The Ringer published some Super Bowl predictions yesterday. Seven of their eight NFL writers took the Chiefs to win. CBS Sports has picks from eight of its own writers up on its site. Eight of the eight are taking the Chiefs. ESPN asked 64 of its writers to make a selection. 49 of the 64 took…Kansas City.
The Chiefs are an underdog in betting markets.
To be fair, the Chiefs are only a two-point underdog. Their implied win probability, based on the going moneyline, is about 46%. This is close to a coin-flip game in the eyes of those who make their money setting accurate probabilities. In the eyes of those who make their money through generating attention, the Chiefs are evidently the favorite.
What’s going on here?
Part of this might be a little bit of media ass-covering. If the herd is going one way, it’s harder to get picked on by heading its direction, especially when that direction comes with such a simple, one-line explanation: It’s Patrick Mahomes! If a media member picks the 49ers right now, they become The Person Who Picked Against Patrick Mahomes. If a media member picks the Chiefs, no one notices. There aren’t many rewards in media for being right. There are some rewards but also punishments for being wrong. Picking the Chiefs? It’s a reputational value play. It’s giving that simple answer to a public that wants simplicity (no sport’s fans enjoy simplicity more than the NFL’s, who are so enormous in number largely because the league is so conveniently simple to follow).
It’s also dumb.
This isn’t to say the pick isn’t going to end up correct. Patrick Mahomes and the Kansas City Chiefs might win the Super Bowl on Sunday. The probability’s about 46%. But reducing it—as a lot of these people are—to It’s Patrick Mahomes! is insulting to these people’s own work. CBS calls its writers “experts,” and it’s an accurate term. These are people who devote their careers to understanding the intricacies of the game they cover. They know what makes the 49ers so effective at moving the ball on the ground. They know how many dimensions are trustworthy in the Chiefs’ passing game. They know how Kyle Shanahan will and will not generally coach in a tight second half. Their job isn’t picking games. It’s knowing football and specifically knowing the NFL very, very well. For some reason, they ignore the latter when they’re asked to do the former. The same people who made two decades of content off of How much of this is Tom Brady and how much is Bill Belichick? are throwing away football expertise to jump into the crowd and ride with one player of the 106 who will be active for Sunday’s game.
Since the beginning of the season, the 49ers have either been the best or the second-best team in the NFL at the end of every given week. Their defense has looked vulnerable in the playoffs, but their offense has bullied teams in its pair of second halves. Kyle Shanahan, under constant fire for a second-half turtling seven years ago, has an 8–3 career playoff record as a head coach. The whole criticism of Brock Purdy is that the Niners don’t ask him to do too much.
The 49ers will probably win this game. It’s a narrow probability, but it leans in their direction. Why? Like the Mahomes explanation, it’s simple, but this time it makes sense:
The 49ers are the better team.
Bubble Talk
We’ve reached the awkward point in the college basketball season where we’re starting to get a sense of how each bubble team’s résumé will look at the end of the year. We don’t yet know the exact details, but we have a good sense of what each team’s strengths and weaknesses will be. Nebraska? Three great wins, but they were all at home, and they better hope Michigan State does more winning. Gonzaga? Undeniably a solid team, but at some point, the committee asks that you beat someone competitive.
We’ll be pivoting from the very basic version of our bracketology model to one more nuanced over the next few weeks, to account for the introduction of these specifics. For those who are curious now, though, here are my thoughts on where our model’s probably wrong and where our model’s probably right, going place by place through its biggest disagreements this morning with yesterday morning’s Bracket Matrix:
Auburn: Bracket Matrix 4-Seed, The Barking Crow 1-Seed
Our model is predictive, not reflective like most of those included in the Bracket Matrix. We’re trying to show where each team should be expected to wind up, not where they currently stand. There are benefits to both, but at some level it’s an arbitrary choice. In this case, we like our model’s assessment of the Tigers, but we will say that they’re the least bad option for that fourth 1-seed, especially with the committee generally not waiting to see how the SEC Tournament winds up.
Michigan State: Bracket Matrix 9-Seed, The Barking Crow 5-Seed
The odd thing about Michigan State is that because the committee tends to seed based on different criteria from what it uses to select the 68 teams, there’s a very small chance that Michigan State will be a bad seed. Unless they’re really on the bubble, it’s hard to see them falling much further down than the 7 or 8-line unless they actually start playing worse. They win by a lot when they win. They’re very good at home. They’re a good team on the aggregate. They won’t get the subliminal AP Poll boost, so our model’s probably a bit too high (it doesn’t incorporate that boost until the penultimate poll of the season), but Sparty should get a decent seed so long as they can avoid actual bubble trouble.
Gonzaga: Not in Bracket Matrix, The Barking Crow 6-Seed
This is the same situation as Michigan State’s, but on steroids. In this case, I’m wary of our model. We have a feature we haven’t included yet which accounts for the punishments placed on teams who win very few Q1 games, or those with an especially bad Q1 win percentage. Gonzaga is 0–5 in Q1 games, with probably only three opportunities left (at Kentucky tomorrow, at Saint Mary’s on March 2nd, likely against Saint Mary’s in the WCC Tournament Championship). They probably need to win two of those to stay clear of any bubble discussion, unless one is that conference tournament title game and they take the automatic bid. Will the committee leave out a big brand with a 23–9 overall record? I’m not sure, but that version of Gonzaga would at least be in danger of getting sent to Dayton. The bubble is a little bit like a whirlpool for seeding.
Wake Forest: Not in Bracket Matrix, The Barking Crow 7-Seed
This is one where we’re glad we have the predictive model and not a reflective one. Right now, Wake’s best win came at home against Florida. Coming up, though, they get two shots at Duke, a home chance against Clemson, a game in Charlottesville against an over-perceived Virginia team, and whoever they play in the ACC Tournament. If they’re as good as all indications indicate, the Deacs will not only make the NCAA Tournament, but will enjoy a healthy seed. It helps, too, to not have lost at all at home. Not because the committee values that, but because home losses come with some added punishment in the quadrant system.
