As I posted earlier, there's enough evidence to say Seed ratings have the same chance of predicting the outcome of games as the Books and considering the amount of argument the Ratings stir up its surprising how close they match up. After going through the games the following Dogs stood out, firstly games where the Dogs were rated lower than should be and the fav rated above what should be, according to the Books.
Arkansas over Indiana
St Joseph's over Oklahoma
Siena over Vanderbilt
The following are Favourites overrated playing Teams on their correct seed.
Temple over Michigan St
St Mary's over Miami
San Diego over Connecticut
Baylor over Perdue.
The obvious fly in the ointment here is one could argue that it is the Books that are overrating the Dogs in their assessment of these Games and the favourites are the play. I'm posting this more as an exercise for the future than trying to select plays but it wouldnt hurt if others gave their opinions on whether it is the Seedings or the Books who are right here. :drink:
Arkansas over Indiana
St Joseph's over Oklahoma
Siena over Vanderbilt
The following are Favourites overrated playing Teams on their correct seed.
Temple over Michigan St
St Mary's over Miami
San Diego over Connecticut
Baylor over Perdue.
The obvious fly in the ointment here is one could argue that it is the Books that are overrating the Dogs in their assessment of these Games and the favourites are the play. I'm posting this more as an exercise for the future than trying to select plays but it wouldnt hurt if others gave their opinions on whether it is the Seedings or the Books who are right here. :drink: