RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

The Field of 64
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 14710
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 10:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Not that the Big East is bunched closely together behind DePaul or anything... Very Happy

We have no chance in hell of getting four into the real bracket, but it's nice to dream.



_________________
"Silence must be heard, noise should be observed
The time has come to learn, that silence...
SILENCE MUST BE HEARD..."
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2481



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 11:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If S Carolina loses it's third game against UConn and Notre Dame wins out the Irish would have a better RPI and SOS. Both teams would have a loss to Tenn with S car worse because it came at home & a loss to UConn. ND's third loss would be at NC St while S Carolina's at Duke.

I'd say that Notre Dame would clearly have a better claim of a 1 seed.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 11:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

My opinion of Maryland has not changed. If they run undefeated through a major conference and win the conference tournament, ending the season with only one close loss against the #1 team in the country, they will be a #1 seed.



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2481



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 11:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
My opinion of Maryland has not changed. If they run undefeated through a major conference and win the conference tournament, ending the season with only one close loss against the #1 team in the country, they will be a #1 seed.


Based on the times I have seen them play I'd agree they should be a 1 seed, but seeing how the NCAA has them seeded right now I doubt anything could lift them that high. At the most they would get a 2 or 3 seed. I sure wouldn't want them in UConn's region but it would be easy for the committee to invoke their "geography rule". It seems like they have a rule to justify anything. And what better way to keep them out of the FF and justify the committee's making them a 4 seed than putting them in Bridgeport. I'd much rather see them face Miss St in the S16. Last time I looked Massey had that game figured at MD -1.


SpaceJunkie



Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 2521
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 11:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
My opinion of Maryland has not changed. If they run undefeated through a major conference and win the conference tournament, ending the season with only one close loss against the #1 team in the country, they will be a #1 seed.


(Edit because I think I was too generous last night)

I think 5 of the following realistic scenarios need to happen for that to happen (though it still might not be enough). That some of these teams still play each other should take care of at least couple:
Oregon St lose 2 games (maybe 1)
South Carolina lose to UConn and 2 games (maybe 1)
Mississippi St lose 2 games
Notre Dame lose a game
Florida State lose 3 games (maybe 2)
Baylor lose 3 games (maybe 2)
Texas lose 3 games (maybe 2)




Last edited by SpaceJunkie on 02/07/17 4:08 pm; edited 5 times in total
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 41794



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/06/17 11:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Now Maryland is going to be the #2 team in the AP poll. I hope SC beats UConn next week to see if Maryland makes it to #1 in the AP poll. Smile



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
Marquette Fan



Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 1867



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 12:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
Not that the Big East is bunched closely together behind DePaul or anything... Very Happy

We have no chance in hell of getting four into the real bracket, but it's nice to dream.


Yeah and I think Marquette is going to be the team that's not dancing unless they win out and make a big run in the BET. But I don't see any way they win the rematch against DePaul and there's no guarantee they'll beat bad Xavier and Butler teams on the road either with how they've been playing lately.


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 1859
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 11:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

New Top 16 revealed by the tournament committee:

1. UConn
2. Baylor
3. South Carolina
4. Mississippi Sate
5. Florida State
6. Notre Dame
7. Oregon State
8. Stanford
9. Maryland
10. Washington
11. Texas
12. Duke
13. Louisville
14. UCLA
15. NC State
16. DePaul

The above were determined before yesterday's games, which included several relevant results (including Texas beating Baylor, UCLA beating Stanford and also Louisville taking the loss at Notre Dame).

Last such reveal comes on February 20th.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 19011



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 3:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I like it that the committee is using Maryland to send a message for the future. If Maryland should really be a 2 or even a 1 then they will show that in the postseason.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 7593
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 4:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oh yes, Stanford for Bridgeport #2 please!



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 19011



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 4:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Oh yes, Stanford for Bridgeport #2 please!


Don't worry. You'll probably get us. More likely as a 3 though, so you're less likely to actually play us.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/07/17 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SpaceJunkie wrote:
pilight wrote:
My opinion of Maryland has not changed. If they run undefeated through a major conference and win the conference tournament, ending the season with only one close loss against the #1 team in the country, they will be a #1 seed.


(Edit because I think I was too generous last night)

I think 5 of the following realistic scenarios need to happen for that to happen (though it still might not be enough). That some of these teams still play each other should take care of at least couple:
Oregon St lose 2 games (maybe 1)
South Carolina lose to UConn and 2 games (maybe 1)
Mississippi St lose 2 games
Notre Dame lose a game
Florida State lose 3 games (maybe 2)
Baylor lose 3 games (maybe 2)
Texas lose 3 games (maybe 2)


I agree Maryland needs a lot of help.

If either ND or FSU win out in the ACC and win the ACC tournament, they'll be a #1 seed.
If either S.Car. or Miss St win out in the SEC and win the SEC tournament, they'll be a #1 seed.
If Baylor wins out and wins the Big 12 tournament, they'll be a #1 seed.
Next in line would be Oregon St, if they win out and win the PAC tournament.

All these teams would be in front of Maryland.

And, as you point out, some of these teams might remain in front of Maryland even with a loss.

Which is as it should be. Maryland will have zero top ten wins. Their SOS is a ridiculous 88. You have to go all they way down to Drake, RPI # 32, to get to a team with a weaker schedule. It's not just the conference's fault, by the way, as only PSU and Northwestern have worse SOS rankings than Maryland among the Big10 teams. Maryland's piss poor schedule is of its own choice.

BTW, ESPN quotes the head of the selection committee discussing Maryland and NCSt, which has an even worse OOC SOS than Maryland (but much better overall SOS) and has some weak losses. The statement:

"Terry Gawlik, chair of the NCAA Division I women's basketball committee, said quality wins were the difference.
"What stood out was the recent win over Louisville after wins over Notre Dame, the No. 2 RPI team; Florida State, No. 7; and Duke, No. 11," she said. "Those were significant."


All those teams that will be in front of Maryland in the seeding have significant wins. Maryland will have none, unless you consider Ohio State with two more losses (to Maryland) a significant win.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/13/17 11:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote



Multiple Bid Conferences
8 SEC
7 ACC
6 P12
4 B12
4 AAC
4 BEast
3 B10
2 Horizon
2 Ivy
2 MVC

Just Missed: James Madison, Villanova, Northwestern, Western Kentucky
Last In: Northern Iowa, Harvard, Tulane, Auburn

How did I arrive at this?

First, I gave two points for a win over a top 25 RPI team and one for a win over a 26-50 RPI team.

Then, I subtracted one point for a loss to a 26-50 team, and two for a loss against a sub-50 team.

I then added points based on the remaining schedule: .5 for a game remaining against a top 25 RPI team and .25 for a game against a 26-50 RPI team.

Teams more than one game under .500 in conference are not allowed in.

Many teams were moved within the same seed to prevent teams in the same conference from meeting before the conference finals or to meet the new rules about conferences with top four seeds. In this instance four teams swapped seeds to avoid this. Miami (FL) and Missouri moved up one; Creighton and Tennessee moved down one.

Ties went in favor of the team with the most points on current wins and losses. If still tied then better RPI.

The cut off for getting in as an at large was -4.75 points. It took 14 points to get a #1 seed.



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 3795
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/13/17 3:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Don't be too sure that the CAA spot goes to Elon. It's a tourney spot, and JMU has beaten Elon twice already. Depending on seeding and how things shake out, on any given day, that spot could go to JMU, Drexel, Elon, or someone else. JMU has beat up on Drexel once already, and twice on Elon, with one more chance at Drexel; their losses are sort of inexplicable--twice to Towson, whose record otherwise is pretty abysmal, and early on to William and Mary, who comes back next week. So who knows?



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/19/17 2:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Leaving on vacation tomorrow morning, so no new projection this week



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 2528



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/19/17 3:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Leaving on vacation tomorrow morning, so no new projection this week


Have a great vacation! Thanks for all the updates.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/17 1:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote



Multiple Bid Conferences
8 ACC
7 SEC
6 P12
5 B12
4 BEast
3 AAC
3 B10
2 MVC
2 Summit
2 CAA

Just Missed: Toledo, Harvard, Auburn, Indiana
Last In: Northern Iowa, Virginia, St John's Oregon

How did I arrive at this?

First, I gave two points for a win over a top 25 RPI team and one for a win over a 26-50 RPI team.

