From the Matrix: NCAA-wise, Tech’s still as cool as Keanu
Here’s a fun Web site I didn’t know existed until today. (Credit Greg Wallace of the Anderson Independent-Mail for digging it up.) It’s called The Bracket Matrix, and it contains so many numbers Georgia Tech folks will think they’re in calculus heaven. (Sorry. Little joke.)
The Matrix follows every mock NCAA bracket on the Internet, and now you’re wondering: How many mock brackets are on the Internet? According to the Matrix, there are 74. And, as of yesterday, the average of those 74 had the Yellow Jackets as a No. 9 NCAA seed. But, because the 74 brackets managed to come up with only three No. 8 seeds and five No. 9’s — mock brackets work independently — the Jackets were bumped up to a No. 8.
Yes, this consensus was reached before Tech lost at Clemson on Tuesday, but losing a road game to a team likewise seeded No. 8 shouldn’t damage the Jackets’ case overmuch. What’s more important is that GT was included on all 74 mocks, and only two had the Jackets as a No. 12 seed, which is slippery-slope stuff. (The final at-large invitees are invariably 12th seeds.)
Even after the Clemson loss, I still would not — would not, I say — characterize Tech as on the wrong side of the bubble. The Jackets’ RPI is 35 even after losing in Littlejohn, and if you’re from a major conference and you’re under 40 you’re usually OK. The only way they can miss the Big Dance is if they lose to Virginia Tech (52 RPI) here on Saturday and then lose their ACC tournament opener.
So say I. And so says the Matrix. And with that, I’m making like Neo and taking the red pill.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
216 comments Add your comment
Bangkapi Ajarn
March 3rd, 2010
10:43 am
Not sure they deserve it now. Maybe better with an NIT bid?
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
10:45 am
If Tech lands in the No-Account Invitation Tournament, that’s a major issue.
Bangkapi Ajarn
March 3rd, 2010
10:46 am
Was I supposed to say first or something lame like that? Of, perhaps “Nung” in respect of my screen name??
At any rate, really concerned that the road record of Tech foretells a less than auspicious run at the big dance. Perhaps more excitement for fans (and a longer run) in the small dance, so to speak.
Bryan G.
March 3rd, 2010
10:54 am
I agree that Tech should be in the tournament now. Lose the next two, though, and that may be a different story.
I’m a UGA alum, but I think Tech could still be a dangerous 8 seed. You have to think at SOME point they get it together, don’t you?
Paul Johnson's Johnson
March 3rd, 2010
10:55 am
FIRE PAUL HEWITT!!!!How do you call your next to last timeout with 9 minutes left in the game!!!
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
10:56 am
Bryan G, you have distilled my feelings about this Tech team into two paragraphs.
Fed Up With Wren (Again)
March 3rd, 2010
10:57 am
Here is another way to look at it. GT is currently seventh in a conference having an off year that most people think will get four bids. That equals NIT to me unless they make a run in the ACC tournament.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:00 am
There’s no way the ACC gets only four bids, Fed Up. More like seven.
GT65
March 3rd, 2010
11:00 am
In truth, GT has not earned an NCAA bid. That being said, as of right now, I think they are in with a win vs VPI –probably a 10 seed out west, but they’re in. To me Tech stands as a prime example as to why anyone advocating the expansion of the NCAA tournament to 96 teams –I think Mr. Twit was a vocal advocate earlier in the season– is off the mark. i actually think that 64 (65) is a tad too many, but this has been the number since ‘85 so why change it.
Paul Johnson's Johnson
March 3rd, 2010
11:00 am
If Shumpert plays with any consistency we have a chance. But he and the rest of the team are really immature. At this point in the season you should have maturity at every level, but we dont have any. Thats because Hewitt is terrible!
Ozzy
March 3rd, 2010
11:00 am
Who cares? If they make it they’re not going anywhere. Total under achievers and one of the worst coaches drawing a paycheck. Who misses the whole apparatus with a free throw? Hell I could make 50%. My son in high school makes 85-90%.
Bring on baseball season.
Jesse Stone
March 3rd, 2010
11:00 am
I’m OK with CPH spending his timeouts early. That means they won’t be poorly coached with TO’s down the stretch.
Aero Jacket
March 3rd, 2010
11:01 am
First to say “first”.
After last night’s latest debacle, I have to wonder if Tech is worthy of getting into the NCAA tourney. Even if we do, will it be another 1-and-out?
Mark, are the GT head coach’s salaries handled solely by the AD, or does the president also have to sign off? While Dave Brainless is clearly responsible for Hewitt’s lifetime contract, which has allowed him to retire in place, I have to wonder if the departed Wayne Clough also shares responsibility for the Gailey and Hewitt contracts.
Since Hewitt can’t, or won’t, coach the Jackets to their potential, he should do the decent thing and step down. This collection of talent should be in the top 3 of the ACC and at least the top 15 in the AP, instead we aren’t ranked and won’t even finish in the top half of the conference. And I don’t see anything changing under Hewitt, who is now getting rather testy with reporters and alumni.
