2024 Bracketology / Selection Show

[OrangeXtreme]

I don't remember the selection show ever being quite that late. Usually it's at 9pm I thought? With the late start to the ACC semifinal, I better upgrade my nap schedule for the weekend.

Women at 9, Men at 9:30.

 

[fieldystick]

I don't remember the selection show ever being quite that late. Usually it's at 9pm I thought? With the late start to the ACC semifinal, I better upgrade my nap schedule for the weekend.

This is from the last page of conference tourney schedule doc from last season. It was 9:30 last year too.

 

[Powellfan]

This is from the last page of conference tourney schedule doc from last season. It was 9:30 last year too.

View attachment 240626

Ha, with Syracuse out of it last year, I don't think I watched!

 

[fieldystick]

NCAA Bracketology: Will Seeding or Selection be Hardest?

Just five steps — with varying degrees of difficulty — are required to make the committee’s toughest task seeding rather than selection.

www.usalacrosse.com

Stevens:

Hempstead, N.Y.

(1) Notre Dame vs. METRO ATLANTIC/Sacred Heart-AMERICA EAST/Albany
(8) Penn State vs. IVY/Cornell

Towson, Md.

(5) BIG EAST/Denver vs. ATLANTIC SUN/Utah
(4) Duke vs. COASTAL/Towson

Hempstead, N.Y.

(3) Syracuse vs. PATRIOT/Army
(6) Virginia vs. Georgetown

Towson, Md.

(7) Maryland vs. Yale
(2) BIG TEN/Johns Hopkins vs. ATLANTIC 10/Saint Joseph’s

Last three included: Penn State, Yale, Georgetown
First three on the outside: Penn, Princeton, Michigan
--

He went with the 8/9 flip from me that I predicted but not the 3/4 flip. So he also has this thread's un-favored current draw for Syracuse.

 

[nyclax]

when you'd rather be the 5 seed than the 2 seed, let alone the 3, you know bracket integrity is out the window. the flight rule is annoying most years but this year it could really really mess things up...

 

[JeremyCuse]

when you'd rather be the 5 seed than the 2 seed, let alone the 3, you know bracket integrity is out the window. the flight rule is annoying most years but this year it could really really mess things up...

The flight thing is way out of whack and has been for a while, it's not 1991, zero reason for this to still be happening. If your gonna use a bracket system and rank teams the opponents should correlate back. The #3 seed in the ncaa bball tournament isn't playing the #9 seed in the 1st round.

 

[fieldystick]

when you'd rather be the 5 seed than the 2 seed, let alone the 3, you know bracket integrity is out the window. the flight rule is annoying most years but this year it could really really mess things up...

I think it will resolve itself. Patience.

 

[fieldystick]

The flight thing is way out of whack and has been for a while, it's not 1991, zero reason for this to still be happening. If your gonna use a bracket system and rank teams the opponents should correlate back. The #3 seed in the ncaa bball tournament isn't playing the #9 seed in the 1st round.

Army is going to be consensus 12th right now, not 9th, but yeah.

Anyone who has Army as 9th is letting their personal opinion of how good that team is bleed into their evaluation of the data.
-

This is not going to be a popular statement here, but I'm going to say it anyway:

It's clear that Patrick Stevens does not think Syracuse is the 3rd best team in the country. I read the poll threads, and I know this board's reaction to his consistently lower than consensus ranking of the team. I have not been nearly as harsh on my evaluation of Syracuse in my own personal rankings - which having nothing to do with my brackets and do not factor in at all - but I also do not think Syracuse is actually the 3rd best team in the country. Take that for what it's worth, which is absolutely nothing. But if Stevens and I are both ignoring "eye test" (correctly) in making our bracket with respect to Syracuse, the same must apply to Army.

Syracuse deserves either the 2 or 3 seed currently on the basis of their extremely high quality wins, irrespective what I think or anyone else thinks of the actual quality of the team and its play on the field. If any bracket has the top 3 as anything other than ND/JHU/SU or ND/SU/JHU currently, I really question their methodology of how they are arriving where they are and whether they are letting their own opinion of how good certain teams are bleed into that.

 

[nyclax]

I think it will resolve itself. Patience.

you think? i've gamed it out and isn't it going to be tough for denver to fall lower than the 6 seed if they win their big east semifinal? we agree that at 5 they will still get a cake matchup due to geography, 6 is questionable but i still lean toward them getting utah or air force, whoever it is. so we need to get them to the 7 seed basically if they lose the big east semi, all bets are off. but if they win that and then lose to georgetown in the final they seem to be set up pretty well for a top 6 at worst even if virginia leapfrogs them with a win over ND. no?

 

[FloridaCuse]

Army is going to be consensus 12th right now, not 9th, but yeah.

