Season prediction (2019-20) - thru Selection Sunday Mar 2020

VCU Finance 2008

Top Member
Apr 19, 2009
16,222
16,970
I don’t understand the discontent for Bracket Forecast. I also don’t see anyone providing better metric analysis to include “what if” scenarios such as beating Dayton twice.

Quite frankly, I enjoy his posts and I do not see any hints of an all knowing attitude from him.
Wasn't talking about him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thelonious_chunk

VAHills

Top Member
Insider
Mar 27, 2013
2,810
5,955
I’ve concluded there are really three simple rules, in order of importance:
1. Win
2. Against good teams
3. According to expectations

If all 3 criteria are met, our position improves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BracketForecast

Ramdog

Top Member
Feb 10, 2009
6,562
12,967
I’ve concluded there are really three simple rules, in order of importance:
1. Win
2. Against good teams
3. According to expectations

If all 3 criteria are met, our position improves.
I’m fine with exceeding expectations...might be fun;)
 

GuardTheArc

Top Member
Dec 4, 2014
587
926
Here's the realistic NCAA tourney landscape we face..............

36-37 bids = P6 (ACC, B12, B10, SEC, P12, Big East) - Conferences #1-6
9-10 bids = Non-P6 multi-bids (AAC, A-10, MWC, WCC) - Conferences #7-10
22 bids = One-bid leagues - Conferences #11-32
68 bids

Realistically, we are competing w/ the A-10 and three other conferences for about 9-10 bids. This is fairly typical over the past decade or so.

Of the 9-10 bids amongst those four conferences, about 5 of them are "realistically" locked up already (barring some unforeseen circumstance).

#1 NET San Diego St (MWC)
#5 NET Gonzaga (WCC)
#11 NET Wichita St (AAC)
#12 NET Dayton (A-10)
#13 NET Memphis (AAC)


That leaves about 4-5 spots for the following 15 (or so) programs (with current NET):
#32 St Mary's
#35 BYU
#39 Houston
#45 Temple
#48 Utah St
#51 Richmond
#58 New Mexico
#59 St Louis
#64 VCU
#67 UConn
#71 GMU
#79 SMU
#84 Rhody
#89 Cincy
#97 Davidson


Conferences #7-10:
AAC (3) - between Houston/Temple/UConn, it's likely one of those schools makes the AAC a 3-bid league
A-10 (2-3) - at the end of the day, we are probably competing w/ Richmond, St Louis, Davidson, and Rhody for 1-2 spots (Dayton's in).
WCC (2-3) - St. Mary's and BYU will almost assuredly get at least one at-large bid for the WCC (and maybe 2)
MWC (2) - it's hard to see Utah St not making the dance as the #2 school from the MWC (wins already vs Fla/LSU).

Note: All of this above doesn't even take into account potential bid-stealers (like St Louis last yr and Davidson the year before).
 
Last edited:

rvaram

Top Member
Mar 26, 2012
3,081
4,859
Here's the realistic NCAA tourney landscape we face..............

36-37 bids = P6 (ACC, B12, B10, SEC, P12, Big East) - Conferences #1-6
9-10 bids = Non-P6 multi-bids (AAC, A-10, MWC, WCC) - Conferences #7-10
22 bids = One-bid leagues - Conferences #11-32
68 bids

Realistically, we are competing w/ the A-10 and three other conferences for about 9-10 bids. This is fairly typical over the past decade or so.

Of the 9-10 bids amongst those four conferences, about 5 of them are "realistically" locked up already (barring some unforeseen circumstance).

#1 NET San Diego St (MWC)
#5 NET Gonzaga (WCC)
#11 NET Wichita St (AAC)
#12 NET Dayton (A-10)
#13 NET Memphis (AAC)


That leaves about 4-5 spots for the following 15 (or so) programs (with current NET):
#32 St Mary's
#35 BYU
#39 Houston
#45 Temple
#48 Utah St
#51 Richmond
#58 New Mexico
#59 St Louis
#64 VCU
#67 UConn
#71 GMU
#79 SMU
#84 Rhody
#89 Cincy
#97 Davidson


Conferences #7-10:
AAC (3) - between Houston/Temple/UConn, it's likely one of those schools makes the AAC a 3-bid league
A-10 (2-3) - at the end of the day, we are probably competing w/ Richmond, St Louis, Davidson, and Rhody for 1-2 spots (Dayton's in).
WCC (2-3) - St. Mary's and BYU will almost assuredly get at least one at-large bid for the WCC (and maybe 2)
MWC (2) - it's hard to see Utah St not making the dance as the #2 school from the MWC (wins already vs Fla/LSU).

Note: All of this above doesn't even take into account potential bid-stealers (like St Louis last yr and Davidson the year before).
I think we can safely remove ur from the at large conversation
 
  • Like
Reactions: RAMBALLFAN

rvaram

Top Member
Mar 26, 2012
3,081
4,859
Why? Their resume looks about equal to ours. They have one bad loss (which we don’t have), but they also have a Q1 win (which we don’t have). If they do better than us in conference play, they’re in over us.
They still have Chris Mooney on the sideline, right? I'll get a spider tattooed on my rib cage if they get an at large bid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RamLover

RamLover

Top Member
Dec 1, 2016
645
1,016
They still have Chris Mooney on the sideline, right? I'll get a spider tattooed on my rib cage if they get an at large bid.
We’ll see! I obviously don’t want them to be good, but I just think it’s way too early to say they’re out of the discussion. Dayton is in barring a series of catastrophic losses (like losing to Fordham, Dusquesne, or SJU all in Dayton or something). VCU, Richmond, Rhode Island, and St. Louis all have an at-large shot IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rvaram

Mistachill

Top Member
Apr 20, 2009
17,315
28,795
As a bracketologist do you concede promoting accuracy is a bit of a rouse?

Basically what separates the bracketologists (in terms of predicting the field) is correctly calling the last two or three at-large teams. Almost half the field is already selected for you due to tournament winners, then you have a ton of no-brainer at-large selections. I've always wanted to throw a shoe at the TV when ESPN reference Lunardi's 97% accuracy as if that's impressive.

However, props for getting them all right last season. That actually is impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BaNgMyPrOgRaM

BracketForecast

Top Member
May 9, 2011
5,023
6,152
As a bracketologist do you concede promoting accuracy is a bit of a rouse?

Basically what separates the bracketologists (in terms of predicting the field) is correctly calling the last two or three at-large teams. Almost half the field is already selected for you due to tournament winners, then you have a ton of no-brainer at-large selections. I've always wanted to throw a shoe at the TV when ESPN reference Lunardi's 97% accuracy as if that's impressive.

However, props for getting them all right last season. That actually is impressive.
That's fair. It's kinda like how the NFL declares a team World Champions even though the game isn't even played on an entire continent. Little bit of bluster and hyperbole in that statement :lol:

The Matrix also grades on seeding. IIRC I think I got like 63/68 within one seed line?