2018-2019 B1G Basketball Thread

[betarhoalphadelta]

Interesting. Maybe they never put two #1 seeds in the same location for the opening rounds? I assume splitting them up somewhat would help ticket sales in the other sites.

[medinabuckeye1]

Interesting. Maybe they never put two #1 seeds in the same location for the opening rounds? I assume splitting them up somewhat would help ticket sales in the other sites.

Lunardi currently has #1 seeds UVA and UK both in Columbus.  
My guess is that geographic proximity is a bigger driver of ticket sales than high seeds.  Ie, I'd be more likely to watch #4 Ohio State in Cleveland than #1 Ohio State in Chicago but I could be wrong.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

Lunardi currently has #1 seeds UVA and UK both in Columbus.  
My guess is that geographic proximity is a bigger driver of ticket sales than high seeds.  Ie, I'd be more likely to watch #4 Ohio State in Cleveland than #1 Ohio State in Chicago but I could be wrong.  

Hmm. Maybe they just think UNC and Duke will get a HELL of a lot more tickets sold than Duke and UVA in Columbia SC. 
Plus, the relative differences in mileage are pretty striking.
Looking at it, UVA is 360 miles to Columbia or 400 miles to Columbus. Not a big difference in mileage either way. If you're willing to drive 360 miles, you're willing to drive 400. 
UNC is something like 250 miles to Columbia or 450 miles to Columbus. HUGE difference IMHO in whether fans will travel.
Finally, I'd say that a lot of UVA grads are likely to end up in the Washington metro, which is even farther away from Columbia than Charlottesville. Whereas I'd say a lot of UNC or Duke grads end up staying resident in NC or maybe even heading down towards Atlanta.
I don't think the committee will be as simple as looking at the 1 seeds and putting them in the closest site. I'll bet they figure that the difference between Columbia and Columbus is minimal for UVA, whereas the difference between Columbia and Columbus is MUCH greater for UNC.

[medinabuckeye1]

Hmm. Maybe they just think UNC and Duke will get a HELL of a lot more tickets sold than Duke and UVA in Columbia SC.
Plus, the relative differences in mileage are pretty striking.
Looking at it, UVA is 360 miles to Columbia or 400 miles to Columbus. Not a big difference in mileage either way. If you're willing to drive 360 miles, you're willing to drive 400.
UNC is something like 250 miles to Columbia or 450 miles to Columbus. HUGE difference IMHO in whether fans will travel.
Finally, I'd say that a lot of UVA grads are likely to end up in the Washington metro, which is even farther away from Columbia than Charlottesville. Whereas I'd say a lot of UNC or Duke grads end up staying resident in NC or maybe even heading down towards Atlanta.
I don't think the committee will be as simple as looking at the 1 seeds and putting them in the closest site. I'll bet they figure that the difference between Columbia and Columbus is minimal for UVA, whereas the difference between Columbia and Columbus is MUCH greater for UNC.

I think you are probably right.  When I originally started typing that I just assumed that Columbia, SC was a LOT closer to UVA than Columbus, OH but as it turns out you are right, it is closer (at least by car) but the difference is negligible.  You are right, anyone willing to drive 360 miles to follow their Cavaliers is probably willing to drive 400, what is an extra half hour?  
I looked up the restrictions on Lunardi's site and UVA isn't one of them.  They are:

• Georgetown can't be in the East Region
• Louisville can't be in the South Region
• UCONN can't play first weekend games in Hartford
• Utah can't play first weekend games in SLC
• Drake can't play first weekend games in Des Moines
• Jacksonville can't play first weekend games in Jacksonville
• Tulsa can't play first weekend games in Tulsa
• Ohio State can't play first weekend games in Columbus
• USCe can't play first weekend games in Columbia, SC.  

My own guess is that it doesn't matter much for ticket sales anyway because Kentucky (alone) could sell out the arena in Columbus and Dook (alone) could sell out the arena in Columbia.  Where UVA and UNC end up doesn't really matter much in that equation.  

[ELA]

Also something with the Play-In Games?  The Tuesday winner plays Thursday and the Wednesday winner plays Friday?  So you can't have the top two overall seeds both slotted to play the same day?

[bayareabadger]

Interesting. Maybe they never put two #1 seeds in the same location for the opening rounds? I assume splitting them up somewhat would help ticket sales in the other sites.

No prohibition. Lunardi has had two No. 1s in Columbia in like half his projections. 
I looked back, UNC and Virginia were No. 1s that both went to Raleigh in 2016. 

