Bracketology (11/19)

[volleyboy12]

I’ve never been a big fan of “what it” questions, but with Selection Sunday only a week away, I have a “what if” thought looming over me.

(btw this is legitimately looking for answers, not-so-much opinions from some nebraska-hating lunatic)

What if Nebraska beats Wisconsin today and wins out? What does the committee do with the B1G champ whose worse loss is to a ranked Purdue team?

Back in 2017, the committee placed NEB as the #5 seed and blamed their losses to UNI, Oregon, Florida, and Wisconsin (despite NEB being the only team to knock off Penn State that year). If precedent plays a roll this year (not saying it will, but what if), does it hurt Stanford or Nebraska? Looking at the wins, Stanford has better wins. But Stanford has worse losses than Nebraska. But there are only four regional hosts (not that being an away team has ever hurt either of these programs [2016 and 2017]).

Anyway, all of this may not even matter depending on the outcome against Wisconsin. Just had this thought cross my mind, and wanted to start the conversation.

[horns1]

Nov 24, 2019 10:44:42 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

Nov 24, 2019 10:35:01 GMT -5 horns1 said:

Could both Utah and BYU be left out of hosting a sub-regional? That would definitely create several more fly-ins.

I think BYU is in a bad place.  If it comes down to BYU and Utah for the last spot - then that H2H will help.  But their T25/T50 wins are lacking.

Their wins were lacking last year, too, but a win against Stanford seems to carry a lot of weight in the committee's eyes!

[naujack85]

Nov 24, 2019 12:24:43 GMT -5 volleyboy12 said:

I’ve never been a big fan of “what it” questions, but with Selection Sunday only a week away, I have a “what if” thought looming over me.

(btw this is legitimately looking for answers, not-so-much opinions from some nebraska-hating lunatic)

What if Nebraska beats Wisconsin today and wins out? What does the committee do with the B1G champ whose worse loss is to a ranked Purdue team?

Back in 2017, the committee placed NEB as the #5 seed and blamed their losses to UNI, Oregon, Florida, and Wisconsin (despite NEB being the only team to knock off Penn State that year). If precedent plays a roll this year (not saying it will, but what if), does it hurt Stanford or Nebraska? Looking at the wins, Stanford has better wins. But Stanford has worse losses than Nebraska. But there are only four regional hosts (not that being an away team has ever hurt either of these programs [2016 and 2017]).

Anyway, all of this may not even matter depending on the outcome against Wisconsin. Just had this thought cross my mind, and wanted to start the conversation.

If Stanford and Nebraska win out, there is a 0% chance that Stanford is not a top 4 seed imo. Neb might knock Pitt out of the top 4, but theres no way they get it over the Cardinal. They would have more good wins and own the H2H againsted the Huskers, along with a better RPI. No-brainer.

[bbg95]

Nov 24, 2019 12:31:24 GMT -5 horns1 said:

Nov 24, 2019 10:44:42 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I think BYU is in a bad place.  If it comes down to BYU and Utah for the last spot - then that H2H will help.  But their T25/T50 wins are lacking.

Their wins were lacking last year, too, but a win against Stanford seems to carry a lot of weight in the committee's eyes!

Eh, BYU also beat USC, Marquette, and Utah last year (in comparison, Texas beat Oregon, Florida and Kentucky--to me, that's a wash at best in terms of non-conference wins), and the WCC was No. 5 in conference RPI. Oh, and they only had one loss. But sure, the committee did indicate that one factor was BYU's head-to-head win over Stanford versus Texas losing twice to the Cardinal. Looking at their respective wins and losses, I think the committee's decision to give BYU the No. 4 seed was certainly justifiable if not outright correct, and it was vindicated by BYU's sweep of Texas in the Elite 8.

[trojansc]

Nov 24, 2019 10:51:14 GMT -5 bbg95 said:

Nov 23, 2019 22:14:51 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

A 26-50 win becomes a 1-25 win.

