March Madness Notes -- 1

Just a couple of brief observations regarding the numbers:

1) In my opinion, the 13 and 14 seeds have a better chance of beating the 3s and 4s than the 5s have of beating the 12s. Most folks are aware that 12s have had some success versus 5s, but I think not this year.

2) Las Vegas, in terms of odds to win the tournament and their region, clearly feels Michigan State was given an easy road. Although a #2 seed, the Spartans are viewed, at worst, as the third most likely team to win the tournament. This was also the case last year, which begs the question as to whether the committee designs the brackets with an eye towards advancing Michigan State, regardless of the Spartan seeding.

3) This is a very different tournament than in seasons past. I think this is the lowest correlation between seeding and odds of winning in the history of the tournament. Some of this low correlation has to do with Gonzaga being an 11 seed and Iowa being a seven. My perception of what the odds should be, and Las Vegas' perception, and the perception of the massive simulation publicized by USA Today, are all in agreement. The outlier here is the seeding of the teams by the committee. We'll see who is correct. I'll have more to say regarding the simulation tomorrow.

I actually think Michigan State is in the toughest side of the bracket. Virginia, Purdue, Iowa State, and Utah are quality clubs with the ability to make deep runs. I don't see a 13, or 14 that has a prayer of advancing, with the slight possible exception of SF Austin over West Virginia.