www.crackedsidewalks.com Open in urlscan Pro
216.239.32.21  Public Scan

Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

skip to main | skip to sidebar

"My rule was I wouldn't recruit a kid if he had grass in front of his house.
That's not my world. My world was a cracked sidewalk." —Al McGuire

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2022


PREDICTING THE TOP-16 REVEAL


Marquette was last included in the 2019 Top-16 Reveal
Screenshot from CBS Sports


This Saturday will bring the NCAA's official Top-16 Reveal. When even the
Selection Committee is doing bracketology, it means we're getting to the serious
part of the season. We decided to dig into the history of the Reveal, using all
of the data from the first five Reveals, including both NET and RPI data as both
were the relevant metrics of their time. First, here are the teams year by year,
in descending order from the Top Overall Seed at the Reveal to the 16th and
final Revealed team. The teams below the gap are teams that were ranked in the
Top-16 of the current metric at the time but were left out:


2021 Reveal NET 2020 Reveal NET 2019 Reveal NET 2018 Reveal RPI 2017 Reveal RPI
1 Gonzaga 2 Baylor 2 Duke 3 Virginia 1 Villanova 2 2 Baylor 1 Kansas 4 Tennessee
4 Villanova 2 Kansas 3 3 Michigan 3 Gonzaga 3 Virginia 1 Xavier 3 Baylor 1 4
Ohio State 7 San Diego State 1 Gonzaga 2 Purdue 9 Gonzaga 11 5 Illinois 4 Duke 6
Kentucky 5 Auburn 5 UNC 4 6 Villanova 9 Dayton 5 Michigan 6 Kansas 6 Florida
State 6 7 Alabama 10 Louisville 7 UNC 8 Duke 8 Louisville 5 8 Houston 5 West
Virginia 8 Michigan St 9 Cincinnati 11 Oregon 10 9 Virginia 6 Maryland 10 Purdue
11 Clemson 4 Arizona 9 10 West Virginia 17 Florida State 14 Kansas 18 Texas Tech
14 Virginia 14 11 Tennessee 11 Seton Hall 13 Houston 7 Michigan St 21 Florida 7
12 Oklahoma 20 Villanova 15 Marquette 21 UNC 13 Kentucky 12 13 Iowa 8 Auburn 16
Iowa State 13 Tennessee 10 Butler 8 14 Texas Tech 15 Oregon 19 Nevada 14 Ohio
State 22 West Virginia 36 15 Texas 21 Butler 11 Louisville 15 Arizona 15 UCLA 21
16 Missouri 34 Michigan St 12 Wisconsin 12 Oklahoma 19 Duke 17                  
      Colorado 12 Arizona 9 Virginia Tech 10 Rhode Island 7 Xavier 13   Loyola
Chi 13     Texas Tech 16 Nevada 12 Cincinnati 15   Colgate 14         Seton Hall
16 Creighton 16   USC 16                

Here are our key takeaways:


The Reveal Reinforces the Current Metric: The first thing that stands out is the
number of teams ranked in the top-16 of the RPI/NET that are also in the Top-16
Reveal. 67/80 (83.8%) teams in past reveals were in the top-16 of the current
metric. When you go outside the top-16, 78/80 (97.5%) were still in the top-22,
so it's rare for teams to show up below that ranking. In the instances teams
outside did show up, they were massive outliers in the closest alternate metric.
For RPI #36 West Virginia, given a 4-seed in 2017, they were ranked #3 in kenpom
at the time. For NET #34 Missouri, given a 4-seed in 2021, they were ranked #2
in RPI at the time. If you aren't in the top-22 of the current metric, you had
better be elite in the companion metric.

The Top Two Seeds Lines Are Top-11 Teams: This has happened without fail. There
have been a handful of double-digit teams to crack that top-8, but none lower
than 11th. Worth watching that NET as there are some outliers perceived to be
fighting for the 2-line. The Top-11 teams are also pretty safe when it comes to
inclusion. 52/55 (94.5%) teams ranked in the top-11 were included in the Reveal,
whereas just 15/25 (60%) of the teams from 12-16 were included. This calculus
played in when evaluating Villanova, Texas Tech, and Duke for the final 2-seed.


Only Elite Mid-Majors Need Apply: Only 10/80 (12.5%) teams from outside the
traditional Top-6 conferences have been included in the Reveal. 6/10 (66.7%)
were ranked in the top-5 of the current metric. The exceptions had immaculate
records, including 2017 Gonzaga (#11 in RPI, 25-0), 2018 Cincinnati (#11 in RPI,
22-2), 2019 Houston (#7 in NET, 22-1) and 2019 Nevada (#14 in NET, 22-1). If you
had 3+ losses outside the Top-6 leagues, you were left out. And obviously
Colgate in 2021, who was a COVID scheduling NET outlier.

Replacement Teams Are From Top-6 Leagues: There have been 13 teams from outside
the Top-16 of the current metric to be included and all of them came from one of
the traditional Top-6 leagues. Don't expect the Selection Committee to look to a
mid-major if they throw a curveball.

