Home > Bracketology, Current Updates > Bracket Report: How did results measure up?

Bracket Report: How did results measure up?

Dave2015Ultimately, my final projection yielded solid results – although I am a little disappointed with a couple of seed line decisions (by the Committee, of course!).  Here are the basics:

  • Correctly selected 35/36 at-large teams (67/68 overall). My miss was Notre Dame/Texas AM.  I do not have a significant issue with it; Notre Dame was in until Richmond took a spot.
  • Correctly seeded 41 teams on their actual seed line.  Was hoping for a little better here.
  • Correctly seeded another 23 teams within one of their actual seed line.
  • Missed three teams (TCU, Murray State, Iowa State) by two seed lines.  The two most notable for me were Murray and Iowa State, in opposite directions.  I think Murray is a little over-seeded (not that Murray isn’t a great team), and I think Iowa State more typically fits the profile of an 8/9 team.  Other than its win total (largely against non-tournament teams), I do not see how USC would be slotted above TCU; which accomplished more on the court.
  • My goal will be to improve seeding in 2023.  There will always be a tough call somewhere along the cutline, and there is rarely a consensus among Committee members; hence the voting process.

I will share some additional thoughts about the bracket and its regions soon.  Most importantly, I express my sincere appreciation to all of you who followed along and participated here at Bracketville.  It’s an incredibly fun hobby and your interactions make the work worth it.  Thank you!

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: