Don’t the Net and SOS give you a snapshot of quality of performance and quality of opponents?
Being a former math teacher, I know that statistics are valuable but snapshots of anything don’t tell the whole story. If all that’s needed is bare statistics then they should be ranked purely according to whichever metric a committee decides on.
I would prefer that. Then you don’t get nonsense like UNC deserves a 1 seed because…why exactly?
I agree with you 100%. The less subjectivity the better. I don’t think there a perfect metric, but there should be a consensus and everyone should roll with it. That being said, my comment about more info is because I know the committee doesn’t view it like that. UNC as a 1-2 seed is ridiculous but I’m not sure seeding will matter a ton in this tourney. I think it will be a wild ride after the first round.
Really the whole point I was trying to make here is Carolina bias. I don’t think it goes away if you dig deeper, but people will try.
Cuz somebody from the ACC HAS to be a 1 seed. You know that. 😉😆
I just think that Metrics, KenPom and the NET along with Quad wins etc isn't the only testament to a team. I think we rely far to heavily on those things these days. Just my two cents.