We have a little discussion on our selections for the Top-16 Reveal. In
accordance with past history, Gonzaga is the only team from outside the
traditional Top-6 leagues. 14/16 teams selected were also in the Top-16 of NET,
with the exceptions being #20 Wisconsin and #31 Providence. Here is commentary
on a line-by-line basis:

1-Seeds -- Gonzaga, Arizona, Auburn, Kansas: The first three seem clear. Gonzaga
is the top overall seed because despite the resume, their quality metrics are by
far the best in the field. Both Arizona and Auburn seem like obvious picks,
which left four teams for one spot. Kansas has the best average of Resume and
Metric rankings and leads the nation in Q1+2 wins, which allowed them to edge
out Baylor, Kentucky, and Purdue for the final 1-seed.

2-Seeds -- Baylor, Kentucky, Purdue, Villanova: The first three feel obvious and
would more likely show up on the top line than the line below. Villanova gets
the last 2-seed due to their #5 NET ranking and a better Resume+Metric Average
than any team below them.

3-Seeds -- Texas Tech, Duke, Tennessee, Wisconsin: Tech and Duke were considered
for the 2-line, but the metrics just didn't justify moving them up despite
excellent quality wins. Tennessee's win over Kentucky helped solidify their
selection here and while their Q1 isn't as good as some others, they have no
losses outside Q1A. Wisconsin was on our 4-line previously, but with their NET
moving up to 19 after the Indiana win, there is now precedent for them being
placed this high (2021 Oklahoma, 2019 Marquette, and 2018 Michigan State were
all ranked lower) and their 8 Q1 wins are second only to Baylor.

4-Seeds -- UCLA, Illinois, LSU, Providence: Both UCLA and Illinois seemed like
they had to be included. Both have the numbers and enough Q1 volume to warrant
inclusion without any truly bad losses. LSU does have a Q3 loss but we moved
them up because no one around them has a resume that is significantly better
enough without some serious blemishes. Providence sticks as the last team in.
While their NET ranking doesn't seem to warrant inclusion, their single digit
resume average is good enough that it seems likely they'll be included. PC fans
have long said their is no comparison to their resume, but I would point to 2017
West Virginia. While they had diametrically opposite resumes (WVU had monster
wins and narrow losses, PC has narrow wins and big losses), both excelled in the
metric that was not the NCAA's chosen of the day. On the team sheets, WVU had
the aforementioned kenpom rank of #3 while Providence has an average resume
metric of 8.5.


Also considered -- Alabama, Texas, Houston: The Selection Committee always
discusses a few teams that are just on the outside looking in. These three all
have pros and cons. Alabama has a brilliant top-end resume and SOS, but their
two Q3 losses and borderline metrics weren't good enough to put them in. Texas
has similar quality and is ranked #15 in the NET, but too much of their record
is puffed up by Q4 games. Houston has excellent numbers, but despite the #4 NET
(which would be the highest ever left out of the Reveal) they have zero Q1 wins,
zero wins over the field, and too many total losses to be included from outside
a power conference.


And last...Marquette: The Golden Eagles had a legitimate chance to get in this
discussion, but the loss to Butler and narrow win over Georgetown dropped their
NET from 24 to 32. Had they beat Butler and held their 26-point lead against the
Hoyas, they may have been able to get to the 4-line or at least been one of the
alternates considered, but instead they are heading in the other direction. For
now they hold on to our last 6-seed thanks to their Q1 wins, but it was a close
evaluation between them and St. Mary's (the Gaels' 2-6 Q1 record just wasn't
good enough). A win at Creighton so their Q1+2 record doesn't fall below .500
would be strongly advised.

Here's the entire S-Curve:


1-Seeds: 1-GONZAGA 2-ARIZONA 3-Auburn 4-Kansas


2-Seeds: 8-VILLANOVA 7-PURDUE 6-KENTUCKY 5-BAYLOR


3-Seeds: 9-Texas Tech 10-DUKE 11-Tennessee 12-Wisconsin


4-Seeds: 16-Providence 15-Lsu 14-Illinois 13-Ucla


5-Seeds: 17-Alabama 18-Texas 19-HOUSTON 20-Ohio State


6-Seeds: 24-Marquette 23-Michigan State 22-Usc 21-Connecticut


7-Seeds: 25-St. Mary's 26-Arkansas 27-COLORADO STATE 28-Boise State


8-Seeds: 32-Seton Hall 31-San Francisco 30-Iowa State 29-Xavier


9-Seeds: 33-Miami 34-MURRAY STATE 35-Wyoming 36-Tcu

10-Seeds: 40-Memphis 39-Notre Dame 38-Wake Forest 37-Iowa


11-Seeds: 41-Davidson 42-Creighton 43-Byu 44-Michigan 45-Kansas State 46-San
Diego State


12-Seeds: 50-IONA 49-NORTH TEXAS 48-DAYTON 47-LOYOLA CHICAGO


13-Seeds: 51-CHATTANOOGA 52-SOUTH DAKOTA STATE 53-NEW MEXICO STATE 54-TOLEDO


14-Seeds: 58-OAKLAND 57-WAGNER 56-TOWSON 55-VERMONT


15-Seeds: 59-PRINCETON 60-LIBERTY 61-UC IRVINE 62-MONTANA STATE


16-Seeds: 68-NICHOLLS 67-SOUTHERN 66-NORFOLK STATE 65-LONGWOOD 64-NAVY 63-SOUTH
ALABAMA


 

