that some of the guys didn't want to put in the required effort and once they left the team, he was able to get the others to buy in.  This is why he felt they played much better towards the end of the year.  He wants/wanted to reward them with more games and so this is it.

Coach speak for another couple of weeks of practice and game playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, xDerekRx said:

Some other random selection sunday notes.

- Toledo ended up a 6 seed in the NIT

- Central Michigan and Kent State end up in the CBI and cit

- Bowling Green appears to have turned down a bid likely to CBI/cit. 

- I forgot about Furman and their crazy ranked start like ours. They ended up in the NIT as well

- West Virginia amazingly is in the CBI. I guess if you're a name school you're in. Although as weird of a season as they had (0-10 overall on the road 10-6 at home), they did beat Kansas and actually had decent run in the conference tournament beating TT.

It's almost amazing to see a team like that accept a bid but smaller schools like Bowling Green opt out (I know we did it too years back). But I imagine Huggins would like to give his group some more work.

Weird, he says right here he wants to play. Must have passed for money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UB92 said:

I want to rant a bit about the seeding for UB.

It is outrageous that they are a 6 seed.   Three losses and a 6 seed?  And the selection committee chair said that they had no issues in seeding UB as a 6.   This tells me that if UB won ALL OF THEIR GAMES they would only have been a 4, at best.  After all, the wins vs. BGSU and NIU wouldn't have been worth that much.  Certainly Marquette on the road would have been worth something.  But I can't see, with what I see now, that UB would be better than a 4.

UB's RPI was a 9.   A 9...and they are still a 6 seed.

so what do you think they should have been seeded?  does ANYBODY think that UB deserves an overall 9?  you?  if not, what difference does it make that RPI has them at 9?  their seeding is not all that out of line with their ranking and net all year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ed said:

so what do you think they should have been seeded?  does ANYBODY think that UB deserves an overall 9?  you?  if not, what difference does it make that RPI has them at 9?  their seeding is not all that out of line with their ranking and net all year.

I think they should have been a 5 with that profile.   NET has them 16.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ed said:

so you're outraged that they're seeded a whopping ONE spot off from what you think they should be?  😄

Yes.  I am outraged!  I'd prefer them a 4, but factoring in bias of the committee, I realized it could a 5.  A 6 was beyond what I wanted to believe.

After all, the team is ranked by human beings as 15.  To me...that's a 4 seed.

 

Outraged, I tell you.  And I hope the coach and players are as well.  And use that on Friday.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, UB_Prush said:

But the thing there was everyone wanted us to slay a blue blood. We’re less established than either of our potential opponents but we are no longer the underdogs, so this will be interesting. 

Trying to be objective I’d still think neutrals would pull for us. We’re fun to watch and have a great team/staff.

Any "neutrals" may start the game rooting against UB because we're favorites.  If we play against ASU, their rooting interest will change as soon as they get a glimpse of Hurley's antics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...