After looking at all the complaints about seeding and bubble teams, the one stat that seems to best explain this committee's decisions is top 100 wins. It looks to me like they very heavily weighted the team's record versus the top 100 with no extra weighting for top 50 and/or top 25 wins.

 

For example, why Florida a 2 and UK a 4 ... Florida 16-4 vs top 100 and UK 12-7. Louisville 14-8 vs. top 100 which also puts them behind Florida.

 

How does UAB get in with no top 50 wins? They have 10 top 100 wins for an overall top 100 record of 10-7. Compare that to Colorado's 8-11 and Va. Tech's 8-8 and that seems to give insight into how this committee made decisions. Harvard only had 3 top 100 wins. St. Mary's had 2 top 100 wins. VCU is in because they had 9 top 100 wins.

 

Of course there are always exceptions as Georgia went 5-11 vs top 100. But Alabama only had 4 top 100 wins so that seems to be the killer for them.

 

I think the top 100 record was the big factor used this year that led to some of these odd decisions.

After looking at all the complaints about seeding and bubble teams, the one stat that seems to best explain this committee's decisions is top 100 wins. It looks to me like they very heavily weighted the team's record versus the top 100 with no extra weighting for top 50 and/or top 25 wins.

 

For example, why Florida a 2 and UK a 4 ... Florida 16-4 vs top 100 and UK 12-7. Louisville 14-8 vs. top 100 which also puts them behind Florida.

 

How does UAB get in with no top 50 wins? They have 10 top 100 wins for an overall top 100 record of 10-7. Compare that to Colorado's 8-11 and Va. Tech's 8-8 and that seems to give insight into how this committee made decisions. Harvard only had 3 top 100 wins. St. Mary's had 2 top 100 wins. VCU is in because they had 9 top 100 wins.

 

Of course there are always exceptions as Georgia went 5-11 vs top 100. But Alabama only had 4 top 100 wins so that seems to be the killer for them.

 

I think the top 100 record was the big factor used this year that led to some of these odd decisions.

Very good points.

The look on Cal's face also says a bunch.

The mistake is thinking that the committee is measuring UK vs UF. They didn't. Had the two tied for first in the SEC then head-to-head is fine. UF won the regular season and should be rated higher.

 

Clyde, does the same hold true for UNC and Duke? By your logic above wouldn't it make sense that UNC would be at least on par with Duke since the Tar Heels won the ACC regular season? :idunno:

Duke was already a borderline #1 so it may have moved them up one slot from 5 to 4 (4th #1).

 

No way anyone can say UK is one of the top 8 teams in the country. 4 sounds right.

 

I really don't hear too many, if any, UK fans saying the Cats deserve a #2 seed. Can you point them ou? I love your posts Clyde, but here you seem to be tilting at windmills to "pass the time." :thumb:

I haven't read all all 250+ posts, so I apologize if this point is already brought up.

 

Kentucky started the weekend ranked #16 in the country. The secured 3 wins, 2 wins that left little doubt. They beat the #12 team in the country, looking good doing it, and won their conference tournament. So, you're telling me, they wouldn't have moved up at least a place or two?

 

Being the #4 seed in Ohio State's region (if I figure it right) means that they are the worst #4 team...making their ranking 16th? That's what doesn't make sense to me. The didn't improve their situation what so ever by even playing the tournament.

Then why do I keep seeing posts like the one below, and the other ones complaining about UK beating UF twice in the last couple weeks?

 

Most are posting as a way of showing that Florida does not deserve a 2 seed more than UK deserves a 2 seed. The losses to a 4 seed are evidence to that IMO.

I really don't hear too many, if any, UK fans saying the Cats deserve a #2 seed. Can you point them ou? I love your posts Clyde, but here you seem to be tilting at windmills to "pass the time." :thumb:

 

I didn't say anyone said that. I was pointing out that top 16 ie 4 seed sounds right vs , say, top 8.

I didn't say anyone said that. I was pointing out that top 16 ie 4 seed sounds right vs , say, top 8.

 

My apologies if I misinterpreted your post here Clyde.

 

I hope you can see my logic for interpreting it the way in which I did based on the other posts I commented upon.

 

I guess I've yet to see a single poster who even considered UK as Top 8 (i.e. a 2 seed) that you are stating (in a less than clear way to this poster). :thumb:

 

Why not also say that I don't think UK is a top 4 team either?

What 15 teams would any of you all put ahead of UK? I'm just interested.

 

Here's UK's resume btw...

 

RPI: 6

SOS: 8

Good Wins: Washington, Louisville, Notre Dame, Florida (twice), Vanderbilt

Bad Losses: Ole Miss, Arkansas

 

Recent Play: Won 8 of last 9 on route to SEC tournament championship.

And Florida's resume for comparison:

 

RPI: 8

SOS: 4

Good Wins: Kentucky, Kansas St., Vanderbilt (3 times)

Bad Losses: UCF, Miss. St., South Carolina, Jacksonville

From the looks of things, this was all set up before Sunday and the win over the gators didn't happen.

What 15 teams would any of you all put ahead of UK? I'm just interested.

 

Here's UK's resume btw...

 

RPI: 6

SOS: 8

Good Wins: Washington, Louisville, Notre Dame, Florida (twice), Vanderbilt

Bad Losses: Ole Miss, Arkansas

 

Recent Play: Won 8 of last 9 on route to SEC tournament championship.

 

I guess it depends on the concept of "right now" vs "the season."

 

Right now (last week or so) UK is very good.

 

The season measurement tells me they've had a strong year but not a killer year.

 

So, based on the regular season, I'd put the following in front of UK(again, not saying UK wouldn't beat some of these teams today):

 

Duke, UNC, Pitt, Syr, ND, Ohio State, KU, TX, Purdue, Wisconsin, Gators. I 'd then have to think long and hard about UL.

I guess it depends on the concept of "right now" vs "the season."

 

Right now (last week or so) UK is very good.

 

The season measurement tells me they've had a strong year but not a killer year.

 

So, based on the regular season, I'd put the following in front of UK(again, not saying UK wouldn't beat some of these teams today):

 

Duke, UNC, Pitt, Syr, ND, Ohio State, KU, TX, Purdue, Wisconsin, Gators. I 'd then have to think long and hard about UL.

 

See I would put UL ahead of UK as well.

 

I still don't see the Gators as 2 notches above UK. This is particularly glaring when looking at "big wins" category listed above. Florida had only Kansas State as a Good Win outside of Conference. Whereas UK won at UL and vs. Notre Dame. Those trump Florida's non-SEC performance IMO. But Florida trumps UK's in SEC performance so are the two a wash? :idunno:

I really don't hear too many, if any, UK fans saying the Cats deserve a #2 seed. Can you point them ou? I love your posts Clyde, but here you seem to be tilting at windmills to "pass the time." :thumb:

:clap: