Let’s freaking go!
If we are the higher seed, what's the justification for sending us out west and Texas A&M south where we would prefer?
I don't know how much they care about geography for a 3 seed other than location for the 1st and 2nd round games. I believe it's more about the S curve.If we are the higher seed, what's the justification for sending us out west and Texas A&M south where we would prefer?
Even if you ignore geography, the s-curve would ALSO dictate we should be in the South with Auburn.I don't know how much they care about geography for a 3 seed other than location for the 1st and 2nd round games. I believe it's more about the S curve.
Bro you’re going at it like this is the actual bracket. This is just a guy’s projectionEven if you ignore geography, the s-curve would ALSO dictate we should be in the South with Auburn.
Auburn gets their obvious region as the #1 seed, as does Duke in the East, then Houston getting the preferable location of the two remaining, with Florida being the one sent out west as the final #1 seed. The S-curve would dictate Alabama be paired with Florida, so they were shifted to avoid the SEC/SEC matchup. Tennessee is next, also shifted to avoid the SEC/SEC matchup. Michigan State should be next, and by the s-curve should be matched up with the overall 3rd seed, but was moved to the South due to geographical preference. All this results in Florida getting the 8th seed, Texas Tech. Kentucky, by s-curve, SHOULD be matched up against #1 seed Auburn, but instead was swapped with Texas A&M without s-curve OR geographic reasoning.
Suddenly on the 4 seed line the entire s-curve is completely thrown out the window 13 overall Maryland gets their geographic preference instead of being shipped out west as the s-curve would dictate. Wisconsin also gets their geographic preference (which conveniently also matches the s-curve), Purdue gets sent out west despite the s-curve suggesting they should face Duke, but they can't because he has Maryland (an ACC/ACC matchup) slotted where they should be by s-curve, then Clemson lands in both their geographic preference and correct s-curve location.
As far as I can tell, of the Top 16 seeds, Kentucky is the ONLY team not in their geographic OR s-curve location without a shift for avoiding a conference/conference matchup involved in the decision. It looks like the moron in charge only put us there because suddenly keeping the s-curve between the overall 8 and overall 9 mattered. All the rest can be thrown to the wind. Not that it matters, of course, as the actual bracket won't look anything like this. I just like throwing Lunardi under the bus for being bad at the only job he has.
Bro you’re going at it like this is the actual bracket. This is just a guy’s projection
That was a nice write-up by Lunardi. Respect where it is dueHis paragraph is about Kentucky on his updated bracket.
It's not easy to fly under the radar at Kentucky. Yet Mark Pope has done so in the first year at his alma mater. For the first time in forever, the Wildcats are being called overachievers. Even though they won fewer conference games than the past three seasons under John Calipari. Even though they don't have an All-SEC first-team player. What they do have is hope, because a 21-10 (10-8 SEC) record is good enough for a 3-seed out of the loaded SEC. And that kind of tournament placement, backed up by a whopping 10 Quad 1 wins, suggests Big Blue Nation should see the NCAA second weekend for the first time since before the pandemic. It hasn't happened yet, but the ghosts of St. Peter's, Oakland and other recent demons should be buried soon.
![]()
Men's Bracketology: Auburn stays No. 1; Gonzaga's WCC semifinal win keeps them in the hunt
Auburn has lost back-to-back games but is still positioned for the top overall seed as automatic bids begin coming off the table.www.espn.com
Fake news websiteUSA Today still has us a #4 seed.
Infowars has us as a 2 seed.USA Today still has us a #4 seed.
Infowars has us as a 2 seed.
OAN has us a #1 seedInfowars has us as a 2 seed.
It's fine. I was just looking at an old Eastbay catalog I had and somehow they have this years UK squad at a 3.MSNBC just ejected us from the bracket.
If UK is the highest 3 seed, then the West is where they should be placed, if he is using an S-curve.Even if you ignore geography, the s-curve would ALSO dictate we should be in the South with Auburn.
Auburn gets their obvious region as the #1 seed, as does Duke in the East, then Houston getting the preferable location of the two remaining, with Florida being the one sent out west as the final #1 seed. The S-curve would dictate Alabama be paired with Florida, so they were shifted to avoid the SEC/SEC matchup. Tennessee is next, also shifted to avoid the SEC/SEC matchup. Michigan State should be next, and by the s-curve should be matched up with the overall 3rd seed, but was moved to the South due to geographical preference. All this results in Florida getting the 8th seed, Texas Tech. Kentucky, by s-curve, SHOULD be matched up against #1 seed Auburn, but instead was swapped with Texas A&M without s-curve OR geographic reasoning.
Suddenly on the 4 seed line the entire s-curve is completely thrown out the window 13 overall Maryland gets their geographic preference instead of being shipped out west as the s-curve would dictate. Wisconsin also gets their geographic preference (which conveniently also matches the s-curve), Purdue gets sent out west despite the s-curve suggesting they should face Duke, but they can't because he has Maryland (an ACC/ACC matchup) slotted where they should be by s-curve, then Clemson lands in both their geographic preference and correct s-curve location.
As far as I can tell, of the Top 16 seeds, Kentucky is the ONLY team not in their geographic OR s-curve location without a shift for avoiding a conference/conference matchup involved in the decision. It looks like the moron in charge only put us there because suddenly keeping the s-curve between the overall 8 and overall 9 mattered. All the rest can be thrown to the wind. Not that it matters, of course, as the actual bracket won't look anything like this. I just like throwing Lunardi under the bus for being bad at the only job he has.
We're not getting a 2 seedKnocking on the door of a 2 seed.
Find a way to win Thurs and beat Bama on Friday, we're a 2 seed.
Lunardi has us top 3 so maybe it is possible. Is there a reason why you are so ironclad that it is literally impossible?We're not getting a 2 seed
The committee also balances the top 4 teams in each region based on their NET. If one region is too high they will swap teams. There is no exact science to it.If UK is the highest 3 seed, then the West is where they should be placed, if he is using an S-curve.
Auburn is 1 overall. Then Duke, Houston, and UF.
The top 2 seeds are Bama and then UT. Bama goes to the Midwest and UT to the East. That leaves Michigan St. going to the South and Texas Tech going to the West as the lowest 2 seed. The highest 3 goes with the highest 2 on the S-Curve.
So, you get:
South
Auburn(1)
Michigan St.(7)
A&M(10)
East
Duke(2)
UT(6)
Iowa St.(11)
Midwest
Houston(3)
Bama(5)
St. John’s(12)
West
UF(4)
Texas Tech(8)
UK(9)
The strongest 3 should be with the weakest 2.
Not sure about the rules, but I think S-curve trumps geography. I could be wrong, though.
Anyway, Lunardi is probably sticking to the S-curve more than geography.
I think we are somewhere in the middle of these two. Top 3 seed and middle 4.Meanwhile the genius that is Jerry Palm has us hanging on to a 4 seed.
HTF do you have TOP 3, middle 4 ? Pretty broad range.I think we are somewhere in the middle of these two. Top 3 seed and middle 4.
That’s right, 3 seed, mustard seed, poppy seed, grape seed, let’s go!!🏀Doesn't matter that much. Lets play
Not the poster but it really depends on how we do in the SECT. If we lose our first game and other 3/4 range teams make runs I could see us dropping.HTF do you have TOP 3, middle 4 ? Pretty broad range.