Honest question: does the committee really view the difference between 25 and 26 to be that significant? To me, it seems that 25 and 26 have a lot more in common with each other than 1 and 25 or 26 and 50, and I have a hard time believing the committee can't make that distinction.

Well, you get extra bonus points for a 1-25 win vs. 26-50. Then, the nitty gritty sheets will highlight your record against those categories. When you look at a group of teams, and one or a few of them have an advantage in the 1-25 category. 

I would argue that the difference between a team's significant win being 25 or 26 has probably cost them a tournament berth before. 

The closest evidence I can remember off the top of my head might be Seton Hall in 2014. I remember some people thinking I was wrong that they would get an at-large bid -- but they did. They had a big push in T25 wins (can't remember who, but I think it was Creighton or Marquette x2 who barely finished T25). That gave them bonus points and also an RPI advantage on the nitty gritty sheets.

It depends on HOW deep the committee looks at the team sheets versus just looking at the nitty gritty. I imagine this varies by committee and by grouping of teams

[bbg95]

Nov 24, 2019 13:20:44 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 24, 2019 10:51:14 GMT -5 bbg95 said:

Honest question: does the committee really view the difference between 25 and 26 to be that significant? To me, it seems that 25 and 26 have a lot more in common with each other than 1 and 25 or 26 and 50, and I have a hard time believing the committee can't make that distinction.

Well, you get extra bonus points for a 1-25 win vs. 26-50. Then, the nitty gritty sheets will highlight your record against those categories. When you look at a group of teams, and one or a few of them have an advantage in the 1-25 category. 

I would argue that the difference between a team's significant win being 25 or 26 has probably cost them a tournament berth before. 

The closest evidence I can remember off the top of my head might be Seton Hall in 2014. I remember some people thinking I was wrong that they would get an at-large bid -- but they did. They had a big push in T25 wins (can't remember who, but I think it was Creighton or Marquette x2 who barely finished T25). That gave them bonus points and also an RPI advantage on the nitty gritty sheets.

It depends on HOW deep the committee looks at the team sheets versus just looking at the nitty gritty. I imagine this varies by committee and by grouping of teams

I see. That makes sense that it affects teams' own adjusted RPI because of the bonus points. Thanks for the explanation. Also, do you think the committee looks at the actual wins and losses more closely for regional hosts and seeds versus bubble teams? Just curious. Unlike the men's basketball selection process, there isn't a lot of publicly available information about how exactly the field is seeded (I'm not talking about manuals and such--real reporting).

[trojansc]

Nov 24, 2019 13:40:31 GMT -5 bbg95 said:

Nov 24, 2019 13:20:44 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Well, you get extra bonus points for a 1-25 win vs. 26-50. Then, the nitty gritty sheets will highlight your record against those categories. When you look at a group of teams, and one or a few of them have an advantage in the 1-25 category. 

I would argue that the difference between a team's significant win being 25 or 26 has probably cost them a tournament berth before. 

The closest evidence I can remember off the top of my head might be Seton Hall in 2014. I remember some people thinking I was wrong that they would get an at-large bid -- but they did. They had a big push in T25 wins (can't remember who, but I think it was Creighton or Marquette x2 who barely finished T25). That gave them bonus points and also an RPI advantage on the nitty gritty sheets.

It depends on HOW deep the committee looks at the team sheets versus just looking at the nitty gritty. I imagine this varies by committee and by grouping of teams

I see. That makes sense that it affects teams' own adjusted RPI because of the bonus points. Thanks for the explanation. Also, do you think the committee looks at the actual wins and losses more closely for regional hosts and seeds versus bubble teams? Just curious. Unlike the men's basketball selection process, there isn't a lot of publicly available information about how exactly the field is seeded (I'm not talking about manuals and such--real reporting).

Yes, I do. I think the committee is much more interested in getting the top 16 seeds right, especially now that Geography is not supposed to be a factor. I also think the Top 4 seeds will be looked into even more than the Top 16.

