View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 4929
Back to top |
Posted: 01/29/20 5:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Zags hosting would be cool. Spokane is apeshit over basketball.
|
|
ucbart
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 2829 Location: New York
Back to top |
Posted: 01/29/20 6:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
NoDakSt wrote: |
Regarding the Quse, and Barts comments about Qs knowledge of X and Os, I wonder how much not having Tammi and Adeniyi on staff is contributing to that. |
Well-I don't think much. That's the way they've always been, but Tiana masked it for the past two seasons.
|
|
PRballer
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 2562
Back to top |
Posted: 01/29/20 7:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
NoDakSt wrote: |
Zags hosting would be cool. Spokane is apeshit over basketball. |
If they win out in their conference and tournament, they will absolutely be hosting!
Would be cool if Iowa City and Tucson host, too. Those fan bases are really behind their teams (of course not mentioning Oregon, OSU, Miss State, SC, Louisville, etc...)
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 12851 Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 Posts: 12608 Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012 Posts: 4241 Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 12851 Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012 Posts: 5424
Back to top |
Posted: 02/17/20 6:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
A question:
We hear almost every year that the committee is bound by their Policies and Procedures. Over the years those have been revised several times. Who has the final say on the Policies and Prodedures? What is the process in revising them? I'm sure that there are recommendations from individual schools and conferences but at some point there must be a body or an individual who has the final say.
Who is it or who are they?
As Boss Tweed once commented: "I don't care who wins the election as long as I can control who gets nominated".
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009 Posts: 5167 Location: Carson City
Back to top |
Posted: 02/17/20 7:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
linkster wrote: |
A question:
We hear almost every year that the committee is bound by their Policies and Procedures. Over the years those have been revised several times. Who has the final say on the Policies and Prodedures? What is the process in revising them? I'm sure that there are recommendations from individual schools and conferences but at some point there must be a body or an individual who has the final say.
Who is it or who are they?
As Boss Tweed once commented: "I don't care who wins the election as long as I can control who gets nominated". |
The Division 1 Women's Basketball Committee meets in June and discusses policies for the next season. That is generally when changes to the selection and bracket policies are determined
|
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
Posted: 02/18/20 7:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Updated again today:
http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/bracketology
#1 seeds are South Carolina, Baylor, Maryland and Oregon
Marquette moves down from a 9 to 11 seed despite winning 2 games, moving solidly into 2nd place in the Big East and I think their RPI improved a bit. But then again I'd prefer an 11 seed for MU to the 8/9 seed. And I still can't get over the fact that there's even a projection with MU in the field at this point in the season - I was hoping for a .500 overall record with all they graduated and certainly didn't expect their 4th straight 20 win season which they reached with Sunday's win over Butler.
|
|
Phil
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 Posts: 1277
Back to top |
Posted: 02/18/20 9:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
> Who has the final say on the Policies and Prodedures? What is the process in revising them?
Does it really matter? Don't the list of considerations have enough loopholes that they can do whatever they want in claim they complied with their policies and procedures?
The claim they start with RPI, and then have some of the metrics which might move someone up or down. If that's really the case, one would expect that if the RPI indicated they should be, say, a 3 seed, they might end up a three, or maybe get moved up to a 2, or may be down to a 4, but it would be extremely unusual to have more movement than that.
Missouri State is currently #4 in RPI. No I didn't say a four seed, I said number four overall, so their starting position ought to be one of the top four seeds. Creme has them as a five seed which is a long way away. He doesn't say there's a procedural bump moving them from a one to a five, and I don't believe he's commented on it.