Then, I subtracted one point for a loss to a 26-50 team, and two for a loss against a sub-50 team.

I then added points based on the remaining schedule: .5 for a game remaining against a top 25 RPI team and .25 for a game against a 26-50 RPI team.

Teams more than one game under .500 in conference are not allowed in.

Many teams were moved within the same seed to prevent teams in the same conference from meeting before the conference finals or to meet the new rules about conferences with top four seeds. In this instance two teams swapped seeds to avoid this. Syracuse moved up one; Oklahoma moved down one.

Ties went in favor of the team with the most points on current wins and losses. If still tied then better RPI.

The cut off for getting in as an at large was -7 points. It took 15 points to get a #1 seed.



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 14710
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/17 7:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

How TF do you still have St. John's in? Not that I mind, but how?!



_________________
"Silence must be heard, noise should be observed
The time has come to learn, that silence...
SILENCE MUST BE HEARD..."
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/17 8:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
How TF do you still have St. John's in? Not that I mind, but how?!


-6 is just barely good enough. Who should be there instead?



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 3795
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/28/17 10:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Someone on the JMU board said, "anyone who thinks JMU will get an at-large bid over a P5 school, even with a better RPI, is delusional." I tend to agree. P5 schools always get the benefit of the doubt, even with cupcake schedules and a worse RPI, over a mid-major that really tries to boost itself with a tough schedule and has a pretty decent record.

Just for the record, I will submit that I think JMU is not quite as good as they were last year. I do think they're a lot better than some schools that will get in, including maybe some P5s.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2091
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 10:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Creme's latest bracketology, which puts Purdue at a 10 seed AND not even listed among the final 4 teams in the field. Interesting.

http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/bracketology


mzonefan



Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Ann Arbor, MI


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 11:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
Creme's latest bracketology, which puts Purdue at a 10 seed AND not even listed among the final 4 teams in the field. Interesting.

http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/bracketology


RealtimeRPI.com showed Purdue changing its RPI by +25 - quite impressive. I didn't know there could be that much movement this late in the season.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 12:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm wondering if Maryland will be a #2.

We were assuming that for Maryland to win the B10, they would end up with two wins over Ohio St as two respectable wins on their resume. Instead they lost to Ohio St in the season, and then ended up playing Purdue rather than Ohio St in the tournament, so they never beat Ohio St even once.

Their best wins are 27-7 Louisville, 19-12 AZ St, and the next best is 22-9 Michigan.

How in the world does that earn anyone a 2 seed?

If the committee means anything of what they said about SOS, Maryland should be a 4 or 5.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 12:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
Someone on the JMU board said, "anyone who thinks JMU will get an at-large bid over a P5 school, even with a better RPI, is delusional." I tend to agree. P5 schools always get the benefit of the doubt, even with cupcake schedules and a worse RPI, over a mid-major that really tries to boost itself with a tough schedule and has a pretty decent record.


It's not enough to just schedule a few good teams if you don't beat any of them. So they played Tenn and FSU. They lost both. They played Iowa and SJU. They lost both of those too. They beat Wake Forest, but Wake is 15-15 with an RPI of 88, so that doesn't really do much. Their best wins are against Elon, and while Elon will be a tourney team and has a respectable RPI, I doubt anybody on the committee is really standing up and taking notice of beating Elon.

You can't just say well they scheduled some tough teams and they have a decent record if that "decent record" wasn't achieved against the opponents you're holding up as the "tough schedule."

Point out the specific P5 schools slated to make the field that you consider less deserving than JMU and we'll compare their resumes. Especially we'll look at their best wins. Who has demonstrated they can actually win at the tournament level.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2481



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 1:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
I'm wondering if Maryland will be a #2.

We were assuming that for Maryland to win the B10, they would end up with two wins over Ohio St as two respectable wins on their resume. Instead they lost to Ohio St in the season, and then ended up playing Purdue rather than Ohio St in the tournament, so they never beat Ohio St even once.

Their best wins are 27-7 Louisville, 19-12 AZ St, and the next best is 22-9 Michigan.

How in the world does that earn anyone a 2 seed?

If the committee means anything of what they said about SOS, Maryland should be a 4 or 5.


