Yeah, it's a lot more based on the efficiency of teams, instead of what they've accomplished (W-L), which is a lot more like how the committee actually seeds teams (although, it's amazing how often Pomeroy's ratings actually gets teams right, and calls "upsets" appropriately). I might do one later on Sagarin's ELO ratings, which are much more representative of what a team has accomplished to this point, and not at all representative of how well a team is actually playing, to see which looks more reasonable. I'll take Davidson in the first round considering what happened the first go around. Oh I please give us Davidson