Alright, I just wrapped up my seed list, and I'm heated about a couple of Bracket Matrix averages. So, let's play a couple of blind résumés and prove some people wrong.
RÉSUMÉ A: 15-9, SOS 7, 1-8 in Q1A, 5-9 in Q1, 0 losses outside Q1, 23.2 average of all team sheet metrics
RÉSUMÉ B: 15-9, SOS 3, 0-7 in Q1A, 6-7 in Q1, one loss in Q2, one loss in Q3, 35.8 average of all team sheet metrics
I listed résumé A first because it's obviously better, right? Right.
THEN WHY DOES MICHIGAN STATE (B) RANK A FULL SEED LINE AHEAD OF WEST VIRGINIA (A) IN THE MATRIX?
If anything, those two résumés have to at least be considered equal. They're not, though. West Virginia's is better.
Listen, I grew up and am a passionate Syracuse fan, so supporting WVU is painful. But getting this stuff right is more important to me than petty rivalries — unless it's Georgetown, but I don't think we'll have to worry about the Hoyas being in this conversation until they can win back-to-back Big East games for the first time since Ja Morant was in college.
Okay, now that that's out of my system...
Here's another one, but I'm going to leave W-L record out of it to make a point. It's February, so we're allowed to do that. If it's still the case on March 12, I'll correct it.
RÉSUMÉ A (in 71 fields per Matrix data): SOS 135, 0-0 in Q1A, 3-3 in Q1, one Q3 loss, two Q4 losses (gross), NET 70 (gross), no major metrics in Top 50 (so gross!)
RÉSUMÉ B (in 42 fields per Matrix data): SOS 9, 2-4 in Q1A, 5-6 in Q1 (nearly .500 with five wins!!), no losses outside Q1 or Q2, NET 73 with a 56.6 average of all metrics
Team B is Wisconsin, and they're 14-9, so I get it. If you read the last two weeks of bracket updates, you've likely already guessed who Team A is — Clemson (18-6). I'm telling y'all, this résumé sucks so hard. The Tigers are 18-6, which is nice (I guess), but their non-conference SOS is a hideous 343rd in the nation, so how good is that 18-6 really.
Here's another one for you — Clemson is one point against Pittsburgh, one point against Virginia Tech and one point against Florida State away from being 15-9 with all of those bad losses and brutal metrics, and therefore literally not even being a whisper in the NCAA Tournament discussion. Clemson, without those three one-point wins, has essentially the exact same résumé as Virginia Tech, but with a worse NET.
Look, Clemson's probably a tournament team right now because of the win percentage. But no one is paying me for this, so since it's February, again, I'm going to make a point. You'll notice on my seed list — Clemson's out.
THE "IF" GAME"
That Clemson argument was fun. Let's play some more of the "if" game, for a little more perspective on teams' résumé strengths and weaknesses.
• If Northwestern (No. 9/No. 34 overall) had a NET that was 10-15 slots higher, they'd be Miami (No. 5/20).
• If Saint Mary's (No. 5/18) hadn't lost to Loyola Marymount, they'd basically be UCLA (No. 2/7).
• If Gonzaga (No. 5/17) hadn't lost to Loyola Marymount, they'd also basically be UCLA (No. 2/7).
• If Houston (No. 1/4) played a real schedule, they'd (probably) be a No. 2 seed.
Oops, that one may have been too mean. I'll defer to my good friend, Stephen A. Smith, for advice.
• If TCU (No. 5/19) hadn't lost to Northwestern State they'd be Kansas State (No. 3/10).
• If Clemson actually had a good résumé, they'd have a tournament bid.
Okay, I'm done. Here's the seed list.