|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 18, 2014 17:46:01 GMT -5
Ok, more anti-Miami bias! Not surprising from a PAC-12 homer though. Both coasts will naturally have greater support for "their" teams, as will the middle of the country. PAC 12 may beat up on each other but there are a bunch of teams that are better than their records show. Last I looked, eight PAC teams are Top 25 in AVCA. Looks like they're getting due respect. It's a high quality conference. I'm not sure how Miami could have "arranged" for a high RPI. And to say "what have they accomplished" is to denigrate their season completely. I wouldn't say 11-3 to date in the ACC is accomplishing nothing. If you want to argue no quality wins, that's an easier one. They played the top 3 ACC teams and lost each match. Granted the Duke and UNC matches were both away, and they took FSU to 5. But if there are better teams who had better overall seasons than Miami then those teams should get in. i don't envy the committee in making selections! One question: Should Miami get in if they finish with 0 Top-50 wins? it depends on which team would replace them
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Nov 18, 2014 18:00:48 GMT -5
I have been playing with geographical bracketing today and noticed you have UCF included in both your AQ and At-Large Bid lists. At this point in time, who would you add to the field from your "First Four Out" list? Pacific, Michigan State, Pittsburgh or Southern Methodist? I'm not sure.. I want to say Pacific... But maybe Michigan State? It could also go to Lipscomb, W. Ky, Ohio, etc) Next week i'm going to make a whole bracket since most of the AQ's will be determined. I put together a bracket today using your field of teams (adding Pacific to cover the second UCF slot). Comments regarding other methodology and outcome issues: 1. I set the seeds using Rich Kern's projected year-end RKPI and was able to place them in the bracket in order by their projected ranking. 2. I then looked at the 16 teams with the highest projected RKPI and matched them up with the 16 seeded teams, doing this geographically to the greatest extent possible. 3. I then placed the remaining 32 teams into the bracket, again doing this geographically to the greatest extent possible. 4. My resulting bracket has 20 teams traveling more than 400 miles the first weekend of the tournament. This is in line with the average number over the past 5-7 years, and actually on the low end of what we have been seeing since the change allowing seeded teams to automatically host (provided they submit a qualifying bid). I don't have time right now, but if you're interested, I could post my "bracket" sometime over the next couple of days.
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Nov 18, 2014 18:37:48 GMT -5
Always happy to see brackets. I hold off until, say, Sunday when the automatic qualifiers are really filling in and surprises, too.
Skullars was questioning my phrasing on "arranging" a high RPI. You do that by scheduling matches v. teams that will eventually be at or near the top of their conference, no matter how lowly.50% of RPI is Oppositions Won Loss record, so if you play a team that will win it's league (and bribe that coach not to schedule other difficult opponents so his OOC record as well as league record are great), no matter how bad that league, it's a good move. Scheduling a bunch of teams that will end the season 20-10, even with a 200+ RPI, will do wonders for YOUR RPI. West Coast people howl because there are limited opportunities to schedule out here, with three major leagues on the coast, the Big Sky, and maybe Mountain West. If a WCC team wants to schedule easy they are not going to the Pac 12, and Hawaii and LBSU in the Big West are actually good teams that fill their schedule up quickly (or in LBSU's case, travel to meet sound opponents). That's how you arrange to get RPI up.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Nov 19, 2014 8:15:05 GMT -5
Freeball, I, for one, would be very interested in seeing your bracket!
