Bracketology: Michigan State headlines opening Field of 68

Every Selection Sunday journey begins somewhere.  This year, that somewhere is East Lansing.

To no one’s surprise, Michigan State headlines our preseason edition of Bracketology.  The Spartans have the talent, experience and depth to reach another Final Four.

Preseason Bracket
Preseason Seed List

MSU is joined at the top of the bracket by Kentucky, Louisville and Kansas.  A host of other familiar names are close behind: Duke, Florida, Gonzaga, Maryland and North Carolina.  Other top four seeds include reigning National Champion Virginia and runner-up Texas Tech.

From there, the bracket is an open canvas.

Quick Takes: Hawkeyes soar in New York

Two days ago we were oozing about Michigan’s thrashing of Villanova.  Not to be outdone by its Big Ten partner, Iowa cruised into New York and exited with not one – but two – victories, beating up on Oregon and Connecticut at the 2K Classic.  Two weeks in, it appears the Hawkeyes have found a little defense to go along with their potent scoring potential.  If that remains true, they have a chance to be in the B10 race come February.

Speaking of the B10 … it’s worth reiterating how well the league has started as a collective group.  Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, and Ohio State have all posted notable non-conference victories. Michigan State was right there with Kansas; Minnesota beat Utah.  There were eight B10 teams in the preseason bracket; if this keeps up, that number could easily be in play.  Regardless, the Big Ten – ACC Challenge sure looks tasty, doesn’t it?

Duke earns overall No. 1 seed in first 68-team bracket …

Welcome to Bracketville

Defending champion Duke sits atop our first 68-team NCAA Tournament bracket for 2011. The other teams on the top line: Purdue, Kentucky, and Michigan State.  With the Wildcats moving up (from our April look-ahead), Kansas now headlines a strong group of No. 2-seeds that include Ohio State, Texas, and Villanova. 

UPDATE (8/3):  Since this look-ahead was first published on July 24, Northwestern’s Kevin Coble has decided not to return to the Wildcats for the 2010-2011 season.  With that information, I have updated the bracket, moving NC State into the Opening Round and Northwestern into the First Five out.

The first real question, however, is … which teams face off in the new Opening Round (considered the First Four).  These four games will be played in Dayton, with winners moving into the traditional 64-team bracket design.  The last four at-large teams are paired, along with teams seeded 65-68 on the S-curve.  Our initial projection looks like this … St. John’s vs. NC State | St. Louis vs. Miami-FL | Lehigh vs. Vermont | Jackson State vs. SF Austin. 

As I have time, I’ll be working on a graphic to showcase these pairings.  For now, these teams are listed in the bracket with a “/” in between; the winner goes on the seed line indicated.  The St. John’s-St.Louis winner becomes a 12-seed in the East, playing Missouri in Tampa.  The Northwestern-Miami winner gets a 12-seed opposite national runner-up Butler (game in Tucson, Southeast Region).  The other winners earn 16-seeds in the Southwest and West.

Enough talk for now.  Several teams moved one seed line to accommodate bracketing issues.  BYU always creates some chaos because the Cougars cannot be placed in Friday-Sunday sites.  Have a different opinion?  Send a rebound.  The breakdown by conference and other teams considered are listed below the bracket.

Continue reading to see the bracket …

New NCAA Tourney format: Shocking development?

Welcome to Bracketville

Shocked it is. 

The NCAA has announced the set-up for its 68-team field that will be unveiled on Selection Sunday in March 2011.  By now you know there will be two types of play-in games – dubbed the First Four.  The four lowest ranked teams (S-Curve 65-68) will pair up to play for 16-seeds in two regions.  The last four at-large teams will also be paired with the winners falling on a 10-12 seed line against a pre-determined opponent in the other two regions. 

Is it a good compromise?  Depends on your perspective.  If you want to improve opening-round TV ratings (and the NCAA just renegotiated its deal with CBS and Turner for broadcast rights) then matchups between the final at-large selections makes some sense.   More people would likely watch a Virginia Tech-Illinois game (two teams that just missed last year) than would watch three more pairings of lower-level conference champions.  That said, here’s why I’m shocked by the decision …

1) The NCAA must tell us its final four at-large selections – How many Selection Committee chairs have danced around this very question?  Despite a more open approach to the selection process in recent years, there remains a behind-closed-doors element to actual bracket development.   Only recently have we been privy to the tournament’s overall No. 1 seed and rankings of the other No. 1s.   Same for the final two teams on the S-curve who were paired in the 64-65 game.  Now, us fans will know exactly who the last four at-large teams are.  Didn’t think that would happen.  Will the actual S-curve rankings be next?

2) A team either deserves an at-large bid or it doesn’t – Selecting teams has been – and should be – the NCAA’s most important task.  As former Committee Chair C.M. Newton once noted … a team can play its way out of a bad seed, it can’t play it’s way out of not being selected.  But once a team is deemed worthy of an at-large bid, should that team then be told it’s not yet in the actual bracket?  Congratulations, you received an at-large bid.  All you have to do now is win one more game to play in the main tournament that starts on Thursday.  Of course, you can say the same thing for the automatic qualifiers, but that’s the rub of a 65 or 68-team field. 

Overall, a 68-team field is far better than a 96-team set-up.  And three at-large candidates who would otherwise miss the NCAA Tournament will now be playing in the newly touted First Round.  But the only way to create a bracket based on team rankings (s-curve) is to seed the field 1-68 and pair the lowest eight seeds with winners on the 16-seed line.  Doing that actually creates a stronger bracket because the 16-seeds would be more like 15-seeds – meaning a better chance for upsets and a stronger overall field.   Thought that was the goal.  Then again, when money talks people listen.  Even the NCAA and its member schools – who, by the way, shouldn’t complain if they are one of the at-large opening-round participants, because they could be at home.

Now it’s time to move on … an updated 68-team bracket projection (for fun and practice) on it’s way.  The NCAA Tournament will always be the most exciting three weeks in sports.  Have a different opinion?  Send a rebound.

How will the new 68-team tourney look?

Welcome to Bracketville

With July upon us, we NCAA Tournament fans await word from the Men’s Selection Committee regarding the bracketing procedures for 2011.  Next spring, we’ll have a Field of 68.   Andy Katz of ESPN recently had a look at some of the options being considered.  Link to ESPN story.

Since the decision was made to expand to 68 (and not 96, thankfully), there have been two popular schools of thought.  1) Rank the teams on the S-Curve from 1-68,  then take the bottom eight teams and pair them as “play-in” games in each region.  In other words, have a 16 vs. 17 seed in each region with the winner playing the No. 1 seed.  2) Pair up the final eight at-large teams with the winner falling on the 12-seed line (or something similar).  This scenario is obviously more complicated: conference conflicts, regular-season rematches, etc.

Given the importance of balancing each region (regardless of our debates on Selection Sunday), the easiest and most sensible option is No. 1.  That’s why it will come as no surprise when we learn there will be four 16 vs. 17 matchups in the Opening Round.  Play them all at Dayton on Tuesday – an afternoon and evening session with two games each.   Sure, the matchups won’t be a juicy as two bubble teams, but it’s the fairest and most sensible scenario.  It may also increase the potential for a 16-over-1 upset.  Why?  Because teams matching up with No. 1s will be more the equivalent of current 15 seeds.  

Different opinion?  Rebounds are always welcome.  An updated look at the 2011 Field of 68 coming soon.