Pool C

[Hugenerd]

What I found to be most interesting from this week's poll is that UNE's loss last week to Gordon actually hurt Amherst more than it hurt UNE.  UNE had a slim chance at a Pool C anyway, but Amherst was in pretty good contention.  However, when Amherst lost and Brandeis was bumped up a spot in the rankings, directly adjacent to Amherst, Brandeis overtook them because in a head-to-head comparison there is a very strong argument for Brandeis to be considered the better team.  So UNE's loss dropped Amherst from a being "Safe" to being "In Contention."  That just amuses me for some reason, because if UNE had won, in all likelyhood, Amherst would have stayed at 8, UNE at 9, and Brandeis at 10.


Something similar could happen in the selection process.  Let's say CMU wins this weekend over NYU and they have a pretty good resume for a Pool C.  However, lets say while CMU is still on the board (meaning they are tops in their region and being considered along with the other top region teams for a Pool C spot), Brandeis enters the top spot in the NE.  How do you rank Brandeis below CMU when Brandeis beat CMU twice this year?  In all likelihood, that would mean that Brandeis would be ranked a spot ahead of CMU, which could result in both of them either getting in (if in the previous 1-7 rankings, CMU was high up the list) or both of them being left out (if CMU wasnt that high up the list and Brandeis holds CMU near the bottom of that list for the remaining C selections). 

For some reason, I really enjoy the dynamics of the selection process.  Its not just how good your resume is, but how good you compare to the teams that you are actually being compared to.  For example, hypothetically, if you compare a 20-6 Wooster team to 17-8 Brandeis, you may come up with Wooster being the better candidate (this is completely hypothetical, I know CMU and Wooster would not be in Pool C contention at the same time, and Wooster would have to lose again to be in Pool C contention).  That would give you the order;

Wooster
Brandeis

But lets say you had CMU to the mix of teams you are comparing.  In this case CMU beat Wooster and has essentially the same number of losses, therefore you would rank CMU above Wooster, but because Brandeis swept CMU, your rankings could now look like this:

Brandeis
CMU
Wooster

Really interesting to me how the rankings can change depending on which teams you compare.

[Ralph Turner]

What I found to be most interesting from this week's poll is that UNE's loss last week to Gordon actually hurt Amherst more than it hurt UNE.  UNE had a slim chance at a Pool C anyway, but Amherst was in pretty good contention.  However, when Amherst lost and Brandeis was bumped up a spot in the rankings, directly adjacent to Amherst, Brandeis overtook them because in a head-to-head comparison there is a very strong argument for Brandeis to be considered the better team.  So UNE's loss dropped Amherst from a being "Safe" to being "In Contention."  That just amuses me for some reason, because if UNE had won, in all likelyhood, Amherst would have stayed at 8, UNE at 9, and Brandeis at 10.


Something similar could happen in the selection process.  Let's say CMU wins this weekend over NYU and they have a pretty good resume for a Pool C.  However, lets say while CMU is still on the board (meaning they are tops in their region and being considered along with the other top region teams for a Pool C spot), Brandeis enters the top spot in the NE.  How do you rank Brandeis below CMU when Brandeis beat CMU twice this year?  In all likelihood, that would mean that Brandeis would be ranked a spot ahead of CMU, which could result in both of them either getting in (if in the previous 1-7 rankings, CMU was high up the list) or both of them being left out (if CMU wasnt that high up the list and Brandeis holds CMU near the bottom of that list for the remaining C selections). 

For some reason, I really enjoy the dynamics of the selection process.  Its not just how good your resume is, but how good you compare to the teams that you are actually being compared to.  For example, hypothetically, if you compare a 20-6 Wooster team to 17-8 Brandeis, you may come up with Wooster being the better candidate (this is completely hypothetical, I know CMU and Wooster would not be in Pool C contention at the same time, and Wooster would have to lose again to be in Pool C contention).  That would give you the order;

Wooster
Brandeis

But lets say you had CMU to the mix of teams you are comparing.  In this case CMU beat Wooster and has essentially the same number of losses, therefore you would rank CMU above Wooster, but because Brandeis swept CMU, your rankings could now look like this:

Brandeis
CMU
Wooster

Really interesting to me how the rankings can change depending on which teams you compare.

If CMU and Brandeis are on the table at the same time, then Brandeis would have the Head-to-Head and the better record against common opponents. (Basically UAA.  I didn't see another common opponent). 

As a deep C fan, I don't want the Rochester win to help Rochester leapfrog "my team" unless it knocks CMU deep into Pool C!

It is fun!

