Robert Friedman

@kerrancejames @dwbakke They factored some games in, at least Purdue and Nebraska

@dwbakke Exactly. They over-emphasized Sunday and didn't move for Thursday-Saturday haha

More like the committee decided today's winner at 16 and loser at 17 because it's fed up with us saying Sunday games don't matter.

@GrahamDoeren @Bauertology If anything, it should have been Kansas who fell to the 5, but Vandy was outside the top 16 before their run, so it's fair.

@DisneyB12 @Bauertology Vanderbilt was deserving of a 4 seed. But ultimately, the committee decided they'd rather give Vanderbilt a worse seed than an Arkansas team that handled them twice. And I have no problem with that.

Committee did a great job. They made a lot of moves based on a hat happened in conference tournaments. Far more than they usually do. I think they received a message loud and clear about making changes based on conference tournament results! Well done, committee.

@801bracketology I’d argue dropping Kansas over Vandy, but other than that, they were right on.

FWIW… I’m glad the committee put Arkansas over Vanderbilt! I was initially correct, Vandy was ahead of them in the initial reveal. Vandy would have been ahead of Arkansas if today’s result had been flipped. I didn’t believe the committee would take today’s result into account. They did. Excellent work by the committee.

@T3Bracketology @Bauertology Really surprised the committee cared about those things. But I'll take being wrong on that.

Overall a good job from the committee. Great job in fact. They cared about Sunday, mostly went off metrics. Have to tip the cap that’s well done.

@LAOJoe It has to be Vandy. They must have swapped the SEC teams after the title. No way they drop Nebraska at least 5 spots from their initial seeding.

Is Vanderbilt or Nebraska a 5 seed?

@T3Bracketology Yea that was my bad , I should of known based on WAB

NC State in last 4 in…that’s WAB right there. Missouri is above NCSU in WAB

@LAOJoe The MWC gets slighted again

Nova an 8 huh. They are a weak ass 8.

@LAOJoe I debated UCF and SLU but chose SLU because the metrics where better across the board

@DisneyB12 I just missed UCF. They were hard to place. Their predictives say 10, their wins say 9.

I got the first quad exact except I had Nova instead of TCU.

@T3Bracketology If they factored in the Big Ten title game, I will be pleasantly suprsied

Contingency brackets???

@Bacatology1 @RoccoMiller8 There will be some consistency if the top 40 in the WAB all get 10 seeds or better again

@DisneyB12 @RoccoMiller8 this is the issue. They will say one thing one year and another the next. Is it quad 1 wins and wins vs field or does Q1/2/3 mark matter...how about sos and now its WAB. I mean their credibility is riding on them pushing WAB which means NO school with a minus WAB gets in this

A note on the double-edge sword, better known as the Bracket Matrix: Career rankings will give you optimal credit for being like the committee. But if the committee makes mistakes, then should an optimal score remain the goal? I'd say it's vastly more important to be unique.

@Brad_Wachtel Do you think the Committee will make that change this late? Especially if Kansas was initially seeded as a high 4 and St John’s was initially a low 5?

After much thought, I will have St. John's as my last No. 4 seed over Kansas. Kansas has the better overall wins, but the Johnnies have better overall metrics across the board and winning both the Big East regular season AND Big East tournament HAS to mean something.

@HOHBigPhil @801bracketology Yeah, it’s going to be hard to believe the Committee will slide Nebraska down almost a full seed line from where they were initially seeded.

@801bracketology Virginia is weird for me, havent beaten Duke, beat Ohio state by 4 who was down a key player late, are they really a 3? maybe over Huskers is only team you could make a case close on.

This is turning out to be one of the toughest Bracketology years yet. There is so much variance between what I think the committee SHOULD do vs. what the committee WILL do. Examples: 1) Virginia should be a 3 seed in my mind, I think the committee will leave them at a 4. 2) Alabama should be a 5, Arkansas should be a 4. I don’t think the committee will change that. 3) Texas should absolutely be left out. I think the committee will put them in. 4) I think USF has shown enough to be in. They won’t be unless they win today.

@T3Bracketology That one i can see happening because the committee could have scrubbed it last night. But for Arkansas and for Purdue potentially, i just think it's a little too late.

@DisneyB12 No I just changed my mind on SLU vs UCF

Seed List - 3/15 Would not be surprised if UVA is a 3, Arkansas is a 4, some of the 9s are 8s and vice versa, and if any of the 10s end up in Dayton. I can live with it. Wichita State will be an 11 seed for me in USF's place with a win.

@T3Bracketology It seems like everyone is in step with the last teams in, but i will be pleasantly surprised if San Diego State gets in.

Berth Watch 3/15 PM Only one thief. This will be how I have the bubble, though, would not be too surprised to see a few of the teams out as in. Any non locks + Miami (OH) could end up in Dayton.

@DelphiBrackets It also depends on when they stop doing significant scrubbing

So much depends on where the committee seeds the teams the first time. That started on Wed and had seeds 1-8 done on Friday. Then its simply 1 v 1 scrubbing. Which means some teams may never get compared that are maybe three or more spots apart. Once a team is not better than team above the scrubbing moves to other scenarios. Hard to explain in a tweet

@GrahamDoeren @Brad_Wachtel That’s what I've been struggling with as well. I've debated moving Vandy or UVA to a 3 and St. John’s to a 4, but do we really know when the committee stops making significant adjustments to the seed list? Especially at the top of the bracket.

@Brad_Wachtel Often times, people will see one bracketologist puts one team in a certain position and another puts them somewhere else, and they assume that means the bracketologists view the teams differently. But usually, it just means one decided to include new data the other isn't.

The biggest challenge with seeding teams is the unknown factor about what data the selection committee is using and when that data is from. For example, with today's data, Vanderbilt is very deserving of a No. 3 seed over Nebraska and Virginia. Data from two days ago tells a different story.