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

Did the Committee follow their procedures?

 
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
calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 2726
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 4:37 pm    ::: Did the Committee follow their procedures? Reply Reply with quote

Trying to determine how and why the Committee evaluated teams is nearly impossible, and the answers they give are so opaque that they provide little help. But when it comes to filling the bracket there are certain procedures that are laid out. So I thought it might be interesting to see how they did in following them before we get to the games themselves. Here are the procedures:

Each of the first four teams selected from a conference shall be placed in different regions if they are seeded on the first four lines.



Assuming Georgia was seeded ahead of Texas A&M this was done.

Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional final if they played each other three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.

This is very specific and very rare. While I may have missed an instance, I believe the only pairs of teams in the tournament that played three times were Baylor-Texas, Tennessee-South Carolina, UCLA-California, Iowa-Minnesota, Nebraska-Maryland, South Florida-UConn and Florida St-Miami. None play before the regional final, so technically they met the rule, but the last three pairs would meet in that round.

The committee will attempt to keep conference teams from meeting until the regional final round.

This is similar to the previous rule but is only a guideline. But in the case of the ACC there are three potential matchups in the third round. It would have been hard to do that if you weren't trying.

Additional Considerations

If possible, rematches of regular-season games should be avoided in the first- and second-rounds.

There are at least 3 rematches in the first round (NC St - Elon, Georgia - Mercer, DePaul - Oklahoma). A brief scan also shows a possible second round matchup of Creighton - UCLA which I saw in Las Vegas.

If possible, rematches of previous years’ tournament games should be avoided in the first- and second rounds.

Quinnipiac and Miami played in last year's tournament.

The committee shall attempt to avoid moving a team or a conference out of its natural region or geographic area an inordinate number of times and will examine the previous three tournament brackets to determine the number of times a team or conference has been assigned out of its natural region.


I will let others tell me of teams that have had to travel consistently.

It is difficult to follow all of the rules religiously, as anyone who tries to put together a bracket will attest. But it looks like the Committee didn't even try. For instance, if Syracuse and Miami were flipped they could have avoided a Miami - Quinnipiac rematch. That would have also shortened the travel for Syracuse and Miami. They also could have flipped Elon and Mercer, knocking out two rematches. While this would have lengthened travel, both would still be driving distance.

There also seem to be guidelines that underline these considerations. Try to separate teams from the same conference. When you have two teams from the AAC, putting both of them in the same region is lazy. Similarly, having 4 ACC teams in one region seems wrong.


bballgrl



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 3247



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 7:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Once again South Carolina was moved out of its area.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 3551



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 7:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballgrl wrote:
Once again South Carolina was moved out of its area.


That was unavoidable given that Lexington was given a three year contract and Kentucky (SEC) had an unwritten agreement that they would play there. The other problem is that There hasn't been a regional in the South East for a while, despite the number of NCAA teams located in that part of the country.

It's time for the NCAA site committee to make it a priority to find sites closer to the top contenders (and that isn't very difficult to do). Of course holding the S16 at one site would eliminate most of the bitching and allow the committee to stick to the S curve as far as at least the top 16 seeds.


Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 90



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 7:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballgrl wrote:
Once again South Carolina was moved out of its area.


I mean, does South Carolina have room to complain? The only region in their area was Lexington.

Last season they were the weakest number one. Would Dawn have preferred to be a number 2 to Notre Dame or the Huskies? Let's see. Stanford hasn't played in a regional West of the Rockies since they hosted in 2014. South Carolina got to play in Greensboro in 2015. The closest regional that Texas has had in that time is either Louisville or Kentucky, so I don't see the committee moving them. I don't know, it just rubs me the wrong way that Dawn feels like she should be upset about this. I hope the committee sends them to South Dakota again next year just to prove a point.


SpaceJunkie



Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 3163
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 8:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Coyotes wrote:
bballgrl wrote:
Once again South Carolina was moved out of its area.


I mean, does South Carolina have room to complain? The only region in their area was Lexington.

Last season they were the weakest number one. Would Dawn have preferred to be a number 2 to Notre Dame or the Huskies? Let's see. Stanford hasn't played in a regional West of the Rockies since they hosted in 2014. South Carolina got to play in Greensboro in 2015. The closest regional that Texas has had in that time is either Louisville or Kentucky, so I don't see the committee moving them. I don't know, it just rubs me the wrong way that Dawn feels like she should be upset about this. I hope the committee sends them to South Dakota again next year just to prove a point.


Last season South Carolina was the #3 overall seed—Baylor the #4 overall seed, but Baylor was given Oklahoma City since Oklahoma City is too far away from South Carolina anyways.

But South Carolina was lucky in that the got the weakest #4 seed in their region (Miami, who was beaten by Quinnipiac) because the top PAC-12 teams had to be spread out into different regions.


Matt5762



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 492



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 8:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
They also could have flipped Elon and Mercer, knocking out two rematches. While this would have lengthened travel, both would still be driving distance.


Agree with most of your points, but this is incorrect, at least by the NCAAs definition. Mercer to NC State is 425 miles, outside of the 350-mile driving radius. I believe the "minimize plane flights" rule supersedes all other rules and guidelines, especially for low seeds.

Your Syracuse/Miami example is a real head-scratcher though. I would love to hear the committee's explanation for it.


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 2726
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/18 11:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Matt5762 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:
They also could have flipped Elon and Mercer, knocking out two rematches. While this would have lengthened travel, both would still be driving distance.


Agree with most of your points, but this is incorrect, at least by the NCAAs definition. Mercer to NC State is 425 miles, outside of the 350-mile driving radius. I believe the "minimize plane flights" rule supersedes all other rules and guidelines, especially for low seeds.

Your Syracuse/Miami example is a real head-scratcher though. I would love to hear the committee's explanation for it.


I had remembered a 500 mile radius, but perhaps that was just for football playoffs. Still they could have just flipped Belmont and Mercer at Georgia to make the likelihood of a regular season rematch less likely, and done the same thing at North Carolina St with Elon and Princeton. It is hard to believe that the rankings of any of the four teams were significantly different


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 2726
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/18 12:07 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballgrl wrote:
Once again South Carolina was moved out of its area.


I understand your comment, but I am not sure that this procedure is aimed at top seeds. I read this as applying to lower seeds and where they have to play their first two rounds. South Carolina gets to play those games at home. It could also be read to apply to top 4 seeds for their Region, but this becomes much more complicated because of all the other rules surroubding the placement of the top 16 teams. South Carolina is considered in the mideast by virtue of being in the SEC.


elsie



Joined: 08 Apr 2016
Posts: 96



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/18 12:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Zags going to Stanford and if they possibly win, they go to Lexington....despite the fact that Spokane has a regional and would be well attended...


CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 605
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/15/18 1:34 pm    ::: Re: Did the Committee follow their procedures? Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:

Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional final if they played each other three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament.



I think this is a stupid rule. If teams meet three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament, they shouldn't be in the same region at all, period.

There is no excuse for this not to be the case. How often does it happen? Not enough to justify still allowing them to be in the same region. If it was something fairly common, then you might be able to argue that there are times when you can't do anything about it, but I don't believe that's true.

As a side note, I would add this rule:

If a conference has 3 or fewer teams in the Tournament, then those teams will be in separate regions.

I'm actually giving them a little leeway here by not saying "4 or fewer." With 3 there shouldn't really be an excuse.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4788
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/18/18 12:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Short answer to the header....I think in many cases they did not. But then, I'm only a fan with no standing.



_________________
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.--Conventional Wisdom
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
Page 1 of 1

 
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