Winner: ViperOverLord -- College Hoops 2010-11

[vykingsfan64]

You've done a great job as usual flex and can't wait for the tourney to get started. I'm not too sure about these power-ups though. It could provide some big disadvantages to the underdogs. I'd hate to go 5-2 and lose just because they get bonus points added to their totals for accomplishing something in the regular season that has no bearing on playing now. Not too worried about it though as long as Butler keeps worrying about their seed and doesn't prepare and plan for their match against me.

[flexmaster33]

You've done a great job as usual flex and can't wait for the tourney to get started. I'm not too sure about these power-ups though. It could provide some big disadvantages to the underdogs. I'd hate to go 5-2 and lose just because they get bonus points added to their totals for accomplishing something in the regular season that has no bearing on playing now. Not too worried about it though as long as Butler keeps worrying about their seed and doesn't prepare and plan for their match against me.

Remember the bonuses (stars & 6th man) are only counted when that player/team wins their designated map. No win, no bonus.

The though behind the sharp-shooter bonus was to allow some better teams more of a comfort zone in the tournament...similar to North Carolina being more experienced in March Madness than say a once-in-a-decade qualifier such as UC Santa Barbara.

[vykingsfan64]

You've done a great job as usual flex and can't wait for the tourney to get started. I'm not too sure about these power-ups though. It could provide some big disadvantages to the underdogs. I'd hate to go 5-2 and lose just because they get bonus points added to their totals for accomplishing something in the regular season that has no bearing on playing now. Not too worried about it though as long as Butler keeps worrying about their seed and doesn't prepare and plan for their match against me.

Remember the bonuses (stars & 6th man) are only counted when that player/team wins their designated map. No win, no bonus.

The though behind the sharp-shooter bonus was to allow some better teams more of a comfort zone in the tournament...similar to North Carolina being more experienced in March Madness than say a once-in-a-decade qualifier such as UC Santa Barbara.

There's no experience in the NCAA on the better teams anymore. All the good players are 1 and done and off to the NBA nowadays. Look at UNC and Kentucky, nothing but Freshman

[flexmaster33]

true...wish it was at least like college football where kids had to put in at least 2-3 years at a program....that would make for some blockbuster teams.

Radio show brought that up today...back in the day you knew the starting lineups for the elite teams, that's not the case much anymore because the kids just aren't around long enough...Duke and Butler I knew this year, but Kentucky, UNC, Ohio State...players are names in the wind.

[ViperOverLord]

You've done a great job as usual flex and can't wait for the tourney to get started. I'm not too sure about these power-ups though. It could provide some big disadvantages to the underdogs. I'd hate to go 5-2 and lose just because they get bonus points added to their totals for accomplishing something in the regular season that has no bearing on playing now. Not too worried about it though as long as Butler keeps worrying about their seed and doesn't prepare and plan for their match against me.

Remember the bonuses (stars & 6th man) are only counted when that player/team wins their designated map. No win, no bonus.

The though behind the sharp-shooter bonus was to allow some better teams more of a comfort zone in the tournament...similar to North Carolina being more experienced in March Madness than say a once-in-a-decade qualifier such as UC Santa Barbara.

There's no experience in the NCAA on the better teams anymore. All the good players are 1 and done and off to the NBA nowadays. Look at UNC and Kentucky, nothing but Freshman

Yea I'm totally for the power-ups. Any team can earn them during the regular season and it totally simulates the (generally) higher seeds being the better seeds and it allows the underdogs to be real underdogs that have to play well to win. The power-ups and increased game loads will all but eliminate the fluky way in which my team lost its sweet sixteen match-up (2 games over before I even got a turn).

[ViperOverLord]

Yes...those are the final counting RPI numbers as far as power-ups and such.

And no bother on the gripes and such...I like hearing everyone's thoughts on seeding. And like in the real tourney, some are going to be unhappy and others joyous about where they were placed. In the end, it's the first to six wins gets the title

To answer viper's concerns somewhat, 1) the top-40 factored a solid amount into seeding.

To answer viper's and dcc's question on power-ups...I made the brackets based solely on performance during the regular season and added the "power-ups" after the brackets were set. I didn't want them to influence where teams were placed, and I think it makes for some interesting matchups.

Often times, the committee will try to rank teams in a certain order only to have the analysts vote a different region as the toughest to emerge from. All in all, I'm loving the tourney this year...it will be back with a pretty similar format in 2011-12. Just wish I was part of the March Madness field, but alas my Beavers appear bound for the NIT.