Anyone who has Army as 9th is letting their personal opinion of how good that team is bleed into their evaluation of the data.
-

This is not going to be a popular statement here, but I'm going to say it anyway:

It's clear that Patrick Stevens does not think Syracuse is the 3rd best team in the country. I read the poll threads, and I know this board's reaction to his consistently lower than consensus ranking of the team. I have not been nearly as harsh on my evaluation of Syracuse in my own personal rankings - which having nothing to do with my brackets and do not factor in at all - but I also do not think Syracuse is actually the 3rd best team in the country. Take that for what it's worth, which is absolutely nothing. But if Stevens and I are both ignoring "eye test" (correctly) in making our bracket with respect to Syracuse, the same must apply to Army.

Syracuse deserves either the 2 or 3 seed currently on the basis of their extremely high quality wins, irrespective what I think or anyone else thinks of the actual quality of the team and its play on the field. If any bracket has the top 3 as anything other than ND/JHU/SU or ND/SU/JHU currently, I really question their methodology of how they are arriving where they are and whether they are letting their own opinion of how good certain teams are bleed into that.

Clearly Stevens thinks that Syracuse is only the 6th best team right now, as states openly when he ranks them in his USA Lacrosse Top 20. I assume his bracketology, as is yours, is a prediction of what the committee would do right now, based soley on the data. But as to your "eye test" of Syracuse, would it be different if Syracuse had won those 3 OT games and would be 14-1 instead of 11-4? Is the team on an "eye test" basis really that different if Michael Leo hadn't just barely hit the goal mouth in OT in the Maryland game, if Christian Mule's open net long shot in OT of the Army game had gone in instead of missing, and if Syracuse would have scored a goal in one of the 2 OTs vs Cornell (or the official hadn't thrown Pat March out of the game)? Really that different? I bet if all 3 had happened you'd view Syracuse differently and probably had them at least as #2 on an "eye test" basis.

 

[orangecuse]

Clearly Stevens thinks that Syracuse is only the 6th best team right now, as states openly when he ranks them in his USA Lacrosse Top 20. I assume his bracketology, as is yours, is a prediction of what the committee would do right now, based soley on the data. But as to your "eye test" of Syracuse, would it be different if Syracuse had won those 3 OT games and would be 14-1 instead of 11-4? Is the team on an "eye test" basis really that different if Michael Leo hadn't just barely hit the goal mouth in OT in the Maryland game, if Christian Mule's open net long shot in OT of the Army game had gone in instead of missing, and if Syracuse would have scored a goal in one of the 2 OTs vs Cornell (or the official hadn't thrown Pat March out of the game)? Really that different? I bet if all 3 had happened you'd view Syracuse differently and probably had them at least as #2 on an "eye test" basis.

Dang, I was in the process of writing basically the same thing. I couldn't agree more.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Army is going to be consensus 12th right now, not 9th, but yeah.

Anyone who has Army as 9th is letting their personal opinion of how good that team is bleed into their evaluation of the data.
-

This is not going to be a popular statement here, but I'm going to say it anyway:

It's clear that Patrick Stevens does not think Syracuse is the 3rd best team in the country. I read the poll threads, and I know this board's reaction to his consistently lower than consensus ranking of the team. I have not been nearly as harsh on my evaluation of Syracuse in my own personal rankings - which having nothing to do with my brackets and do not factor in at all - but I also do not think Syracuse is actually the 3rd best team in the country. Take that for what it's worth, which is absolutely nothing. But if Stevens and I are both ignoring "eye test" (correctly) in making our bracket with respect to Syracuse, the same must apply to Army.

Syracuse deserves either the 2 or 3 seed currently on the basis of their extremely high quality wins, irrespective what I think or anyone else thinks of the actual quality of the team and its play on the field. If any bracket has the top 3 as anything other than ND/JHU/SU or ND/SU/JHU currently, I really question their methodology of how they are arriving where they are and whether they are letting their own opinion of how good certain teams are bleed into that.

I probably should have clarified but I was just using the #3 seed not playing the 9 as a generic example, it wasn't in referenced to Syracuse or Army or that potential matchup.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Army is going to be consensus 12th right now, not 9th, but yeah.

Anyone who has Army as 9th is letting their personal opinion of how good that team is bleed into their evaluation of the data.
-

This is not going to be a popular statement here, but I'm going to say it anyway:

It's clear that Patrick Stevens does not think Syracuse is the 3rd best team in the country. I read the poll threads, and I know this board's reaction to his consistently lower than consensus ranking of the team. I have not been nearly as harsh on my evaluation of Syracuse in my own personal rankings - which having nothing to do with my brackets and do not factor in at all - but I also do not think Syracuse is actually the 3rd best team in the country. Take that for what it's worth, which is absolutely nothing. But if Stevens and I are both ignoring "eye test" (correctly) in making our bracket with respect to Syracuse, the same must apply to Army.