|
|
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: 12,381
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 19, 2014 9:22:57 GMT -5
Ok, more anti-Miami bias! Not surprising from a PAC-12 homer though. Both coasts will naturally have greater support for "their" teams, as will the middle of the country. PAC 12 may beat up on each other but there are a bunch of teams that are better than their records show. Last I looked, eight PAC teams are Top 25 in AVCA. Looks like they're getting due respect. It's a high quality conference. I'm not sure how Miami could have "arranged" for a high RPI. And to say "what have they accomplished" is to denigrate their season completely. I wouldn't say 11-3 to date in the ACC is accomplishing nothing. If you want to argue no quality wins, that's an easier one. They played the top 3 ACC teams and lost each match. Granted the Duke and UNC matches were both away, and they took FSU to 5. But if there are better teams who had better overall seasons than Miami then those teams should get in. i don't envy the committee in making selections! One question: Should Miami get in if they finish with 0 Top-50 wins? The case of Miami. Everyone that looks at their resume is concluding they just don't belong in the tournament. They have an RPI of 27 and essentially no wins against a top 50 team (Pittsburgh and Virginia Tech are possibly top 50 wins). It is easy to say - this is another RPI quirk that has given Miami an undeserved boost in RPI. However, Miami ranks #27 in their Pablo rating. So I thought I would dig deeper into Miami and see if I can figure out what is clearly not apparent on the surfice. Spoiler alert - I am still searching. I decided to compare Miami to 4 other teams from different regions and conferences. Teams that have at least some top 50 wins and most have impressive top 25 wins. These are also teams that everyone agree belongs in the tournament, but each has a Pablo rating worse than Miami. The teams - Ohio State, Texas A&M, Cal State Northridge, and Oklahoma. For these 5 teams I looked at two metrics; 1) % of points won, and 2) SOS. For SOS, I took the average Pablo rating (not ranking) for each opponent for each set played. I also adjusted for HCA (Miami gets penalized due to having more home court matches and CSNU gets a boost for playing more matches on the road). For those 5 teams, Miami has the highest % of points won: 1) Miami (53.15%) 2) CSNU (52.65%) 3) Texas A&M (51.66) 4) Ohio State (51.58) 5) Oklahoma (51.45) However, Miami also has played the easiest schedule (avg Pablo rating per set of opponent): 1) Ohio State (5852) 2) Oklahoma (5809) 3) Texas A&M (5678) 4) CSNU (5612) 5) Miami (5533) I don't know the correct relationship between % of points won and SOS to determine which from above has played the best. However, I don't know how Miami has the best Pablo rating of these teams? 1) Miami (27) 2) Ohio State (28) 3) Oklahoma (36) 4) CSNU (39) 5) Texas A&M (48) I realize Pablo is way more complicated than this little analysis - but I was kind of expecting something under the surface to jump out before doing this exercise. I would suggest that Miami and CSNU have very similar resume's w/o any huge wins.
|
|
|
Post by dawgs4life on Nov 19, 2014 10:17:02 GMT -5
I'm not sure.. I want to say Pacific... But maybe Michigan State? It could also go to Lipscomb, W. Ky, Ohio, etc) Next week i'm going to make a whole bracket since most of the AQ's will be determined. I put together a bracket today using your field of teams (adding Pacific to cover the second UCF slot). Comments regarding other methodology and outcome issues: 1. I set the seeds using Rich Kern's projected year-end RKPI and was able to place them in the bracket in order by their projected ranking. 2. I then looked at the 16 teams with the highest projected RKPI and matched them up with the 16 seeded teams, doing this geographically to the greatest extent possible. 3. I then placed the remaining 32 teams into the bracket, again doing this geographically to the greatest extent possible. 4. My resulting bracket has 20 teams traveling more than 400 miles the first weekend of the tournament. This is in line with the average number over the past 5-7 years, and actually on the low end of what we have been seeing since the change allowing seeded teams to automatically host (provided they submit a qualifying bid). I don't have time right now, but if you're interested, I could post my "bracket" sometime over the next couple of days. I would love to see it, please!
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Nov 19, 2014 21:12:14 GMT -5
Using the methodology described in my post yesterday, here is a bracket projection. Teams with (T) behind their name are traveling more than 400 miles. I used the NCAA calculator to check some of the mileage figures and now show a total of 23 teams in this group. That number is still in line with the average we have seen over the past 5-7 years.
