Pool C

[magicman]

Williams' strength of schedule will soon improve dramatically (at Hamilton, Middlebury, Amherst, and Trinity, hosting Bowdoin and Colby, 64-29 combined record, including two road games against top 20 squads) ... very back-loaded schedule this year.  

Yes, their SOS will get significantly better. The bigger question is what might happen to their won-loss record. I think the best they'll do is 4-2 over that stretch, which will still leave them at 21-3 (19-2 in region) heading into the NESCAC tournament. They might slide a bit in the Top 25 poll but should still be in good shape for a Pool C bid even if they lose another regional game in the playoffs.  

[magicman]

KnightSlappy,
In looking over Brockport State's regional record, a game against Geneseo State played as part of the Wendy's Classic Tournament in Rochester on Jan. 15th, is not listed as a regional game. Not sure why that wouldn't be in region. I believe Brockport's regional record should be 9-3, unless I'm missing something that's out of the ordinary about that game. 

[KnightSlappy]

KnightSlappy,
In looking over Brockport State's regional record, a game against Geneseo State played as part of the Wendy's Classic Tournament in Rochester on Jan. 15th, is not listed as a regional game. Not sure why that wouldn't be in region. I believe Brockport's regional record should be 9-3, unless I'm missing something that's out of the ordinary about that game. 

Yep, should be a regional game. Fixed it in my sheet. Interestingly, it didn't change their RPI.

[hopefan]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

I think it really depends on who's doing the ranking.  We'll know more about how each region is ranking teams once the first regional rankings come out.  Usually a low SOS will drop a team a couple notches only if they play in a lesser conference.  So Westminster is definitely in that boat.  I happen to think that they're a pretty good team this year and deserving of a C spot (assuming they do indeed end up at 21-3 or 20-4 and assuming there aren't too many other conference tournament upsets).  A lot will depend on how they are viewed by the committee doing the regional ranking.

[scout]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

I think it really depends on who's doing the ranking.  We'll know more about how each region is ranking teams once the first regional rankings come out.  Usually a low SOS will drop a team a couple notches only if they play in a lesser conference.  So Westminster is definitely in that boat.  I happen to think that they're a pretty good team this year and deserving of a C spot (assuming they do indeed end up at 21-3 or 20-4 and assuming there aren't too many other conference tournament upsets).  A lot will depend on how they are viewed by the committee doing the regional ranking.

Granted, I follow The Commonwealth Coast Conference a little more closely than most... So this question is more for my benefit than anything else.

But considering Westminster's case, would Gordon be in a similar situation? I'm not saying they're going to run the table the rest of the way. But if they were to do so, what are their chances of a Pool C spot?

[Hugenerd]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

I think it really depends on who's doing the ranking.  We'll know more about how each region is ranking teams once the first regional rankings come out.  Usually a low SOS will drop a team a couple notches only if they play in a lesser conference.  So Westminster is definitely in that boat.  I happen to think that they're a pretty good team this year and deserving of a C spot (assuming they do indeed end up at 21-3 or 20-4 and assuming there aren't too many other conference tournament upsets).  A lot will depend on how they are viewed by the committee doing the regional ranking.

Granted, I follow The Commonwealth Coast Conference a little more closely than most... So this question is more for my benefit than anything else.

But considering Westminster's case, would Gordon be in a similar situation? I'm not saying they're going to run the table the rest of the way. But if they were to do so, what are their chances of a Pool C spot?

In my opinion, in order to even have a shot, they would need to run the regular season schedule so that their only other loss would be in their conference tourney.  The MIT loss wont hurt them too much, but their other two losses are to teams with losing records.  If they lost another game it would also likely be to a team with ~0.500 record as there are really no other teams with spectacular records in the CCC.  That would be 3 bad losses, if they lose another during the regular season that would be 4.  Their SOS is also below .500, so that is not going to help them.  They also will have no wins over regionally ranked teams, which does not boost their resume (their best wins right now are against 10-5 Husson and 10-6 Wheellock). To feel comfortable they need to win their conference tourney, but they may have on outside shot to get into the discussion if they are 21-4, but I am not sure if a CCC team has ever gotten a Pool C and I wouldnt bank on that.

[scout]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

I think it really depends on who's doing the ranking.  We'll know more about how each region is ranking teams once the first regional rankings come out.  Usually a low SOS will drop a team a couple notches only if they play in a lesser conference.  So Westminster is definitely in that boat.  I happen to think that they're a pretty good team this year and deserving of a C spot (assuming they do indeed end up at 21-3 or 20-4 and assuming there aren't too many other conference tournament upsets).  A lot will depend on how they are viewed by the committee doing the regional ranking.

Granted, I follow The Commonwealth Coast Conference a little more closely than most... So this question is more for my benefit than anything else.

But considering Westminster's case, would Gordon be in a similar situation? I'm not saying they're going to run the table the rest of the way. But if they were to do so, what are their chances of a Pool C spot?

In my opinion, in order to even have a shot, they would need to run the regular season schedule so that their only other loss would be in their conference tourney.  The MIT loss wont hurt them too much, but their other two losses are to teams with losing records.  If they lost another game it would also likely be to a team with ~0.500 record as there are really no other teams with spectacular records in the CCC.  That would be 3 bad losses, if they lose another during the regular season that would be 4.  Their SOS is also below .500, so that is not going to help them.  They also will have no wins over regionally ranked teams, which does not boost their resume (their best wins right now are against 10-5 Husson and 10-6 Wheellock). To feel comfortable they need to win their conference tourney, but they may have on outside shot to get into the discussion if they are 21-4, but I am not sure if a CCC team has ever gotten a Pool C and I wouldnt bank on that.

Gordon actually got a Pool C bid in 05-06. I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you. I don't think there's any way they'd get a bid unless they ran the table and lost the conference championship.