Syracuse deserves either the 2 or 3 seed currently on the basis of their extremely high quality wins, irrespective what I think or anyone else thinks of the actual quality of the team and its play on the field. If any bracket has the top 3 as anything other than ND/JHU/SU or ND/SU/JHU currently, I really question their methodology of how they are arriving where they are and whether they are letting their own opinion of how good certain teams are bleed into that.

Stevens is certainly entitled to his opinion and I don't think most here really care that much. His rankings are a bit out of whack but there's always one every year and his ranking list is literally meaningless as really every top 20 poll is as this isn't football circa 1992.

As for SU not actually being the third best team in the country I don't think anyone is going to jump down your throat for having that opinion. Right now it looks like ND and then everyone else. I would only note that after ND any list after is 100% subjective. I have no idea who you think the actual 2nd 3rd and 4th best teams but i'd be curious to hear because you say in one vain that SU deserves the 2 or 3 seed based on their quality of wins versus the actual quality of the team but if were not going by wins that what exactly are we using as the judging tool?

If you wanna argue Denver is the #2 team that's certainly an option but beyond that you'd be hard pressed to argue convincingly who the actual third best team is. Is it Yale who just got blown out by a bubble Princeton squad? Hopkins who went undefeated in the B10 which is impressive but also lost to a mediocre at best Navy team and to Syracuse and Denver head to head. UVA who has one top 10 win in Maryland? Duke? Maryland?

 

[fieldystick]

you think? i've gamed it out and isn't it going to be tough for denver to fall lower than the 6 seed if they win their big east semifinal? we agree that at 5 they will still get a cake matchup due to geography, 6 is questionable but i still lean toward them getting utah or air force, whoever it is. so we need to get them to the 7 seed basically if they lose the big east semi, all bets are off. but if they win that and then lose to georgetown in the final they seem to be set up pretty well for a top 6 at worst even if virginia leapfrogs them with a win over ND. no?

I'm not totally sure that Denver falls below 5th or anything, but it's my gut feeling of messing with it that there are more scenarios where they end up at 6th or lower than 5th or higher. I have already stated before that I will budge off of 2 flights the second that Denver falls below 5th, and it's because that's my expectation of what the committee would do.

If Denver loses to Georgetown in the Big East championship, I honestly would not be shocked by a seed as low as 7 or even 8. They will be almost certainly seeded, but it will be low.

 

[fieldystick]

Clearly Stevens thinks that Syracuse is only the 6th best team right now, as states openly when he ranks them in his USA Lacrosse Top 20. I assume his bracketology, as is yours, is a prediction of what the committee would do right now, based soley on the data. But as to your "eye test" of Syracuse, would it be different if Syracuse had won those 3 OT games and would be 14-1 instead of 11-4? Is the team on an "eye test" basis really that different if Michael Leo hadn't just barely hit the goal mouth in OT in the Maryland game, if Christian Mule's open net long shot in OT of the Army game had gone in instead of missing, and if Syracuse would have scored a goal in one of the 2 OTs vs Cornell (or the official hadn't thrown Pat March out of the game)? Really that different? I bet if all 3 had happened you'd view Syracuse differently and probably had them at least as #2 on an "eye test" basis.

Since I don't think overtime should even exist in regular season games, I doubt it would change my opinion.

I think Syracuse is the 5th best team this year, but as I've said elsewhere - that means nothing. I don't think about it when putting together a bracket. I'm not going to get into my exact order of how good I think the teams actually are, because it doesn't matter, but you guys know lacrosse, you probably can take a pretty good guess as to which teams I think are better than Syracuse. You can agree or disagree! We all can have our opinions and they be perfectly fine.

I think even if Syracuse is only the 5th best team, they can win a national championship from there. Far crazier things have happened/worse teams have won in the past.

 

[fieldystick]

I probably should have clarified but I was just using the #3 seed not playing the 9 as a generic example, it wasn't in referenced to Syracuse or Army or that potential matchup.

Thanks for clarifying, but now you have done made me out myself as a relative Syracuse non-believer! I believe the kids these days might even call me a "hater"

 

[FloridaCuse]

Since I don't think overtime should even exist in regular season games, I doubt it would change my opinion.

I think Syracuse is the 5th best team this year, but as I've said elsewhere - that means nothing. I don't think about it when putting together a bracket. I'm not going to get into my exact order of how good I think the teams actually are, because it doesn't matter, but you guys know lacrosse, you probably can take a pretty good guess as to which teams I think are better than Syracuse. You can agree or disagree! We all can have our opinions and they be perfectly fine.

