|
Post by n00b on Nov 24, 2017 12:13:45 GMT -5
At the time selections were made, Penn State was #26 adjusted, #30 unadjusted. I was stunned. It was reported here that PSU was #26 adjusted. The NCAA final "nitty gritty" report says they were #22 adjusted. Either way, the excuse given above was weak sauce. PSU went 3-8 against the RPI top-25. San Diego went 3-3, and had an RPI that put them right in line with being seeded. Surely it's harder to win 3/6 of your matches against the top-25 than to win 3/11 of your top-25 matches, right? They were #26 on Selection Sunday (not the Final RPI). extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats%20Library/16%20VB%20Nitty%20Gritty%20thru%20Nov%2026.pdf
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 24, 2017 12:54:25 GMT -5
With one of the criteria being SOS, that is a feather in Kentucky's cap. Their SOS is much stronger than the other teams in the Top 8.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Nov 24, 2017 12:56:24 GMT -5
RPI futures (through 11/22) looks like: 1. Kentucky (despite losing a match at home to Florida; their RPI has moved from #3 to #1; committee ranked them #5; just seems to me that committee won't drop them all way down to #5) 2. Penn State (no reason to believe they aren't still #1 in the committee's eyes at this moment) 3. Florida (won a match at Kentucky; their RPI has moved from #5 to #3; committee ranked them #6; just seems to me that committee won't drop them all way down to #5) 4. Stanford (their RPI has moved from #7 to #4; committee ranked them #4; seems logical to me that committee would bump them up to like #2) 5. Texas (their RPI has moved from #6 to #5; committee ranked them #7; seems logical that the committee will move them up, but tough to go higher than #5) 6. Nebraska (their RPI has moved from #4 to #6; committee ranked them #2; don't know what the committee will do but a drop seems logical as their schedule was more front-loaded than back-loaded; wouldn't imagine a drop to lower than #4) 7. Minnesota 8. Washington 9. USC 10. Utah Reflective of conference strength: 1. Pac-12 (4) - Stanford, Washington, USC, Utah 2. BiG (3) - Penn State, Nebraska, Minnesota 3. SEC (2) - Kentucky, Florida 4. Big 12 (1) - Texas
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 24, 2017 13:25:51 GMT -5
Cannot see two SEC teams getting top 4 seeds. In fact I'd bet on it and I'm not a betting man. The committee loves Nebraska, I don't see them dropping out of top 4 with their remaining schedule. Stanford is in, if they don't drop another. Penn State is definitely in, even if they drop one more. That leaves one spot, which I think goes to Florida. Sorry Kentucky, but I think Texas would get a crack at it before KY. I try to "think like the committee", but don't know what that is. Actually, the committee loved Stanford enough on 10/30 to vault them more spots compared to their RPI ranking than how many spots they vaulted Nebraska; of course, the Cardinal had more room to climb. As I noted, everyone's resume will have changed after 4 weeks of competition. So, the committee has the complete set of criteria to evaluate now (or will in a couple of days), while on 10/30 they had 2/3 of it. Another poster asked the question as to whether Nebraska's RPI drop (to spots) would correlate to a drop in the committees rankings/seedings. Most feel it will; no one knows how much, though. It makes sense that it would as the other teams trailing Nebraska in certain criteria made up some ground, or surpassed. I know bluepenquin has run some projections to include the last matches of the season. And, Kentucky might not end up with the #1 RPI. But, as of today, they are. My seedings were as of today, so not projecting what will occur on Friday/Saturday. It has been rare for teams ranked #1 or #2 in RPI to not be a Top 4 national seed; at brought up FSU in 2014. Not sure if there are others. So, tonight, I can't see Kentucky falling 4 spots compared to their RPI. If Kentucky's final RPI is #1 or #2 and they are given a #5 seed or lower, then that will tell us which criteria (Top 25 RPI wins) the committee emphasized strongly; but, no one thinks that criteria will favor Washington and vault them up to a Top 4 national seed. The number of Washington’s losses is a HUGE red flag for jumping them. 7 losses compared to 2 or 3.... that’s significant.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,140
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 24, 2017 13:28:06 GMT -5
There is a possibility I'm seeing the SEC deserving only Two bids. Would the committee do it?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 24, 2017 13:28:41 GMT -5
Assuming Oregon can jump back into the top 25 RPI and give Stanford 10 top 25 wins, I see the top 8 seeds as
1-PSU 2-Stanford 3-Nebraska 4-Florida 5-Kentucky 6-Texas 7-Minnesota 8-Washington
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Nov 24, 2017 14:06:32 GMT -5
Selection Committee Criteria:W/L: Matches and Games Point differential against teams Away W/L Home W/L Record against Top 10 Teams Record against Top 25 Teams Record against Top 50 Teams Record against Top 75 Teams Record against Top 100 Teams The RPI PABLO. This became a part of the process a few years ago, It is a great addition to the process. Regional Rankings Last ten match results Last five match results Factors considered haven't changed (Pablo is not one of the "affective factors"), but the question is to what degree that other factors are elevated above RPI, by itself, the higher you go up the process: At-Large, Top 16, Top 8, Top 4. www.slideserve.com/march/ncaa-division-i-women-s-volleyball-selections-seeding-and-bracketing
|
|
les
Banned
Falsely equivocates authority
Posts: 911
|
Post by les on Nov 24, 2017 15:20:24 GMT -5
Assuming Oregon can jump back into the top 25 RPI and give Stanford 10 top 25 wins, I see the top 8 seeds as 1-PSU 2-Stanford 3-Nebraska 4-Florida 5-Kentucky 6-Texas 7-Minnesota 8-Washington Could UW bounce Minn with a win over WSU and a Minn loss to PSU? That Stanford win could prove huge!
