Syracuse only had 2 road wins all year.Some of the reasoning for choosing teams and seeds are strange. HOW does Vanderbilt and Michigan State get in with a 19-14 record? And not only get in built a 8 or 9 seed? HOW does Vandy have the #1 SOS and Florida, who plays in the same conference, have the 8th strongest or Kentucky has the 23rd? MSU has a 6-9 record against the top 50..
My Orangemen had the 5-8 against the top 50, but three wins against the top 10 and the same record in the last 12 as MSU...using the committee's logic, the 'Cuse should be in. They had the same record last year and they made the Final Four..
I don't get their thinking...
Yes they should. If you only win games at home and other teams win on the road which is always tougher then that should count for more.My point is not that they deserve to be in. My point is that win as losses should count evenly. Wins or losses should not have more weigh than the other.
Depends. If your in the ACC, your win-loss ratio is completely different than in a conference like the SEC which has far less competition.My point is not that they deserve to be in. My point is that win as losses should count evenly. Wins or losses should not have more weigh than the other.
ACC vs. SEC, ACC teams get bonus points for being in their conference the way SEC teams do in football rankings.Wow! Several teams got screwed on seeding. No way UNC is a #1.
UCLA should have been a #1 or #2, not a #3.
Arizona should have been a #1.
Duke is not a #2....PERIOD! #3 at best
Now let's talk about Kentucky.
How does Kentucky get a #2 and not a #1 when they beat UNC, have less loses than UNC,
have less loses to unranked teams than UNC?