|
Post by rogero1 on Nov 17, 2014 4:40:13 GMT -5
With 10 Pac-12 teams in, what are the chances of having an all Pac-12 regional (assuming that they all win)?
|
|
|
Post by volleyfan24 on Nov 17, 2014 5:09:21 GMT -5
I love your bracket. I really hope it pans out this way. Ten is like getting the entire conference in yikes really speaks to the depth and how good the teams are in the conference I think this will serve all teams well come tournament time. I think the more interesting question is where these non-seeded Pac-12 teams will be placed. Colorado is almost surely going to CSU. It remains to be seen what subregional USC, UCLA (assuming they don't get a seed), Utah, Arizona State, and Oregon State will be in, as these teams will have to travel so their subregional could be anywhere. If these teams can land in the Kansas State/Kentucky/Iowa State subregional, I think all the Pac-12 teams can beat those teams. Will they is a different story, but I like their chances. If there is a Pac-12 team in the Kansas State, Kentucky, and Iowa State subregional, in addition to Colorado State (which we know Colorado will be in), and given 5 likely seeds, I'm going to go on record and predict that not only will the Pac-12 set a record for most bids to the tournament, but they will also set a record with 8 teams to make the sweet 16. I agree with you I really would love to see this CSU-CU match up I know you have the Buffs but I think they are way too inconsistent they beat Washington in 5 then almost lose to Washington State if there is one thing CSU is is consistent. They won't beat themselves I could see them beating Colorado but I would assume it would be a good match and certainly one of the most intriguing ones. I don't know how many other PAC schools could make noise in the tournament with potential upsets the middle is so jumbled I liked UCLA and Oregon but they seem to be losing steam.
|
|
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: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 17, 2014 9:06:02 GMT -5
Blue, Thanks for looking at Scheduling Bonus already, I missed that in your first post. There will be a few bubble teams with penalties for 167+ losses for us to keep an eye on. You can look at ncaastats.figstats.net/volleyball-rpi.cgi or RKPI to get the basic RPI numbers. Then by looking at what teams are listed in different order in NCAA RPI, you can see how much the basic number must have changed to have teams in different order. If you look at rpiarchive.ncaa.org it appears that they calculate an "original" rpi for each week, then create an "adjusted" rpi list by applying the bonuses and penalties to the "original" rpi list. So the top 25 win bonus looks at "original" rpi list, and the top 50 scheduling bonus looks at the same "original" list. We could probably look at some bottom PAC12 teams with no top 25 wins, but that get Schedule Bonus, and see how far they are moved up on NCAA RPI list to see approximately what that bonus is. And then find a team with just one top 25 win, but without schedule bonus (or any penalties) and compare their basic RPI ranking with NCAA list to find the range of the top25 win bonus. Same for penalties. Does that make sense? Let's pick a couple teams and try it this week. Hmmm. Although we will have to find a team that is bracketed by teams that aren't receiving bonus or penalty also. Thanks for the clarification on the top 25 win - I don't know how they could do it any other way without having an endless loop. What you have outlined can be done - however the remaining issue is that my program is set up for season ending RPI as opposed to current RPI. I need to calculate the current RPI w/o adjustments and compare to the NCAA RPI rankings - and I am not in position to do that at the moment. One other potential problem - for OOC w/l % I am using the percentage of the combined wins and losses of the opponents (subracting out the results of the H2H match) as opposed to the average of the opponents w/l%. I am not sure which one the NCAA uses - I am guessing the latter. I don't think this results in much differences, but...
