Top 25 talk

[Flying Dutch Fan]

OK, now everyone in unison,

PARITY

[Hugenerd]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford (all top 10 teams, Augie and UMD are also top 10 teams that lost). 

[Ralph Turner]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford. 

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

[Hugenerd]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford. 

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

Thanks for the info.  So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10.  Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).

[Ralph Turner]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford. 

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

Thanks for the info.  So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10.  Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).

2007 Men's Bracket.

Week #13 2007 Men's Top 25.

Here they are. 

[Hugenerd]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford. 

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

Thanks for the info.  So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10.  Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).

2007 Men's Bracket.

Week #13 2007 Men's Top 25.

Here they are. 

With Ralph's urging, I looked it up and 5/16 regionals had no ranked teams last year.  So there were only 3 regionals in which a ranked team participated and didnt make it to the sweet 16.  I guess the breakup of the brackets has a lot to do with the reason that so few ranked teams make it to the sweet 16.  Some regions just dont have as many ranked teams and therefore there may be 0 or 1 ranked team in that 4 team pod.  Other regions have as many as 3 ranked teams.

[kiltedbryan]

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation.  The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional.  So there were 6 regional "upsets".  If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5.  I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset.  I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford. 

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

10 appears to be a low--and 8 still lower-- for the d3hoops era.  I went through and compared the pre-tournament poll to the teams that made the sweet sixteen. Here are the number of ranked teams that have made it each year:

2008: 8 teams/16
2007: 10/16
2006: 12/16
2005: 12/16
2004: 12/16
2003: 12/16
2002: 12/16
2001: 13/16
2000: 13/16

So in the past 9 tournaments, only in the most recent two has the Sweet Sixteen not consisted of at least 75% d3hoops Top 25 teams.

I didn't spend the time to analyze exactly how bracket dynamics came into play--ie. how often Top 25 teams eliminated each other in early rounds vs. how often a Top 25 lost in an upset to an unranked team--but there you are. Exact numbers on how many Top 25 teams are usually still dancing at this point.

[Hugenerd]

It is interesting that between 2000-2006 there were at least 12 ranked teams that made it to the final 16.  I dont know if the representation in the top 25 was more diverse by region previous to last year, but the maximum number of ranked teams that could have made it to the sweet 16 last year was 11 (5 pods had no ranked teams).  This year, on the other hand, may just be an anomoly in that there are a large number of upsets.

[Ralph Turner]

The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006.  That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.

[Hugenerd]

The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006.  That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.

Makes sense then, so I guess you really cant compare before and after the expansion.

[Ralph Turner]

The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006.  That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.

Makes sense then, so I guess you really cant compare before and after the expansion.

I wonder the same thing myself.  If we see similar numbers next season, then that may be the case.

I wonder if it is the shrinking world of D3.  How many webcasts and videocasts did we catch this weekend as we surfed the tourney!  I know that I followed McMurry women Wednesday and Saturday night and UMHB men on Friday night, and caught portions of 6 other games, even when most of the starting times were identical, 7 pm local!

The fun thing is to catch the West Coast games at the end of the night! 

[HopeConvert]

Another way to see how things have changed is to compare the total number of losses among top 10 teams since 2000. I come up with (from the penultimate poll):

2008 - 34
2007 - 35
2006 - 26
2005 - 28
2004 - 27
2003 - 22
2002 - 27
2001 - 31
2000 - 23

With the exception of 2001 (a year when the 14th ranked team won) there's a significant gap between 2007 and 2008, where it's been noted there's a drop in the number of top-ranked teams in the Sweet 16, and prior years. This would make sense, as more losses among top 10 teams would indicate a lack of dominant teams, and thus less of them would make the sweet 16.  Why the jump in the number of losses between '06 and '07? I don't know, but I'm interested in any hypotheses.

[sac]

Fewer home games being played in rounds 1 and 2 now with the pod format.

[HopeConvert]

But that wouldn't affect why they have more losses over the course of the year.

[sac]

But that wouldn't affect why they have more losses over the course of the year.

Ok now I get what you were talking about.