Managing Your Madness

Today is the Monday after Selection Sunday, which also means today is the single most unproductive day of the year in offices across the country. Printers are running out of toner trying to keep up with the mass queues of brackets coming hot off the server, browsers are being x-ed out or hastily minimized as supervisors walk by, and all anyone can think about is how to beat that mutant Rob in accounting, who got the Final Four right the past three years. Rob is so annoying.

This day and the next few are filled with anxiety, as people wear through paper, erasing and updating the notorious 8/9 match up, and daring themselves to pick the first 1/16 upset ever. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, right? Generally, yes…but still, don’t ever pick 16 over 1. Ever.

So, as the clock ticks and the Thursday deadline for most brackets approaches, you’re still deciding exactly how you want to mold your own Madness. Not sure how you want to fill it all out? Well, I’ve put together a few potential options to help guide you in the right direction.

I decided to take a look at the different bracket-filling techniques and rank them on merit. To keep it simple, I’ll be judging each on three basic principles on a scale of 1-10. The judgment areas are as follows; Fun Factor, Effectiveness and Honor.

So put down the pencil, close the browser, take a long lunch and when you’re done, hopefully you will have achieved some sort of bracket clarity.

(Sidenote: If you plan on picking Michigan to win any games, stop reading now. I’m not a miracle worker, and even if I was, I wouldn’t help you anyway.)

The Analytical Approach – This technique is the most common, mainly because the people most excited about the tournament are the ones who have been watching games all year, and have some sort of working knowledge about a decent chunk of the teams. Another reason this approach is so common is because anyone who watches sports absolutely KNOWS, 100%, front and back, every team, player, coach and style, so they’re perfectly qualified to make these life or death decisions. What does Roy Williams know anyway? More like Hall of Lame. YOU finished second in a 16-team fantasy basketball league in ’07. Like a BOSS. When using the analytical approach, usually just a single bracket is filled out, no matter how many different groups you’re in. But you know what you’re talking about, and couldn’t be wrong, so there’s no point in making out an alternate one. Alternate brackets are for jerks, right? Right.

Anyway, when it comes to the Fun Factor in the Analytical Approach, there are two sides to the story. Truly knowing what you’re talking about, things like team tendencies, injury issues and match up problems can make for an incredibly rewarding tournament if you make the correct picks. Nothing like telling all your friends how right your logic and attention to detail was, and how wrong they were. However, nothing can ruin your March like a logic-based bracket, shattered by the human elements of effort, desire and the It-Factor. Sometimes NBA Jam is more realistic than you'd think (HE'S ON FIRE!). So for that reason, The Analytical Approach will get a split Fun Factor Score of either 2 or 9/10. Risk versus reward, baby!

Effectiveness of the Analytical Approach is hotly debated, for some of the reasons I just listed. Mainly it comes down to the struggle between measurable metrics and the human element, which will forever be argued. Some years, this approach can make you King Of All That Is Right In The World, and others, it will turn you into a melted pile of awful in the corner who only got three of his or her opening round picks right. For that reason, this is a wash, so it gets a 5/10.

In terms of Honor, the Analytical Approach is hard to refute. Steadfast belief in your method is hard to deny. However, being a total jerk about it, especially when you aren’t as smart as you think, brings what could be a perfect score down to an 8/10. Pride comes before the fall, right Coach?

Final Score: 15/30 OR 22/30.

The Shotgun Approach – I’m not going to mince words, this is by far the lowest form of bracketology. These are the people who fill out 52 brackets, covering every random, bizarre, shot in the dark pick out there, just so by the time the tournament ends they (hopefully) have one that holds up reasonably well. These people then go on and on for a week afterwards, proclaiming what a genius they are for triumphing in the face of all adversity. When their fed-up friends and co-workers point out that it took them 52 attempts to get it marginally right, their shocked retort is something along the lines of, “What, you mean you only filled out one? No wonder you did so poorly, that's your own fault!” Please don’t be like this.

Since this little guide is tailored to the person filling out the bracket, I have to admit the Fun Factor is going to be off the charts for the Shotgun Approach. If it included everyone, it would be well into the negatives since everyone hates you by April, but that isn’t the point here. Filling out a bunch of brackets is fun, keeping up on the scores is fun, and potentially doing well is fun. I’ve got to give the Shotgun Approach’s Fun Factor a 10/10. And it pains me to do so.

Thankfully, Effectiveness will punish those who follow the Shotgun Approach. The more attempts you fail at, the lower your winning percentage. And if you do happen to be correct on a bracket, the preceding and following ones will be completely different to give yourself a better chance if the one that DOES end up being correct, isn’t. So whether you strike it on the head in the first bracket you filled in or the 900th, there will be plenty of other bad brackets in your file that scream out that you’re a loser. Plus, I don’t want anyone to think this technique will work. 1/10.

And as for the Honor in the Shotgun Approach, I counter, “What honor?” No Points for you. Goose egg. And you can take THAT to the Final Four.  0/10.

