Pool C

[pabegg]

I tried to squeeze a little too much information in here, so I understand that I've confused people.

In the Midwest:

Augustana, Washington U, Bluffton, and Grinnell are the favorites for the Pool A bids (as is Eureka, well below the top 11).

Aurora is the top Pool B contender in the country, and probably has already clinched a bid.

Chicago is the #3 Pool C team in the country and in excellent position (as would be Augustana and WashU if they miss a Pool A bid).

Elmhurst is 15th in Pool C standings, which would be "in" today. However, there are normally about 6 upsets of higher ranked Pool A teams, so Elmhurst would probably be bumped out (the way WashU was last year).

Wheaton and Carthage are in the second and third tiers of Pool C teams and might have a chance if they keep winning, but are outside now. Likewise, Bluffton would be third tier if they don't win the Pool A bid.

The only way the HCAC gets two bids is if Bluffton wins all their games except the conference title game, and gets a lot of help in other conference tournaments.

[Pat Coleman]

Patrick,

What do I have to do to get the 2001-02 scores database from you?

[John Gleich]

This is great pabegg.  I expect that the regional rankings will be very close to this list here.  This is a great resource!!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Hey does anyone know for sure if the regional rankings take into account tonight's games or not?

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I did the QOWI numbers for the teams in NE at 9 or better.  I've listed them below.  Some of the games from tonight may affect these teams, so I've given the QOWI as it stands now and then the range it could be between tomorrow depending on outcomes.  I doubt that the committee is taking tonight's games into affect, but you never know.  The first number is the team's ranking in terms of in-region record.

1       Amherst         22-0     11.73 (11.63 - 11.82)
3       WPI               15-2      11.06 (10.94 - 11.06)
2       Salem            17-2      10.79 (10.74 - 10.95)
4       RIC                17-3      10.75 (10.65 - 10.80)
5       Trinity            15-3      10.61 (10.56 - 10.72)
7       Bates             16-4      10.25 (10.1 - 10.3)
8       Keene            14-4      10.06 (10 - 10.06)
21     Tufts              13-8        9.86 (9.81 - 9.90)
10     Brandeis        14-6        9.85 (9.8 - 9.95)
6       Husson          16-3        9.58 (9.53 - 9.63)
11     Bridgewater   14-6       9.55 (9.45 - 9.65)
9       Gordon          12-5        9.29 (9.18 - 9.35)
14     Elms              12-6        9.00 (9 - 9.06)

[pabegg]

My understanding was that the regional rankings took into account games through Sunday.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I thought so, but I didn't know for sure.  So disregard the below numbers in parentheses.

[Titan Q]

Remember, there is ranking criteria beyond QOWI and in-region winning %...

* In-region head-to-head
* In-region results vs common opponents
* In-region results vs regionally ranked teams


For example, I'd expect Augustana to be ranked ahead of Wash U since Augie has a head-to-head win, and all other measures are very close.

[diehardfan]

I thought so, but I didn't know for sure.  So disregard the below numbers in parentheses.

Ouch.... that was a lot of work for no result.... 

In general, it's a good idea to not include teams with any more than a certain number of in-region losses, or a certain in-region loss precentage in the teams that you bother to count. I just don't see Tufts geting any sort of metion with 8 regional losses, for example.

Now that I know what date the Regional rankings count through, I'll try and do a list of West Region teams later. The fact that regional games aren't marked on the schedule will probably make this take more time than normal though! 

I assume that with all the overzealous posters in the midwest area, someone will do that for my home region.

Remember, there is ranking criteria beyond QOWI and in-region winning %...

* In-region head-to-head
* In-region results vs common opponents
* In-region results vs regionally ranked teams


For example, I'd expect Augustana to be ranked ahead of Wash U since Augie has a head-to-head win, and all other measures are very close.

Obviously the people in the committees change, but I've noticed that different regions weigh those criteria differently. The midwest region, for example, tends to care more about in-region win % than other regions, where as some seem to go mostly on QOWI. Or maybe that's just my perception.

[diehardfan]

Crap.... uhm, do provisional members count as in-region? Doesn't it depend on what year it is? Is there a list anywhere of what year schools are in in terms of their provisional status? 

[Ralph Turner]

Crap.... uhm, do provisional members count as in-region? Doesn't it depend on what year it is? Is there a list anywhere of what year schools are in in terms of their provisional status? 

Provisionals in year 3 and year 4 count.

UT-Tyler is in year 4 and I believe that Tri-State is in year 3.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I thought so, but I didn't know for sure.  So disregard the below numbers in parentheses.

Ouch.... that was a lot of work for no result....

It only took an extra five minutes and while there is little result here, it is still of some interest to those readers of the NE Region Rankings board where it was originally posted.

Crap.... uhm, do provisional members count as in-region? Doesn't it depend on what year it is? Is there a list anywhere of what year schools are in in terms of their provisional status?

Third and Fourth years count, but there are some provisionals who were held back in the process (as I found out via Pat sometime last week).  As far as I can tell, if they are marked with a little black box on the d3hoops.com schedules, they are indeed in-region.  They've done a very good job in tracking all of those down.

[Gray Fox]

Crap....

Have you been hanging out with the guys too long?

[miacwatchmen]

When do they come out with updated regional rankings and where can I find them on the internet?

[diehardfan]

Crap....

Have you been hanging out with the guys too long?

Are there people that consider that a bad word? I basically rate it on the level of gosh and darn.... and a notch below extremely rude phrases like "Shut up" that I would never say to another person seriously. I think the better evidence that I have hung out with guys too much is the fact that I occasionally use the word frick when I've been around guys a lot.... a favorite word of many more conservative guys I know. But honestly, I know a whole bunch of women (including both of my coworkers) that cuss up a storm, even around me despite the fact that they know I don't really like it. Unfortunately, girls just aren't made of sugar and spice and everything nice anymore... except for me. 

And on a basketball related note...

When do they come out with updated regional rankings and where can I find them on the internet?

February 7th, and the easiest source is right on the front page.... Pat and the staff are pretty good at getting them right after they are published on the NCAA site. They'll probably be in the Daily Dose.... but I'm not going to speak for Pat on that one.