Last Four Byes: Notre Dame, Memphis, Davidson, Creighton


Last Four In: Byu, Michigan, Kansas State, San Diego State


First Four Out: Indiana, North Carolina, SMU, Rutgers


Next Four Out:  VCU, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Belmont





Multibid Leagues

Big East: 7

Big 10: 7

Big 12: 7

SEC: 6

ACC: 5

MWC: 4


WCC: 4


Pac-12: 3


American: 2

Atlantic-10: 2






Written by Alan Bykowski at 6:47 AM 0 comments  






TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2022


MARQUETTE'S QUADRANT BREAKDOWN


Marquette will try to avoid stepping on more rakes like the loss at Butler
 Image from The Simpsons | 20th Television


The bracket side of Cracked Sidewalks is preparing for a guest appearance on the
Delphi Bracketology podcast later tonight as well as the Top-16 Reveal, so
instead of digging deep into a topic, we'll talk a bit about Marquette's resume
by Quadrant, including what's left on the schedule before getting to the new
S-Curve. At this point, it's all about trying to not step on any more rakes.


Quadrant 1 (7-6), Remaining (1): at Creighton


Marquette is tied for third nationally in Quadrant 1 wins, behind only Baylor
(9) and Kansas (8). While the game at Creighton is the only Q1 opportunity left
on the schedule, the home game at Seton Hall could potentially move up to this
Quadrant as the Pirates are 34 in the NET and the home cut-off is 30. At the
other end, Providence could fall from Q1 to Q2 as the Friars sit exactly on the
Q1 cutline at 30. Regardless, this is a very strong number, particularly as 4 of
these wins are in the elite Q1A category.

Quadrant 2 (2-3), Remaining (1): at DePaul


The good news is that Marquette's two worst losses have moved up to this
Quadrant as Creighton and St. Bonaventure are currently in Q2B. The roadie at
DePaul is the only remaining Q2 game, though the Ole Miss win could move to this
category as the Rebels are at 108 with the neutral cut-off being 100. Creighton
is the game that seems most likely to fall out of this category, the Jays are 70
and the cutoff is 75.

Quadrant 3 (3-0), Remaining (2): vs Butler, vs St. John's

Marquette is solid here, with the only worry being a game from Q2 dropping to
this range. Win at home and hope nothing falls so the resume doesn't have any
bad losses.

Quadrant 4 (4-0), Remaining (1): vs Georgetown 

It's rare to play a Q4 game in Big East play, but here come the Hoyas. None of
Marquette's current Q4 games look likely to move up, and Georgetown certainly
doesn't seem to show any indications of improving by the 55 spots they would
need to reach Q3 territory. The positive in this quadrant is there are no
sub-300 games, which has helped give Marquette the #2 ranked Strength of
Schedule nationally, which factored into us placing them on the 6 line this
week.


1-Seeds: 1-GONZAGA 2-ARIZONA 3-Auburn 4-KENTUCKY


2-Seeds: 8-DUKE 7-PURDUE 6-BAYLOR 5-Kansas


3-Seeds: 9-VILLANOVA 10-Texas Tech 11-Tennessee 12-Ucla


4-Seeds: 16-HOUSTON 15-Providence 14-Wisconsin 13-Illinois


5-Seeds: 17-Lsu 18-Alabama 19-Michigan St 20-Ohio St


6-Seeds: 24-Xavier 23-Marquette 22-Connecticut 21-Texas


7-Seeds: 25-Arkansas 26-St. Mary's 27-Usc 28-Colorado St


8-Seeds: 32-Iowa 31-Boise St 30-WYOMING 29-Seton Hall


9-Seeds: 33-Tcu 34-MURRAY ST 35-San Francisco 36-Wake Forest


10-Seeds: 40-North Carolina 39-Notre Dame 38-Miami 37-Iowa St


11-Seeds: 41-Indiana 42-Oklahoma 43-Creighton 44-Memphis 45-Byu 46-Oregon


12-Seeds: 50-IONA 49-NORTH TEXAS 48-DAYTON 47-LOYOLA CHICAGO


13-Seeds: 51-CHATTANOOGA 52-SOUTH DAKOTA ST 53-TOLEDO 54-NEW MEXICO ST


14-Seeds: 58-OAKLAND 57-WAGNER 56-TOWSON 55-VERMONT


15-Seeds: 59-LIBERTY 60-UC IRVINE 61-PRINCETON 62-MONTANA ST


16-Seeds: 68-NICHOLLS ST 67-SOUTHERN 66-GARDNER WEBB 65-NORFOLK ST 64-NAVY
63-SOUTH ALABAMA


 

Last Four Byes: Notre Dame, North Carolina, Indiana, Oklahoma


Last Four In: Creighton, Memphis, BYU, Oregon


First Four Out: San Diego State, Kansas State, Davidson, Belmont


Next Four Out: Michigan, West Virginia, SMU, Rutgers

Also Considered: Florida, Mississippi St, Virginia Tech, VCU, St. Louis, UAB,
Virginia, Washington St, Texas A&M, Utah St, Santa Clara, Cincinnati