[Hugenerd]

What I found to be most interesting from this week's poll is that UNE's loss last week to Gordon actually hurt Amherst more than it hurt UNE.  UNE had a slim chance at a Pool C anyway, but Amherst was in pretty good contention.  However, when Amherst lost and Brandeis was bumped up a spot in the rankings, directly adjacent to Amherst, Brandeis overtook them because in a head-to-head comparison there is a very strong argument for Brandeis to be considered the better team.  So UNE's loss dropped Amherst from a being "Safe" to being "In Contention."  That just amuses me for some reason, because if UNE had won, in all likelyhood, Amherst would have stayed at 8, UNE at 9, and Brandeis at 10.


Something similar could happen in the selection process.  Let's say CMU wins this weekend over NYU and they have a pretty good resume for a Pool C.  However, lets say while CMU is still on the board (meaning they are tops in their region and being considered along with the other top region teams for a Pool C spot), Brandeis enters the top spot in the NE.  How do you rank Brandeis below CMU when Brandeis beat CMU twice this year?  In all likelihood, that would mean that Brandeis would be ranked a spot ahead of CMU, which could result in both of them either getting in (if in the previous 1-7 rankings, CMU was high up the list) or both of them being left out (if CMU wasnt that high up the list and Brandeis holds CMU near the bottom of that list for the remaining C selections). 

For some reason, I really enjoy the dynamics of the selection process.  Its not just how good your resume is, but how good you compare to the teams that you are actually being compared to.  For example, hypothetically, if you compare a 20-6 Wooster team to 17-8 Brandeis, you may come up with Wooster being the better candidate (this is completely hypothetical, I know CMU and Wooster would not be in Pool C contention at the same time, and Wooster would have to lose again to be in Pool C contention).  That would give you the order;

Wooster
Brandeis

But lets say you had CMU to the mix of teams you are comparing.  In this case CMU beat Wooster and has essentially the same number of losses, therefore you would rank CMU above Wooster, but because Brandeis swept CMU, your rankings could now look like this:

Brandeis
CMU
Wooster

Really interesting to me how the rankings can change depending on which teams you compare.

If CMU and Brandeis are on the table at the same time, then Brandeis would have the Head-to-Head and the better record against common opponents. (Basically UAA.  I didn't see another common opponent). 

As a deep C fan, I don't want the Rochester win to help Rochester leapfrog "my team" unless it knocks CMU deep into Pool C!

It is fun!

Yeah, you essentially have the same case with Brandeis/Amherst as you do with Brandeis/CMU.  Brandeis would be ranked higher in both cases but they have 3 more losses.

[pabegg]

I count: 10 locks, 21 safe, 9 in contention, and 9 chance teams.
Using Ralph's 17 no-shot-at-C conferences + 1 (Wash U) + 3 (Pool B) + 10 (locks) + 21 (safe) = 52 bids
8 bids remain for the 23 "in contention" and "chance" teams.  8 upsets will turn these into "out of contention" and "no chance".  Is this correct?

Almost. Ralph's math was off by 1, as there are 16 no-shot-at-C conferences (39 Pool A - 1 for Wash U - 22 on my list = 16). So the over/under on upsets is 9.

[sumander]

PaBegg, Little tiff over on the West board. What are Bethel's chances of a pool C. Bid?

[pabegg]

PaBegg, Little tiff over on the West board. What are Bethel's chances of a pool C. Bid?

Negligible.

While they might be on the national board early, I can't see the case for selecting them.

They haven't beaten anyone in contention, as they're 0-2 vs. St. Thomas (and would be 0-3 as a Pool C contender). It's hard to see them picked over a team like DePauw, who's 15-5 and 2-1 vs. ranked teams.

[sumander]

Thank You!

[cubs]

Point 35
UWO 30

Halftime

Pointers end half on a 5-0 run after UWO tied it at 30 with just over 2:00 left in the half.

[Hugenerd]

Upset Alert:

St. Mary's (MD) trailing to Marymount by 1 at the half, not looking good for someone's Pool C if that holds up.

[cubs]

Point 43
UWO 38

Under 16:00 Media timeout

UWO opens second half with an 8-0 run to take 38-35 lead, but Point answers with an 8-0 run of their own to make it 43-38.

[Hugenerd]

Upset Alert:

St. Mary's (MD) trailing to Marymount by 1 at the half, not looking good for someone's Pool C if that holds up.

St. Marys opens the half on a 20-8 run.

[cubs]

Point 52
UWO 44

12:47 Remaining

UWO cuts into Point's lead and makes it 45-44, but Point goes on another quick 7-0 run to ake a 52-44 lead.

[cubs]

Point 69
UWO 63

3:49 Remaining

[Hugenerd]

Marymount takes the lead over St.Mary's with 6 minutes left, 62-61.

[Ralph Turner]

Marymount takes the lead over St.Mary's with 6 minutes left, 62-61.

You beat me!   

So now.  This is  "Pool A" St Mary's MD 62, "Pool C" Marymount 61?