I did have a weak versus Top 40 resume, but to me that is but a small component. Versus Top 40 should really just be a potential tie breaker factor IMO. The versus Top 40 goes into the RPI. And after my recent showing in the conference tourney combined withe other teams falling off, I think it's quite possible (if not likely) that Butler finished in the Top 15 RPI. But we don't really know the exact data since the season is still going. Which makes me wonder why do the seeds before all of the data is truly in? I think a Top 15 RPI, Conference Championship, Conference Tourney Championship would have had Butler looking like a lock for a 3 or a 4 seed.

Also, I can't quite fault you for putting as much stock into the Top 40 Versus Record. I know that at least a good amount of the time that they do that in real life. I think I'm more partial to the overall RPI though, since it is approximate statistical ranking with a very slight margin of error.

I guess I can't say I disagree with not looking at the power-ups although if your goal is to simulate the type of thinking that the committee uses then I'd say you should. They have often referred to 'the eyeball test.' Bur really that's just their modem operandi to justify giving BYU RPI 5 and SDSU 4 a 3 and 2 seed when they should have had 2 and 1 seeds and thereby bump the 'power six' teams up.

Also, if you can't tell already I strongly believe that the real life tournament selection process is rigged. (At least with Flex's system I see a good amount of logic). That is why VCU and USC had their play-in match-up when in reality neither team was really worthy of being there. Besides USC's 'violations', they were a weak 18-13 in a weak conference and about 15 teams that did not get at-large bids had better records and RPIs then USC. So why USC you ask? The committee (operated by the Power SIx) wanted that 2nd largest LA market.

And VCU was in the same situation. I actually watched VCU's conference tourney loss. It was close and when it got to the end that Rodriguez dude took about 3 or 4 terrible shots, totally choking. They only finished 4th in their 'weak' Colonial Conference. And like USC there were 15 teams with better records and RPIs to choose from. So why VCU? Easy - The committee thought that they were the easiest win for USC. And you'll notice that CBS/ESPN who want their gravy always say 'three Colonial teams got in' and not 'the 4th place team from the Colonial league.' They all know how to play the shell game. It serves those bastards right that they tried to rig it and VCU went on this unbelievable run and essentially cost them millions of dollars.

And just so you know, when I talk about 15 teams being better than USC/VCU I'm talking quality teams. Three teams that were in the top 41 RPI and had won their league title or a share of their regular league title. Harvard was 35 RPI and lost the Ivy Playoff to Princeton at the buzzer. We all saw how Princeton almost beat Kentucky in that virtual home game in Florida. Cleveland State was 40 RPI and had 3 way tied Butler for the Horizon Leauge (VCU and USC in late 60s RPI and much worse records). Missouri State was 26-7, had 41 RPI and won the Missouri Valley Conference (but lost a conference tourney game). Naturally any of those teams would have presented bigger challenges to USC. St. Mary's was a 47 RPI, 24-7 (had lost to BYU by a point) and were a monster team in last year's tourney. Nope, got to go with cruddy VCU and give USC a chance. Even if you go to the end of the list, you'll find a New Mexico team that beat BYU (a top 5 RPI team) twice (and once with Davies).

That's all I'll say for now. I have a whole sports blog on this stuff if anybody pms, I'll send the link.

ADD-ON: And I should add that the committee manipulates all types of seedings; from turning 3 seeds from 'lesser' conferences into 6's and then double whammying them with teams that they slid back to limited the potential efffect of 'cinderellas.' Flex's use of the word 'ranking' kind of got me on that rant b/c I know that that is a euphemism. That is why the committee operates behind closed doors. They are a trust that has an agenda the minute that they go into those meetings. It is also why they don't have defined guidelines for picking teams despite what they claim. Anybody that is really pissed off by their usurping power and manipulating the system should message me for the link.

[flexmaster33]

The NCAA is a corrupt organization and the cracks are beginning to open...it will be interesting to see what happens to college athletics in the next 10 years. Saint Mary's should have been in the real tourney.

Next year, i will be starting the season a couple weeks early, so we can get all the conference tourneys in, and have our Selection Show in the same week as the real tourney in revealed.

[Culs De Sac]

Not that it matters but Columbia beats Yale in the Ivy Title game.. Takes auto bid to Tourney... Yay!

Gluck to the Ivy's in the Tourney.. Time to upset those "Power" conferences

[flexmaster33]

Yes, I'm excited to see how this turns out...lots of big-time players in the mix.

Conference tourneys (most of 'em) are winding down...I'll be posting updated brackets by Saturday morning.
Also, power-ups will go to default settings if you don't get back to me by midnight Friday.

Four of the first-round games have been sent and I should be able to get another set launched late tonight.
Hoping to post the NIT bracket by the end of the weekend...still waiting on a couple auto qualifiers to wrap up.