|
|
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: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 17, 2014 9:22:13 GMT -5
Given that, I see this bracket LOUISVILLE 1 Stanford 16 UCLA/Nebraska/Kansas/Kentucky 9 Illinois 8 Florida MINNEAPOLIS 5 Wisconsin 12 Kansas State 13 Arizona 4 FSU SEATTLE 3 Washington 14 UCLA/Nebraska/Kansas/Kentucky* 11 Oregon 6 North Carolina AMES 7 Penn State 10 Colorado State 15 Iowa State* 2 Texas The asterisks is to note that I think that Iowa State should have the #14 seed over the others, but Iowa State is a regional host and can't be in a regional with Washington. The 15/16 spot could go to a number of teams, it depends on what the Committee values most. UCLA has the most number of significant wins among the three, Nebraska would have the highest overall SOS among the three, Kentucky has the best Win/Loss ratio among the three and they are really close to Louisville (ugh), Kansas because they are in the RPI range. I just think that given the primary criteria, if the committee actually followed it, we really shouldn't be seeing anything too different (given this data set). Perhaps a spot or two shift, such as Washington and FSU (3/4) switching, or Wisconsin and North Carolina (5/6) switching or PSU and Florida switching (7/8). Given the primary criteria I think the top 8 seeds could easily fall with RPI and we get (1)Stanford/(8)PSU, (2)Texas/(7)Florida, (3)FSU/(6)North Carolina, (4)Washington/(5)Wisconsin. This of course would be DISASTROUS bracket, but the primary criteria can easily justify it, and it's not like the committee didn't give us something similar last year (Stanford/PSU regional, All Pac-12 Regional, All SEC Regional) This is pretty much where I see the top 11. Florida and PSU could easily be either 7th or 8th. And if Florida beats Texas... A lot left in determing the final 5. As for the Disastrous bracket - which I agree would be a bad result - I think this may not happen because the Minnesota regional Needs Wisconsin. If I am wrong about that, then it becomes very possible that Wisconsin goes to Washington. And the Disastrous bracket is just as bad for the ACC as for the rest of the conferences. The ACC has a chance for 2 teams in the FF - but not if both are in the same regional. I can say the SEC fans were not anymore happy about the Florida/Missouri regional last year as anyone else. Penn State is similar to Stanford last season - no one is going to want them in their regional, but their RPI is going to push them to a much worse seed position. I would also rather see them in different regions this year.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 17, 2014 9:26:35 GMT -5
Colorado St. is going to be a 4 seed. 10 is too high for their resume. Only 4 Top 50 matches, a loss outside T50.
Can Marquette drop out of the Top 25 if they lose in the Big East tourney?
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Nov 17, 2014 9:35:36 GMT -5
Given the primary criteria I think the top 8 seeds could easily fall with RPI and we get (1)Stanford/(8)PSU, (2)Texas/(7)Florida, (3)FSU/(6)North Carolina, (4)Washington/(5)Wisconsin. This of course would be DISASTROUS bracket, but the primary criteria can easily justify it, and it's not like the committee didn't give us something similar last year (Stanford/PSU regional, All Pac-12 Regional, All SEC Regional) Can you imagine?! What a nightmare. Stanford and PSU in the same region again, just like last year (and a seeded rematch of an earlier meeting this season); Texas and Florida, Round 3; FSU and UNC, Round 3; and Wisconsin at Washington for a second time this season. I pray the committee wouldn't do this.
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Nov 17, 2014 9:37:54 GMT -5
I like the bracket too, but if UCLA and Oregon are sent to Seattle, that could put 3 Pac schools in one regional. Which seems overkill...despite the committees hard and valiant work each year to try to keep more than 1 Pac team out of the FF.
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Nov 17, 2014 9:45:18 GMT -5
I like the bracket too, but if UCLA and Oregon are sent to Seattle, that could put 3 Pac schools in one regional. Which seems overkill...despite the committees hard and valiant work each year to try to keep more than 1 Pac team out of the FF. If 10 PAC teams make it, it is probable that 3 PAC schools will be in each of 2 regions, so the likelihood of 3 making it to the regional semis is possible in 2 regions. It is quite possible 4 PAC teams will be in one region, with 2 PAC teams in the 3 other regions.
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Nov 17, 2014 9:56:33 GMT -5
Blue, While you are tracking top 50 wins, can you also see who has scheduled the majority of their matches versus top 50 teams? By comparing final rpi with adjusted rpi of affected teams, we should be able to derive the actual numerical amount of the Bonus and Penalty. Factor IV: Bonus: Scheduling majority of matches against teams ranked 1-50 in the RPI and for wins against teams ranked 1-25 in RPI. Penalty: Scheduling majority of matches against teams 167 and above in RPI and for losses against teams 167 and above and non-Division I teams. I think that Factor IV bonus is so dumb. You cannot control what your conference does. Since the majority of most teams matches are against their conference foes (>60% for many), you are forced to schedule a majority of teams who may end up with a certain RPI that falls below 50, and since there are 334 D1 teams, you have a very small chance of playing those teams. If they want to use just OOC, then maybe it would be ok. But still not quite fair. You schedule a year or two in advance, that team ends up not being very good, even though they were good a couple years in a row before this, and you are penalized. Did people think Michigan, Minnesota, Cal, Northern Iowa, Wichita State, Louisville would be outside the top 50 this year?
