|
Post by c4ndlelight on Oct 20, 2014 12:50:58 GMT -5
Not an analysis - just a compilation. If you have corrections, feel free to provide them, and I'll input them. Florida at #8 is clearly on the edge (even if conference top-25 wins are considered), but would have more top-25 wins than either North Carolina or Oregon. A loss to Texas (1) won't hurt them and a win over Kentucky (11) would match North Carolina (head-to-head). I didn't include top-25 losses. Florida LOST to Marquette - they don't count as a win. They also have minimal opportunities to get more. Colorado St. is already capped out at the same total the other three are tied in right now (and has the thinner resume overall).
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Oct 20, 2014 13:22:57 GMT -5
If I was making a bracket off this, I'd have: 1 Texas 8 Penn State 9 Florida 16 UCLA 2 Stanford 7 Oregon 10 Colorado State 15 BYU 3 Washington 6 North Carolina 11 Nebraska 14 Kentucky 4 Florida State 5 Wisconsin 12 Illinois 13 Arizona Why send Kentucky to Seattle, when there's a regional at Louisville?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 20, 2014 13:27:14 GMT -5
If I was making a bracket off this, I'd have: 1 Texas 8 Penn State 9 Florida 16 UCLA 2 Stanford 7 Oregon 10 Colorado State 15 BYU 3 Washington 6 North Carolina 11 Nebraska 14 Kentucky 4 Florida State 5 Wisconsin 12 Illinois 13 Arizona Why send Kentucky to Seattle, when there's a regional at Louisville? Travel is not a factor for the 3/4 round seeding, only the 1/2 round seeding. The host school is guaranteed to be placed there, if they make the tournament, but the host school is not Kentucky. It is University of Louisville. (Other host schools are Washington, Minnesota, and Iowa State.) It certainly seems likely right now that the only seeded team locked into a region will be Washington. That being said, the committee might well look to Kentucky to be an attendance draw at Louisville and slip them into that bracket, if they end up being seeded.
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Oct 20, 2014 13:33:06 GMT -5
Why send Kentucky to Seattle, when there's a regional at Louisville? Travel is not a factor for the 3/4 round seeding, only the 1/2 round seeding. The host school is guaranteed to be placed there, if they make the tournament, but the host school is not Kentucky. It is University of Louisville. (Other host schools are Washington, Minnesota, and Iowa State.) It certainly seems likely right now that the only seeded team locked into a region will be Washington. Since Louisville will most likely not make it to their own regional, it only makes sense to at least make it possible for Kentucky to reach there for increased audience purposes. Kentucky will be in the lower half of the bracket anyway, forcing them to Seattle for any reason just seems silly.
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Oct 20, 2014 13:36:41 GMT -5
Why send Kentucky to Seattle, when there's a regional at Louisville? Travel is not a factor for the 3/4 round seeding, only the 1/2 round seeding. The host school is guaranteed to be placed there, if they make the tournament, but the host school is not Kentucky. It is University of Louisville. (Other host schools are Washington, Minnesota, and Iowa State.) It certainly seems likely right now that the only seeded team locked into a region will be Washington. That being said, the committee might well look to Kentucky to be an attendance draw at Louisville and slip them into that bracket, if they end up being seeded. If I were on the committee, I would even force Louisville to Kentucky for the first 2 rounds to increase the odds of at least one of them making it to the Louisville regional.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Oct 20, 2014 13:54:11 GMT -5
Florida LOST to Marquette - they don't count as a win. They also have minimal opportunities to get more. Colorado St. is already capped out at the same total the other three are tied in right now (and has the thinner resume overall). Thanks for the clarification. Fixed it. Bluepenguin has Colorado State with two losses - I have them with one, since I don't see where the second loss will come from (Boise St, Utah St, @ San Diego St, @ Fresno St, Air Force, New Mexico, San Jose St, @ Nevada, Wyoming). Do you? Bluepenguin also has Oregon with only three more losses, including two presumably from Stanford and @ Washington, which leaves them with only one loss from Arizona (12), @ Arizona, UCLA (17), and USC (25). I think they lose at least two of those (@ Arizona and UCLA).