My conclusion is that the claim they start with RPI is a crock, or at best, it means the other considerations are so significant that the RPI ends up being meaningless.
|
|
Phil
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 Posts: 1277
Back to top |
Posted: 02/18/20 9:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Marquette Fan wrote: |
Updated again today:
Marquette moves down from a 9 to 11 seed despite winning 2 games, moving solidly into 2nd place in the Big East and I think their RPI improved a bit. But then again I'd prefer an 11 seed for MU to the 8/9 seed. And I still can't get over the fact that there's even a projection with MU in the field at this point in the season - I was hoping for a .500 overall record with all they graduated and certainly didn't expect their 4th straight 20 win season which they reached with Sunday's win over Butler. |
I think Marquette deserves an 8 but I understand why that might be less desirable than 11
|
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
Posted: 02/18/20 9:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Phil wrote: |
Marquette Fan wrote: |
Updated again today:
Marquette moves down from a 9 to 11 seed despite winning 2 games, moving solidly into 2nd place in the Big East and I think their RPI improved a bit. But then again I'd prefer an 11 seed for MU to the 8/9 seed. And I still can't get over the fact that there's even a projection with MU in the field at this point in the season - I was hoping for a .500 overall record with all they graduated and certainly didn't expect their 4th straight 20 win season which they reached with Sunday's win over Butler. |
I think Marquette deserves an 8 but I understand why that might be less desirable than 11 |
Marquette only has 3 regular season games left and I have a feeling they'll lose two of them - at Villanova and vs. DePaul. So they'd probably move down a bit with that. They absolutely have to win at Georgetown on Sunday as right now they don't have any good wins but at least they can say they don't have any bad losses either. And a loss to Georgetown would definitely be a bad loss. A loss to Villanova wouldn't be the greatest thing but a lot more respectable than losing to Georgetown.
I really shouldn't complain about any seed they get this season as it's so unexpected. I literally came into the season hoping they could finish with at least a .500 record so they could be WNIT eligible. And I think this is the first time they've ever had four straight 20 or more win seasons in program history.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67111 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 02/18/20 10:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Phil wrote: |
My conclusion is that the claim they start with RPI is a crock, or at best, it means the other considerations are so significant that the RPI ends up being meaningless. |
The committee uses RPI in a peculiar way. They use it as a measure of how good your wins or how bad your losses are, not as a measure of how good you are. In the weird reasoning of the committee, it's better to beat the #4 team than to be the #4 team. Oregon State and Gonzaga derive more benefit from Missouri State's absurd RPI than the Bears do themselves.
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009 Posts: 5167 Location: Carson City
Back to top |
Posted: 02/19/20 7:48 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Pilight is 100% correct about the RPI. This year will be interesting to see how the Committee uses the quadrant system. This is a seemingly small change, particularly since the quadrants are not adjusted for home court. But from a pure optics standpoint quadrant 1 now combines games against the top 25 with games against 26-50.
(A) There are currently 60 teams that have 2 wins or more over quadrant 1. (B)There are only 15 teams that have not lost to a team outside of quadrant 1. (C) 35 teams have more quadrant 1 wins than non-quadrant 1 losses and (D) another 8 that have the same number.
Those teams are:
South Carolina (11 Q1 wins, 0 nonQ1 losses)
Maryland (10-0)
Oregon (9-0)
Baylor (8-0)
UCLA (8-1)
Iowa (8-3)
Louisville (7-1)
Northwestern (7-0)
North Carolina St (6-2)
TCU (5-1)
Arizona (5-0)
Florida St (5-3)
LSU (5-4)
Oklahoma (5-5)
Oregon St (4-1)
Missouri St (4-1)
Connecticut (4-0)
Mississippi St (4-1)
Texas A&M (4-0)
Indiana (4-0)
DePaul (4-0)
Kentucky (4-1)
Purdue (4-1)
Michigan (4-2)
Texas (4-3)
Syracuse (4-5)
Gonzaga 3-1)
Central Michigan (3-3)
Ohio St (3-1)
Arizona St (3-1)
Duke (3-3)
South Dakota (3-0)
Iowa St (3-2)
West Virginia (3-3)
Virginia (3-5)
St John's (3-5)
Minnesota (3-4)
Nebraska (3-2)
Michigan St (3-3)
Butler (3-4)
Princeton (2-0)
Old Dominion (2-2)
Florida Gulf Coast (2-0)
Virginia Tech (2-2)
Drake (2-1)
Creighton (2-4)
Rutgers (2-3)
Penn (2-2)
Seton Hall (2-4)
Northern Iowa (2-3)
Georgia Tech (2-3)
USC (2-4)
Southern Illinois (2-6)
Georgia (2-5)
North Carolina (2-4)
Auburn (2-7)
Wake Forest (2-9)
Buffalo (2-7)
Texas Tech (2-3)
St Mary's (2-11)
With this analysis there are a few teams that stand out. Tennessee has only 1 quadrant 50 win but no losses against non top 50. Other teams with no such losses but 3 or fewer quadrant 1 wins are South Dakota (3), Princeton (2), Florida Gulf Coast (2) and Stony Brook (0).
