Pool C

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The chances of the NCAA allowing a first weekend flight to fill out the pod in Texas is probably slim. The NCAA is dealing with tight budgets and basically the message is they will allow as few flights as possible. If Texas as three teams available, they will put the bye down there and have them play it out that weekend with the one remaining team fly the second weekend. And by flying in a NWC or SCIAC team to Texas, you leave another flight for the remaining team (assuming there are no extra bids there, either) to head some place... this starts to add up to more and more flights.

[Gregory Sager]

D-Mac, I think that the point that's being made here is that there will essentially be three sets of geographic orphans in this scenario: A Pacific Northwest orphan, a southern California orphan, and two Texas orphans (not three) that are within 500 miles of each other. Given that each of the West Coast orphans will have to fly, anyway, it makes sense to pair them up with the two Texas orphans. Two flights are inevitable, no matter what. This scenario fills out a full pod, and leaves the bracketmakers the ability to give the bye to a more deserving team with regard to actual basketball qualifications.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Well that certainly is an interesting idea, though I know a flight from that pod will be necessarily the second weekend, they could essentially eliminate that as a chance by having the two byes be on the west coast and Texas... then fly those winning teams to their next destination for Saturday and gamble neither wins needing a flight the following weekend.

But, I do like the idea... would open up the byes to teams like UWSP, Amherst and others.

[sac]

D-Mac, I think that the point that's being made here is that there will essentially be three sets of geographic orphans in this scenario: A Pacific Northwest orphan, a southern California orphan, and two Texas orphans (not three) that are within 500 miles of each other. Given that each of the West Coast orphans will have to fly, anyway, it makes sense to pair them up with the two Texas orphans. Two flights are inevitable, no matter what. This scenario fills out a full pod, and leaves the bracketmakers the ability to give the bye to a more deserving team with regard to actual basketball qualifications.

What I was pointing out was UT-Dallas is in good position to host and how difficult it would be to get teams there.  Currently there are no logical opponents for even a 3 team scenario involving UTD and Trinity, no matter what a third and fourth opponent would have to be flown in.  Since the two on the West Coast have to fly, why not send them both to Dallas.

If UTD doesn't host and Trinity makes the tournament you either have to pair them up and fly the winner out on for the 2nd round.  Or fly them both to another location.  If you do that, with the west coast teams that makes 4 flights.

[KnightSlappy]

Well that certainly is an interesting idea, though I know a flight from that pod will be necessarily the second weekend, they could essentially eliminate that as a chance by having the two byes be on the west coast and Texas... then fly those winning teams to their next destination for Saturday and gamble neither wins needing a flight the following weekend.

But, I do like the idea... would open up the byes to teams like UWSP, Amherst and others.

It necessitates a flight on the second weekend, but limits the number of first weekend flights to two. So you're not actually adding any flights here. You'd actually be reducing the risk of later flights by doing this because you'd be capping the total number of flights for these four teams at three (2 in on the first weekend and 1 out on the second).

There's just no way around three flights.

[Titan Q]

Not the most scientific thing ever, but my take on Pool C at this point...

20 most "bubble proof" current conference leaders
1. UW-Stevens Point (WIAC) - West #1
2. Amherst or Williams (NESCAC) - Northeast #1 and #2
3. Wooster (NCAC) - Great Lakes #1
4. Brockport State (SUNYAC) - East #1
5. Illinois Wesleyan (CCIW) - Midwest #2
6. SUNY-Purchase (SKY) - Atlantic #1
7. Cabrini (CSAC) - Mid-Atlantic #1
8. Scranton (Land) - Mid-Atlantic #2
9. Randolph-Macon (ODAC) - South #1
10. Wesley (CAC) - Mid-Atlantic #3
11. St. Thomas (MIAC) - West #3
----------gets a little dicier here
12. Mount Union (OAC) - Great Lakes #4
13. Staten Island (CUNYAC) - Atlantic #3
14. Texas-Dallas (ASC) - South #2
15. Hope (MIAA) - Great Lakes #6 
16. St. Norbert (MWC) - Midwest #5
17. Eastern Connecticut (LEC) - Northeast #5
18. WPI (NEWMAC) - Northeast #6
19. Dickinson (CC) - Mid-Atlantic #6
20. Whitworth (NWC) - West #6

15 strongest current Pool C candidates (teams not leading their conference)
1. UW-Whitewater (WIAC) - West #2
2. Amherst or Williams (NESCAC) - Northeast #1 and #2
3. Babson (NEWMAC) - Northeast #4
4. Wheaton (CCIW) - Midwest #3
5. Geneseo State (SUNYAC) - East #2
6. Plattsburgh State (SUNYAC) - East #3
7. Ohio Wesleyan (NCAC) - Great Lakes #2
8. Virginia Wesleyan (ODAC) - South #3
9. Guilford (ODAC) - South #5
10. Emory (UAA) - South #6
11. Augustana (CCIW) - Midwest #4
12. Bowdoin (NESCAC) - Northeast #3
13. Springfield (NEWMAC) - Northeast #7
14. Dubuque (IIAC) - West #4
15. Mary Washington (CAC) - Mid-Atlantic #5


(Regional ranking noted is from Feb 9)

[KnightSlappy]

The new data sheets are live on NCAA.com

http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d3

Looks like vRRO is based on last week's rankings.

[Titan Q]

vRRO

We probably need a new abbreviation, since it's now "Results vs All Division Ranked Opponents."

[Pat Coleman]

Not sure we need to change the abbreviation, though -- all those teams are regionally ranked opponents. Just not in the same region.

[Titan Q]

Not sure we need to change the abbreviation, though -- all those teams are regionally ranked opponents. Just not in the same region.

True.

[KnightSlappy]

Not sure we need to change the abbreviation, though -- all those teams are regionally ranked opponents. Just not in the same region.

And this was always how it was tabulated anyway, right (so long as they counted as in-region games)? There's nothing new about cross-region (geographic) games counting in the vRRO.

[Titan Q]

Not sure we need to change the abbreviation, though -- all those teams are regionally ranked opponents. Just not in the same region.

And this was always how it was tabulated anyway, right? There's nothing new about cross-region games counting in the vRRO.

Well, only if the game was "in-region."

So last year, IWU vs Hope would not have counted in RRO (would have only been considered in secondary criteria)...but now it does. 

Very significant change.

[KnightSlappy]

Not sure we need to change the abbreviation, though -- all those teams are regionally ranked opponents. Just not in the same region.

And this was always how it was tabulated anyway, right? There's nothing new about cross-region games counting in the vRRO.

Well, only if the game was "in-region."

So last year, IWU vs Hope would not have counted in RRO (would have only been considered in secondary criteria)...but now it does.  Very significant change.

Right, but that's the same change that occurred with WP and SOS as well. vRRO isn't different in that regard.

[Pat Coleman]

Here are the new regional rankings:

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/19/2014-ncaa-regional-rankings-week-2/

[KnightSlappy]

Rankings I don't quite understand:

Hood over Christopher Newport/St. Mary's (Md.) in the Middle Atlantic.
Centre behind Texas-Dallas in the South.
Hardin-Simmons being ranked in the South.
Pomona-Pitzer in over Claremont-Mudd-Scripps in the West.