Written by Alan Bykowski at 1:14 PM 0 comments  






MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2022


A BAD WEEK TO BE SURE, BUT LET'S TAKE IT IN STRIDE



Well, the joys of college basketball generally and #mubb specifically is they
zig when we zag. The team had a rough week losing one game that was somewhat
expected and another that was definitely unexpected. So we talk about the week
in total and especially everyone taking their foot off the gas against Butler.
We also spend time talking about the defense and what is driving the lagging
performance of late. We then look ahead to the week to come and predict whether
it will bring success or more pain. As always, enjoy!
https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/t5btmp/ScrambledEggs_Editted_021322.mp3



Written by Phil Bush at 9:41 AM 0 comments  






FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2022


BIG EAST WIN TARGETS


Justin, how many wins would it take to lock Marquette into the NCAA field?
 Photo by Justin Gash | AP Sports


The Big East has 7 teams fighting for bids right now. So what do they need to do
in order for all 7 to get in, and is there any chance one of the outsiders could
crack the field? Bear in mind any of these teams could probably get to Dayton
with one fewer win than I'm presenting, but we are talking lock status, Let's
break them down in order of the standings:

Providence Friars (20-2/10-1) -- 1 win:  The Friars might be safe already, but
the strength of their resume is the lack of losses, and if they suddenly had
losses to DePaul and Butler (among others) on the resume, the resume metrics
that are propping them up would drop quickly. I expect they could probably lose
out and still get into Dayton, but they need at least one more to be certain.

Villanova Wildcats (18-6/11-3) -- 1 win: Similar to Providence, Villanova is
probably safe, but if they lose out their 18-13 record would be the kind that
gets a lot more scrutiny. Get one more win and they are completely secure.

Connecticut Huskies (16-6/7-4) -- 4 wins: UConn needed that win against
Marquette as it's only their third win over a team in the projected field (two
against Marquette and a beauty over Auburn). They still need to add a couple
notches on the belt. This feels like a high number for a team with UConn's
metrics, but their win over Marquette was only their third against a team in the
field (MU twice & Auburn) and they have three games against teams unlikely to
get in. While 3 wins would probably be enough considering the soft bubble, it
would take 20 wins for UConn to feel completely safe on Selection Sunday.

Marquette Golden Eagles (16-8/8-5) -- 3 wins: Marquette is similar to Villanova
in that 18 is just a very risky number of wins to bring to the Selection
Committee. They have enough quality wins and the metrics are fine, so it's just
a matter of not stepping on too many rakes before Selection Sunday. The
remaining schedule should mean a comfortable finish, but Marquette fans jaded by
major swoons each of the past 3 years could be forgiven for not feeling that
comfort just yet.



Creighton Blue Jays (14-8/6-5) -- 6 wins: While 5 might do it, anything less
than 6-2 down the stretch will have them sweating in Omaha. The plus side is
they have some fantastic wins and despite the shaky metrics; their three Q1A
wins are the types of wins that get poor-metric teams into Dayton (see 2019
Arizona State, 2019 St. Johns, and 2021 Wichita State). Getting 6 more wins
would mean adding at least 2 more over teams in the field. It's an uphill climb,
but the opportunity is there.

Xavier Musketeers (16-7/6-6) -- 4 wins: Xavier's once sterling resume is
starting to look iffy. They haven't beat a top-75 NET team since December 18.
They only have wins over two teams we can confidently put in the field (Ohio
State and Marquette, Creighton is very bubbly). As long as they can win the
games they are supposed to down the stretch, they should be okay, but as we saw
at Cintas against DePaul, that hasn't been an easy task of late.


Seton Hall Pirates (15-7/6-6) -- 3 wins: While this would put Seton Hall in that
"not hitting 19" category we discussed above, their cancelled games mean 18 wins
would keep them out of Dayton. Picking up one more quality win (Xavier,
Villanova, or UConn all qualify) would really help their case, but the Pirates
are still in pretty good shape as long as they don't collapse.

St. John's Red Storm (13-10/5-7) -- 7 wins: The good news for St. John's is that
they can get in the field without needing to cut down nets at MSG. The bad news
is they probably can't take another loss and feel secure in that. Their
miserable non-conference made it really difficult to get an at-large, but if
they win out, they would add 4-5 wins over teams in the field, including two
away from home. There's no margin for error, but with their NCSOS they really
can't afford to be close to the bubble because when your best non-con win is
Colgate, the Selection Committee won't view your resume favorably.

DePaul Blue, Blue, Blue Demons (12-10/3-9) -- 8 wins: It's St. John's all over.
If DePaul wins out, they could get an at-large. There isn't much in the non-con
to write home about, but they didn't take any terrible losses there either. The
wins over Seton Hall and Xavier are both solid and a winning record in this
league with what would be required to win out would have them dancing in
Chicago. It's a virtual impossibility, but for now they can cling to virtual
reality.


Butler Bulldogs, Georgetown Hoyas -- 4 wins (at MSG): Both teams have amassed
too many losses already to have any real case for the Selection Committee. It
would take a repeat of Patrick Ewing's 2021 run for either to hear their name
called.


