Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
NCAA selection process
Author Message
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,640
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 54
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE
Post: #21
RE: NCAA selection process
yo dback, you talking about BYU NC season in 1984 [13-0]
#4 Washington [10-1] & #7So Car [10-1] could have played in Holiday bowl
both turned it down for more prestize game vs name opponent for more money
well #2 Okla got beat & #3 Fla was on probation

i like the yr '96 Fla stole BYU oppertunity in rematch with FSU, FSU beat them your out
#2 Ariz St #4 OSU contractally had to go Rose Bowl, #3 Fla just got beat
#5 BYU up next
(This post was last modified: 07-15-2017 01:11 AM by templefootballfan.)
07-15-2017 12:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
owl at the moon Online
Eastern Screech Owl
*

Posts: 2,850
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 64
I Root For: Rice:NatlChamps
Location: 17mi from Waranch TC
Post: #22
NCAA selection process
(07-14-2017 10:45 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  So does this change anything Steve? Is this really going to push more mid-majors into the tournament? Or is this just fluff to make someone feel better about the process?

A step in the right direction, toward "more fair", as in still Power Conference biased, but less egregiously so.

Seems to me the last 3-4 years there's been at least one mid-major egregiously left out. If this gets most of those guys in (and I'm talking on average one a year tops) then it is all of the above. Feel good fluff (in the sense it doesn't upset the $$ Apple Cart) but hopefully correcting the very worst of the oversights.
07-15-2017 01:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 12,509
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #23
RE: NCAA selection process
Emphasizing and rewarding quality wins is good, and obviously an improvement over nonsense arguments like "Any win is a good win and any team with 25 wins is deserving no matter who they beat."

But the elephant in the room here is that the selection committee will continue to use the bogus RPI as a metric for this upcoming season and won't stop looking at RPI until the 2018-19 season at the earliest. See the last paragraph of this article:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/col...story.html

It would be far better if the committee junked RPI altogether. This tweak isn't a bad thing but it's not nearly enough. It just amounts to putting lipstick on the RPI pig.
07-15-2017 02:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,544
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #24
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-14-2017 01:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Just saw this....
There still will be four separate columns, with the first column consisting of home games against teams ranked 1-30, neutral-site games against teams ranked in the top 50 and road games against opponents ranked in the top 75. The second column will include home games against teams ranked 31-75, neutral-site games versus teams ranked 51-100 and road games against teams ranked 76-135.

The third column will consist of home games played against competition ranked 76-160, games played on a neutral court versus teams ranked 101-200 and games on the road against teams ranked 136-240. The fourth column will include home games against teams ranked 161-351, neutral-site games played against teams ranked 201-351 and road games versus opponents ranked 241-351.


So for instance- last year a team like #1 Villanova(by RPI going into tourney)

old way-
12-2 vs top 50
5-1 vs 51-100
9-0 vs 101-200
5-0 vs 201-351

new way-
11-2 vs tier 1(2-1 home top 30, 4-0 neutral top 50, 5-2 vs away top 75)
7-1 vs tier 2(5-1 vs h 31-75, 1-0 vs N 51-100, 1-0 a 76-135)
9-0 vs tier 3(3-0 vs h 76-160, 1-0 vs N 101-200, 5-0 vs a 136-240)
4-0 vs tier 4(4-0 vs h 161+)

Seems pretty reasonable.

Stever curious as to your analysis of the mid tier Big East teams. My perception is they got a lot of quality wins against top 50 teams at home. How does it affect a Illinois State versus a Marquette?
07-15-2017 08:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,544
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #25
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-14-2017 11:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I really don't think it's going to impact the mid majors as some folks think. I mean, look at what I posted earlier with Illinois St. I think any games that they might gain in the 51-75 road category they may lose in the 31-50 home range.

