I love this from David Worlock. We need more transparency about what's happening with the committee and what they are discussing so we don't have people referencing Joe Lunardi all the time. It does no good. We look at things like that and BracketMatrix to get a feel about where everyone thinks teams are going to be. But it's just that. An educated guess. We don't have a clue as to what the actual committee - the one who matters - is doing.
And here we have a look. As of yesterday there were 16 open spots in the NCAA Tournament for at-large teams. 20 were voted in according to David. They also have the top-4 lines seeded, but that can change. That's what scrubbing means. If there's a loss or a win, whatever between those teams they can adjust. But they at least have a build started.
It's also why teams hate playing games on Selection Sunday. We've seen it not matter because they basically have the bracket set by then. SEC coaches have talked about it for years and how they wish the championship game was Saturday.
I know we all love the wait in terms of seeing where our team is in the bracket. Which we can still get! I just want more transparency. Each year it seems to change what the committee values. Is it quad 1 wins. Is it top quad 1 wins? Is it road wins? Is it NET ranking? It's not like the college football playoffs where we get a weekly ranking show and some questions answered. We have one top-16 selection show and then it's educated guessing time.
I will say as of now it does seem like almost every team is in the Tournament with the true bubble teams being Oklahoma State, Nevada and Arizona State. The biggest thing that can change is FAU losing in the C-USA Tournament a bid stealer coming. Outside of that there aren't *too* many bid stealers. It's basically like Ohio State, San Jose State, Vanderbilt and someone from the AAC not named Houston/Memphis.
Call me a nerd but give me more bracket talk all week from the actual people.