Pool C

[Titan Q]

The topic I brought up has nothing to do with SOS, sac.  It has to do with the simple reality of a national decision being based strictly on regional criteria, and the fact that some regions are deeper than others (West vs East, say).

The only SOS implication is along the same lines - the fact that you have to compare the SOS of two teams, while Team A's region may be a lot better than Team B's.

I don't see a solution really, but again, if Hamilton is Pool C #1, that says quite a bit about how this works.

[sac]

merely refuting augiefan's asertion that this system penalizes the better conferences and regions when I don't believe thats the case.

[Titan Q]

merely refuting augiefan's asertion that this system penalizes the better conferences and regions when I don't believe thats the case.

So with Hamilton as the #1 Pool C and, say, UW-Platteville #6, you don't see UW-P being penalized for playing in a better region than Hamilton?

[sac]

...yeah thats dumb, but on the whole the WIAC, CCIW etc will get more teams in over a longer period of time using this system than they would have with SOSI.

[Ralph Turner]

merely refuting augiefan's asertion that this system penalizes the better conferences and regions when I don't believe thats the case.

So with Hamilton as the #1 Pool C and, say, UW-Platteville #6, you don't see UW-P being penalized for playing in a better region than Hamilton?

But pabegg's calculations are not the NCAA's.

In 2008 only Rochester earned a Pool C from the East Region and no team earned a Pool C from the Atlantic Region.

Maybe the committee leaves Hamilton on the table as they left the Atlantic Region last year.

[titan2000]

So St. Norberts College of the MWC has lost 3 of its last 4 and its listed as an A ?   

[pabegg]

So St. Norberts College of the MWC has lost 3 of its last 4 and its listed as an A ?   

By the numbers, they still have the best overall record in the MWC.

[Titan Q]

So St. Norberts College of the MWC has lost 3 of its last 4 and its listed as an A ?   

By the numbers, they still have the best overall record in the MWC.

Anyway to switch that up this time of year, Patrick?  St. Norbert is the #4-seed in the MWC tournament.  Can you make the conference tournament #1 seeds the AQ team?  Or would that be too manual of a process?

Again, thanks for all you do on this stuff.

[pabegg]

So St. Norberts College of the MWC has lost 3 of its last 4 and its listed as an A ?   

By the numbers, they still have the best overall record in the MWC.

Anyway to switch that up this time of year, Patrick?  St. Norbert is the #4-seed in the MWC tournament.  Can you make the conference tournament #1 seeds the AQ team?  Or would that be too manual of a process?

Again, thanks for all you do on this stuff.

OK, maybe #1 seeds makes sense now.

[Hugenerd]

it just does not make sense not to use all D3 games.  Really hoping that change is made at some point.  That wouldn't solve the problem of different regions being stronger than others, but it would be nice if all D3 games at least factored in.

I agree totally. The current system penalizes the top conferences and the top regions. All games should be factored in for Pool C bids.

Actually this system is better for the better conferences than the old SOSI was,  the CCIW, WIAC and NESCAC should get multiple teams in every year under this system.

Contrary to popular opinion in the CCIW, it does not deserve 4 bids just because its fans believe they deserve 4 bids every year.  Two most years, three occasionally.  This system will do that.

...but I also agree all D3 games should count it would make things 100% better.

I think it makes sense for the regional committees to use the regional records for regional rankings, but it definitely seems like once they have the top Pool C candidate from each region (the 8 teams under consideration), they should switch to numbers accounting for all games in d3.  It seems only logical that if you are comparing teams betweeen regions that you would also use games between regions.  Also, unless I am mistaken, didnt I read somewhere that the regional and final national committees are different?  So it seems like it would be alright to let the regional people use regional numbers and national picks be made with national numbers.

[Greek Tragedy]

I always considered #1 seeds the "conference AQs"...no big deal.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

hungenerd - I believe, if I am not mistaken, the head of each regional committee makes up the national committee. So they bring the arguement for each team in their region to the table.

[ronk]

  If they stay with the regional emphasis, here's a scheduling strawman for discussion:

  The AD for Misericordia(northeastern Pa. with many close 200+ out-of region opponents) who's the Mid-Atlantic rep on the NCAA says to his coach after this year's Pool C deliberations: if you want to have the best chance at Pool C selection, then I suggest
1) 14 conference in-region games(11-3)
2) play 3 local in-region(maybe Scranton,Susquehanna,Keystone)(2-1)
3) play 4 weekend out-of-region tournaments against tough teams(ok,at least 1 toughie/tournament)
       (New England tipoff-Elms,Amherst)
       (Wooster Invitational-Wooster,John Carroll)
       (Las Vegas Desert Classic(UW-whoever,Augustana)
       (Catholic Holiday-Catholic,Va. Wesleyan)

  Your in-region is 13-4, a .765 winning %, maybe 3-5 out-of-region for an overall 16-9

or some tweaking of the idea. What sayest thou?

[Hugenerd]

hungenerd - I believe, if I am not mistaken, the head of each regional committee makes up the national committee. So they bring the arguement for each team in their region to the table.

Thanks

[Ethelred the Unready]

  If they stay with the regional emphasis, here's a scheduling strawman for discussion:

  The AD for Misericordia(northeastern Pa. with many close 200+ out-of region opponents) who's the Mid-Atlantic rep on the NCAA says to his coach after this year's Pool C deliberations: if you want to have the best chance at Pool C selection, then I suggest
1) 14 conference in-region games(11-3)
2) play 3 local in-region(maybe Scranton,Susquehanna,Keystone)(2-1)
3) play 4 weekend out-of-region tournaments against tough teams(ok,at least 1 toughie/tournament)
       (New England tipoff-Elms,Amherst)
       (Wooster Invitational-Wooster,John Carroll)
       (Las Vegas Desert Classic(UW-whoever,Augustana)
       (Catholic Holiday-Catholic,Va. Wesleyan)

  Your in-region is 13-4, a .765 winning %, maybe 3-5 out-of-region for an overall 16-9

or some tweaking of the idea. What sayest thou?

I believe you just described Hamilton's season.  Playing your toughest games out of region is pretty smart.  Knowing they are in a pretty weak league, they schedule their toughest competition out of region and get good experience going 2-4, and finish 16-2 in  the East region for a #2 ranking.