Knight world

two 16 seeds made it to the sweet 16 in D2. 

Upsets are turned up way too much. 

Ridiculous. 

Way to keep it real ...... Real stupid,

Fact is the gap between a 1 seed and 16 seed in HD is nowhere near the gap it is in real life. In real life 1 seeds are probably 99% faves over 16 seeds and in the closest games probably a 96% fave. In HD I would say on average a 1 seed is 90% fave with the closes games being 75-80%. Going a step further if the 16 seed does get that 10% chance they will likely only be a 40% dog against the 8/9 seed.

Neither of those arguments make any sense at all. Since 1981, there has been ONE season where a 1 seed has not made the final 4. ONE! And that had a 2 and a 3 seed. The Knight NT has a 10 8 7 and 3. And the teams are not even good. The 10 8 and 7 are not final 4 teams at all. I could see the 7 because its lostmyth and the team is almost there, but the others are not. I feel like the NT is a different game then the regular season and its just stupid. My team has played terrible in the last 2 seasons NT. Actually look at the stuff and get things to back up your case before you just shout out random George Mason trash. The NT needs to be much less random, there comes a point where randomness is not good.

Posted by kmasonbx on 8/2/2010 1:42:00 AM (view original):
Fact is the gap between a 1 seed and 16 seed in HD is nowhere near the gap it is in real life. In real life 1 seeds are probably 99% faves over 16 seeds and in the closest games probably a 96% fave. In HD I would say on average a 1 seed is 90% fave with the closes games being 75-80%. Going a step further if the 16 seed does get that 10% chance they will likely only be a 40% dog against the 8/9 seed.

You are pulling percentages out of nowhere. If the 1 seed was only a 90 percent favorite then there would be a 1 vs 16 upset every 3 seasons and that doesnt happen at all.  However 1 seeds are not the problem. The problem is average teams suddenly becoming superhuman in the NT and going on Final 4 runs. It is stupid. I could see if the coach was making a master gameplan to get there but there is not enough control of a HD team to make a master gameplan. Teams that are great in the regular season against great competition should not suddenly lose to teams they are much better then and then see teams they beat by 20+ in the regular season going on Final 4 runs. Look at Virginia Tech. They didnt exactly light the world on fire, they lost 7 games in the ACC, however now they are playing like they are the best team in the nation. They lost by 35 to UNC in the regular season then just beat them by 18 in the Final 4. 

Nobody like a ******-off veteran feeling superior to totally ignore the facts.  Sure, VA Tech lost to UNC at UNC, but they won at home.  Sure, they went 9-7 in the toughest half-conference in the world.  UNC went 8-8.  Why should they haved won that game again?  Tech's final RPI was 6.  They must not be all THAT bad, eh?

Posted by tmacfan12 on 8/2/2010 1:43:00 AM (view original):
Neither of those arguments make any sense at all. Since 1981, there has been ONE season where a 1 seed has not made the final 4. ONE! And that had a 2 and a 3 seed. The Knight NT has a 10 8 7 and 3. And the teams are not even good. The 10 8 and 7 are not final 4 teams at all. I could see the 7 because its lostmyth and the team is almost there, but the others are not. I feel like the NT is a different game then the regular season and its just stupid. My team has played terrible in the last 2 seasons NT. Actually look at the stuff and get things to back up your case before you just shout out random George Mason trash. The NT needs to be much less random, there comes a point where randomness is not good.

^ This. 

kmason is 100% correct -- trying to compare 1 seeds vs. 2/3/5/8/10/etc from HD to real life is basically meaningless and futile.

Quite simply, there is a lot more parity on HD. You may like that or not like it, but that's a fact, and the simple reason why 1 seeds aren't quite the juggernaut in HD as they are in real life.

I won the DIII Naismith title last season as a #15 seed but my RPI entering the NT was 47.  In the most recent NCAA season, UNLV was #47. If they made the Final Four, it would be surprising but not shocking. They lost in the 1st round, 69-66, to No. Iowa who knocked off #1 Kansas two days later.

In my case, the seeding was probably off. I was better than a #15.  I lost 12 games but the average RPI of those opponents was 44.  Most of those losses were early in the season when I struggled with the new engine. 

The other Final Four teams were seeded #1, #1, and #3.

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/2/2010 2:58:00 AM (view original):
Nobody like a ******-off veteran feeling superior to totally ignore the facts.  Sure, VA Tech lost to UNC at UNC, but they won at home.  Sure, they went 9-7 in the toughest half-conference in the world.  UNC went 8-8.  Why should they haved won that game again?  Tech's final RPI was 6.  They must not be all THAT bad, eh?

Does that matter at all. Have you seen the Virginia Tech team. I dont understand what you dont get. They are not that good but they just won the National Championship. Am I supposed to recruit worse, then I will have a better chance of winning in the NT?

This sentence sums up everything.

8/01 2:08 PM

ellisonatg

Let me see if I get this right. I'm 17-13, miss the NT, lose to Long Island in the PIT....but yet, I am 2-0 against the teams in the final and 3-0 against teams in the final four. Any one get that?

Posted by girt25 on 8/2/2010 7:10:00 AM (view original):
kmason is 100% correct -- trying to compare 1 seeds vs. 2/3/5/8/10/etc from HD to real life is basically meaningless and futile.

Quite simply, there is a lot more parity on HD. You may like that or not like it, but that's a fact, and the simple reason why 1 seeds aren't quite the juggernaut in HD as they are in real life.

My point is in no way that 1 seeds should be better. Its that the great teams should be better in the NT. I don't care what anyone says about parity in HD. When multiple teams dominate in the regular season and consistently beat very good teams, they should not suddenly lose to just an ok team. Its stupid. And before you go oh but in real life, just stop. In real life a lot of the upsets are because of the human factor. That is, things happen in the game that can not be recreated in a sim engine. Also, I am not talking about 1 specific example. I am stating that in the current Final 4 in Knight, Not one of the best teams in a bracket made it to the Final 4. That is just not right and is flat out too random. And before anyone answers, look at the bracket.

Midwest- Duke- beat Virginia Tech by 10+ the 2 times they played, they lost in a toss up game against Texas A&M. However Texas A&M then lost to VT.
East- Texas- Lost to UCLA, no way they should have lost. UCLA then lost to UNC.
South- USC- Lost to a Nebraska team they should have beat by 20+. Nebraska then lost to Indiana.
West- Arkansas- Lost to Arizona State in Elite 8

Posted by creator9586 on 8/1/2010 11:56:00 PM (view original):
so what.... upsets like that happen in real life....and they can happen here.... I honestly think thats more realistic in the sense that being a lower seed doesnt always guarantee defeat...

I think we agree here, but your justification is ridiculous. This shouldn't happen because "upsets happen in real life" 16s can/should sometimes beat 1s because in HD, the difference in team quality is a lot closer than in real life...there are no gimmes in HD per se...there's just a lot more parity (though with the new recruits, we may not see this any longer).

This is one of the few things that I justify happening in this game, but it's because in the game context, it makes sense, not because it's possible IRL.

Folks, "it happens in real life" isn't a valid reason for backing these HD results...you'd think this is rather obvious.