Colorado: Not in Bracket Matrix, The Barking Crow 7-Seed
Can you tell our model uses a lot of kenpom?
Colorado won’t get as many opportunities as Wake to impress the viewing public (a demographic which includes the selection committee), but they do host Arizona tomorrow coming off a three-overtime game the Wildcats played in Salt Lake City. They’re also the second-likeliest team right now to win the Pac-12 Tournament outright. Our model is probably a little high, but only a little.
Cincinnati: Bracket Matrix 12-Seed, The Barking Crow 8-Seed
Cincinnati is the platonic ideal of Wake’s situation: They’re a good team with great opportunities. Their next two games are at home against Houston and Iowa State. Odds are good they win at least one of those.
South Carolina: Bracket Matrix 5-Seed, The Barking Crow 9-Seed
There are two ways to get yourself a good seed in the NCAA Tournament. One is to be among the best teams. The other is to keep yourself very high in the AP Poll, to the point where the committee ignores every lesson college basketball ever teaches and believes AP voters. South Carolina’s median projection from here is to go 4–5. They’ll make the tournament with a performance like that, given how well they’ve done so far, but they’re going to need to do better if they want to play against a double-digit seed.
Xavier: Not in Bracket Matrix, The Barking Crow 10-Seed
Our model might not be accounting well enough for the risk that Xavier’s overall win–loss record (maybe only 18–14) pulls them into the NIT. It’s also missed out before on an occasional weighting the committee gives to Q1A games, somewhere Xavier does not presently excel. But with two chances left against Marquette, home games remaining against Providence and Creighton, and road trips on the schedule to Seton Hall and Butler, we think the Muskies will enter the Big East Tournament on the right side of that cut line, and that they’ll stay there. Their current win–loss (13–10) is uglier than what the final mark should be.
Utah State: Bracket Matrix 6-Seed, The Barking Crow 11-Seed
This is like South Carolina’s situation, but with less margin for error and worse potential pitfalls. That said, groupthink is a definitional component of how a committee operates, and Utah State establishing a high mark on the “scoreboard” of a process that’s supposed to only look at final team sheets is going to help them. Our model’s failure to incorporate that streak of confirmation bias is a shortcoming we want to correct. We haven’t figured out exactly how yet.
Boise State: Bracket Matrix 8-Seed, The Barking Crow NIT 2-Seed
On one hand, Boise State has some dangerous games coming up against the dregs of the Mountain West, and they could easily close the season on a four-game losing streak, finishing against good Mountain West teams before possibly facing quality competition in their conference tournament opener. But one thing our model’s still missing is that Q1 wins component. Boise beat Nevada in Reno and New Mexico in Albuquerque, and it beat Saint Mary’s in Idaho Falls and San Diego State at home. It’ll probably grab another good win or two along the way. I’d guess a better model than ours would like the Broncos more.
Nebraska: Bracket Matrix 9-Seed, The Barking Crow NIT 1-Seed
As we mentioned above, Nebraska has some great wins. They beat Purdue. They beat Wisconsin. They beat Michigan State. They also, though, most likely don’t face any more NCAA Tournament teams until the Big Ten Tournament, and perception isn’t kind to MSU. If Wisconsin continues to fall off, this team sheet is going to be a one-hit wonder. I’d guess our model’s too low, but there’s mostly downside ahead for the Huskers. You’d rather be taking shots than dodging bullets.
Mississippi: Bracket Matrix 10-Seed, The Barking Crow NIT 3-Seed
Mississippi avoided having one of the worst nonconference schedules in the country (something that the committee dislikes when it happens to a bubble team), but they don’t have any great wins and they’re poised to finish quite poorly if things go as expected down the stretch. Our model is probably too low—perception loves these guys—but they’re in serious danger.
Seton Hall: Bracket Matrix 12-Seed, The Barking Crow NIT Unseeded (i.e., 5-Seed or worse)
This situation’s a lot like Nebraska’s. Seton Hall beat UConn and Marquette. Those are darn good wins. But even the reflective bracketologists aren’t sure about them making the tournament right now, they’re set to be an underdog in a lot of games down the stretch, and just as the NCAAT committee’s selection criteria differs from its seeding criteria, the NIT committee’s overall criteria differs a lot from the NCAAT’s. The last two years, it’s looked more at numbers that say how good or bad a team is than numbers that say how much a team has or hasn’t accomplished. That bodes poorly for the Pirates.
The Rest
College basketball:
- Arizona’s trip to Colorado is big for Colorado, and for an Arizona team trying to look like a 1-seed. Illinois’s trip to Michigan State is a key opportunity for the Spartans to put bubble whispers to rest. Gonzaga could really use this win at Kentucky. There’s upset potential in Houston/Cincy, Tennessee/A&M, and UNC/Miami. Then you have games like Baylor’s trip to Kansas, which could be great, and plenty more that should be good. Tomorrow is another great college basketball day.
- Iowa State hosts TCU, and focus is the big thing for these Cyclones. They were 16–6 at this point last year and finished 19–14. They’re 17–5 right now. It’s winnable, but they’d do well to assert themselves. The Big 12 regular season title is a longshot, but it’s a real possibility.
Chicago:
- The Bulls beat the tanking Grizzlies in Memphis, further confirming to Artūras Karnišovas that Artūras Karnišovas is a competitive genius. They’ve got the Magic on the road tomorrow night. Trying to gain ground in that race for 8th place!
- The Blackhawks host the Rangers tonight, trying to break that five-game losing streak.
