MBB: Landmark Conference

[Charles]

CUA was higher regionally ranked (#2 vs. #3), but Williams criteria info was better than CUA's. CUA despite their record was #2 in the MA because of their SOS... Williams SOS is better and their criteria is better... so not surprised that CUA is having to travel.

wondering what you mean by criteria? 

Dave could have said other criteria since SOS is part of the primary criteria that the NCAA uses to make their ranking/hosting decisions.

Other being what? Besides SOS, W-L, W-L vs. tournament teams; regional ranking; winning the conference? What could other criteria possibly mean?

[ronk]

CUA was higher regionally ranked (#2 vs. #3), but Williams criteria info was better than CUA's. CUA despite their record was #2 in the MA because of their SOS... Williams SOS is better and their criteria is better... so not surprised that CUA is having to travel.

wondering what you mean by criteria? 

Dave could have said other criteria since SOS is part of the primary criteria that the NCAA uses to make their ranking/hosting decisions.

Other being what? Besides SOS, W-L, W-L vs. tournament teams; regional ranking; winning the conference? What could other criteria possibly mean?

From the D3hoops' FAQ:

What does the NCAA use to select and seed teams into the tournament?

These are the selection (and seeding) criteria:

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed:
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP) (weighted 2/3).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP) (weighted 1/3).
- Add OWP and OOWP to give total strength of schedule
- See more info on men's SOS below
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.
Note:
• Once an opponent is listed in a regional ranking, it is considered ranked throughout the process. (Once ranked, always ranked.)
• Conference postseason contests are included.
• Contests versus provisional and reclassifying members in their third and fourth years shall count in the primary criteria. Provisional and reclassifying members shall remain ineligible for rankings and selection.

If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision by the committee, the following secondary criteria (for ranking and selections) will be evaluated:
• Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
• Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
• Results versus common non Division III opponents.
• Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
• Overall win-loss percentage.
• Results versus all common opponents.
• Overall DIII Strength of Schedule.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the Division III men's and women's basketball committees. In order to be considered for selection for Pools B or C, an institution must play at least 50 percent of its competition against Division III in-region opponents.

Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a selection criterion by the basketball committee for selection purposes.

[cugrad]

The NCAA committee can use any stat they want to place these teams.  The only stat they need is that Catholic is the regular season champion in the Landmark, as well as the tournament champion, while Williams finished second in the regular season and second in the tournament.  The NCAA has rewarded a second place team with a home game against a regular season/tournament champion.  Catholic beat the ODAC champion, as well as the CAC champion by 16 points.  Williams beat the CAC's second place finisher by 1 point!  Catholic beat a very good Transyvania by 26, as well as a very good Scranton team who went deep into the 2012 tournament. How can one determine who played a more difficult schedule when they have few, if any common opponents. This is not the first or second time they have taken it to Catholic.  BTW, how often does a regular season/tournament champion with a record of 25-3 have to travel in the second round, particularly to a second place team?  There isn't a coach or player who wouldn't be irate over such a decision!!!

[Charles]

The NCAA committee can use any stat they want to place these teams.  The only stat they need is that Catholic is the regular season champion in the Landmark, as well as the tournament champion, while Williams finished second in the regular season and second in the tournament.  The NCAA has rewarded a second place team with a home game against a regular season/tournament champion.  Catholic beat the ODAC champion, as well as the CAC champion by 16 points.  Williams beat the CAC's second place finisher by 1 point!  Catholic beat a very good Transyvania by 26, as well as a very good Scranton team who went deep into the 2012 tournament. How can one determine who played a more difficult schedule when they have few, if any common opponents. This is not the first or second time they have taken it to Catholic.  BTW, how often does a regular season/tournament champion with a record of 25-3 have to travel in the second round, particularly to a second place team?  There isn't a coach or player who wouldn't be irate over such a decision!!!

well said. not to mention a smaller venue and a 450 mile bus ride.

[Pat Coleman]

Records aside, where I agree a 25-3 team with a slightly above average SOS should not be traveling in the second round, runners-up in better conferences host champions of other conferences all the time.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The NCAA committee can use any stat they want to place these teams.  The only stat they need is that Catholic is the regular season champion in the Landmark, as well as the tournament champion, while Williams finished second in the regular season and second in the tournament.  The NCAA has rewarded a second place team with a home game against a regular season/tournament champion.  Catholic beat the ODAC champion, as well as the CAC champion by 16 points.  Williams beat the CAC's second place finisher by 1 point!  Catholic beat a very good Transyvania by 26, as well as a very good Scranton team who went deep into the 2012 tournament. How can one determine who played a more difficult schedule when they have few, if any common opponents. This is not the first or second time they have taken it to Catholic.  BTW, how often does a regular season/tournament champion with a record of 25-3 have to travel in the second round, particularly to a second place team?  There isn't a coach or player who wouldn't be irate over such a decision!!!