Here's the updated S-Curve:


1-Seeds: 1-GONZAGA 2-Auburn 3-Kansas 4-ARIZONA


2-Seeds: 8-HOUSTON 7-KENTUCKY 6-PURDUE 5-BAYLOR


3-Seeds: 9-VILLANOVA 10-DUKE 11-Wisconsin 12-Texas Tech


4-Seeds: 16-Providence 15-Ucla 14-Illinois 13-Tennessee


5-Seeds: 17-Texas 18-Marquette 19-Lsu 20-Alabama


6-Seeds: 24-Michigan St 23-St. Mary's 22-Arkansas 21-Ohio St


7-Seeds: 25-Connecticut 26-Xavier 27-Seton Hall 28-Indiana


8-Seeds: 32-Usc 31-Tcu 30-Boise St 29-Iowa St


9-Seeds: 33-Wake Forest 34-Iowa 35-WYOMING 36-Colorado St


10-Seeds: 40-Byu 39-LOYOLA CHICAGO 38-Davidson 37-MURRAY ST


11-Seeds: 41-West Virginia 42-Oklahoma 43-San Francisco 44-Oregon 45-Notre Dame


12-Seeds: 50-IONA 49-UAB 48-ST. LOUIS 47-Belmont 46-Creighton


13-Seeds: 51-CHATTANOOGA 52-NEW MEXICO ST 53-SOUTH DAKOTA ST 54-TOLEDO


14-Seeds: 58-OAKLAND 57-WAGNER 56-TOWSON 55-VERMONT


15-Seeds: 59-LIBERTY 60-UC IRVINE 61-MONTANA ST 62-PRINCETON


16-Seeds: 68-NICHOLLS ST 67-TEXAS SOUTHERN 66-GARDNER WEBB 65-NORFOLK ST
64-SOUTH ALABAMA 63-NAVY


 

First Four Out: Michigan, Miami, SMU, San Diego St


Next Four Out: North Carolina, VCU, Florida, North Texas





Multi-bid Leagues

Big 12: 8

Big East: 7

Big 10: 7

SEC: 6

Pac-12: 4


WCC: 4

ACC:  3


MWC: 3


A-10: 2

OVC: 2






Written by Alan Bykowski at 5:07 AM 0 comments  






THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2022


BPI SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM TEAM SHEETS




Might BPI cost Creighton a NCAA bid?
 Photo by Mitchell Layton | Getty Images




While playing around on with Team Sheets today, I decided to dig into ESPN's
Basketball Power Index (BPI). Of the metrics included on the official NCAA Team
Sheets, only BPI is owned by a media company. The Selection Committee uses
averages of the metrics on the Team Sheets when it comes to seeding and
selection, so what numbers are on there matters.

There are two types of metrics on the NCAA Team Sheets. Resume metrics look at
wins and losses, similar to the old RPI. Quality metrics look at team
efficiency, so the more you score and fewer you allow, the better you do. The
easiest way to understand the difference is to look at a team like Providence,
who has a great record, and thus excellent resume metrics (5.0 average) but with
blowout losses and narrow win margins, comparably low quality metrics (36.7
average). BPI is one of those quality metrics, along with kenpom and Sagarin.

What is galling to some fans is that Mountain West teams in particular (and
Marquette, for fans of this blog) fares far worse in BPI than they do the other
quality metrics. While systems using different calculations will always have
disparities, when one of those systems belongs to a media company that has
contracts to broadcast some teams and not others, those disparities will be the
ones that stand out the most.

I went through the top-100 teams in the NET and picked out every team where the
BPI rank was 10 spots greater or worse than the other two quality metrics. I
then looked at both the change made by the BPI in terms of how far it moved the
team's quality average and also looked at who the team's conference has their
media rights with. Here are the results, with teams in red being teams ranked
worse by BPI and teams in green being ranked better by BPI:



Team BPI KP SAG AVG Change TV Marquette 43 24 31 32.7 -5.2 Fox Wyoming 91 36 69
65.3 -12.8 Fox Boise State 56 29 38 41.0 -7.5 Fox Colorado State 86 50 40 58.7
-13.7 Fox Virginia Tech 21 35 35 30.3 5.3 ESPN Utah State 74 31 53 52.7 -10.7
Fox Belmont 42 55 60 52.3 5.2 ESPN BYU 80 46 42 56.0 -12.0 ESPN Mississippi St
27 49 45 40.3 6.7 ESPN Chattanooga 57 68 88 71.0 7.0 ESPN Toledo 62 72 75 69.7
3.8 ESPN Cincinnati 88 78 78 81.3 -3.3 ESPN Texas A&M 60 76 80 72.0 6.0 ESPN
Creighton 94 77 64 78.3 -7.8 Fox New Mexico St 127 88 89 101.3 -12.8 ESPN
Clemson 53 67 70 63.3 5.2 ESPN Richmond 66 86 81 77.7 5.8 ESPN Stanford 100 90
87 92.3 -3.8 Pac-12 Colorado 120 99 79 99.3 -10.3 Pac-12 Wagner 90 113 126 109.7
9.8 ESPN+ Liberty 82 98 110 96.7 7.3 ESPN+

It seems noteworthy that every single team who benefits more from BPI is in a
league that has a contract with ESPN. It also seems noteworthy that 8 of the 11
teams that are harmed most by BPI have their primary contracts with networks
other than ESPN. The only potential at-large team that is harmed by the BPI is
BYU. Every other viable at-large candidate that is harmed is with Fox and every
viable at-large candidate that is helped is with ESPN.