I'd like to read the homer board of the 1 seed that were to get MD as the 4 seed in their team's region.
In 1995 only 2 BE teams made the tournament and UConn played a lot of local cupcake teams in their OOC schedule. I'm sure their SOS would have been close to Maryland's but they won the NC and were justifiably considered the best team in the country in the polls despite their mediocre/poor RPI & SOS.

Maryland may not have proven their worth with a top level schedule but I'd much rather see UConn play Miss St , Oregon St, or any of a bunch of teams with better RPI's & SOS's than face Maryland again.


ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 1039
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 1:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

In Creme's latest bracketology, he has Ohio State playing Louisville in a 4/5 match up. I would love to see that game in the second round. How intriguing. Two teams were ranked in the top 10 in the preseason and were both given a legit shot to have a top seed. In November, this was viewed as a possible E8/FF match up.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 1:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ucbart wrote:
In Creme's latest bracketology, he has Ohio State playing Louisville in a 4/5 match up. I would love to see that game in the second round. How intriguing. Two teams were ranked in the top 10 in the preseason and were both given a legit shot to have a top seed. In November, this was viewed as a possible E8/FF match up.


The game in his bracket that intrigues me is the 3-6 matchup between Washington and Syracuse.

I don't know how well played it would be, but it certainly wouldn't be boring.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 19011



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 1:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Since Stanford beat OrSU in the P12 tourney, who should be the #2 seed in Stockton? Charlie has OrSU, but I think Stanford has given the committee an opportunity to put them there. And it would increase fan attendance for sure. Although having it in the 'boonies' in Stockton is a totally weird choice of locale anyway if they are wanting fan attendance.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 1859
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 2:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Since Stanford beat OrSU in the P12 tourney, who should be the #2 seed in Stockton? Charlie has OrSU, but I think Stanford has given the committee an opportunity to put them there. And it would increase fan attendance for sure. Although having it in the 'boonies' in Stockton is a totally weird choice of locale anyway if they are wanting fan attendance.


Despite Stanford winning the Pac-12 Tourney, I still think OrSU deserves to be slotted by the tournament committee as the best Pac-12 team, by virtue of having won the regular season conference title, and having beaten Stanford 2 out of 3 times, and having beaten every single other conference opponent at least once (which is not something Stanford can claim).

Plus, I bet the Corvallis fans would actually travel pretty well to Stockton!

If Stanford gets that Stockton siting over the Beavs, it's not that I would consider it a moral travesty or something, but if the call were up to me, I'd give the narrow nod to Oregon State.


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 1859
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 2:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
ucbart wrote:
In Creme's latest bracketology, he has Ohio State playing Louisville in a 4/5 match up. I would love to see that game in the second round. How intriguing. Two teams were ranked in the top 10 in the preseason and were both given a legit shot to have a top seed. In November, this was viewed as a possible E8/FF match up.


The game in his bracket that intrigues me is the 3-6 matchup between Washington and Syracuse.

I don't know how well played it would be, but it certainly wouldn't be boring.


NC St. vs. Kentucky is, I think, a pretty good 2nd round matchup in Creme's current bracket. Texas vs. A&M in Austin could be fun. Ditto Oregon St. vs. Tennessee. I even think Oregon vs. Baylor could be a fun-to-watch 2nd rounder.

Even though the final conclusion of this tournament is (in my eyes) all but foregone, there should be some neat fireworks to watch this March. Can't wait! Good luck to all!


Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 126
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 11:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 14710
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 11:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


That is true, most of them are amusingly wrong and occasionally forget basic bracket principles.

On the other hand, I think pilight is pretty much our only other option, and he doesn't bracket his field.



_________________
"Silence must be heard, noise should be observed
The time has come to learn, that silence...
SILENCE MUST BE HEARD..."
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 126
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/17 11:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


That is true, most of them are amusingly wrong and occasionally forget basic bracket principles.

On the other hand, I think pilight is pretty much our only other option, and he doesn't bracket his field.

They have been droning on all week about Baylor being a lock for #1. Maybe they still are, but I won't be surprised if it doesn't happen.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2091
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 10:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Latest bracketology shows West Virginia as a 7 seed...with Stanford being the 2 seed and traveling all the way to Morgantown. Wouldn't that be something lol.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16599
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 10:37 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2091
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 10:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html


Wow! That took some time.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 3795
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 12:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 1:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.

