Texas and UNC are ridiculous, although Texas a smidge more deserving than UNC. Xavier isn't getting nearly enough talk in this. They also had a garbage Q1 record, but no bad losses. I guess at least they were first four.
VCU still likely would have gotten an at-large if they had lost. An 11 is an at-large seed but based on other crap, it would have been close. They were an 11 on bracketmatrix.
Louisville had a 5 seed ranking on bracketmatrix, but it was low enough to be a 6. An 8 is sort of crazy.
Memphis getting a 5 is nuts to me. Their metrics just don't support it at all. They have a really good Q1-2 record, which the committee said it valued this year. But they also had two Q3 losses.
The committee toys with the Mountain West. New Mexico probably should have been around an 8 and got a 10. Utah State got the same 10, but got swept by New Mexico and absolutely crushed by CSU twice in the past two weeks. San Diego State is riding its Houston win. Boise State was hot and beat San Diego State but got three-game swept by CSU and that was their end game because the committee wasn't going to put five in this year. CSU had an at-large resume compared to the rest of this by the end of the year but got a 12 with the autobid. If you were going to do four, though, Boise State absolutely deserved it over San Diego State at the end.
Boise and VCU were the only ones with Q4 losses, so might have impacted both.
UC San Diego also doesn't look like it would have gotten an at-large with their 12 seed. That's nonsense, but then we get UNC and Texas. When a conference like the Big West or Valley has one of these teams that really performs well they just can't come to grips with it. It's ridiculous.
The committee said they did not value what have you done lately and it showed with Boise and CSU's seed. Apparently, that didn't matter with Xavier, which is the only reason I can see the justification of their inclusion.
As I mentioned, they also said the Q1-2 record mattered a lot and I think that is where you are going to see some of these seeds and maybe even with the two bigger snubs. West Virginia was 10-13 with no bad losses. Indiana was 9-13 with no bad losses.
But then, North Carolina was 9-12 with a Q3 loss. So the committee is going to committee and as many have said here, not to be trusted.
Bracketmatrix had West Virginia in all 111 of its brackets, and as a safe 10 seed. For those of us who are entertained greatly by this stuff, that just doesn't happen. UNC, Xavier and Texas combined to be in 107.
VCU still likely would have gotten an at-large if they had lost. An 11 is an at-large seed but based on other crap, it would have been close. They were an 11 on bracketmatrix.
Louisville had a 5 seed ranking on bracketmatrix, but it was low enough to be a 6. An 8 is sort of crazy.
Memphis getting a 5 is nuts to me. Their metrics just don't support it at all. They have a really good Q1-2 record, which the committee said it valued this year. But they also had two Q3 losses.
The committee toys with the Mountain West. New Mexico probably should have been around an 8 and got a 10. Utah State got the same 10, but got swept by New Mexico and absolutely crushed by CSU twice in the past two weeks. San Diego State is riding its Houston win. Boise State was hot and beat San Diego State but got three-game swept by CSU and that was their end game because the committee wasn't going to put five in this year. CSU had an at-large resume compared to the rest of this by the end of the year but got a 12 with the autobid. If you were going to do four, though, Boise State absolutely deserved it over San Diego State at the end.
Boise and VCU were the only ones with Q4 losses, so might have impacted both.
UC San Diego also doesn't look like it would have gotten an at-large with their 12 seed. That's nonsense, but then we get UNC and Texas. When a conference like the Big West or Valley has one of these teams that really performs well they just can't come to grips with it. It's ridiculous.
The committee said they did not value what have you done lately and it showed with Boise and CSU's seed. Apparently, that didn't matter with Xavier, which is the only reason I can see the justification of their inclusion.
As I mentioned, they also said the Q1-2 record mattered a lot and I think that is where you are going to see some of these seeds and maybe even with the two bigger snubs. West Virginia was 10-13 with no bad losses. Indiana was 9-13 with no bad losses.
But then, North Carolina was 9-12 with a Q3 loss. So the committee is going to committee and as many have said here, not to be trusted.
Bracketmatrix had West Virginia in all 111 of its brackets, and as a safe 10 seed. For those of us who are entertained greatly by this stuff, that just doesn't happen. UNC, Xavier and Texas combined to be in 107.
