Pool C

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Dave,
  Does the national committee exclusively do the next regional rankings? I assume there's no time after Sunday's games for the RACs to have a conference call and/or input for those rankings.

RACs meeting in the morning, as far as I know, so they are working with some unknowns, but they're just advisory anyway.  Technically, the national committee does every ranking.

Ryan touches on it ...

The RACs meet Sunday morning and produce their rankings ... knowing there could be some games still to be played that day. They will then come up with their final "what ifs" as well and hand those to the national committee. The national committee will make any changes they need to make, especially considering the outcome of games on Sunday (which the national committee continues to harp they hate - Sunday title games, especially late in the day) and then come up with the Week 4 rankings.

Once the Week 4 rankings are complete, the national committee will have the vRRO data run another time and will then readjust their rankings to come up with their ultimate finale rankings. The vRRO data, for these rankings only, takes into account Week 3 and "Week 4" so that there is nothing left off the table. These finale rankings are the ones they use for at-large, bracketing, and hosting conversations.

And as Ryan has said and we repeat often (including to you in an email) - let's remember the RACs are only advisory. The national committee is actually tasked with creating these rankings themselves. The system has been set-up to have RACs help them with this work, but the RAC's work can be actually thrown out if the national committee wants and they can do it all themselves by themselves if they want. The RACs are helpful, but their decisions basically don't hold any standing in the long run.

[AO]

Dave,
  Does the national committee exclusively do the next regional rankings? I assume there's no time after Sunday's games for the RACs to have a conference call and/or input for those rankings.

RACs meeting in the morning, as far as I know, so they are working with some unknowns, but they're just advisory anyway.  Technically, the national committee does every ranking.

Ryan touches on it ...

The RACs meet Sunday morning and produce their rankings ... knowing there could be some games still to be played that day. They will then come up with their final "what ifs" as well and hand those to the national committee. The national committee will make any changes they need to make, especially considering the outcome of games on Sunday (which the national committee continues to harp they hate - Sunday title games, especially late in the day) and then come up with the Week 4 rankings.

Once the Week 4 rankings are complete, the national committee will have the vRRO data run another time and will then readjust their rankings to come up with their ultimate finale rankings. The vRRO data, for these rankings only, takes into account Week 3 and "Week 4" so that there is nothing left off the table. These finale rankings are the ones they use for at-large, bracketing, and hosting conversations.

And as Ryan has said and we repeat often (including to you in an email) - let's remember the RACs are only advisory. The national committee is actually tasked with creating these rankings themselves. The system has been set-up to have RACs help them with this work, but the RAC's work can be actually thrown out if the national committee wants and they can do it all themselves by themselves if they want. The RACs are helpful, but their decisions basically don't hold any standing in the long run.

What happens if they bring a new team into the "finale" regional rankings after the last vRRO data run?  Maybe it's an unofficial rule that they can only shuffle teams within the rankings and not bring in any new teams?

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Dave,
  Does the national committee exclusively do the next regional rankings? I assume there's no time after Sunday's games for the RACs to have a conference call and/or input for those rankings.

RACs meeting in the morning, as far as I know, so they are working with some unknowns, but they're just advisory anyway.  Technically, the national committee does every ranking.

Ryan touches on it ...

The RACs meet Sunday morning and produce their rankings ... knowing there could be some games still to be played that day. They will then come up with their final "what ifs" as well and hand those to the national committee. The national committee will make any changes they need to make, especially considering the outcome of games on Sunday (which the national committee continues to harp they hate - Sunday title games, especially late in the day) and then come up with the Week 4 rankings.

Once the Week 4 rankings are complete, the national committee will have the vRRO data run another time and will then readjust their rankings to come up with their ultimate finale rankings. The vRRO data, for these rankings only, takes into account Week 3 and "Week 4" so that there is nothing left off the table. These finale rankings are the ones they use for at-large, bracketing, and hosting conversations.

And as Ryan has said and we repeat often (including to you in an email) - let's remember the RACs are only advisory. The national committee is actually tasked with creating these rankings themselves. The system has been set-up to have RACs help them with this work, but the RAC's work can be actually thrown out if the national committee wants and they can do it all themselves by themselves if they want. The RACs are helpful, but their decisions basically don't hold any standing in the long run.