How much impact might this have? In the case of a team like Marquette or
Belmont, it could move them up or down one seed line. For teams like Colorado
State or Wyoming, it could be 2-3 seed lines and possibly even keep them out of
the tournament altogether. For a team currently on the bubble, like the Big
East's Creighton, BPI could be the reason they miss the NCAA Tournament.
Considering the value of NCAA Tournament Credits, this is hugely impactful,
particularly for leagues that rely on College Basketball and the NCAA Tournament
for significant portions of their revenue.


Maybe it's coincidence. Maybe this is an outlier year. However this at the bare
minimum has the appearance of potential impropriety. It is certainly plausible
that the creators of BPI have found a way to weight their metric to help
programs that have contracts with their company.

I don't know what goes into all the metrics present on the Team Sheets. Maybe
BPI is on the up-and-up and this is just a coincidence. But if the NCAA values
transparency, honesty, and good faith, they should remove BPI from the Team
Sheets immediately. Media companies should not be able to put their fingers on
the scales of the NCAA Selection, and it certainly seems plausible that's
exactly what's going on with the BPI.






Written by Alan Bykowski at 3:32 PM 0 comments  






TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 08, 2022


LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION


Andrew Rowsey wasn't enchanted with the road atmosphere in 2017
 Photo by Kevin C. Cox | Getty Images


The Top-16 reveal is less than 2 weeks away and we will have a bracket in a
little over a month. Before we get to the S-Curve, let's think about location.
Knowing the seven locations Marquette could open NCAA play at (as host they
cannot play at Fiserv Forum) we decided to look at which locations are most
likely, which are most desirable, and what circumstances would bring Marquette
to one of those locations.

Placement occurs by assigning the seeds in order of their most desired location.
So the top overall seed gets the spot closest to their campus, the second
overall seed gets the closest to their campus, and it continues like this based
on available spots. Only two seeded teams (top-4 seeds) can play at each
location, so once the most desirable spots are filled, teams are farmed out
further away from home. We're going to work under the assumption that Marquette
will go no higher than a 2-seed and no lower than an 8-seed, assuming the bottom
completely falls out. In addition, as Marquette is hosting, the NCAA tries to
keep teams from playing games on the same day they host, meaning Marquette is
most likely to play at one of the Thursday/Saturday sites, though this is not a
hard and fast rule.


1) Buffalo, NY -- KeyBank Center (Thursday/Saturday)

Most Likely Seeds: Providence


Desirability Rank: 2


I feel that Buffalo is the most likely destination for Marquette. This is also a
highly desirable spot. First, Providence is the only likely seeded team that has
Buffalo as first choice, so it allows Big East fans to team up. It's also the
third closest to Milwaukee, so not terrible from a travel perspective. Also, as
Buffalo will be one of the least desirable for other fanbases, it seems likely
there won't be any significant road environment. This site is most likely going
to have a pair of 4-seeds as their marquee teams, which would mean 50% of the
teams on the 4/5 lines playing here, hence why it's our #1 on the list.
Marquette would most likely land here as one of the last 4-seeds or as a 5-seed
playing into a team like Tennessee or Michigan State.


2) Portland, OR -- Moda Center (Thursday/Saturday)

Most Likely Seeds: Gonzaga

Desirability Rank: 3


Gonzaga being here is a lock. Chisel it in stone now. However, as this location
is far away from almost everyone else, there's a good chance if Marquette went
here it would be as a 4-seed. No one else in the mix for a 5/6 is particularly
close, so a road environment seems unlikely (though a 4 playing a hypothetical
12-seed Oregon in round two could suck). It's also possible a collapse could
have Marquette in an 8/9 game playing into Gonzaga, but considering the
remaining schedule that seems unlikely.


3) Pittsburgh, PA -- PPG Paints Arena (Friday/Sunday)

Most Likely Seeds: Villanova 

Desirability Rank: 1


If your immediate thought is "why a Friday/Sunday spot instead of the other
Thursday/Saturdays" the reason is because the other Thursday/Saturday sites will
almost certainly both include two teams on the top-2 seed lines, and given the
remaining schedule Marquette is unlikely to fall to the 7/8 lines. This would be
an awesome place to play because it's the second closest to campus and will
likely have a large Big East contingent as Villanova is likely to land here.
Marquette would likely come here if they could get up to the 13th or better
overall seed (3/4 lines) or as a 5/6 playing into one of those teams. That said,
this seems less likely than the first two because it's the same days Fiserv is
hosting.


4) Greenville, SC -- Bon Secours Wellness Arena (Friday/Sunday)

Most Likely Seeds: Auburn, Duke 

Desirability Rank: 4


Auburn is a virtual lock to land here, and while there are a number of teams for
whom this might be the closest remaining spot when their number comes up, it
feels like Duke will be here. That means almost certain road crowds in at least
one, if not both opening weekend games. But on the upside, the weather should be
nice and having a chance to end Coach K's career could be an eternal Trivial
Pursuit answer we'd never forget. Marquette would only land here if they were in
the 6-8 seed range. Like Pittsburgh, I don't think this is highly likely because
Fiserv hosts the same day.