For at-larges, I think they do much less work. For example, we can look at 2017. I imagine they just used the RPI cut off method -- and looked at the bottom of the cut list and decided to make adjustments. The only adjustment was moving North Texas out for North Carolina State, a difference of a couple RPI spots. When the committee chair was interviewed, she was discussing at-large bids and said they were impressed that College of Charleston had played a tough schedule. That comment was really, really strange. College of Charleston didn't actually play a tough schedule - their strength of schedule was ranked like 150-ish. They just had a big win over Baylor (who was seeded). So, that to me, along with not mentioning High Point's inclusion, was very very sketchy

[gibbyb1]

Nov 24, 2019 12:54:00 GMT -5 naujack85 said:

Nov 24, 2019 12:24:43 GMT -5 volleyboy12 said:

I’ve never been a big fan of “what it” questions, but with Selection Sunday only a week away, I have a “what if” thought looming over me.

(btw this is legitimately looking for answers, not-so-much opinions from some nebraska-hating lunatic)

What if Nebraska beats Wisconsin today and wins out? What does the committee do with the B1G champ whose worse loss is to a ranked Purdue team?

Back in 2017, the committee placed NEB as the #5 seed and blamed their losses to UNI, Oregon, Florida, and Wisconsin (despite NEB being the only team to knock off Penn State that year). If precedent plays a roll this year (not saying it will, but what if), does it hurt Stanford or Nebraska? Looking at the wins, Stanford has better wins. But Stanford has worse losses than Nebraska. But there are only four regional hosts (not that being an away team has ever hurt either of these programs [2016 and 2017]).

Anyway, all of this may not even matter depending on the outcome against Wisconsin. Just had this thought cross my mind, and wanted to start the conversation.

If Stanford and Nebraska win out, there is a 0% chance that Stanford is not a top 4 seed imo. Neb might knock Pitt out of the top 4, but theres no way they get it over the Cardinal. They would have more good wins and own the H2H againsted the Huskers, along with a better RPI. No-brainer.

Correct

[trojansc]

I have absolutely no idea what we are going to do with the loser of Northern Kentucky and Milwaukee.

Would we really give FOUR bids to the Horizon?

Milwaukee potentially has 5 Top 50 wins ............. all in the 40s. Northern Kentucky beat Cincinnati, a T25 win in the non-conference.

[bprtbone]

Nov 24, 2019 13:55:53 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Would we really give FOUR bids to the Horizon?

No.

[trojansc]

Nov 24, 2019 14:24:39 GMT -5 bprtbone said:

Nov 24, 2019 13:55:53 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Would we really give FOUR bids to the Horizon?

No.

Would you rather South Dakota?

[Deleted]

Right now Milwaukee is #57 and N. KY is #62 in the RPI. Historically, the mythical "RPI Cut-Off Line" has been in the mid to upper 40s.

[bprtbone]

Nov 24, 2019 14:30:02 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 24, 2019 14:24:39 GMT -5 bprtbone said:

No.

Would you rather South Dakota?

Yes! Just don't hold me to any blind resume challenge...

[trojansc]

Nov 24, 2019 14:34:52 GMT -5 @wfbvbfan said:

Right now Milwaukee is #57 and N. KY is #62 in the RPI. Historically, the mythical "RPI Cut-Off Line" has been in the mid to upper 40s.

I don't have Milwaukee's accurate RPI numbers -- but they are somewhere in the 40's right now (like, according to matches played up until RIGHT NOW)

Northern Kentucky is #49 in RPI right now.

[trojansc]

Nov 24, 2019 14:39:30 GMT -5 bprtbone said:

Nov 24, 2019 14:30:02 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Would you rather South Dakota?

Yes! Just don't hold me to any blind resume challenge...

Milwaukee is down 0-2 to Northern Kentucky in the Championship.

So, that would make Milwaukee, Green Bay, and Wright State on the bubble.
Milwaukee would be the worst in RPI -- but beat Green Bay (3x) and would have 5 Total T50 wins. But Milwaukee has a strength-of-schedule that should be illegal (230)