Oklahoma has 5 quadrant 1 wins but they are currently under .500. If Oklahoma could win 4 of its last 5 (which would include wins against 2 more top 50 teams) they would have to be seriously considered.
There are several teams with only 1 quadrant 1 win but are still being considered for an at-large berth: Arkansas (1 Q1 win, 2 nonQ1 losses), Marquette (1-2), Oklahoma St (1-2), Bradley (1-2), James Madison (1-2), Western Kentucky (1-3), Middle Tennessee (1-3) and Ohio (1-3). Finally there are 2 teams in the RPI top 50 who do not have a Quadrant 1 win, Troy and Dayton.
(note: these numbers are from Warren Nolan. I noted that in one case a win over Virginia (RPI 51) was included as Q1, but I believe the information is generally accurate.
|
|
insidewinder
Joined: 19 Feb 2006 Posts: 240
Back to top |
Posted: 02/19/20 8:00 pm ::: Hmmm |
Reply |
|
calbearman76 wrote: |
Pilight is 100% correct about the RPI. This year will be interesting to see how the Committee uses the quadrant system. This is a seemingly small change, particularly since the quadrants are not adjusted for home court. But from a pure optics standpoint quadrant 1 now combines games against the top 25 with games against 26-50.
(A) There are currently 60 teams that have 2 wins or more over quadrant 1. (B)There are only 15 teams that have not lost to a team outside of quadrant 1. (C) 35 teams have more quadrant 1 wins than non-quadrant 1 losses and (D) another 8 that have the same number.
Those teams are:
South Carolina (11 Q1 wins, 0 nonQ1 losses)
Maryland (10-0)
Oregon (9-0)
Baylor (8-0)
UCLA (8-1)
Iowa (8-3)
Louisville (7-1)
Northwestern (7-0)
North Carolina St (6-2)
TCU (5-1)
Arizona (5-0)
Florida St (5-3)
LSU (5-4)
Oklahoma (5-5)
Oregon St (4-1)
Missouri St (4-1)
Connecticut (4-0)
Mississippi St (4-1)
Texas A&M (4-0)
Indiana (4-0)
DePaul (4-0)
Kentucky (4-1)
Purdue (4-1)
Michigan (4-2)
Texas (4-3)
Syracuse (4-5)
Gonzaga 3-1)
Central Michigan (3-3)
Ohio St (3-1)
Arizona St (3-1)
Duke (3-3)
South Dakota (3-0)
Iowa St (3-2)
West Virginia (3-3)
Virginia (3-5)
St John's (3-5)
Minnesota (3-4)
Nebraska (3-2)
Michigan St (3-3)
Butler (3-4)
Princeton (2-0)
Old Dominion (2-2)
Florida Gulf Coast (2-0)
Virginia Tech (2-2)
Drake (2-1)
Creighton (2-4)
Rutgers (2-3)
Penn (2-2)
Seton Hall (2-4)
Northern Iowa (2-3)
Georgia Tech (2-3)
USC (2-4)
Southern Illinois (2-6)
Georgia (2-5)
North Carolina (2-4)
Auburn (2-7)
Wake Forest (2-9)
Buffalo (2-7)
Texas Tech (2-3)
St Mary's (2-11)
With this analysis there are a few teams that stand out. Tennessee has only 1 quadrant 50 win but no losses against non top 50. Other teams with no such losses but 3 or fewer quadrant 1 wins are South Dakota (3), Princeton (2), Florida Gulf Coast (2) and Stony Brook (0).