What happens if they bring a new team into the "finale" regional rankings after the last vRRO data run?  Maybe it's an unofficial rule that they can only shuffle teams within the rankings and not bring in any new teams?

They've got a really good computer program through the NCAA that adjusts those numbers in real time.  If they bring in a new team on Sunday, the vRRO will change.  However, if you're bringing a new team in, they're likely in last place, and results vs that team are only going to matter in the very few instances where teams are near identical in the resume - unless, of course, that last team in a common opponent for two teams on the table.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Dave,
  Does the national committee exclusively do the next regional rankings? I assume there's no time after Sunday's games for the RACs to have a conference call and/or input for those rankings.

RACs meeting in the morning, as far as I know, so they are working with some unknowns, but they're just advisory anyway.  Technically, the national committee does every ranking.

Ryan touches on it ...

The RACs meet Sunday morning and produce their rankings ... knowing there could be some games still to be played that day. They will then come up with their final "what ifs" as well and hand those to the national committee. The national committee will make any changes they need to make, especially considering the outcome of games on Sunday (which the national committee continues to harp they hate - Sunday title games, especially late in the day) and then come up with the Week 4 rankings.

Once the Week 4 rankings are complete, the national committee will have the vRRO data run another time and will then readjust their rankings to come up with their ultimate finale rankings. The vRRO data, for these rankings only, takes into account Week 3 and "Week 4" so that there is nothing left off the table. These finale rankings are the ones they use for at-large, bracketing, and hosting conversations.

And as Ryan has said and we repeat often (including to you in an email) - let's remember the RACs are only advisory. The national committee is actually tasked with creating these rankings themselves. The system has been set-up to have RACs help them with this work, but the RAC's work can be actually thrown out if the national committee wants and they can do it all themselves by themselves if they want. The RACs are helpful, but their decisions basically don't hold any standing in the long run.

You can think about it as the National Committee making the decisions, with the rep from each region responsible for bringing an initial ranking for their region.  They use the RAC as the means of composing that initial ranking to present to the committee.  It gives a broader perspective so when someone on the national committee says, "Why is CNU over Swat?" The members can say, "we talked about it and the consensus was ________."

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Bob,

Would it be possible to add the d3 records for each of the teams to your list (especially for Sunday)?  I feel, in the past, the number of wins overall has had some bearing (even if the winning percentages might be similar).  Without the rigid use of the .3 to 2 ration, I think that might come into play again.

Also, thanks for doing all the hard work to compile those; it makes my life much easier.

Our friend @d3bubble has the records here, Ryan...

http://www.fantastic50.net/d3h_men.html

I have always heard it is strictly WP, and not # of wins/losses...but I can't confirm that.

I remember hearing, especially back when there were lots of non-region games in the mix, that total qualifying games sometimes played a factor.  It's always nice to see, for me, anyway.

[AO]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

It wouldn't be accurate if you stopped it.  If you bring in a new team, everything has to be run again.  It's just a flawed system.  You're still giving more credit for wins against teams that dropped out of the rankings from 10th to 12th than wins against teams that jumped from 13th to 11th.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

It wouldn't be accurate if you stopped it.  If you bring in a new team, everything has to be run again.  It's just a flawed system.  You're still giving more credit for wins against teams that dropped out of the rankings from 10th to 12th than wins against teams that jumped from 13th to 11th.

When it comes to using vRRO, it's much more about who you played than the record itself.  As I said, moving teams on or off near the bottom rarely has a real impact of selections.  If it's down to one win over a #8 team, they're probably going to secondary criteria anyway.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

It wouldn't be accurate if you stopped it.  If you bring in a new team, everything has to be run again.  It's just a flawed system.  You're still giving more credit for wins against teams that dropped out of the rankings from 10th to 12th than wins against teams that jumped from 13th to 11th.

So when do you stop the runs, AO? I mean ... the committees have to get to work to pick teams, bracket, and host, at some point ... right? So where is your arbitrary run stop?

Teams are also ranked that don't show up on the public polls ... if they have to get to those teams (which has happened), their vRRO data doesn't change things, either.

