What is the point of seeding teams 1-68?

To frick LSU of course

quote:

---

Why seed 1-68 if you don't follow them?

---

Supposedly the quadrant is balanced overall using the seeds, not necessarily the worst #2, worst #3, etc.

I haven't run the numbers to check it out.

quote:

---

If Duke is the number 1 overall seed shouldn't the 2 seed in their region

---

The explanation given by the chairman of the committee was that since Michigan St was the 5 seed (highest 2 seed) that they were put in the closest venue which was Duke's region.

quote:

---

I'm still confused why LSU is in Duke's region. If Duke is the number 1 overall seed shouldn't the 2 seed in their region be the number 8 overall seed and the 3 seed in their region be the number 12 overall seed? Why seed 1-68 if you don't follow them?

---

I usually don't like to argue about seeding - the Committee does a pretty good job and it's just wasted energy.

But it is strange that they don't at least arrange the 1s and 2s as you suggest, where the no. 8 overall seed would be in Duke's region. Location and geography might be a factor. I don't know

quote:

---

If Duke is the number 1 overall seed shouldn't the 2 seed in their region be the number 8 overall seed and the 3 seed in their region be the number 12 overall seed? Why seed 1-68 if you don't follow them?

---

They do roughly try to follow that, but because of geographic reasons and conferences, they cannot strictly follow it.

I'm not sure I follow, are you saying it should be like a snake draft? So it would be according to national seed like below?

1, 8, 9, 16
2, 7, 10, 15
3, 6, 11, 14
4, 5, 12, 13

Nevermind, I just reread your post. If they did it your way then the top #2 seed would have to play all the top seeds below them and the worst 1 seed? That wouldn't make much sense