[MichiFan87]

It doesn't really matter where Michigan ends up for the first weekend (none of which would be favorable, though Hartford or San Jose would probably actually be preferable to Columbus with the Michigan fan base in NYC / Boston and the Bay Area), but I certainly hope they're in the DC Regional (not only for selfish reasons, because they'd have the best Michigan turnout here, though Anaheim would be good, too, as evidenced by their games in LA last year).

Also, not that it really matters, but a 1 seed is still a vague possibility if Michigan wins out and Duke, Virginia, and/or Tennessee get upset in the mean time (Gonzaga just won at Saint Mary's so it'd be a shock if they lost in the WCC tournament).... Presuming they remain a two seed, I don't really have a preference about which 1 seed would be in their region. I don't want to see Houston or Texas Tech from the 3-seed, but Purdue and Sparty are the other current 3-seeds on CBSSports.com (but I know that intra-conference rematches are only prevented through the first weekend).

[ELA]

MSU probably comes down to where this committee falls on good wins vs. bad losses.  I believe going into the weekend, MSU had more Quad 1 wins than any team in the country.  But they also have worse losses than any of the teams right around them.  Not sure where they rank in the MET, but KenPom still had them as a 1 seed (which is not realistic) after the weekend's games, with MSU, Duke and Virginia being the only teams in the top 10 in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

My guess though is that they wind up as the top 3.  I'd like to see Ward in the BTT, just for conditioning, and to work him back in a bit before the real thing.  I think they'll get dinged a couple times, with as worn out as they looked last weekend.  Should still beat Nebraska tomorrow, but wouldn't shock me to see them lose to Michigan, and in a 3-6 game on Friday.

[Anonymous Coward]

MSU had more Quad 1 wins than any team in the country. 

I think the winner of the M/MSU game has a solid shot at a 1-seed. MSU has the nation's most Quad-1 wins. Michigan has the nation's most Quad-1 + Quad-2 wins. And both teams are tied at 7-1 versus the AP Top 25, which is also the best tally and win% in cbb. The last one isn't a committee criterion but the point stands that the winner on Saturday will have strong arguments.

[bayareabadger]

 Meant to post my thoughts on the Penn State game after a rewatch. Technically I didn’t feel as if Wisconsin was doing anything particularly bad. They were just missing a lot of shots that in theory the players are good enough to make. There were some issues here and there, a little too much reliance on tough shots, but generally that’s where I felt. 

 The Badgers are getting by with none of their three best players playing all that well on offense. If they can rediscover any of that, they’ll be in very good shape. 

( I also still have no good read on Kobe King, but he feels a year away from being a true reliable frontline guy. There is potential though) 

[ELA]

I think the winner of the M/MSU game has a solid shot at a 1-seed. MSU has the nation's most Quad-1 wins. Michigan has the nation's most Quad-1 + Quad-2 wins. And both teams are tied at 7-1 versus the AP Top 25, which is also the best tally and win% in cbb. The last one isn't a committee criterion but the point stands that the winner on Saturday will have strong arguments.

I think if that winner also wins the BTT, then mayyyyybe.  I still don't think so though.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I think if that winner also wins the BTT, then mayyyyybe.  I still don't think so though.

Depends what wins or losses occur to the teams currently ahead of them IMHO. Right now MSU and Michigan are 8 & 9 in NET, respectively.

• Gonzaga would have to slip a lot to drop below a 1.
• There are 3 ACC teams ahead of them (Duke/UVA/UNC). At least one, possibly two, of those teams is getting a 1 seed.
• Tennessee OR Kentucky (probably whichever wins their conference tourney) is most likely assured of a 1.
• Houston would have to hold serve and win out, but they're still 2 spots ahead of MSU, so I could see them with a strong shot at a 1 if they win out.

I don't see either Michigan or MSU winning out and being guaranteed a 1. I think it requires a little bit of chaos ahead of them.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the committee looks at NET and fills the bracket. They use team sheets, which weigh other things like Quad 1 / Quad 2 wins, low Quad losses, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my view on NET is that it's more of a tie breaker than a conversation starter.

[ELA]

I don't think the committee looks at NET and fills the bracket. They use team sheets, which weigh other things like Quad 1 / Quad 2 wins, low Quad losses, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my view on NET is that it's more of a tie breaker than a conversation starter.

I think it's flipped, I think it's the conversation starter, then they look at the team sheets to move teams up or down against the NET ranking as their baseline.