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,440
|
Post by bluepenquin on Oct 20, 2014 14:44:06 GMT -5
Florida LOST to Marquette - they don't count as a win. They also have minimal opportunities to get more. Colorado St. is already capped out at the same total the other three are tied in right now (and has the thinner resume overall). Thanks for the clarification. Fixed it. Bluepenguin has Colorado State with two losses - I have them with one, since I don't see where the second loss will come from (Boise St, Utah St, @ San Diego St, @ Fresno St, Air Force, New Mexico, San Jose St, @ Nevada, Wyoming). Do you? Bluepenguin also has Oregon with only three more losses, including two presumably from Stanford and @ Washington, which leaves them with only one loss from Arizona (12), @ Arizona, UCLA (17), and USC (25). I think they lose at least two of those (@ Arizona and UCLA). I wouldn't assume Oregon loses to Stanford. Here are the estimated win probabilites for Oregon with the updated Pablo ratings. Arizona (62.1%) Arizona State (73.1%) Cal (89.8%) Stanford (35.2%) at Washington (24.3%) at Washington State (81.3%) at Arizona (53.1%) at Arizona State (64.9%) UCLA (64.6%) USC (69.2%) at Utah (74.3%) at Oregon State (68.7%) Favored to win 10 of their remaining games and I am guessing their total win probability for the year is between 13 and 14 conference wins. I don't think Colorado State moves past Oregon in the final RPI with one more win and Oregon with one more loss, but I am not sure that would matter that much to the committee.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 20, 2014 15:18:25 GMT -5
Travel is not a factor for the 3/4 round seeding, only the 1/2 round seeding. The host school is guaranteed to be placed there, if they make the tournament, but the host school is not Kentucky. It is University of Louisville. (Other host schools are Washington, Minnesota, and Iowa State.) It certainly seems likely right now that the only seeded team locked into a region will be Washington. That being said, the committee might well look to Kentucky to be an attendance draw at Louisville and slip them into that bracket, if they end up being seeded. If I were on the committee, I would even force Louisville to Kentucky for the first 2 rounds to increase the odds of at least one of them making it to the Louisville regional. THAT completely degrades the integrity of the seeding process. I can understand adjusting seeds for the actual host school, but Kentucky is not the host school and therefore should receive any other benefit other than what can be applicable to other schools also wanting a seed.
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Oct 20, 2014 15:41:53 GMT -5
... the integrity of the seeding process... Were you able to say that with a straight face?
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Oct 20, 2014 15:47:31 GMT -5
It's kind of amusing to have a knowledgeable fan like you make a point based on how something "degrades the integrity of the seeding process". Your point assumes that there is integrity in the seeding (and bracketing) process, which we see year after year is not the case.
Assuming Kentucky has a high enough RPI to justify a seed, the shocking result (based on observation of how the committee has operated in the past) would be if they weren't placed in the Louisville region. And, if Kentucky is hosting the 1st weekend, and Louisville sneaks into the field (not a given at this point), there is a high probability of them being sent to play at Kentucky.
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Oct 20, 2014 15:50:58 GMT -5
Although geography should not interfere with seeding, as a general rule it is not unusual to find situations like Washington and BYU(Hawaii) in the SC regional last year, with Kansas as fourth. Teams do get seeded geographically, if feasible. Then there is Stanford in Kentucky. Oh, well.
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Oct 20, 2014 17:00:50 GMT -5
Sadly, volleyball's fan base at many schools (exceptions being Hawaii & Nebraska) is not strong enough to allow the committee to ignore geography when placing teams in brackets.
What's worse, giving Kentucky an seemingly unfair advantage in the tournament, or having a regional match on national television in front of 120 fans?
Deny it they might, but the NCAA is still a business. And in this case it makes good business sense to prop up your product before you worry about not being impure.
|
|
|
Post by tempesthorn on Oct 20, 2014 18:02:26 GMT -5
If I were on the committee, I would even force Louisville to Kentucky for the first 2 rounds to increase the odds of at least one of them making it to the Louisville regional. THAT completely degrades the integrity of the seeding process. I can understand adjusting seeds for the actual host school, but Kentucky is not the host school and therefore should receive any other benefit other than what can be applicable to other schools also wanting a seed. Stanford was sent to the Cal regional when Cal wasn't seeded as recently as 2012. Do you believe that was just how the seedings fell? Since 2001, there was only one time where 2 regions were without a host. This year it will likely be 3. Coupled with the fact you have so many regionals in the center of the country, I would not be surprised to see Kentucky as a lock for the Louisville regional and Nebraska as a lock for Ames. They are not going to want 3 regionals with less than 500 fans.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 20, 2014 18:07:01 GMT -5
As far as I know, there are no pre-assigned regionals toward the seeds, so unless Kentucky is in a regional with some other host, what's wrong with assigning them to the Louisville regional? Unless someone seeded higher in their regional has a location as nearby, what would be the issue? It's not seeding according to geography, it's putting them in a regional that is close by.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Oct 20, 2014 19:12:22 GMT -5
Florida LOST to Marquette - they don't count as a win. They also have minimal opportunities to get more. Colorado St. is already capped out at the same total the other three are tied in right now (and has the thinner resume overall). Thanks for the clarification. Fixed it. Bluepenguin has Colorado State with two losses - I have them with one, since I don't see where the second loss will come from (Boise St, Utah St, @ San Diego St, @ Fresno St, Air Force, New Mexico, San Jose St, @ Nevada, Wyoming). Do you? Bluepenguin also has Oregon with only three more losses, including two presumably from Stanford and @ Washington, which leaves them with only one loss from Arizona (12), @ Arizona, UCLA (17), and USC (25). I think they lose at least two of those (@ Arizona and UCLA). Even with your pessimistic view of Oregon, they'd still end up with 4 Top 25 wins by the end of the season, doubling up CSU, with UNC and Florida not able to surpass that even if they win out...... And that's not even getting into overall SOS or UO v CSU Top 50 wins (11 v 3!!). And that's assuming Oregon drops two matches Pablo favors them in and CSU doesn't lose - they couldn't run the table in the MWC last year, and the conference is way deeper this year.
|
|