Bracketology
5 comments so far
March 20, 2008 by
Today kicks off the best four day run of sports entertainment of the year. I could write about the Bo Pelini's shoe size or Marlon Lucky's bench press, but instead I'll wander one more time into hoops. There's no silver bullet when it comes to picking NCAA tournament games. Upsets will happen that no one foresees. Yet even when trying to predict that which can't really be accurately predicted, I rely on my own biases.
Is there any sicker feeling than watching a late desperation three-pointer by an opponent steal a game you thought the team on your brackets had won? Isn't it that much worse when you despise the team that stole the game? I've used that rationale to send Duke and Texas deep into the tournament for years - and I'm not stopping now.
I've got Duke to the round of 8 (I usually put them in the Final Four, so maybe I don't loathe them as much as I used to). But if Texas makes it to the Sweet 16, they get to play 2 games in Houston and 2 more in San Antonio. I'm told if they fall far enough behind, their three-pointers will be counted as fours. The tournament is single-elimination for everyone else, but if the 'Horns lose they get to play best of three. The referees will be giving the team rubdowns at halftime and making them cookies for after the game.
Seriously, when a team is as advantaged as that, I can't stomach to watch them beat someone in my brackets. Which is why I've picked the 'Horns to win it all. I know all about the resumes of UCLA, North Carolina, and Kansas. But seeing them win wouldn't hurt nearly as much. So I've locked in the Horns which means they'll be lucky to last through this weekend. Hook 'em.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: Basketball
Post a comment
Dwayne Mar 22 08
Here's a question I pose to BRN: What are your thoughts of bracketology applied to college football? What makes March Madness so mad and could this concept be applied after the regular college football schedule with obviuosly fewer teams? What if by some great chance, the NCAA scrapped the idea of the current system, and did something that actually worked? I'm just curious on the staff's thoughts on how BRN would fix if given the opportunity, what many people consider a debacle... the BCS.
Steve Mar 22 08
Everyone's got their own formula, so I can't say I speak for the entire BRN staff. An eight-team playoff with the existing BCS bowls as the first round makes sense, but I can go one better, I think.
Right now there are 11 conferences and only 4 independents. That means you could have a field of 12 teams with the conference champions and one "at-large" bid (which could go to an strong independent [like Notre Dame] or the most promising runner-up team). You seed the teams and pick the at-large using a BCS-like formula. In round 1 (one week after the conference title games) the top 4 seeds get byes and the next four get home dates against the last four. Round 2 games take place at the BCS sites (all on New Year's Day or the nearest Saturday to New Year's) and the the semi's take place a week later at two of those sites and the final one more week later at a third site.
The people that host those bowls make more money because in most years they get to host two games. The middle seeds are rewarded with another home game (and sure sellout) and the TV money would be good enough to make first round games payoff for the lowest seeds as well. You can then have bowl games for teams outside the top 12 (or you could even invite the four teams that lost in the opening round playoffs to play in the other bowls). After all, we still have the N.I.T.'s.
That said, I'm less bothered by the lack of a playoff than most. It's what makes regular season games so exciting, since the whole season is a playoff. For that reason, I'd reseed after each round so that the top seed gets the best chance.
Dwayne Mar 22 08
Would you require each conference to have a conference championship game?
Steve Mar 22 08
I'm flexible on that. Each conference could make there own rules for choosing a champion. The "at large" might give a Big Ten a small advantage if their two best teams dodge each other. Then again, that at large could just as easily go to a team with a conference championship game where a shocking upset occurred (like when K-State beat OU but OU played for the title anyway).
dwayne Mar 22 08
The reason why I ask is because I like the importance of the regular season in college football. The one issue I have which I guarantee will occur, is there will be at some point, three unbeaten teams from three different confenences. Major conferences. The way it is set up now, is that one team, very well deserving will be left out in the cold. The current system does not address that. And in that sense, I would almost much rather see the way it was prior to the BCS. And also in that sense, the program which is left out, their regular season is almost meaningless in the grand scheme of trying to win a championship. The other thing I don't like is the period of time between the last game played and the championship. It is beginning to push over a month. The beauty of march madness is that it cuts to the chase and the entire champion is decided within maybe 3 weeks?