I actually think this is the one thing Creme does fairly well. Where he isn't worth a damn is pretending to be a WBB expert analyst, with pre-season rankings, ranking the best players, or otherwise pretending to be a Kara Lawson. He doesn't know enough. But you don't have to understand the game to crunch numbers and follow precedent and rules. Nobody asks Joe Lunardi to pretend to be Jay Bilas year round. But I guess they think they need to use Creme for other things ( for which he is not qualified) in order to justify his salary.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16599
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 2:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.



X_______________________


shadowboxer



Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2101



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 6:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:


Multiple Bid Conferences
8 ACC
7 SEC
6 P12
5 B12
4 BEast
3 AAC
3 B10
2 MVC
2 Summit
2 CAA



Just Missed: Toledo, Harvard, Auburn, Indiana
Last In: Northern Iowa, Virginia, St John's Oregon

How did I arrive at this?

First, I gave two points for a win over a top 25 RPI team and one for a win over a 26-50 RPI team.

Then, I subtracted one point for a loss to a 26-50 team, and two for a loss against a sub-50 team.

I then added points based on the remaining schedule: .5 for a game remaining against a top 25 RPI team and .25 for a game against a 26-50 RPI team.

Teams more than one game under .500 in conference are not allowed in.

Many teams were moved within the same seed to prevent teams in the same conference from meeting before the conference finals or to meet the new rules about conferences with top four seeds. In this instance two teams swapped seeds to avoid this. Syracuse moved up one; Oklahoma moved down one.

Ties went in favor of the team with the most points on current wins and losses. If still tied then better RPI.

The cut off for getting in as an at large was -7 points. It took 15 points to get a #1 seed.


Thanks for the consideration, pilight. Toledo defeated Akron in first MAC Tourney game, utilizing bench heavily, able to rest/rotate starters out frequently. The Rockets peaking at right time at end of regular season, defeating NIU and Ball State on road, with all starters healthy, versus earlier in conference play. Toledo had 3 players w/double doubles at NIU game. We're at Quicken Arena tomorrow, playing Kent, who also had late season surge. MAC definitely up for grabs, with history of deep runs for teams regardless of seeding, such as #8 seed Buffalo winning MAC Tourney last yr. Toledo also defeated #1 seed CMU earlier this year as well. No illusions any MAC team would ever be considered for a NCAA bid outside of the auto bid, however. Parity in MAC if nowhere else.
Go Rockets!




Last edited by shadowboxer on 03/07/17 7:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53112
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/17 6:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

One problem with just running numbers is that the non-P5 teams that don't get auto bids will almost always take an extra bad loss in the conference tournament. I'm working on ways to address that.



_________________
Way back in history three thousand years
In fact every since the world began
There's been a whole lot of good women sheddin' tears
For a brown eyed handsome man
Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 126
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/17 11:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.

I actually think this is the one thing Creme does fairly well. Where he isn't worth a damn is pretending to be a WBB expert analyst, with pre-season rankings, ranking the best players, or otherwise pretending to be a Kara Lawson. He doesn't know enough. But you don't have to understand the game to crunch numbers and follow precedent and rules. Nobody asks Joe Lunardi to pretend to be Jay Bilas year round. But I guess they think they need to use Creme for other things ( for which he is not qualified) in order to justify his salary.

If the predictions are pure speculation then what is the value in it? Nobody knows how any of this is going to play out until the committee releases the brackets to the public.
It's typical ESPN... hire people to talk about how things MIGHT go, then watch as none of those things actually happen, rendering every minute spent talking about it as a total waste of time.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/17 2:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.

I actually think this is the one thing Creme does fairly well. Where he isn't worth a damn is pretending to be a WBB expert analyst, with pre-season rankings, ranking the best players, or otherwise pretending to be a Kara Lawson. He doesn't know enough. But you don't have to understand the game to crunch numbers and follow precedent and rules. Nobody asks Joe Lunardi to pretend to be Jay Bilas year round. But I guess they think they need to use Creme for other things ( for which he is not qualified) in order to justify his salary.


If the predictions are pure speculation then what is the value in it? Nobody knows how any of this is going to play out until the committee releases the brackets to the public.
It's typical ESPN... hire people to talk about how things MIGHT go, then watch as none of those things actually happen, rendering every minute spent talking about it as a total waste of time.


