IAKOW Bracketology: 2/17/14

The reason behind me doing my own bracketology was simple. I decided I was sick and tired of complaining about everybody else’s bracketology, and honestly thought I could do a better job myself.

So I got a UConn fan, a Florida fan and a Michigan State fan together to balance out any conference/regional biases. We sat down, crunched some numbers, remembered what we’ve actually seen with our own eyes on the basketball court so far this year, and balanced out the eyeball test and the RPI to come up with our own bracket.


SOUTH (Memphis)

(1) Florida (SEC)
(16) Utah Val/R Morris
(Orlando, FL)
(8) Arizona St (Pac 12)
(9) UMass (A10)


(4) Villanova (Big East)
(13) Delaware (CAA)
(San Antonio, TX)
(5) UCLA (Pac 12)
(12) Toledo (MAC)


(6) Ohio State (Big 10)
(11) Richmond (A10)/SMU(AAC)
(Raleigh, NC)
(3) Duke (ACC)
(14) Vermont (AEC)


(7) New Mexico (MWC)
(10) Okla St (Big 12)
(Milwaukee, WI)
(2) St. Louis (A10)
(15) N Car Cent (MEAC)



(1) Syracuse (ACC)
(16) Weber St/Ala St
(Buffalo, NY)
(8) Gonzaga (WCC)
(9) Colorado (Pac 12)


(4) Iowa State (Big 12)
(13) Mercer (A Sun)
(Spokane, WA)
(5) Michigan (Big 10)
(12) Harvard (Ivy)


(6) Oklahoma (Big 12)
(11) Mississippi (SEC)
(Raleigh, NC)
(3) Louisville (AAC)
(14) Iona (MAAC)


(7) Memphis (AAC)
(10) Stanford (Pac 12)
(Milwaukee, WI)
(2) Wisconsin (B1G)
(15) Georgia St (S Belt)




(1) Wichita St (MVC)
(16) Davidson (South)
(St. Louis, MO)
(8) California (Pac 12)
(9) G Wash (A10)


(4) Kentucky (SEC)
(13) SF Aus (Southland)
(San Diego, CA)
(5) Texas (Big 12)
(12) N Dak St (Summit)


(6) UConn (AAC)
(11) Tennessee (SEC)
(Buffalo, NY)
(3) Michigan St (Big 10)
(14) Belmont (Oh Val)


(7) Pittsburgh (ACC)
(10) Minnesota (Big 10)
(St. Louis, MO)
(2) Kansas (Big 12)
(15) UC Irv (Big West)



(1) Arizona (Pac 12)
(16) C Carolina (B Sth)
(San Diego, CA)
(8) VCU (A10)
(9) Xavier (Big East)


(4) Creighton (Big East)
(13) Green Bay (Horiz)
(Spokane, WA)
(5) Iowa (Big 10)
(12) St Joes’s (A10)/ Providence (Big East) 


(6) N Carolina (ACC)
(11) St John’s (Big East)
(Orlando, FL)
(3) Cincinnati (AAC)
(14) Mid Ten St (CUSA)


(7) Kansas St (Big 12)
(10) Missouri (SEC)
(San Antonio, TX)
(2) San Diego St (MWC)
(15) Boston U (Patriot)

9 thoughts on “IAKOW Bracketology: 2/17/14

  1. Alright Neil I usually praise everything you do, but I have some serious questions on this piece. First, would you mind explaining to me what the fuck St. Louis is doing masquerading as a #2 seed? And how is Villanova a 4?

    1. I think St. Louis is legit, but I agree about Villanova, I think Neil put them a bit too low.

      I see them more on the 3 line, because of their 22-3 record and their win over Kansas. Now, admittedly, getting swept by Creighton (including an absolute beatdown on their own floor) does not look good. But I would think that 22-3 with the Kansas win would at least make them a 3 seed, if not a 2.

      And I’m really wondering why he put Michigan State as a #3 seed. Had they beaten Nebraska yesterday, they would have been in the mix for a 1 seed. OK, no, they didn’t beat Nebraska, but one loss shouldn’t carry a 2-seed range.

      1. Meh, I think Sparty’s up and down. I wouldn’t argue that pick. On one hand, they’re not fully healthy, but on the other hand, they look really, REALLY bad at times, even when they win. And Neil did say that the eyeball test was a big part of the equation, and Michigan State royally fails that every time. They looked SO bad against Iowa, even though they won that game.

        But Nova as a 4 seed… like you said, a win over Kansas and another one over Iowa… that’s the one I have a problem with. That and an A10 team that’s not undefeated being a 2 seed.

        1. Oh, I wasn’t saying MSU should be higher; I think they should be on the 4 line, maybe even the 5. Because I completely agree with you about them. If the eyeball test is part of this, they have no business getting advantageous locations in the tourney at all.

          Let’s wait and see what he has to say about Villanova. I know he goes to school up near there, so he probably has some sort of bias against em 🙂

          1. All your arguments, in order:

            -St. Louis is 23-2. Their two losses were by a combined 11 points to Wisconsin and Wichita State. True, they don’t have any spectacular wins, but the A-10 is a solid conference (going to get at least four, maybe five teams in) and they’re currently 10-0 in that conference.

            -Villanova is interesting. I wanted them as a 3, the Michigan State/UConn fans wanted them as a 5. Since it’s my site 🙂 we split the difference. Yes, beating Kansas was big, as was beating Iowa. But they didn’t just get swept by Creighton. They got skunked, not once, but twice. As for the eyeball test, we’ve watched six Villanova games this year; two of them were against Creighton, the other four were: OT win against Butler (not impressive), close win over Georgetown (I was the only one impressed, so we just disagreed on that one), a good beating at the hands of Syracuse (not impressive) and Kansas (impressive). From what we saw, Kansas was an extreme outlier, so we went with the larger sample size. Don’t get me wrong, I think Nova could do damage in March. I really like the way James Bell can light you up from outside, and he, JayVaughn Pinkston and Daniel Ochefu just have a nose for the ball once it’s in the air. Villanova is a really good team; but so far, I don’t see them as a great one. (And to your last line about Nova, that’s why we had fans of three teams, to balance out any biases.)

            -The Michigan State fan wanted them to be a #2 seed, but as of right now, there’s absolutely no friggin way I can honestly call them a top eight team in the country. First of all, a #2 seed would not have home losses to Nebraska and North Carolina, or a neutral site defeat to Georgetown. Those last two losses are bad; Nebraska falls under the albatross category. Second of all, you’re absolutely right, they miserably fail every eyeball test they get. Even when they win (the Iowa game you noted), they look so bad. A myriad of stupid fouls and silly turnovers from that one game will be forever etched in my brain.

            1. Fair enough about Nova. I just think that 22-3, with all three losses coming to ranked teams plus a win over Kansas and another over Iowa, merits better treatment than a 4 seed. But the more I thought about what you just said, the more I think you’re right. They absolutely got their asses kicked twice by a team outside the top 10; to give them a seeding that suggests a top 10 ranking probably isn’t appropriate.

  2. Good piece. Fun to debate. But is there a way that you could do this in a better way visually next time? Just reading blocks of text and trying to put the whole thing together and imagine it as a bracket is kind of tough on the eyes. Thanks.

    1. I tried making a bracket on paintbrush, screen shotting it and putting it up here. But right now, IAKOW doesn’t allow me to upload images- we’re working on that now.

Comments are closed.