Louisville Region
1 Stanford vs. New Hampshire (T) CSUN vs. Santa Clara
16 Kentucky vs. Murray State Ohio State vs. Lipscomb
8 Oregon vs. Hofstra (T) Hawaii (T) vs. Oklahoma (T)
9 Illinois vs. Oakland Western Kentucky vs. Illinois State
Seattle Region
4 Washington vs. Idaho State (T) Pacific (T) vs. LSU (T)
13 Colorado State vs. Denver Colorado vs. BYU (T)
5 North Carolina vs. Hampton Arizona State (T) vs. Loyola Marymount (T)
12 Arizona vs. American (T) San Diego (T) vs. LBSU (T)
Ames Region
2 Texas vs. Stephen F. Austin Texas A&M vs. Purdue (T)
15 Iowa State vs. Harvard (T) Creighton vs. UCLA (T)
7 Florida vs. Alabama State UCF vs. Miami (FL)
10 Penn State vs. Dayton LIU-Brooklyn vs. Ohio
Minneapolis Region
3 Florida State vs. Samford Alabama vs. Utah (T)
14 Nebraska vs. Radford (T) Kansas State vs. Oregon State (T)
6 Wisconsin vs. Marist (T) Marquette vs. Duke (T)
11 Kansas vs. UMKC UALR (T) vs. USC (T)
|
|
|
Post by hapaguy on Nov 19, 2014 22:20:05 GMT -5
Using the methodology described in my post yesterday, here is a bracket projection. Teams with (T) behind their name are traveling more than 400 miles. I used the NCAA calculator to check some of the mileage figures and now show a total of 23 teams in this group. That number is still in line with the average we have seen over the past 5-7 years. Louisville Region1 Stanford vs. New Hampshire (T) CSUN vs. Santa Clara 16 Kentucky vs. Murray State Ohio State vs. Lipscomb 8 Oregon vs. Hofstra (T) Hawaii (T) vs. Oklahoma (T)9 Illinois vs. Oakland Western Kentucky vs. Illinois State Hawaii in the Louisville Region....that would be terrific!
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Nov 19, 2014 23:37:07 GMT -5
Using the methodology described in my post yesterday, here is a bracket projection. Teams with (T) behind their name are traveling more than 400 miles. I used the NCAA calculator to check some of the mileage figures and now show a total of 23 teams in this group. That number is still in line with the average we have seen over the past 5-7 years. Louisville Region1 Stanford vs. New Hampshire (T) CSUN vs. Santa Clara 16 Kentucky vs. Murray State Ohio State vs. Lipscomb 8 Oregon vs. Hofstra (T) Hawaii (T) vs. Oklahoma (T) 9 Illinois vs. Oakland Western Kentucky vs. Illinois State Seattle Region4 Washington vs. Idaho State (T) Pacific (T) vs. LSU (T) 13 Colorado State vs. Denver Colorado vs. BYU (T) 5 North Carolina vs. Hampton Arizona State (T) vs. Loyola Marymount (T) 12 Arizona vs. American (T) San Diego (T) vs. LBSU (T) Ames Region2 Texas vs. Stephen F. Austin Texas A&M vs. Purdue (T) 15 Iowa State vs. Harvard (T) Creighton vs. UCLA (T) 7 Florida vs. Alabama State UCF vs. Miami (FL) 10 Penn State vs. Dayton LIU-Brooklyn vs. Ohio Minneapolis Region3 Florida State vs. Samford Alabama vs. Utah (T) 14 Nebraska vs. Radford (T) Kansas State vs. Oregon State (T) 6 Wisconsin vs. Marist (T) Marquette vs. Duke (T) 11 Kansas vs. UMKC UALR (T) vs. USC (T) you don't think Florida and FSU will bump into each other again?
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Nov 20, 2014 6:47:17 GMT -5
you don't think Florida and FSU will bump into each other again? Are you thinking one of them won't be seeded?