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 17, 2014 9:58:19 GMT -5
I like the bracket too, but if UCLA and Oregon are sent to Seattle, that could put 3 Pac schools in one regional. Which seems overkill...despite the committees hard and valiant work each year to try to keep more than 1 Pac team out of the FF. If 10 PAC teams make it, it is probable that 3 PAC schools will be in each of 2 regions, so the likelihood of 3 making it to the regional semis is possible in 2 regions. It is quite possible 4 PAC teams will be in one region, with 2 PAC teams in the 3 other regions. I think the issue is more to put 3 of the 5 SEEDED PAC teams in one region. That's a pretty bad imbalance, which would be solved by my "Top 3 teams from each conference in different regions" proposal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 10:05:20 GMT -5
As many anticipated, the Big Ten has evolved into a monster league again this season. Early on, with so many freshmen and sophomores in key roles, the Big Ten was vulnerable. Not so much any more. I love to see the faces on Florida, North Carolina, Florida State, or a handful of other top dozen seeds when they learn the 4th, 5th, or 6th place Big Ten team will be visiting them for a first or second round NCAA match-up.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 17, 2014 10:07:52 GMT -5
As many anticipated, the Big Ten has evolved into a monster league again this season. Early on, with so many freshmen and sophomores in key roles, the Big Ten was vulnerable. Not so much any more. I love to see the faces on Florida, North Carolina, Florida State, or a handful of other top dozen seeds when they learn the 4th, 5th, or 6th place Big Ten team will be visiting them for a first or second round NCAA match-up. And what do you base that on? Wisconsin and Penn St. are both powerhouses, no doubt. After that? Not too many monsters. I watched FSU-UNC - Purdue and Ohio St. are going to have to significantly up their level if they want to take either of them down. (*I do like either team's chances against Kentucky though)
|
|
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: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 17, 2014 11:23:50 GMT -5
If 10 PAC teams make it, it is probable that 3 PAC schools will be in each of 2 regions, so the likelihood of 3 making it to the regional semis is possible in 2 regions. It is quite possible 4 PAC teams will be in one region, with 2 PAC teams in the 3 other regions. I think the issue is more to put 3 of the 5 SEEDED PAC teams in one region. That's a pretty bad imbalance, which would be solved by my "Top 3 teams from each conference in different regions" proposal. I think/hope the only way 3 Pac seeded teams are in the same region is if their are 5 seeded teams. I am a big proponent of conference balance like NCAA Men's Basketball, but losing money and filling up seats have a prioriety with VB. I don't think this would be all that terrible. Having Washington and Stanford in the same regional would be terrible. Also, there just isn't that much difference between the #4 and 5 teams in the Pac 12 that may get seeded and the 5 teams below them that will not get a seed. And those teams will be spread out to other regions. The 4th and 5th seeded teams probably will only have around a 60% chance of making it out of their sub-regional anyway. I can see Colorado State having a lower seed - Maybe Nebraska wins one of their big matches at the end of the season and moves up to #10 and CSU becomes #15? Unless Iowa State gets a seed, I think they want Nebraska in Aimes. It may be tough to justify #10 or 11 that will fit in that spot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 11:38:44 GMT -5
Given the primary criteria I think the top 8 seeds could easily fall with RPI and we get (1)Stanford/(8)PSU, (2)Texas/(7)Florida, (3)FSU/(6)North Carolina, (4)Washington/(5)Wisconsin. This of course would be DISASTROUS bracket, but the primary criteria can easily justify it, and it's not like the committee didn't give us something similar last year (Stanford/PSU regional, All Pac-12 Regional, All SEC Regional) Can you imagine?! What a nightmare. Stanford and PSU in the same region again, just like last year (and a seeded rematch of an earlier meeting this season); Texas and Florida, Round 3; FSU and UNC, Round 3; and Wisconsin at Washington for a second time this season. I pray the committee wouldn't do this. agreed, this would be a poor draw and one that doesn't best represent who the top teams are in the nation. FSU 3rd seed....
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 17, 2014 12:52:29 GMT -5
[quote author=" bluepenquin" source="/post/1222280/thread" timestamp="1416233162 [/quote]Thanks for the clarification on the top 25 win - I don't know how they could do it any other way without having an endless loop. What you have outlined can be done - however the remaining issue is that my program is set up for season ending RPI as opposed to current RPI. I need to calculate the current RPI w/o adjustments and compare to the NCAA RPI rankings - and I am not in position to do that at the moment. One other potential problem - for OOC w/l % I am using the percentage of the combined wins and losses of the opponents (subracting out the results of the H2H match) as opposed to the average of the opponents w/l%. I am not sure which one the NCAA uses - I am guessing the latter. I don't think this results in much differences, but... [/quote] Don't worry about those things we can use RKPI or ncaastats.figstats.net/volleyball-rpi.cgi for basic rpi calculations. One other thing to look at for your Futures is that some of the B1G teams may get the Schedule Bonus. With the unbalanced schedule, it won't be everyone, but with Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, and Northwestern hovering around 50 rpi, it could easily happen.
|
|