In Pollack We Trust
March 3rd, 2010
11:01 am
David Pollack just tweeted that Hewitt has accepted the position of Head Coach of the Washington Generals effective April 1st. He said it’s a “done deal”.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:02 am
Here’s the thing: The NCAA committee doesn’t go on potential, realized or otherwise. It just looks at raw data. If you’re asking if Tech has had the year it coulda/shoulda, that’s a different story.
MagnaCarterGT
March 3rd, 2010
11:02 am
I have to say, Mark, only the truly insane enjoy taking calculus classes at Tech.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:03 am
Dr. Wayne Clough, who was president of Georgia Tech when Hewitt was hired and when Dave Braine signed him to the new contract in 2004, was in favor of both moves. Or so I’m told.
Paul Johnson's Johnson
March 3rd, 2010
11:03 am
BTW—THWG!!
Bangkapi Ajarn
March 3rd, 2010
11:04 am
As of today my feelings towards Tech’s basketball team is disappointment lightly sprinkled with pessimism.
I am feeling somewhat like “Fed up with Wren”, Tech has quite a few teams ahead of them in the ACC pecking order, and it may well come down to how many ACC teams will be allowed in the big dance.
A few short years ago who would have thought that Tech’s ACC football team is more successful now and has better future prospects that their ACC basketball team?
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:04 am
I never took calculus. I don’t think UK even had a math department. (Kidding!)
GT, in your dreams
March 3rd, 2010
11:06 am
Mr. Bradley, it’s the type of attitude you present that bugs me about the NCAA Tournament. Why should teams with records like GT be invited when there are scads of “mid major” teams with 23-26 wins that don’t get invited? I don’t particularly care if the tourney is expanded to 96 teams, except that all I think that’ll mean is every single ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big East and other big conference team that is no more than 2 games under .500 will be invited, and all those 20+ win teams from “lesser” conferences will still have to accept scraps and dream of being a cinderella. (Please don’t give me that, “isn’t that what makes the tournament great” bromide.) I’ve always believed that the 2nd best team from any conference in the country is better than the 7th best team from any other conference.
So, while the UABs, Wichita States, Vermonts and Houstons of the country pile up impressive season records and have to hope they get their conference’s one bid, the Georgia Techs can glibly reach the 18 win mark and then argue about their seeding.
(Sorry, but I’ve never gotten over your hosannas to the selection committee for choosing a (what was it) 14-14 Georgia team a decade or so ago.)
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:06 am
The NCAA committee doesn’t put as much stock in conference standings as you’d think. It goes on strength of schedule and RPI. That’s why Virginia Tech, which is 8-6 in league play, is more likely to miss the NCAA tournament than Georgia Tech, which is 7-8.
El Bravo
March 3rd, 2010
11:08 am
Honestly MB, I don’t think that a win against VT is enough. There is too much parity and too many teams on the proberbial bubble. A few upsets during Conference Tournaments and a couple of teams making a run (UConn and ND come to mind) and Tech could end up on the outside looking in with their 8-8 ACC record. I’m afraid that we need to beat VT and win a first rounder in the ACC tourney…
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:09 am
I was as astonished as anyone that Georgia got in at 16-14 in 2001. I didn’t praise the committee, as I recall. I was stunned to the point where I could barely type.
And it wasn’t just that Georgia got it at 16-14. It was a No. 8 seed! But that was all a function of the RPI.
Stan
March 3rd, 2010
11:09 am
C’mon fire Hewitt….I’m 55 years old and can shoot better than 50%…..
Tron5000
March 3rd, 2010
11:10 am
Axe Paul Hewitt and hire David Boyd from Milton. He’s led countless young men to the hardwood Promised Land.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:11 am
Remember, El Bravo, those 65 teams must come from somewhere. And I’d submit that Tech is in much better position than Illinois, Florida or Virginia Tech.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:12 am
I believe David Boyd has won state titles at three different schools, has he not?
Tron5000
March 3rd, 2010
11:16 am
I think you’re right, Mark. I was at Berkmar when he led the Tony Akins-led team to a Championship game loss to Savannah. He won 2 there after I left. I’m pretty sure he won at Dunwoody.
Roylee13
March 3rd, 2010
11:18 am
HOW ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC!!! A team that might go 7-9 in their conference is an outright lock to play for the national title?
Am I really so old and out of it that I am the only person that has a problem with this?
I am not sure I read this right but it seems that Bradley thinks GT is a lock at 7-9 while VT might get left out at 9-7.
That shows you how much the national title in basketball is worth. And just think, there are millions of people out there, including almost all the sports media, that want the same for college football.
lanier
March 3rd, 2010
11:18 am
I am afraid the best thing for Tech moving forward is to miss out and go to the NIT
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:21 am
The committee doesn’t solicit my input, Roylee13. But I have observed how it works over the years. Conference records matter less than SOS and RPI.