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Nov 24, 2017 15:27:34 GMT -5
The number of Washington’s losses is a HUGE red flag for jumping them. 7 losses compared to 2 or 3.... that’s significant. Already baked into RPI. If the RPI Futures of 11/22 sticks (no guarantee), then Washington has 9 top-25 wins and 3 top-10 wins, compared to 5 and 1 for Minnesota. Washington's win over Stanford (4) trumps Minnesota's win over Texas (5). If Illinois (25) or Louisville (23) falls out, Minnesota will be down to 4 top-25 wins, to 3 top-25 wins if both fall out. On the other hand, if Oregon falls out, Washington will still have 7 top-25 wins. Minnesota was able to skip matches against Penn State, Nebraska, and Illinois; Washington skipped matches against Arizona and ASU.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Nov 24, 2017 15:50:58 GMT -5
The number of Washington’s losses is a HUGE red flag for jumping them. 7 losses compared to 2 or 3.... that’s significant. Already baked into RPI. If the RPI Futures of 11/22 sticks (no guarantee), then Washington has 9 top-25 wins and 3 top-10 wins, compared to 5 and 1 for Minnesota. Washington's win over Stanford (4) trumps Minnesota's win over Texas (5). If Illinois (25) or Louisville (23) falls out, Minnesota will be down to 4 top-25 wins, to 3 top-25 wins if both fall out. On the other hand, if Oregon falls out, Washington will still have 7 top-25 wins. Minnesota was able to skip matches against Penn State, Nebraska, and Illinois; Washington skipped matches against Arizona and ASU. Well lots of stuff for consideration are already “baked Into the RPI”. My comment was direct response to southie re why people aren’t suggest UW should be a top 4 seed based on top 25 wins. I’m not sure what your comment here has to do with anything I said.
|
|
les
Banned
Falsely equivocates authority
Posts: 911
|
Post by les on Nov 24, 2017 15:55:57 GMT -5
The number of Washington’s losses is a HUGE red flag for jumping them. 7 losses compared to 2 or 3.... that’s significant. Correction. Minn will have 5 losses and UW 7 assuming UW wins and Minn loses this weekend. Given UWs higher SOS and Minn only playing PSU and NE once and given they loss both leaves them with only the diminished TX win (Texas was minus Ebony). And given the Big 10 keeps losing teams from the top 25 I don't see how they can be ahead of UW at the end of season with a loss to PSU and a UW win.
|
|
|
Post by eastcoastopp on Nov 24, 2017 15:59:10 GMT -5
The number of Washington’s losses is a HUGE red flag for jumping them. 7 losses compared to 2 or 3.... that’s significant. Correction. Minn will have 5 losses and UW 7 assuming UW wins and Minn loses this weekend. Given UWs higher SOS and Minn only playing PSU and NE once and given they loss both leaves them with only the diminished TX win (Texas was minus Ebony). And given the Big 10 keeps losing teams from the top 25 I don't see how they can be ahead of UW at the end of season with a loss to PSU and a UW win. Ebony played that match. She only played the first set and went 0 for 10 so they took her out for YBG.
|
|
les
Banned
Falsely equivocates authority
Posts: 911
|
Post by les on Nov 24, 2017 16:04:30 GMT -5
Correction. Minn will have 5 losses and UW 7 assuming UW wins and Minn loses this weekend. Given UWs higher SOS and Minn only playing PSU and NE once and given they loss both leaves them with only the diminished TX win (Texas was minus Ebony). And given the Big 10 keeps losing teams from the top 25 I don't see how they can be ahead of UW at the end of season with a loss to PSU and a UW win. Ebony played that match. She only played the first set and went 0 for 10 so they took her out for YBG. Right now the pac has 58% of teams in top 25 RPI. Big is only at 42%. If a team can't beat NE or PSU then they have nothing to hold their hat on. UW beat Stanford. If I recall, they pulled Ebony because of injury.
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 24, 2017 16:05:16 GMT -5
I would say that if Colorado beats Utah tonight, then Colorado has a very good chance at a seed. Both Denver and Colorado State (automatic bid winners from their conference championships) are less than a 1 hour drive to Boulder, and that will be very attractive to the committee -- on top of Colorado's resume and RPI. But the committee doesn't consider geography in selection or seeding.
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 24, 2017 16:07:34 GMT -5
Selection Committee Criteria:W/L: Matches and Games Point differential against teams Away W/L Home W/L Record against Top 10 Teams Record against Top 25 Teams Record against Top 50 Teams Record against Top 75 Teams Record against Top 100 Teams The RPI PABLO. This became a part of the process a few years ago, It is a great addition to the process. Regional Rankings Last ten match results Last five match results Factors considered haven't changed (Pablo is not one of the "affective factors"), but the question is to what degree that other factors are elevated above RPI, by itself, the higher you go up the process: At-Large, Top 16, Top 8, Top 4. www.slideserve.com/march/ncaa-division-i-women-s-volleyball-selections-seeding-and-bracketing Just the mere fact that they call them "affective factors" really appeals to the geek in me.
|
|