[ViperOverLord]

VOL's PIcks

Sweet Sixteen

Iowa State
Texas Tech
Yale
Toledo
Oregon
Perdue
Duke
Villanova
Columbia
Butler (The Butler/N Iowa would easily the highest powered second round match-up)
Utah
Duquesne
Miami
North Carolina
Marquette (The Marquette/USC match-up looks like a doozie)
San Jose State

Elite Eight

Iowa State
Toledo
Oregon
Villanova
Butler
Utah
North Carolina
San Jose State

Final Four

Iowa State
Oregon
Butler
San Jose State

[flexmaster33]

Conference tourney brackets are updated...most are in or nearing their championship games...the Big East and Big-10 are the only ones lagging behind a bit at the moment.

[Lufsen75]

MW final — #2 Air Force @ #1 Utah

Utah is the true winner of the final by 94-53. Well fought all.

[emerickmachine]

Question do i get my power-up in the play-in game because it isn't listed next my team's name like the others

[flexmaster33]

Congrats to Utah for winning the Mountain West...conference tourneys are starting to pair down nicely, so NIT and Play-ins should be decided in the next day or two I'd guess.

I've also posted Scoreboards for first-round matches in the South and Midwest Regions...the other two will go posted before the weekend is out. Not much scoring yet, but I'll be updating those each night (if possible) throughout the tournament.

[flexmaster33]

Question do i get my power-up in the play-in game because it isn't listed next my team's name like the others

I'll have to double-check the play-in teams for power-ups, but yes, it works like all the rest of the March Madness tourney games, so any power-ups earned will be used.

[flexmaster33]

Congrats to J Law who has Cornell onto the second round with an 87-65 win over No. 14 seed Duke -- our first winner of the opening round. Also advancing is No. 10 seed Wake Forest...although the Deacons are still awaiting a final score.

14 games are not active in the first round...play-ins are coming together. Missouri State has punched an unexpected ticket out of the Valley, knocking Richmond into the NIT field.

[jrh_cardinal]

finally got my head screwed on straight after a terrible big 12 regular season, here comes cinderella

I dont know how you're working these brackets, but there better still be a spot for me in the tourney if I win the big 12 championship game

[flexmaster33]

Yes, the bracket is set with a few of the play-in games on hold for the few teams still able to get in by winning their conference tourneys...speaking of that the auto-bid chart has been updated and two more conferences moved into title games today...including Kansas State vs. Iowa State in the Big-12...if you can beat the nation's #1 team jrh I suppose we can let you in

[dowian2]

If I did my math right...

Clemson vs Michigan St.:

PG: Clemson, 18-7
SG: Michigan St., 19-6
SF: Clemson, 20-5
PF: Michigan St., 14-11
C: Clemson, 19-6
B1: Michigan St., 5-4
B2: Michigan St., 11-1 (8-1, +3 for 6th man bonus)

Final score:
Clemson 79, Michigan St. 67

[flexmaster33]

First-round boxscores are updated with a handful of teams already through to the second round.
NCAA bracket is also up now, along with the NIT bracket (mostly)....still waiting for a couple conference tourneys to finish up leaving a couple holes in the play-in games and NIT.

The Regional breakdowns are still up...posted with links now.

[Culs De Sac]

Congrats to J Law who has Cornell onto the second round with an 87-65 win over No. 14 seed Duke -- our first winner of the opening round. Also advancing is No. 10 seed Wake Forest...although the Deacons are still awaiting a final score.

14 games are not active in the first round...play-ins are coming together. Missouri State has punched an unexpected ticket out of the Valley, knocking Richmond into the NIT field.

Ivy league! Ivy League!.. woop woop

[Culs De Sac]

Although not official.. Columbia will lose 6/7 games in the first round. With 3 power ups and 4/7 starts in the games.. The immaculate, so called random, unforgiving. fking die of conquer club screwed us over.. Congrats to VA tech.. and best of luck in the tournament.. may your 2v1 wins carry you the rest of the way.

Goes to prove that power ups don't mean jack squat.. Good luck to the rest of the Ivy league

[flexmaster33]

Thanks for playing Culs De Sac...hope to see you back next year.

And congrats to the Hokies on this year's first and biggest shocker...who says a 16-seed can't do it??? Watch out coach goggles is on a roll.

[flexmaster33]

No updates or new maps for a few days...I'm off to the beach for a few nights with the fam

Look for a new wave Monday...in the meantime, if you're still in ongoing conference tourney games let's try to wrap those up, so we can get everyone into the NCAA/NIT brackets.

thanks, flex

[Night Strike]

I looks like we tied 73-73 in our First 4 Game.