Why seeding matters in ncaa's

[ofmgator]

Reading through conference standings in USA Today I realized the importance of getting a high seed in the tournamant. I knew that getting a high seed helps but when I saw which teams were leading their respective conferences it stood out About the number of conferences and that the leaders or conference champs would be facing high seeded teams in the first round and none of those teams from lesser conferences had great records at all. # 1 seeds will rule.

[xenythx]

A 1, 2, or 3-seed and you're fine. Honestly it's more about the luck of the draw on your side of the bracket than anything.

[InstiGATOR1]

A one seed always faces a power conference at large team in the second round at 8 or a 9 seed. A 3 either gets a 6 or an 11 seed. A 6 could be a good power conference at large team or if you are lucky enough to have an upset opposite you, you might get an 11 who limped into the tourney.

Of course UF has also had the upset opposite them and either struggled against Penn or even lost to Temple. So I would rather have a better draw and travel less than have slightly higher seed.

[themistocles]

Your seed is very, very important to you chances of getting through the tournament.

But you should never downplay the effects of LUCK.

[GatorLurker]

One seed gives you a "royal road" to the Sweet 16. After that most of the huge upsets are no longer in play.

Odds of making the FF are greatly increased if you have a 1 seed.

And like themistocles says "luck" is important. As a 1 seed you need a whole let less of it to get to the FF. And as I have said for decades "The NCAA champ has to be lucky. The better you are, the less luck you need."

[GatorRade]

There is a confluence of two factors here: 1) Top seeds get the most favorable draws, but also 2) top seeds are the usually best teams.

Just a quick look at some historical analysis from KenPom, and we can see what happens to top seeds that are overseeded based on KenPom ratings (#1 seeds out of the top 10, and #2 seeds out of top 20).

Year, Seed/Team, KenPom rating, Result
2003: 2-Wake Forest, KP 22, Lost in round of 32 to KP 44 Auburn
2004: 1-Stanford, KP 16. Lost in round of 32 to KP 29 Bama
2005: 1-Washington, KP 15, Lost in sweet 16 to KP 5 Louisville
2006: 2-Tennessee, KP 22, Lost in round of 32 to KP 32 Wichita St
2010: 2-Villanova, KP 21, Lost in round of 32 to KP 42 St Mary's
2012: 2-Duke, KP 20, Lost in round of 64 to KP 82 Lehigh

Obviously, the sample size is too small to make any real conclusions, but in these cases of severe seed/KP disparity, the high seeds don't seem to have helped very much, as none of these teams performed to their seeds.

[REM08]

In general, there's no denying the premise here. However, its only a fully accurate statement if the S curve is followed exactly - AND if the 1-68 seeding is accurate.

The fact is that this just isn't the case. The committee has admited that the S curve isn't followed because they have to take many different seeding rules into consideration (cant play a conference opponent till a certain point - take location into account, etc).

There are examples of this every year. A good example was overall number one seed Ohio State two years ago. They landed the number one overall seed and faced a hot UK team in the sweet sixteen. Had they beaten Kentucky, they would have played the 5th overall ranked team that barely missed a 1 seed in UNC. All that to get out of just their region. It happens to some highly seeded teams every year. Some teams benefit and some pay.

Your specific draw and your specific path to the FF matters more than your seed does. In general though, lower seeds usually correlate with easier paths - but its far from a given.

[GatorLurker]

They will move teams on the S-curve to the point of changing a seed by 1 up or down for all kinds of reasons. Travel distance is one, but preventing a lower seed from getting a geographical advantage is really high on the list. #1 is avoiding teams that are hosting from playing on their own floor.

[CAGator93]

Look at us last year - we were upset with our seeding, but ended up with a better road than most 1 seeds

[GatorLurker]

Thank you Norfolk State!

[BLING]

It definitely matters in the 1st two rounds. If you are a #1 you "almost" have a ticket to the sweet 16. Although even #2 seeds are not "safe" in the 1st round, it's still extremely shocking for a #2 seed to lose early.

Not so much after that. Anybody can get knocked out after the round of 16 if they have just one off game. Of course when UF won their championship they came out of nowhere (weren't we 5 seed?), and last year the final four was in our grasp from a 7 seed. So it's not like a lower seed "dooms" you, or a higher seed gives you a ticket to the final 4 (UF knows all about getting upset as high seed as well). However if you have a great team, you definitely want to grab that #1 seed and use it to hopefully avoid an early round upset.

[gator2109]

Originally Posted by BLING

It definitely matters in the 1st two rounds. If you are a #1 you "almost" have a ticket to the sweet 16. Although even #2 seeds are not "safe" in the 1st round, it's still extremely shocking for a #2 seed to lose early.

Not so much after that. Anybody can get knocked out after the round of 16 if they have just one off game. Of course when UF won their championship they came out of nowhere (weren't we 5 seed?), and last year the final four was in our grasp from a 7 seed. So it's not like a lower seed "dooms" you, or a higher seed gives you a ticket to the final 4 (UF knows all about getting upset as high seed as well). However if you have a great team, you definitely want to grab that #1 seed and use it to hopefully avoid an early round upset.

We were a three seed. The last 12 champions have been a 1, 2, or three seed. Here's a CBS article from a couple days ago breaking down some stats the champions have in common. Pretty interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...tball/21622236

[REM08]

Originally Posted by gator2109

We were a three seed. The last 12 champions have been a 1, 2, or three seed. Here's a CBS article from a couple days ago breaking down some stats the champions have in common. Pretty interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...tball/21622236

Think this gets into causation vs correlation. The best teams usually have high seeds. I'd bet its more that than the high seed creating an easier path. I'm not saying this is what you meant though.

[gator2109]

Yeah - the top 3 seeds are definitely better and I'd agree it is due to that rather than them having an easier road. I just posted to article as it has a lot more info outside of just where teams were seeded. It seems to weed out some of the top 4 seed lines so we will see if the trends hold this year.