|
|
Post by vinnielopes on Apr 19, 2024 12:32:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vinnielopes on Apr 19, 2024 12:33:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 19, 2024 12:55:28 GMT -5
Vinnie, I guess I don't see quite so clearly why Beach could not be #1 overall adding a Haw/Irvine away win, and top 5 away win that was lacking from the resume, if UCLA loses to GCU, & Beach wins the BWCT. Granted UCLA no matter what will be #1 KPI, still the committee hasn't gone solely (nor should it be that overly addicted to KPI) on KPI/RPI. Beach would be at 26-2 vs. UCLA with five losses, and Beach with a 5-2 top 5 record, UCLA with a 5-2 record vs. top 5. Beach with both regular season and BWCT as well, so yeah pretty much toss up. If GMU won the EIVA, that would strength the Beach resume in teh idiotic 'teams in tourny and under consideration category' and if OSU won the MIVA, UCLA gets another loss in that category thrown in lol. probably close to a moot point, it's easy for the committee to do the a 'lazy' KPI/RPI #1 thing. and they can just point to SOS to make it UCLA if they want. |
|
|
|
Post by vinnielopes on Apr 19, 2024 13:08:58 GMT -5
Good question, and should go without saying both of these are great teams that are capable of winning the title.
The big thing that is going to put UCLA is the SOS. UCLA is No. 1, while Long Beach is in the 20s. Just as a reminder for everyone, coaches poll has nothing to do with determining your SOS — it’s straight up your opponents’ combined winning percentage.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 19, 2024 13:13:32 GMT -5
Good question, and should go without saying both of these are great teams that are capable of winning the title. The big thing that is going to put UCLA is the SOS. UCLA is No. 1, while Long Beach is in the 20s. Just as a reminder for everyone, coaches poll has nothing to do with determining your SOS — it’s straight up your opponents’ combined winning percentage. yep, SOS was lower all year. in the 20s, yikes Massey now has Beach at 13 and Hawaii at 14, so they are paying another RPI penalty there. lesson this year for Hawaii & Beach was don't schedule teams for the good of the game |
|
|
|
Post by vinnielopes on Apr 19, 2024 14:23:04 GMT -5
Well I think you can schedule for the good of the game but it can’t just be anyone. Belmont Abbey at 19-4, Fort Valley State at 15-8, Saint Francis at 21-8, St. Thomas Aquinas at about .500, Lincoln Memorial at 21-5 all would have been good for SOS teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 19, 2024 14:34:57 GMT -5
Well I think you can schedule for the good of the game but it can’t just be anyone. Belmont Abbey at 19-4, Fort Valley State at 15-8, Saint Francis at 21-8, St. Thomas Aquinas at about .500, Lincoln Memorial at 21-5 all would have been good for SOS teams. yep, that's all true. not always so simple. King had a better year in 2023, so scheduling them may not have seemed so bad. the 2x though was pretty rough end the end. and even tougher for Hawaii, they need teams to come out. if 10 teams want to schedule Belmont Abbey, good luck if 2 or 3 can even get them on the schedule King went from winning the CC bid last year to 7-20, projecting isn't necessarily always easy. Hindsight is always 20-20  |
|
|
|
Post by noblesol on Apr 19, 2024 14:53:39 GMT -5
RPI or KPI... choose one. Using both is nonsense. Using both as equally weighted criteria is moronic. And since both exist to make a proper sense of SOS and integrate it into their algos, that then makes using SOS as an independent equally weighted criteria a tripling down on bat%*$# crazy. But moronic and bat%*$# crazy is much of the NCAA way, until someone sues them into making an ounce of sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 19, 2024 15:43:49 GMT -5