Great analysis. I wonder more if it will reduce the bad loss possibilities going on the road in conference games. Some of those 160 teams on the road can be a tough out yet the mid majors face many more of them.
07-15-2017 08:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CougarRed Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,426
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 269
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #26
RE: NCAA selection process
Ken Pomeroy started pushing for this 18 months ago.

http://kenpom.com/blog/tiers-of-joy/

In 2017, Pomeroy used 27/50/82 for Top 50 equivalent wins home/neutral/away, and 63/100/135 for Top 100 equivalent wins.

The NCAA used almost the same formula, picking a midpoint between 63 and 82 (i.e. 75) for consistency.

The NCAA will use 30/50/75 and 75/100/135.

***************

Clearly, the new rules mean Top 30, Top 75 and Top 135 become huge lines of demarcation. Sucks to play teams ranked 31, 76 or 136. A conference needs as many teams in those groupings as possible to maximize their quality wins/games.

**************

The NCAA will also experiment with various composite rankings in 2017-18 instead of just the RPI in hopes of coming up with a permanent composite rank for use in 2018-19 and beyond.
(This post was last modified: 07-15-2017 04:04 PM by CougarRed.)
07-15-2017 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,811
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 276
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #27
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-15-2017 02:24 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Emphasizing and rewarding quality wins is good, and obviously an improvement over nonsense arguments like "Any win is a good win and any team with 25 wins is deserving no matter who they beat."

But the elephant in the room here is that the selection committee will continue to use the bogus RPI as a metric for this upcoming season and won't stop looking at RPI until the 2018-19 season at the earliest. See the last paragraph of this article:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/col...story.html

It would be far better if the committee junked RPI altogether. This tweak isn't a bad thing but it's not nearly enough. It just amounts to putting lipstick on the RPI pig.

And the issue remains: Top 50 according to whom? Or Top Anything, for that matter.

To me, a better approach is to evaluate conferences' performance in recent NCAAT's, and award a specified # of bids to each conference based on that. Then, let the conferences pick their representatives, after which a seeding committee will decide where they go. I think you could bet that conferences would make their picks based on their conference standings, and not on some metric like RPI.
07-15-2017 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CougarRed Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,426
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 269
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #28
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-15-2017 09:39 AM)ken d Wrote:  And the issue remains: Top 50 according to whom?

As I stated, they are moving towards a composite.
07-15-2017 09:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,811
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 276
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #29
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-15-2017 09:46 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  
(07-15-2017 09:39 AM)ken d Wrote:  And the issue remains: Top 50 according to whom?

As I stated, they are moving towards a composite.

One thing I learned over years of data analysis is this. If each element of the data you are analyzing is, on its own merits, garbage, then adding all of those elements together and calculating an average or aggregate score will also produce a result that is garbage.

You can't "fix" faulty data by aggregating it.
07-15-2017 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 28,331
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 263
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #30
RE: NCAA selection process
(07-15-2017 01:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  
(07-14-2017 10:45 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  So does this change anything Steve? Is this really going to push more mid-majors into the tournament? Or is this just fluff to make someone feel better about the process?

A step in the right direction, toward "more fair", as in still Power Conference biased, but less egregiously so.

Seems to me the last 3-4 years there's been at least one mid-major egregiously left out. If this gets most of those guys in (and I'm talking on average one a year tops) then it is all of the above. Feel good fluff (in the sense it doesn't upset the $$ Apple Cart) but hopefully correcting the very worst of the oversights.

Thing is that Illinois St like I showed would have gotten dinged pretty good with the new stuff....

tier 1- old 1-2 new 0-3
tier 2- old 1-2 new 1-2- cumulative old- 2-4 new 1-5
tier 3- old 13-1 new 12-1
tier 4- old 11-1 new 13-0

So I don't see how Illinois St would have magically gotten in as a result of this.

Meanwhile- Kansas St- the last team in the tourney
tier 1- old 4-9 new 6-8
tier 2- old 2-2 new 0-4 cumulative old 6-11 new 6-12
tier 3- old 8-2 new 6-1
tier 4- old 6-0 new 8-0

If anything Kansas St is helped by things as they now have 2 more tier 1 wins.
07-15-2017 12:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.