5) Indianapolis, IN -- Gainbridge Fieldhouse (Thursday/Saturday)

Most Likely Seeds: Purdue, Kentucky 

Desirability Rank: 5


I feel like this location screams "it's a trap" for Marquette fans. Yes, it is
the closest to Marquette's campus, but both Purdue and Kentucky (currently
projected as top-two seeds) also have this as first choice. That means if
Marquette lands here, they are most likely a 6-seed at best and will have to
face one of those monster front courts to advance. I know it's close, but for me
Indy is a hard pass as it likely means Marquette has fallen to the 7/8 lines.


6) Fort Worth, TX -- Dickies Arena (Thursday/Saturday)

Most Likely Seeds: Kansas, Baylor, Houston 

Desirability Rank: 6

With apologies to Joe McCann, this is not the kind of spot Marquette should be
hoping for. There are a ton of teams fighting for seeding (Texas Tech and Texas
also have this as option #1) that would create a road environment no matter
which region Marquette was in. In addition, the heavy Big 12 contingent might
root against Shaka Smart's team no matter the circumstance. Add in that
Marquette only comes here as a 7/8 seed and this is one location I'm glad feels
unlikely.


7) San Diego, CA -- Viejas Arena (Friday/Sunday)

Most Likely Seeds: Arizona, UCLA

Desirability Rank: 4


I don't think it's very likely Marquette will play into UCLA since we saw them
in the regular season (same goes for Illinois) so the only likely way we land
here is playing into Arizona, which means most likely a 7/8 seed. If the
Wildcats slip back to a 3, this location becomes more likely. It would also
feature likely road environments, but the upside is a weekend in San Diego, and
after a long winter that's always a win. Decent location, but I would be
surprised if it happens, especially as it's on the same days Fiserv hosts.

Let's get to the updated S-Curve:




1-Seeds: 1-GONZAGA 2-AUBURN 3-PURDUE 4-KANSAS


2-Seeds: 8-HOUSTON 7-Kentucky 6-ARIZONA 5-Baylor


3-Seeds: 9-VILLANOVA 10-Texas Tech 11-Duke 12-Wisconsin


4-Seeds: 16-Providence 15-Tennessee 14-Ucla 13-Illinois


5-Seeds: 17-Marquette 18-Michigan State 19-Ohio State 20-Alabama


6-Seeds: 24-Iowa State 23-Xavier 22-St. Mary's 21-Texas


7-Seeds: 25-Connecticut 26-Lsu 27-Arkansas 28-WYOMING


8-Seeds: 32-MURRAY STATE 31-Colorado State 30-Boise State 29-Usc


9-Seeds: 33-Seton Hall 34-Indiana 35-Tcu 36-LOYOLA CHICAGO


10-Seeds: 40-Byu 39-Iowa 38-DAVIDSON 37-San Francisco


11-Seeds: 41-Oregon 42-Notre Dame 43-Creighton 44-Wake Forest


12-Seeds: 50-IONA 49-UAB 48-West Virginia 47-Kansas State 46-Belmont 45-Miami


13-Seeds: 51-CHATTANOOGA 52-NEW MEXICO STATE 53-TOLEDO 54-WAGNER

14-Seeds: 58-TOWSON 57-SOUTH DAKOTA STATE 56-OAKLAND 55-VERMONT

15-Seeds: 59-PRINCETON 60-SOUTH ALABAMA 61-LIBERTY 62-MONTANA STATE


16-Seeds: 68-NICHOLLS STATE 67-NORFOLK STATE 66-TEXAS SOUTHERN 65-LONGWOOD
64-NAVY 63-UC IRVINE

 

Last Four Byes: Oregon, Notre Dame, Creighton, Wake Forest


Last Four In: Miami, Belmont, Kansas State, West Virginia


First Four Out: Oklahoma, San Diego State, VCU, Stanford


Next Four Out: North Carolina, Florida, Virginia, Mississippi State





Multibid Leagues

Big 12: 8

Big East: 7

Big 10: 7

SEC:6

ACC: 4

Pac-12: 4


WCC: 4

MWC: 3

OVC: 2






Written by Alan Bykowski at 3:00 PM 0 comments  





Older Posts Home

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


MARQUETTE ATHLETICS WIKI


Marquette Athletics Wiki

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




CRACKED SIDEWALKS ARCHIVE

 * ▼  2022 (18)
   * ▼  February (10)
     * Predicting the Top-16 Reveal
     * Marquette's Quadrant Breakdown
     * A bad week to be sure, but let's take it in stride
     * Big East Win Targets
     * BPI Should be Removed from Team Sheets
     * Location, Location, Location
     * Oh nothing, just a casual sweep of a top 15 progra...
     * Weekend Viewing Guide
     * Non-Con Check In
     * It was a good run, let's start another
   * ►  January (8)

 * ►  2021 (81)
   * ►  December (5)
   * ►  November (11)
   * ►  October (13)
   * ►  September (1)
   * ►  August (1)
   * ►  July (2)
   * ►  June (2)
   * ►  May (1)
   * ►  April (10)
   * ►  March (23)
   * ►  February (6)
   * ►  January (6)