RPI or KPI... choose one. Using both is nonsense. Using both as equally weighted criteria is moronic. And since both exist to make a proper sense of SOS and integrate it into their algos, that then makes using SOS as an independent equally weighted criteria a tripling down on bat%*$# crazy. But moronic and bat%*$# crazy is much of the NCAA way, until someone sues them into making an ounce of sense. agree using both is compounding an already poor metric. average them, but don't count them as 2 criteria. need SOS, but basing SOS on RPI and using RPI is bad. One hopes the committee is being a little more sophisticated and utilizing top 5/10/15 records and showing some discrimination among this categories, the guidelines don't preclude that. fortunately this year, it's not too contentious....yet, albeit the arguments between GCU (high KPI and decent SOS), Irvine (extremely high SOS), Hawaii (not so good KPI/SOS) have different merits amongst them. If GCU wins the MPSF, and the winner of Hawaii/Irvine wins the BWCT, then it's all very nice and tidy If one averaged KPI and Massey (I throw away RPI in teh trash bin where it belongs) UCLA 1/1 (5-1 vs this group) Beach 3/2 (4-2 vs this group) GCU 2/3 (0-4 vs. this group, that one data point is like a sore thumb) Hawaii 6/4 (3-3 vs. this group, worst SOS of the group) Irvine 4/5 (3-5 vs. this group, best SOS of the group) |
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Apr 19, 2024 17:27:24 GMT -5
lesson this year for Hawaii & Beach was don't schedule teams for the good of the game This won't be the first time a laissez faire schedule has cost Hawaii if they don't make it. |
|
|
|
Post by CoastalVB on Apr 19, 2024 18:07:41 GMT -5
Good question, and should go without saying both of these are great teams that are capable of winning the title. The big thing that is going to put UCLA is the SOS. UCLA is No. 1, while Long Beach is in the 20s. Just as a reminder for everyone, coaches poll has nothing to do with determining your SOS — it’s straight up your opponents’ combined winning percentage. yep, SOS was lower all year. in the 20s, yikes Massey now has Beach at 13 and Hawaii at 14, so they are paying another RPI penalty there. lesson this year for Hawaii & Beach was don't schedule teams for the good of the game Lesson: Don't schedule so many teams for the good of the game. UCLA scheduled Fort Valley State and Morehouse (for the good of the game) and still played a tremendous schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by ccfan24 on Apr 19, 2024 20:52:21 GMT -5
yep, SOS was lower all year. in the 20s, yikes Massey now has Beach at 13 and Hawaii at 14, so they are paying another RPI penalty there. lesson this year for Hawaii & Beach was don't schedule teams for the good of the game Lesson: Don't schedule so many teams for the good of the game. UCLA scheduled Fort Valley State and Morehouse (for the good of the game) and still played a tremendous schedule. Exactly this. UCLA scheduled their two "grow the game matches" at the very beginning of the season. The rest of their non-con schedule was against opponents who are traditionally considered more competitive sprinkled among home, neutral, and away. LBSU scheduled about 6 "easier" matches, the majority of which were at the pyramid. |
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on Apr 20, 2024 4:08:07 GMT -5
Vinnie, I guess I don't see quite so clearly why Beach could not be #1 overall adding a Haw/Irvine away win, and top 5 away win that was lacking from the resume, if UCLA loses to GCU, & Beach wins the BWCT. Granted UCLA no matter what will be #1 KPI, still the committee hasn't gone solely (nor should it be that overly addicted to KPI) on KPI/RPI. Beach would be at 26-2 vs. UCLA with five losses, and Beach with a 5-2 top 5 record, UCLA with a 5-2 record vs. top 5. Beach with both regular season and BWCT as well, so yeah pretty much toss up. If GMU won the EIVA, that would strength the Beach resume in teh idiotic 'teams in tourny and under consideration category' and if OSU won the MIVA, UCLA gets another loss in that category thrown in lol. probably close to a moot point, it's easy for the committee to do the a 'lazy' KPI/RPI #1 thing. and they can just point to SOS to make it UCLA if they want. Does it rally matter who is seeded #1 vs. #2? Either way, you will get a D-2 team in the 1st round, then either UCI or GCU in the semis. However they separate UCLA and Long Beach State, they will likely put UCI and GCU at #3 and #4 based on putting them on the opposite side of the bracket from their conference rival. |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 20, 2024 9:54:24 GMT -5