Final Score: 11/30

The Die-Hard Approach – This is the technique for those who cannot fathom an idea other than picking their team to go all the way, because it is obviously their destiny. Who could be so obtuse as to not recognize that your team is bound for greatness? What gall it takes to even consider picking another team. Your team is all about WINNING. DUH. This person has one branch of their bracket filled out since November, and the only purpose of the months between the start and end of the season is to dictate which teams will lose to their pick. There are two ways to look at this approach. One is that having such unflappable, blind faith in one’s favorite team is respectable because they’re truly invested in the process and willing to deal with constant heartbreak should their team not triumph every year (not that they’ll ever admit it’s possible). It also can be incredibly stupid and annoying, especially if their favorite team perennially sucks and if their favorite team is one you hate. They only fill out one bracket though which is respectable, because none of the other games matter, as long as they result in their team singing along with One Shining Moment (which was written in East Lansing, according to Mark Hollis. Holla!).

The Fun Factor for the Die-Hard Approach is unmatched because the joy the people using this approach get from writing their team’s name in as champion and then working backwards is unmatched. Love living in your house full of fluffy towels, puppies, waterfalls and fire poles? You don’t have anything on the people who use the Die-Hard Approach. And you had better watch out if they’re actually close to being right or actually are right, because they’ll explode and rain down million-dollar bills, candy bars and baby sasquatch everywhere. And have you ever SEEN a baby sasquatch? When they lose, they’re momentarily crushed, but their eternally optimistic drive just focuses attention on next year, when their team will redeem themselves. They’re kind of like Cubs fans, except rational, and sometimes they actually win. 10/10.

Effectiveness Factor usually depends on whether the person is fanatical about a good team or a bad team. Usually the most nutzo, obsessed fans are involved in rooting for programs that have a legitimate shot though, because they’re more easily followed and have a reasonable shot of proving them right. To pick a team that has literally no shot every year would turn this process into torture, so more often than not their teams are generally competitive. But while their teams usually have a shot at the very least, the chances are still very small for one school out of hundreds to pull it out, no matter how good. But hey, they deserve something for their effort. 4/10.

There is something to be said about the irrepressible exuberance someone has in supporting their team to such a degree that they can’t even process the thought of another team winning. There is also something to be said for general reasoning and logic though, which they clearly lack. However, always err on the side of passion, because someone will usually believe you. They get a 7/10 for Honor.

Final Score: 21/30

The Arbitrary/Girlfriend(AG) Approach  – I would first like to clear myself of any animosity and acknowledge there are many women who are massive fans and know far more than men. And there are also plenty of guys who know nothing and don’t care about basketball. But on the flipside, there are still fewer female fans than male in general. But the ones who do get involved and don’t follow the sport or are interested but uninformed form rather interesting techniques to make their picks. And more often than not, they’re surprisingly correct.

I am choosing to exclude the technique where a person makes picks based exclusively on who their partner tells them is cool, good or crappy, because that’s just a branch off the Analytical Approach. The AG Approach is the one where someone makes their picks on points of interest miles removed from the sport and any performance based metrics. Things such as uniforms, haircuts, towns, or where their friend’s nephew goes to school. Flipping coins, rolling dice or having an animal eat a treat to dictate which team will win is what I’m talking about. We hear stories every year about the grandparent who won the family tournament by picking games based on temperatures of school locations or had a friend whose girlfriend beat them handily by picking her preferred mascot (Richmond never gets far in this technique).  There is no reason for any of these decisions, and somehow, they seem to work over every other sort of logic, and they're wildly entertaining to watch unfold. That’s why it’s called March Madness, I suppose.

The Fun Factor for the AG approach is high, mainly because people using this technique have nothing to lose if they do poorly and get massive bragging rights if they do well using some Byzantine guessing system. The method of selection can be anything you want, lifting the enjoyment factor even higher. Besides, who wouldn’t want to say they were right because they picked against Tennessee or Wisconsin because they hate high-top fades? 10/10.

Since there is absolutely no proven method to picking teams, nobody can say your way of doing it is wrong, so there is no quantitative way to prove or disprove this method’s Effectiveness. However, as evidenced by the stories of weird and successful ways of picking seen every year, it seems the more ridiculous method, the more successful. Why use logic when you can use darts, candy and magnets? They get a 7/10 for Effectiveness because WHYNOT.

The Honor Factor is hard to break down here, because on one hand, there is no sneaky thought process, no picking against alma maters and no misinterpretation of statistics, because these people don’t care how their bracket turns out. On the other hand, these people don’t care how their bracket turns out. 5/10.

Final Score: 22/30

So there it is, your potential techniques for filling out your 2011 NCAA Tournament brackets, with the final standings:

#1 - The Analytical Approach (When it works) – 22/30

#1 - The Arbitrary/Girlfriend Approach – 22/30

#3 - The Die-Hard Approach – 21/30

#4 - The Analytical Approach (When it fails) -15/30

#5 - The Shotgun Approach – 11/30

So go forth, brave bracketeers, and fill out your sheets proudly, passionately and carefully. Or maybe sheepishly, indifferently and uncertainly. But whatever you do, don’t fill out 52 of them, because that makes you a jerk and nobody likes jerks and their teams lose every time.