Hunker Down
March 3rd, 2010
11:21 am
3 McDonalds All Americans on team. B’s have not lived up to potential unfortunately again. Hewitt is a good recruiter but has had only one glory year and the rest mediocre at best based on talent.
J Dawg
March 3rd, 2010
11:21 am
No way they get in, unless its because of what they were supposed to be this year, they have way to much talent on this roster to be seventh in the worst ACC in recent memory. Hewitt is not getting it done, plain and simple. They are a dangerous team if they would ever get it together but I dont see it happening.
Tech Land
March 3rd, 2010
11:22 am
Tech makes the nCAAs easy, but will go out in round 1—mark it down!
K-Dub
March 3rd, 2010
11:22 am
Ozzy..u said “apparatus”. LOLOLOLOL!! that’s embarrassing..he misses the entire apparatus ALL THE TIME!
Tron5000
March 3rd, 2010
11:23 am
Anyone wish their football season ticket renewal forms came with a box you could check to donate to the $7 Million Paul Hewitt Buyout Fund? They would’ve gotten a few extra dollars out of this house.
YEAR 6 GT BASKETBALL HELD HOSTAGE
March 3rd, 2010
11:23 am
If GT is not able to make changes due to contract..then why not put the coach on a paid leave of absence and either hire an interim head coach who is a former coach who doesn’t need the money or a up and coming coach who wants to break into the ACC and will coach for 100,000 until this contract is over and done with. If I hear one more person say what a nice man this coach is I will hurl. Nice people know when they have taken advantage of a situation and would come forth and try to rectify and situation on their own. This is pure hell to see GT getting ripped off and I am disappointed that the GT admin doesn’t have the b@lls to do something about it but sit there and live in fear about the whole thing
Tron5000
March 3rd, 2010
11:25 am
What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is Josh Elliott wearing on SportsCenter? Good grief.
Ted M
March 3rd, 2010
11:28 am
Mark and/or others,
Who do you think will be the best 3 or 4 teams that don’t make the tourney?
Lost KSU fan
March 3rd, 2010
11:31 am
Kennesaw State takes on Lipscomb at 2:30 today in Macon. Three wins and the Owls are dancing.
Not likely I know, but it is more exciting than watching Paul Blewitt coach a bunch of underachievers.
WisonDunkit
March 3rd, 2010
11:36 am
Money is AN issue with the Tech administration and AD in Hewitt’s case, but it is not even THE issue. When alumni support (the source of many things financial) has faltered so, and revenues are almost certain to continue declining with the lackluster play/coaching (not to mention the economy) if they continue with Hewitt, the cost of keeping him vs. paying him off are not as far apart as one might think. It’s a heap of change, no doubt, but when I’ve talked to folks who should know on campus and off they almost universally discount the money angle. Hewitt’s high profile with the BCA and in amateur leagues is a big factor in wanting to keep him. And while no one will admit it publicly, Tech likes having a highly visible minority in its program. The problem is that his failure to progress past the mediocre is beginning to have real diminishing returns in these areas as well as setting the program back in its relationships in the conference and with recruiting. There have been complaints from recruits, parents, and even some high school officials regarding Hewitt’s approach to recruiting.
Jacket Backer
March 3rd, 2010
11:37 am
Mark Price!!!
WisonDunkit
March 3rd, 2010
11:38 am
I’d bet KSU’s coach could do better with Hewitt’s players than Hewitt can. Go Hooters.
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:38 am
Usually the best three or four teams left out come from the mid-majors, Ted M. Say, College of Charleston if it doesn’t win the Southern tournament.
WisonDunkit
March 3rd, 2010
11:39 am
Va. Tech and Notre Dame should get in but probably won’t.
El Bravo
March 3rd, 2010
11:42 am
I don’t know if they are better than VT Mark. They have better talent but VT has a better overall and ACC record, an RPI in the top 50. Say Tech wins the finale against VT and does nothing in the ACC T. VT loses their last but wins one or two in the tourney (not far-fetched)… Also, there are a ton of teams in the bubble that could finish strong and get in (Louisville, Miss St, Utah St, Ok St)
Mark Bradley
March 3rd, 2010
11:43 am
Here’s my feeling on teams from the BCS leagues that don’t get in: It’s their fault for not playing better schedules. Virginia Tech’s SOS is 133. Notre Dame’s is 56.
Paul Hewitt
March 3rd, 2010
11:44 am
I told you nerds my team is just beginning to play its best ball of the season. Now shut up and watch!
FullMetalJacket
March 3rd, 2010
11:45 am
It sure likes Georgia Tech is in and I am glad. I wonder how many other Tech fans are like myself in hoping we go far in the tournament but not far enough to secure Hewitt another year? It would be different if he were demonstrating that he has turned it all around, but instead we’re winning ugly (albeit a win is a win is a win) when we don’t lose and there is little promise for the future. Oliver and Rice (and presumably Shumpert) are not a bad trio of returners, but we’re back to the drawing board on big men.