You have barely mentioned any criteria here... being the conference champion or not is not part of the criteria; opponents beat for CUA only becomes relevant if they are common opponent to Williams (unless you are going really deep into the secondary criteria, which would you won't get to thanks to primary criteria); point spreads mean nothing in the grand scheme of things (again, unless there is a common opponent).

As Pat mentioned, second place teams are hosting conference champions in more places than Williams this weekend: Dickinson at Wooster, Calvin at UW-Stevens Point, Christopher Newport at Virginia Wesleyan, and Concordia (TX) at Mary Hardin-Baylor (same conference, though Concordia can't host anyway).

And the coaches know these situations all the of the time and I would hope they are explaining them to their student-athletes. Just because you win a conference title doesn't give you the right to host over someone from a better conference and with a better resume.

For comparison, data from the final public regional rankings with WP adjusted for the final games of the regular season along with vRRO if necessary and the final rankings per what I received:
CUA:
#2 in regional ranking, 21-3 (.875) region record, .528 SOS (may not have improved that much in the final week), 2-2 vs regionally ranked opponents

Williams:
#3 in regional ranking, 21-4 (.840) region record, .556 SOS (probably improved greatly with games against Middlebury and Amherst), 4-4 vs. regionally ranked opponents.

With that information... CUA wins the regional ranking and the region record; Williams wins SOS and record versus regionally ranked opponents. Because the SOS isn't close (and was probably a wider spread than we have data for)... I can see why this would be a toss up and why CUA certainly could have hosted - but I can not argue with the committee for giving the game to Williams.

[mailsy]

While it would be nice to have your games at home. Believe me I wish Cabrini was playing at home. But they didn't this year. Some deserve it some don't. Not saying Catholic didn't deserve it. But the thing is just go win. Play with a chip on your shoulder. Prove everyone wrong. Just win! 

[Pat Coleman]

Catholic fans may find the Jostens Trophy finalists list more to their liking:
http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2013/03/jostens-finalists-announced

[ronk]

The NCAA committee can use any stat they want to place these teams.  The only stat they need is that Catholic is the regular season champion in the Landmark, as well as the tournament champion, while Williams finished second in the regular season and second in the tournament.  The NCAA has rewarded a second place team with a home game against a regular season/tournament champion.  Catholic beat the ODAC champion, as well as the CAC champion by 16 points.  Williams beat the CAC's second place finisher by 1 point!  Catholic beat a very good Transyvania by 26, as well as a very good Scranton team who went deep into the 2012 tournament. How can one determine who played a more difficult schedule when they have few, if any common opponents. This is not the first or second time they have taken it to Catholic.  BTW, how often does a regular season/tournament champion with a record of 25-3 have to travel in the second round, particularly to a second place team?  There isn't a coach or player who wouldn't be irate over such a decision!!!

You have barely mentioned any criteria here... being the conference champion or not is not part of the criteria; opponents beat for CUA only becomes relevant if they are common opponent to Williams (unless you are going really deep into the secondary criteria, which would you won't get to thanks to primary criteria); point spreads mean nothing in the grand scheme of things (again, unless there is a common opponent).

As Pat mentioned, second place teams are hosting conference champions in more places than Williams this weekend: Dickinson at Wooster, Calvin at UW-Stevens Point, Christopher Newport at Virginia Wesleyan, and Concordia (TX) at Mary Hardin-Baylor (same conference, though Concordia can't host anyway).

And the coaches know these situations all the of the time and I would hope they are explaining them to their student-athletes. Just because you win a conference title doesn't give you the right to host over someone from a better conference and with a better resume.

For comparison, data from the final public regional rankings with WP adjusted for the final games of the regular season along with vRRO if necessary and the final rankings per what I received:
CUA:
#2 in regional ranking, 21-3 (.875) region record, .528 SOS (may not have improved that much in the final week), 2-2 vs regionally ranked opponents

Williams:
#3 in regional ranking, 21-4 (.840) region record, .556 SOS (probably improved greatly with games against Middlebury and Amherst), 4-4 vs. regionally ranked opponents.

With that information... CUA wins the regional ranking and the region record; Williams wins SOS and record versus regionally ranked opponents. Because the SOS isn't close (and was probably a wider spread than we have data for)... I can see why this would be a toss up and why CUA certainly could have hosted - but I can not argue with the committee for giving the game to Williams.

