clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

The 2010 Bracketology Post-Mortem (Verdict: Needs Improvement)

New, 4 comments

As I was busy writing a reaction piece for SB Nation last night, I didn't get to do a proper post-mortem of my performance. After looking things over, I didn't perform quite as well as last year, particularly in terms of seeding, something I really focused on this year.

I got 33 of 34 at-larges correct, which is one more than I was expecting. Heading into Sunday, I figured this would be a year when the Committee would try to teach teams a lesson in a creative way. Whether they actually did that is up for debate. UTEP over Virginia Tech doesn't seem terrible creative to me. William & Mary in for the Hokies would've made me take notice.

Seeding-wise, the news wasn't so good. I only got 24 of 65 seeds correct. As a perfectionist, I can only say that's terrible. Making matters worse, I didn't get a single seed right between lines 6 and 9. And I only got one 5 and one 10 right. 

I did place 32 teams within one line of their correct seed, which is acceptable, given the Committee has the flexibility to move teams up or down a line to balance the bracket out.

Seven teams were within two lines, and one (Cal) was off by three. I took the Jay Bilas approach when it came to the Golden Bears. I felt their profile sans Pac-10 regular season and tournament crowns was one better suited for the 11 line instead of the 8, even taking the Theo Robertson injury into account.

Here's how I did compared to the last four years.

Correctly Selected At-Large Teams
33 of 34: 2009 and 2010
34 of 34: 2008
32 of 34: 2006 and 2007

Correctly Seeded
24 of 65: 2010
31 of 65: 2009
36 of 65: 2008
23 of 65: 2007
28 of 65: 2006 

Off By One LIne
32 of 65: 2010
22 of 65: 2009 and 2008
25 of 65: 2007
19 of 65: 2006

Off By Two Lines
7 of 65: 2010
9 of 65: 2009
4 of 65: 2008
12 of 65:2007
13 of 65: 2006

Off By Three Or More Lines
1 of 65: 2010
2 of 65: 2009
3 of 65: 2008
4 of 65: 2007
6 of 65: 2006

For more bracketology reaction, check out Andrew Sharp's Bracketology: FAIL and Adam Jacobi's critique of mid-major seeding

I'll be back tomorrow with a viewer's guide of sorts.