I think even if Syracuse is only the 5th best team, they can win a national championship from there. Far crazier things have happened/worse teams have won in the past.

So who do you think it better -- Duke, Virginia, Hopkins? All of whom Syracuse beat.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Thanks for clarifying, but now you have done made me out myself as a relative Syracuse non-believer! I believe the kids these days might even call me a "hater"

Lol your no hater. Open to all opinions here but as I noted in my post above we would wanna get your opinion on who os head of them and why.

 

[fieldystick]

but i'd be curious to hear because you say in one vain that SU deserves the 2 or 3 seed based on their quality of wins versus the actual quality of the team but if were not going by wins that what exactly are we using as the judging tool?

I'm not sure that I follow you. Either I'm misunderstanding something or we actually agree. I think Syracuse should be the 2 or 3 seed right now. That's a fact. It's nearly indisputable.

Games are played once. They are a relatively random probabilistic sample. Ask the ACC in 2022 about how that sometimes turns out. Syracuse has the actual results in those games to deserve the seeding of 3rd (2nd would be fine too). that they are receiving. I am using wins and losses to judge seedings.

If the NCAA called up the two of us (me and Stevens) who have been consistently making brackets this season and said screw all these stated criteria, the two of you seed this how you want to based on how good you think these teams actually are and give the people the 1-16 bracket they think they crave based on your subjective (meaningless) eye test, I promise you that Syracuse is not ending up 2nd or 3rd.

I do not advocate this subjective seeding of teams, and I launched into this topic because I thought you were evaluating Army in particular at 9th.
-

Let me know what you meant in the part I quoted if I have just totally not addressed it, because I didn't understand if we are arguing different things.

 

[FloridaCuse]

Thanks for clarifying, but now you have done made me out myself as a relative Syracuse non-believer! I believe the kids these days might even call me a "hater"

It's ok to be a Syracuse non-believer. Many (if not most) of us weren't until later in the season. Maybe not until we beat Virginia. [some of us may still not be, inspite of the data.] I wouldn't call you a hater. Nor do I think Stevens is. Paul Rabil is a Syracuse hater and I believe he's said so openly. [Petro may be again also.]

 

[fieldystick]

So who do you think it better -- Duke, Virginia, Hopkins? All of whom Syracuse beat.

In games that were played once, Syracuse won. The season is a small sample size by design: it prevents wear and tear and it introduces a degree of uncertainty and randomness to the eventual outcome. Thankfully we don’t have to watch these matchups be played hundreds or even thousands of times each to know FOR SURE which team is actually better.

It might be those teams, it might not be. It’s not worth getting into. I’m not here to talk my opinion of teams. I’m here to talk brackets.

The whole discussion of “eye test” crept into this because I read a post as evaluating Army at 9th on eye test (which is not accurate)

 

[FloridaCuse]

In games that were played once, Syracuse won. The season is a small sample size by design: it prevents wear and tear and it introduces a degree of uncertainty and randomness to the eventual outcome. Thankfully we don’t have to watch these matchups be played hundreds or even thousands of times each to know FOR SURE which team is actually better.

It might be those teams, it might not be. It’s not worth getting into. I’m not here to talk my opinion of teams. I’m here to talk brackets.

The whole discussion of “eye test” crept into this because I read a post as evaluating Army at 9th on eye test (which is not accurate)

I greatly respect your bracketology and analysis of the various teams for the NCAAT and your participation in this Forum. And enjoy it. But the above sounds like rationalization to me.

 

[fieldystick]

I greatly respect your bracketology and analysis of the various teams for the NCAAT and your participation in this Forum. And enjoy it. But the above sounds like rationalization to me.

Call it rationalization or not, it’s an objective fact that the best team does not always win games.

If they did, there would be no need to play games, ever.

We can go ahead and hand the trophy to Notre Dame if that were the case.

 

[FloridaCuse]

Call it rationalization or not, it’s an objective fact that the best team does not always win games.

If they did, there would be no need to play games, ever.

We can go ahead and hand the trophy to Notre Dame if that were the case.

agree. Not yet!

 

[FloridaCuse]

In games that were played once, Syracuse won. The season is a small sample size by design: it prevents wear and tear and it introduces a degree of uncertainty and randomness to the eventual outcome. Thankfully we don’t have to watch these matchups be played hundreds or even thousands of times each to know FOR SURE which team is actually better.

It might be those teams, it might not be. It’s not worth getting into. I’m not here to talk my opinion of teams. I’m here to talk brackets.

The whole discussion of “eye test” crept into this because I read a post as evaluating Army at 9th on eye test (which is not accurate)

By the way, this discussion would make great bulletin board material for the Syracuse team.