Geographic Priorities for Seeds

[XUFan09]

At what point in the S-curve does the Selection Committee no longer care about geography when assigning teams to regions? I know other things take priority, like trying to get the seed right and avoiding rematches. For the higher seeds, though, don't they try to put them in the right region as much as possible? I figure there's a certain point where they no longer care and there's no longer mention of trying to get teams in a reasonable region (e.g. maybe non-protected seeds).

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[RoseyMuskie]

I've always been under the impression that it is a factor fairly far down the curve - maybe to spot 40, or a ten seed or so.

That being said, once below the protected point, I think teams either get a more favorable seed, or location, not both. Meaning, a Midwest team might be a 7 in distant location such as the West, or an 8 in a close location.

[X-band '01]

The highest 5 seed, highest 6 seed, etc. do get more priority as far as location; the lowest 5 seed, lowest 6 seed, etc. get less priority. Region balance is only considered when it comes to the top 4 seeds in each region.