Vinnie, I guess I don't see quite so clearly why Beach could not be #1 overall adding a Haw/Irvine away win, and top 5 away win that was lacking from the resume, if UCLA loses to GCU, & Beach wins the BWCT. Granted UCLA no matter what will be #1 KPI, still the committee hasn't gone solely (nor should it be that overly addicted to KPI) on KPI/RPI. Beach would be at 26-2 vs. UCLA with five losses, and Beach with a 5-2 top 5 record, UCLA with a 5-2 record vs. top 5. Beach with both regular season and BWCT as well, so yeah pretty much toss up. If GMU won the EIVA, that would strength the Beach resume in teh idiotic 'teams in tourny and under consideration category' and if OSU won the MIVA, UCLA gets another loss in that category thrown in lol. probably close to a moot point, it's easy for the committee to do the a 'lazy' KPI/RPI #1 thing. and they can just point to SOS to make it UCLA if they want. Does it rally matter who is seeded #1 vs. #2? Either way, you will get a D-2 team in the 1st round, then either UCI or GCU in the semis. However they separate UCLA and Long Beach State, they will likely put UCI and GCU at #3 and #4 based on putting them on the opposite side of the bracket from their conference rival. for that first round, yeah the #1 & #2 get the far lower rated opponents, although one could argue #1 getting #42 Fort Valley State is one additional level an easier path than getting #23 Belmont Abbey, the CC top teams are a higher level. either would be in a shocker upset anyway and pretty sure the committee will desire to keep Big West & MPSF teams on oppposite sides of the brackets, just how they justify that could be interesting (or funny perhaps). I can't see how a committee could straight faced keep Irvine #4 and GCU #3 if Irvine wins and GCU loses tonight, other than going with KPI, and that's a bout it, lol. when the KPI & SOS could be used to make GCU #2 and Beach #3 right now. I mean GCU would be 0-5 vs. the top five and IRvine 5-5 and IRvine with the best SOS (the argument that would be used to make to keep UCLA #1), just would be funny to see them use one metric to make one decision, and then ignore the same metric to make a different decision on another team. it's always an element of entertainment to see committees justify certain decision |
|
|
|
Post by BigDigEnergy on Apr 20, 2024 10:26:22 GMT -5
Does it rally matter who is seeded #1 vs. #2? Either way, you will get a D-2 team in the 1st round, then either UCI or GCU in the semis. However they separate UCLA and Long Beach State, they will likely put UCI and GCU at #3 and #4 based on putting them on the opposite side of the bracket from their conference rival. for that first round, yeah the #1 & #2 get the far lower rated opponents, although one could argue #1 getting #42 Fort Valley State is one additional level an easier path than getting #23 Belmont Abbey, the CC top teams are a higher level. either would be in a shocker upset anyway and pretty sure the committee will desire to keep Big West & MPSF teams on oppposite sides of the brackets, just how they justify that could be interesting (or funny perhaps). I can't see how a committee could straight faced keep Irvine #4 and GCU #3 if Irvine wins and GCU loses tonight, other than going with KPI, and that's a bout it, lol. when the KPI & SOS could be used to make GCU #2 and Beach #3 right now. I mean GCU would be 0-5 vs. the top five and IRvine 5-5 and IRvine with the best SOS (the argument that would be used to make to keep UCLA #1), just would be funny to see them use one metric to make one decision, and then ignore the same metric to make a different decision on another team. it's always an element of entertainment to see committees justify certain decision Right, whatever they see fit! My preference is always to have the two conferences on opposite side of the bracket until the championship match if it gets there. |
|