Oklahoma has 5 quadrant 1 wins but they are currently under .500. If Oklahoma could win 4 of its last 5 (which would include wins against 2 more top 50 teams) they would have to be seriously considered.
There are several teams with only 1 quadrant 1 win but are still being considered for an at-large berth: Arkansas (1 Q1 win, 2 nonQ1 losses), Marquette (1-2), Oklahoma St (1-2), Bradley (1-2), James Madison (1-2), Western Kentucky (1-3), Middle Tennessee (1-3) and Ohio (1-3). Finally there are 2 teams in the RPI top 50 who do not have a Quadrant 1 win, Troy and Dayton.
(note: these numbers are from Warren Nolan. I noted that in one case a win over Virginia (RPI 51) was included as Q1, but I believe the information is generally accurate. |
I know you are a Cal fan, but seems extreme to leave out somebody...
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009 Posts: 5167 Location: Carson City
Back to top |
Posted: 02/19/20 9:05 pm ::: Re: Hmmm |
Reply |
|
insidewinder wrote: |
I know you are a Cal fan, but seems extreme to leave out somebody... :lol: |
No Cal only has 1 Quadrant 1 win.
Seriously that was just an inadvertent mistake (and probably not the only one given the amount of data.)Thanks for catching it.
Stanford has 4 Quadrant 1 wins, impressively all over top 25 teams, and has no losses against non Quadrant 1 teams. Their losses include two top 10 teams and Texas.
|
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
|
mzonefan
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 4879 Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Back to top |
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
|
snlMINAJ
Joined: 21 Jan 2010 Posts: 1233
Back to top |
Posted: 02/24/20 6:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
maryland 4th number 1 - yikes? i guess good for uconn though.
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009 Posts: 5167 Location: Carson City
Back to top |
Posted: 02/25/20 4:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The Big East is intriguing. DePaul is in for sure and Marquette is almost certainly in as well. But then comes the crowd with Butler, Villanova, Creighton, St John's and Seton Hall all under consideration. Butler is 11-3 in 2020. With two wins this weekend over the New York area teams they will move into second place and should get an at-large berth (even though Crème doesn't even list them in the first 8 out.) Villanova vaulted back into consideration with a weekend sweep over DePaul and Marquette, but they were bad in non-conference so they will need to sweep Creighton and Providence this weekend and most likely get to the Big East finals to have a shot at an at-large berth. Creighton has been in for Crème based on their wins over DePaul and Marquette, but their resume continues to weaken. They had 3 non-conference wins over Northern Iowa, South Dakota St and West Virginia that don't look as good as they did 2 months ago. A sweep over Villanova and Georgetown would get them up to a tie for 3rd or 4th and that should get them in, but a loss would put them in position where they would have to make a deep run in the Big East tourney.
St. John's and Seton Hall have very similar resumes which makes it surprising why Crème has been so much higher on St. John's. Either team has to sweep this weekend which would put them ahead of Creighton, and even then they will have to get at least one win in the Big East tourney and probably two.
In the end the Big East could get 3 or 4 teams in the NCAA. But who they are depends on this weekend and the Big East tourney.
|
|
Marquette Fan
Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 3582
Back to top |
|
Matt5762
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 Posts: 607
Back to top |
Posted: 02/25/20 5:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I'm guessing Creme considers Butler's RPI disqualifying (currently #89). IMO Nebraska (#87) is an even more glaring omission considering their resume compared to those of the other teams on this year's bubble. I believe these numbers are indeed far higher than those of any at-large selection in history, but given the sad state of this year's bubble, it would seem wrong of the committee to blanket rule them out on that basis alone.
|
|
|
|