With Randolph-Macon becoming regionally ranked in the final rankings, Catholic's record improves to 3-2(vrro) and wins that criteria on a % basis, also.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

This is true, ronk. But as you say, just in percentage... they do look at "results" and Williams "results" are against teams like Amherst, Middlebury and others. CUA's are against RMC, DeSales, Scranton (am I missing any?).

[ronk]

This is true, ronk. But as you say, just in percentage... they do look at "results" and Williams "results" are against teams like Amherst, Middlebury and others. CUA's are against RMC, DeSales, Scranton (am I missing any?).

Missing St. Mary's.

[Matt Letourneau]

Dave,
I think we can all agree it was a close call.  But it would appear that they chose to place MORE weight on SOS than any of the other "criteria" and I do have a problem with that, especially because it was close.  As has been said, there are no common opponents.   The SOS difference is entirely because of league play.  If anything, they should reward a team that plays in a weaker league and chose to play tougher non-conference games to make up for that.  Don't forget Husson, who made the tournament and Catholic beat 72-49.  I'm not sure how much more you could reasonably expect for a team. 

I can understand why Williams fans would be upset if their team was on the road, too, but if I didn't win my own conference and I was ranked third in my region, than logically (which doesn't seem to play into much of anything related to the NCAA), I wouldn't be real surprised to have to travel. 

I hope they do channel it.  I'm sure the players and coaches aren't dwelling on it at this point and are preparing for the game.  But the rest of us can vent.

[Matt Letourneau]

And yes, I'm very happy for Chris Kearney, a Jostens finalist.  I have heard nothing but outstanding things about Chris off the court.

It is a pretty special year when you have both a men's and women's player nominated for the Jostens award.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Matt... you want to reward a team for playing in a weaker conference and thus a weaker SOS versus a team that played in a more challenging conference, had a better SOS, and proved they could win with that schedule?

The .02 difference in SOS is sizable and it was probably a bigger spread since Williams played Middlebury and Amherst in the final week and Catholic played Merchant Marine and Juniata. And if we are looking at the primary criteria and basically all of them are a wash but SOS is the biggest difference - why shouldn't they give the team with the better SOS the host? If Williams and Catholic were up for the final at-large bid, they would use the exact same criteria and probably choose Williams because of the SOS.

Should we have the game between Wooster and Cabrini be played at Cabrini because the Cavs SOS was hurt so much by their conference?

Husson making the tournament does not help Catholic. There is no criteria for who in the tournament you played and Husson never made the regional rankings in any week including the last. Also, Husson doesn't exactly have a great WP and their opponents weren't that great... so that means a weak SOS.

Believe it or not... there are five criteria in the primary criteria and if most are a wash - and they pretty much are - and one is clearly better (and .02+ difference is noticeable)... then guess what... the SOS is the determining factor. It is just one of the criteria... but the others can't help make the decision. If they went to secondary criteria, there is a chance CUA would have gotten the bid thanks to the game with Transylvania counting in many parts... but clearly the SOS probably out-weighed having to go to secondary criteria.

[Charles]

Matt... you want to reward a team for playing in a weaker conference and thus a weaker SOS versus a team that played in a more challenging conference, had a better SOS, and proved they could win with that schedule?

The .02 difference in SOS is sizable and it was probably a bigger spread since Williams played Middlebury and Amherst in the final week and Catholic played Merchant Marine and Juniata. And if we are looking at the primary criteria and basically all of them are a wash but SOS is the biggest difference - why shouldn't they give the team with the better SOS the host? If Williams and Catholic were up for the final at-large bid, they would use the exact same criteria and probably choose Williams because of the SOS.

Should we have the game between Wooster and Cabrini be played at Cabrini because the Cavs SOS was hurt so much by their conference?

Husson making the tournament does not help Catholic. There is no criteria for who in the tournament you played and Husson never made the regional rankings in any week including the last. Also, Husson doesn't exactly have a great WP and their opponents weren't that great... so that means a weak SOS.

Believe it or not... there are five criteria in the primary criteria and if most are a wash - and they pretty much are - and one is clearly better (and .02+ difference is noticeable)... then guess what... the SOS is the determining factor. It is just one of the criteria... but the others can't help make the decision. If they went to secondary criteria, there is a chance CUA would have gotten the bid thanks to the game with Transylvania counting in many parts... but clearly the SOS probably out-weighed having to go to secondary criteria.

Dissing Merchant Marine and Juniata is unfair. MMA and Juniata are two very good programs. Their kids are tough and they play hard.