(05-13-2023, 01:55 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(05-12-2023, 10:23 PM)d4cohn Wrote: I think we have done enough to get that top 8 seed (if anything, because of some absolute chaos out there with the would be chasers of the Cardinal). I think a compelling argument could made for a seed as high as #4. I will set my prediction as a #6 seed.
I thought that the NCAA was contractually obligated to set the top 8 seeds as Oklahoma, UCLA and 6 SEC schools.
The Cardinal somehow, have been stunningly left off the top 8 seed line.
To put a bow on this is the first time in the history of the NCAA tournament under its current "Super Regionals" format that a top 4 RPI team,
let alone a top 3 RPI team, has not been a top 8 seed.
Stanford is a #9 seed, and get Long Beach State, Loyola Marymount and Florida in their regional.
Duke is the #8 seed with Charlotte, Campbell and George Mason in the Durham regional.
One other lesson from seeding: H2H results matter. Washington is a top 8 seed (after beating us at home). Duke is a top 8 seed
beating us in the first tournament of the year. I flagged that loss to Duke for a while as a potentially significant factor in determining
our seeding. I can almost guarantee if that early season contest goes the other way, Stanford would have been the #8 seed (which the committee chair also has essentially confirmed).
Second factor: you have to beat top competition (specifically top 10 wins) (which the committee chair has now confirmed, along with top 25 wins and H2H, were the three main criteria). We didn't beat anyone in the top 10 (four losses to UCLA, a loss to Oklahoma, and a loss to Duke).