 * ►  2020 (71)
   * ►  December (7)
   * ►  November (19)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  July (1)
   * ►  June (2)
   * ►  April (3)
   * ►  March (8)
   * ►  February (20)
   * ►  January (10)

 * ►  2019 (101)
   * ►  December (10)
   * ►  November (6)
   * ►  October (14)
   * ►  September (11)
   * ►  August (5)
   * ►  July (1)
   * ►  June (3)
   * ►  May (5)
   * ►  April (5)
   * ►  March (18)
   * ►  February (12)
   * ►  January (11)

 * ►  2018 (64)
   * ►  December (10)
   * ►  November (4)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (7)
   * ►  August (9)
   * ►  June (4)
   * ►  May (4)
   * ►  April (7)
   * ►  March (7)
   * ►  February (5)
   * ►  January (6)

 * ►  2017 (39)
   * ►  December (4)
   * ►  November (3)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (3)
   * ►  July (1)
   * ►  June (2)
   * ►  May (1)
   * ►  April (1)
   * ►  March (9)
   * ►  February (6)
   * ►  January (8)

 * ►  2016 (52)
   * ►  December (9)
   * ►  November (6)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (1)
   * ►  July (3)
   * ►  June (1)
   * ►  May (2)
   * ►  April (1)
   * ►  March (9)
   * ►  February (7)
   * ►  January (12)

 * ►  2015 (81)
   * ►  December (8)
   * ►  November (11)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  August (1)
   * ►  July (2)
   * ►  June (1)
   * ►  May (2)
   * ►  April (37)
   * ►  March (6)
   * ►  February (3)
   * ►  January (9)

 * ►  2014 (72)
   * ►  December (12)
   * ►  November (3)
   * ►  October (3)
   * ►  September (2)
   * ►  August (7)
   * ►  July (3)
   * ►  April (5)
   * ►  March (16)
   * ►  February (6)
   * ►  January (15)

 * ►  2013 (44)
   * ►  December (4)
   * ►  November (5)
   * ►  October (2)
   * ►  September (1)
   * ►  June (1)
   * ►  April (5)
   * ►  March (18)
   * ►  February (4)
   * ►  January (4)

 * ►  2012 (176)
   * ►  December (17)
   * ►  November (16)
   * ►  October (7)
   * ►  September (7)
   * ►  August (8)
   * ►  July (13)
   * ►  June (9)
   * ►  May (5)
   * ►  April (13)
   * ►  March (40)
   * ►  February (18)
   * ►  January (23)

 * ►  2011 (259)
   * ►  December (14)
   * ►  November (27)
   * ►  October (18)
   * ►  September (15)
   * ►  August (5)
   * ►  July (12)
   * ►  June (12)
   * ►  May (16)
   * ►  April (10)
   * ►  March (56)
   * ►  February (42)
   * ►  January (32)

 * ►  2010 (211)
   * ►  December (17)
   * ►  November (31)
   * ►  October (20)
   * ►  September (14)
   * ►  August (4)
   * ►  July (8)
   * ►  June (9)
   * ►  May (5)
   * ►  April (7)
   * ►  March (45)
   * ►  February (32)
   * ►  January (19)

 * ►  2009 (257)
   * ►  December (21)
   * ►  November (39)
   * ►  October (27)
   * ►  September (10)
   * ►  August (5)
   * ►  July (9)
   * ►  June (6)
   * ►  May (7)
   * ►  April (10)
   * ►  March (44)
   * ►  February (47)
   * ►  January (32)

 * ►  2008 (363)
   * ►  December (41)
   * ►  November (42)
   * ►  October (21)
   * ►  September (14)
   * ►  August (13)
   * ►  July (19)
   * ►  June (13)
   * ►  May (19)
   * ►  April (48)
   * ►  March (49)
   * ►  February (41)
   * ►  January (43)

 * ►  2007 (521)
   * ►  December (37)
   * ►  November (41)
   * ►  October (45)
   * ►  September (28)
   * ►  August (29)
   * ►  July (30)
   * ►  June (35)
   * ►  May (26)
   * ►  April (35)
   * ►  March (91)
   * ►  February (65)
   * ►  January (59)

 * ►  2006 (399)
   * ►  December (52)
   * ►  November (59)
   * ►  October (39)
   * ►  September (26)
   * ►  August (14)
   * ►  July (14)
   * ►  June (21)
   * ►  May (20)
   * ►  April (21)
   * ►  March (60)
   * ►  February (39)
   * ►  January (34)

 * ►  2005 (294)
   * ►  December (24)
   * ►  November (37)
   * ►  October (17)
   * ►  September (9)
   * ►  August (18)
   * ►  July (20)
   * ►  June (31)
   * ►  May (51)
   * ►  April (15)
   * ►  March (22)
   * ►  February (39)
   * ►  January (11)




CONTACT

 * Tim Blair
 * Kevin Buckley
 * Rob Lowe


 
Diese Website verwendet Cookies von Google, um Dienste anzubieten und Zugriffe
zu analysieren. Deine IP-Adresse und dein User-Agent werden zusammen mit
Messwerten zur Leistung und Sicherheit für Google freigegeben. So können
Nutzungsstatistiken generiert, Missbrauchsfälle erkannt und behoben und die
Qualität des Dienstes gewährleistet werden.Weitere InformationenOk