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Nov 20, 2014 9:03:00 GMT -5
Bump. We've got two similar threads going at once; I hope they can be merged.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Nov 20, 2014 10:40:51 GMT -5
you don't think Florida and FSU will bump into each other again? Are you thinking one of them won't be seeded? so it only happens when one of them is NOT seeded? phew
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 20, 2014 12:55:25 GMT -5
Using the methodology described in my post yesterday, here is a bracket projection. Teams with (T) behind their name are traveling more than 400 miles. I used the NCAA calculator to check some of the mileage figures and now show a total of 23 teams in this group. That number is still in line with the average we have seen over the past 5-7 years. Louisville Region1 Stanford vs. New Hampshire (T) CSUN vs. Santa Clara 16 Kentucky vs. Murray State Ohio State vs. Lipscomb 8 Oregon vs. Hofstra (T) Hawaii (T) vs. Oklahoma (T) 9 Illinois vs. Oakland Western Kentucky vs. Illinois State Seattle Region4 Washington vs. Idaho State (T) Pacific (T) vs. LSU (T) 13 Colorado State vs. Denver Colorado vs. BYU (T) 5 North Carolina vs. Hampton Arizona State (T) vs. Loyola Marymount (T) 12 Arizona vs. American (T) San Diego (T) vs. LBSU (T) Ames Region2 Texas vs. Stephen F. Austin Texas A&M vs. Purdue (T) 15 Iowa State vs. Harvard (T) Creighton vs. UCLA (T) 7 Florida vs. Alabama State UCF vs. Miami (FL) 10 Penn State vs. Dayton LIU-Brooklyn vs. Ohio Minneapolis Region3 Florida State vs. Samford Alabama vs. Utah (T) 14 Nebraska vs. Radford (T) Kansas State vs. Oregon State (T) 6 Wisconsin vs. Marist (T) Marquette vs. Duke (T) 11 Kansas vs. UMKC UALR (T) vs. USC (T) Dare I say, a near perfect bracket, based on the team placement? Though, some of those seeds just aren't gonna shake that way. Like Kansas at 11?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 20, 2014 13:07:34 GMT -5
Using the methodology described in my post yesterday, here is a bracket projection. Teams with (T) behind their name are traveling more than 400 miles. I used the NCAA calculator to check some of the mileage figures and now show a total of 23 teams in this group. That number is still in line with the average we have seen over the past 5-7 years. Louisville Region1 Stanford vs. New Hampshire (T) CSUN vs. Santa Clara 16 Kentucky vs. Murray State Ohio State vs. Lipscomb 8 Oregon vs. Hofstra (T) Hawaii (T) vs. Oklahoma (T) 9 Illinois vs. Oakland Western Kentucky vs. Illinois State Seattle Region4 Washington vs. Idaho State (T) Pacific (T) vs. LSU (T) 13 Colorado State vs. Denver Colorado vs. BYU (T) 5 North Carolina vs. Hampton Arizona State (T) vs. Loyola Marymount (T) 12 Arizona vs. American (T) San Diego (T) vs. LBSU (T) Ames Region2 Texas vs. Stephen F. Austin Texas A&M vs. Purdue (T) 15 Iowa State vs. Harvard (T) Creighton vs. UCLA (T) 7 Florida vs. Alabama State UCF vs. Miami (FL) 10 Penn State vs. Dayton LIU-Brooklyn vs. Ohio Minneapolis Region3 Florida State vs. Samford Alabama vs. Utah (T) 14 Nebraska vs. Radford (T) Kansas State vs. Oregon State (T) 6 Wisconsin vs. Marist (T) Marquette vs. Duke (T) 11 Kansas vs. UMKC UALR (T) vs. USC (T) Dare I say, a near perfect bracket, based on the team placement? Though, some of those seeds just aren't gonna shake that way. Like Kansas at 11? If I was a betting man on this bracket, my sweet 16 would look like Lousiville- Stanford, Ohio State, Oregon, Illinois Seattle- Washington, Colorado, North Carolina, Arizona Ames- Texas, UCLA, Florida, Penn State Minneapolis- FSU, Nebraska, Wisconsin, USC
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Nov 20, 2014 13:49:18 GMT -5
Dare I say, a near perfect bracket, based on the team placement? Though, some of those seeds just aren't gonna shake that way. Like Kansas at 11? I agree regarding the seeds. Every year I look forward to doing this type of exercise once the field is determined and the seeds are set. Last year was the first year I wasn't able to devise a bracket with roughly the same amount of travel and also a much fairer distribution of teams in the pods for the first weekend.
|
|