It was just a question for the masses...

[Pat Coleman]

Thanks for the heads-up, guys. This is how our data gets better, with everyone's eyes on it.

Long story short -- any Wendy's game had the potential to be tagged wrong, with pairings being updated. Roberts Wesleyan's presence in the field meant we couldn't simply tag every game as regional at the outset.

[John Gleich]

A couple of pertinent Pool C/NCAA tournament hosting questions (maybe just pertinent to me, but...)

Do we know (i.e. have they told us) if the NCAA selection committee uses the RPI [.25(WP)+.5(OWP)+.25(OOWP)] as a primary or secondary criterion for Pool C selection... or is this merely a projection using the standard definition of RPI... and other individual numbers (like WP, OWP, or OOWP) are the actual criteria?

Who has the hosting preference this year, men or women?

[KnightSlappy]

I haven't paid enough attention to SOS etal, so I'm curious... How often does it seem to come into play in the decision making....  How often does a team with a very good regional record not get in because of a weaker strength of schedule?  Are there any prime examples from the last couple of years?

Being closely associated with the SLIAC, I'm well aware that a second team from the conference has no hope of being chosen for the field, but it hasn't impacted because generally, no non tourney winner comes close to having a good regional record.   But this year, Westminster could well run the SLIAC table, and if they were to be upset in the Conference tourney, would still offer up a regional record of something like 21-3, but with a very low SOS....     what does history tell us happens in a case like this?  Does the third or 4th CCIW/UAA/ODC team with 6 or 7 or 8 regional losses become the 62nd/63rd team, or would that starry regional record vs weak competition take precedence?

I think it really depends on who's doing the ranking.  We'll know more about how each region is ranking teams once the first regional rankings come out.  Usually a low SOS will drop a team a couple notches only if they play in a lesser conference.  So Westminster is definitely in that boat.  I happen to think that they're a pretty good team this year and deserving of a C spot (assuming they do indeed end up at 21-3 or 20-4 and assuming there aren't too many other conference tournament upsets).  A lot will depend on how they are viewed by the committee doing the regional ranking.

Westminster is in the same position that Anderson and St. Norbert are in (the three are nearly identical with respect to WP, OWP, and OOWP).

According to RPI they all rank below 11-5 CCIW Wheaton, and above 11-5 CCIW Augustana. It really is a case by case, team by team comparison. We'll have to see how the NCAA feels about them when the first few sets of rankings come out.

My gut feeling on Westminster right now is that they might sneak in should they run the table but lose the tourney final, but another loss on top of that may be too much for their schedule to overcome.

[scout]

A couple of pertinent Pool C/NCAA tournament hosting questions (maybe just pertinent to me, but...)

Do we know (i.e. have they told us) if the NCAA selection committee uses the RPI [.25(WP)+.5(OWP)+.25(OOWP)] as a primary or secondary criterion for Pool C selection... or is this merely a projection using the standard definition of RPI... and other individual numbers (like WP, OWP, or OOWP) are the actual criteria?

Who has the hosting preference this year, men or women?

I could be wrong... but I think the women had the preference last year. Which would give the men hosting preference this year.

[KnightSlappy]

A couple of pertinent Pool C/NCAA tournament hosting questions (maybe just pertinent to me, but...)

Do we know (i.e. have they told us) if the NCAA selection committee uses the RPI [.25(WP)+.5(OWP)+.25(OOWP)] as a primary or secondary criterion for Pool C selection... or is this merely a projection using the standard definition of RPI... and other individual numbers (like WP, OWP, or OOWP) are the actual criteria?

Who has the hosting preference this year, men or women?

I have not seen the NCAA say that they calculate an RPI to rank teams. For me, it's just a projection but WP and SOS (the defined two-thirds OWP and one-third OOWP) are the actual criteria. They may calculate an RPI, but I don't believe it's stated or promised.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Do we know (i.e. have they told us) if the NCAA selection committee uses the RPI [.25(WP)+.5(OWP)+.25(OOWP)] as a primary or secondary criterion for Pool C selection... or is this merely a projection using the standard definition of RPI... and other individual numbers (like WP, OWP, or OOWP) are the actual criteria?

The handbook for this year is pretty similar to past years.  They will use in-region winning percentage and the SOS figure as primary criteria.  RPI is not mentioned anywhere I can see.  I don't think selection will go any differently than it did last year.

[John Gleich]

A couple of pertinent Pool C/NCAA tournament hosting questions (maybe just pertinent to me, but...)

Do we know (i.e. have they told us) if the NCAA selection committee uses the RPI [.25(WP)+.5(OWP)+.25(OOWP)] as a primary or secondary criterion for Pool C selection... or is this merely a projection using the standard definition of RPI... and other individual numbers (like WP, OWP, or OOWP) are the actual criteria?

Who has the hosting preference this year, men or women?

I have not seen the NCAA say that they calculate an RPI to rank teams. For me, it's just a projection but WP and SOS (the defined two-thirds OWP and one-third OOWP) are the actual criteria. They may calculate an RPI, but I don't believe it's stated or promised.

I can't remember from years past... but is there any evidence that the selection goes pretty purely along RPI lines? (like, this year, could we assume that, say, the top 15 RPI teams will be selected and then 4 of the next 6 or so...?)

I know that it's an inexact science and there is some wiggle room persay...  but have we seen a correlation in the past?

I could be wrong... but I think the women had the preference last year. Which would give the men hosting preference this year.

That's what I thought too (reasons why Point and Wash U couldn't host and further exacerbating the travesty that was the Midwest/West bracket last year).


As an aside.. can a travesty be exacerbated?  I'm not sure if technically that means what I'm trying to say, but it does sound pretty cool!