Let's be realistic. There was a point in time when they would drop the Week 3 vRRO data altogether and also a time when they didn't update the info. They at least have a system in place that does it best to create the best data they can. Furthermore, each week doesn't take into account the current rankings for the vRRO, just the previous. That keep this in place to the smallest degree possible.

[AO]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

It wouldn't be accurate if you stopped it.  If you bring in a new team, everything has to be run again.  It's just a flawed system.  You're still giving more credit for wins against teams that dropped out of the rankings from 10th to 12th than wins against teams that jumped from 13th to 11th.

So when do you stop the runs, AO? I mean ... the committees have to get to work to pick teams, bracket, and host, at some point ... right? So where is your arbitrary run stop?

Teams are also ranked that don't show up on the public polls ... if they have to get to those teams (which has happened), their vRRO data doesn't change things, either.

Let's be realistic. There was a point in time when they would drop the Week 3 vRRO data altogether and also a time when they didn't update the info. They at least have a system in place that does it best to create the best data they can. Furthermore, each week doesn't take into account the current rankings for the vRRO, just the previous. That keep this in place to the smallest degree possible.

I'm not debating when you should stop running the vRRO data, Ryan has already confirmed it does not stop.  They just have to decide when to stop bringing in new teams.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

But those go hand in hand ... if you redo the vRRO data, you want to consider when to revaluate those ranked based on that data. When you change the rankings, you then want to re-run the vRRO data to be sure you have the most updated information (which, again, is only done at the very end.

Basically the committee has decided it this way: they do the Week 4 rankings that the RACs help with and come up with a rankings, they re-run the vRRO data to be up to date and then make sure that nothing crazy has changed or needs to be adjusted. That dictates another tweak and adjustment and then the rankings are locked.

[AO]

But those go hand in hand ... if you redo the vRRO data, you want to consider when to revaluate those ranked based on that data. When you change the rankings, you then want to re-run the vRRO data to be sure you have the most updated information (which, again, is only done at the very end.

Basically the committee has decided it this way: they do the Week 4 rankings that the RACs help with and come up with a rankings, they re-run the vRRO data to be up to date and then make sure that nothing crazy has changed or needs to be adjusted. That dictates another tweak and adjustment and then the rankings are locked.

But if they add another team during that last tweak, the vRRO will change automatically (according to Ryan).  The committee might choose to ignore those changes but changes have been made. 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

But those go hand in hand ... if you redo the vRRO data, you want to consider when to revaluate those ranked based on that data. When you change the rankings, you then want to re-run the vRRO data to be sure you have the most updated information (which, again, is only done at the very end.

Basically the committee has decided it this way: they do the Week 4 rankings that the RACs help with and come up with a rankings, they re-run the vRRO data to be up to date and then make sure that nothing crazy has changed or needs to be adjusted. That dictates another tweak and adjustment and then the rankings are locked.

But if they add another team during that last tweak, the vRRO will change automatically (according to Ryan).  The committee might choose to ignore those changes but changes have been made.

The issue is when you stop moving teams, more than when you change the vRRO info.  You could end up in a loop if you change the vRRO, then change the teams, then change vRRO, etc.  You have to stop at some point - that's what I was referring to when saying those changes lower down in the rankings aren't going to affect things as much because they're low-ranked teams.

[wally_wabash]

You have to stop the vRRO run at some point. If they kept updating it, and then changing rankings, it won't stop.

It wouldn't be accurate if you stopped it.  If you bring in a new team, everything has to be run again.  It's just a flawed system.  You're still giving more credit for wins against teams that dropped out of the rankings from 10th to 12th than wins against teams that jumped from 13th to 11th.

When it comes to using vRRO, it's much more about who you played than the record itself.  As I said, moving teams on or off near the bottom rarely has a real impact of selections.  If it's down to one win over a #8 team, they're probably going to secondary criteria anyway.

Secondary Criteria was the name of my band in college. 

[Titan Q]

Secondary Criteria was the name of my band in college.

I do think D3 tournament time brings about some good band names.

* Secondary Criteria
* The Bid Thieves
* RAC
* Island Pod

Many more.