For you to say "then watch as none of those things actually happen" I have to assume you have actually never paid attention to the selections before.


Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 126
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/17 3:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.

I actually think this is the one thing Creme does fairly well. Where he isn't worth a damn is pretending to be a WBB expert analyst, with pre-season rankings, ranking the best players, or otherwise pretending to be a Kara Lawson. He doesn't know enough. But you don't have to understand the game to crunch numbers and follow precedent and rules. Nobody asks Joe Lunardi to pretend to be Jay Bilas year round. But I guess they think they need to use Creme for other things ( for which he is not qualified) in order to justify his salary.


If the predictions are pure speculation then what is the value in it? Nobody knows how any of this is going to play out until the committee releases the brackets to the public.
It's typical ESPN... hire people to talk about how things MIGHT go, then watch as none of those things actually happen, rendering every minute spent talking about it as a total waste of time.


For you to say "then watch as none of those things actually happen" I have to assume you have actually never paid attention to the selections before.

Why on Earth would you think that? I watch them get their predictions wrong every year.
As far as my comment on "watch as none of those things actually happen," that wasn't specific to the selections. It includes every sport they cover.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 2528



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/17 7:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stonington_QB wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Stonington_QB wrote:
RULE #1:
NEVER trust Charlie Creme, Joe Lunardi or ESPN when it comes to bracket predictions.


^^^THIS^^^^ x1000. Especially Charlie. For my money the guy is a complete dolt.


I'd like to see you do better.

He actually does very well in predicting the field.

It's pretty hard to predict the seeding and locations accurately when the women's committee never follows its own precedent or the rules they claim to follow. He"s proposing a bracket that follows their supposed "rules". When they go off and change the rules on whim every year, it's obviously hard to project.

I actually think this is the one thing Creme does fairly well. Where he isn't worth a damn is pretending to be a WBB expert analyst, with pre-season rankings, ranking the best players, or otherwise pretending to be a Kara Lawson. He doesn't know enough. But you don't have to understand the game to crunch numbers and follow precedent and rules. Nobody asks Joe Lunardi to pretend to be Jay Bilas year round. But I guess they think they need to use Creme for other things ( for which he is not qualified) in order to justify his salary.


If the predictions are pure speculation then what is the value in it? Nobody knows how any of this is going to play out until the committee releases the brackets to the public.
It's typical ESPN... hire people to talk about how things MIGHT go, then watch as none of those things actually happen, rendering every minute spent talking about it as a total waste of time.


For you to say "then watch as none of those things actually happen" I have to assume you have actually never paid attention to the selections before.

Why on Earth would you think that? I watch them get their predictions wrong every year.
As far as my comment on "watch as none of those things actually happen," that wasn't specific to the selections. It includes every sport they cover.


Some people enjoy the process and get pleasure from just discussing the possibilities. Isn't that why most of us are here on this board? I think it's great fodder for discussion.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 3795
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/17 10:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Drexel "last out", and AAC a 3 bid conference merely on the strength of a supposedly higher RPI merely because UConn is in their conference? I don't think so. For one, JMU has a better record than Drexel, and for the other, two, UConn and USF.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 853



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm not sure why Drexel is in the discussion, while I like them, they aren't remotely under consideration.

JMU deserves consideration ahead of Virginia.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 3795
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:41 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Phil wrote:
I'm not sure why Drexel is in the discussion, while I like them, they aren't remotely under consideration.

JMU deserves consideration ahead of Virginia.


Thank you. But the committee will almost always pick a P5 over a mid-major Razz



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 853



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm not sure why Drexel is in the discussion, while I like them, they aren't remotely under consideration.

JMU deserves consideration ahead of Virginia.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 10503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Phil wrote:


JMU deserves consideration ahead of Virginia.


I really doubt if the committee views it that way because James Madison hasn't beaten anyone. The only tournament team they've beaten is Elon, while UVA has better wins over A10 champ Dayton and #12 FSU. Not only did JMU get drubbed by FSU, they also have two horrible losses to #209 Towson.

I doubt if James Madison is anywhere close to UVA on the at large list, and it has nothing to do with any P5 bias. It has to do with their actual resumes.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin