Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Selection Committee Metrics
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
mturn017 Online
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 6,373
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 390
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #21
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

They were early in the season though. Supposedly the committee puts more emphasis on how you play later in the season. There's very little room for error for either MT or WKU though.
(This post was last modified: 01-31-2018 09:54 AM by mturn017.)
01-31-2018 09:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KAjunRaider Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,565
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 150
I Root For: U.M.T.
Location: Atop Tiger Hill, TN
Post: #22
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

Another problem is our conference's sh*tty "TV" package, and all of our teams playing at the same time on Saturdays..........

How is Western gonna pass the "eye test" if no one of the committee has seen them play ?
01-31-2018 09:59 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EverRespect Offline
Free Kaplony
*

Posts: 24,002
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 658
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 09:53 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

They were early in the season though. Supposedly the committee puts more emphasis on how you play later in the season. There's very little room for error for either MT or WKU though.

WKU has 2 signature top 50 wins OOC wins. MT doesn't have any. I believe WKU has a little more margin for error, despite a littler higher RPI. MT's resume is prime for a snubbing. Based on the tournament wins, however, MT may actually benefit from bias in their favor. There is an outside possibility of 3 bids if everything plays out perfectly.
(This post was last modified: 01-31-2018 10:04 AM by EverRespect.)
01-31-2018 10:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WKUFan518 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,375
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 24
I Root For: WKU
Location: Lexington KY
Post: #24
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

Every team in the nation has multiple "bad losses" this season besides maybe 1-3 teams....Plus those two losses were without 2 players which with Power conf. teams they give them a benefit of the doubt, for us probably not but its an angle to play....Either or we need to worry about ourselves taking care of business on what we control....We win every game rest of the season and tournament we don't have to worry about it, if we lose 1 or 2 games along the way we will be sweating regardless what Ohio, Missouri St, Austin Peay, etc does....Remember RPI is just one metric used, no telling what they actually use in that room...I am sure it varies depending on what conference you are from and the politics of the day...
01-31-2018 10:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KAjunRaider Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,565
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 150
I Root For: U.M.T.
Location: Atop Tiger Hill, TN
Post: #25
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 10:09 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

Every team in the nation has multiple "bad losses" this season besides maybe 1-3 teams....Plus those two losses were without 2 players which with Power conf. teams they give them a benefit of the doubt, for us probably not but its an angle to play....Either or we need to worry about ourselves taking care of business on what we control....We win every game rest of the season and tournament we don't have to worry about it, if we lose 1 or 2 games along the way we will be sweating regardless what Ohio, Missouri St, Austin Peay, etc does....Remember RPI is just one metric used, no telling what they actually use in that room...I am sure it varies depending on what conference you are from and the politics of the day...

They will not give your situation without the 2 players another thought.

Now, a Privileged Conference team will get to use any "injury" for a bad loss as an excuse. I've seen it happen time and time again, while a damn good Non-Privileged team gets left out of the Dance.
01-31-2018 10:13 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ThreeifbyLightning Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,616
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 223
I Root For: Jenna Webb
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 10:09 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

Every team in the nation has multiple "bad losses" this season besides maybe 1-3 teams....Plus those two losses were without 2 players which with Power conf. teams they give them a benefit of the doubt, for us probably not but its an angle to play....Either or we need to worry about ourselves taking care of business on what we control....We win every game rest of the season and tournament we don't have to worry about it, if we lose 1 or 2 games along the way we will be sweating regardless what Ohio, Missouri St, Austin Peay, etc does....Remember RPI is just one metric used, no telling what they actually use in that room...I am sure it varies depending on what conference you are from and the politics of the day...

MT doesn't have any bad losses yet. Emphasis on yet.

But as you indicate it is very easy for a team to take a night off on a game they should win easily that looks bad at selection time. We lost three games to Auburn, USC and Miami by an average of a little over three points. We lost the USC and Miami games in the waning seconds. Either of those two we could have won - the ball just didn't bounce our way late. Had we gotten either of those we would be in much better shape.

Here is what I believe based on the direction and trend that the NCAA is moving towards. If we could be 30-4 with an RPI in the low 30s and not get an NCAA bid (which is exactly what would have happened last year) there is very little chance either one of us are getting an at large this year. Either MT or wkcc will have to win out and lose the championship game of the tournament. That's about the only scenario I can see either of us getting an at large.
01-31-2018 10:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KAjunRaider Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,565
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 150
I Root For: U.M.T.
Location: Atop Tiger Hill, TN
Post: #27
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 10:23 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  
(01-31-2018 10:09 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  
(01-31-2018 09:41 AM)CincyDave Wrote:  The current problem for WKU, assuming we win out (other than maybe a loss to MTSU again) is the Ohio loss. That loss looks worse and worse everyday. Missouri State and Wisconsin losses also don't look very good.

Every team in the nation has multiple "bad losses" this season besides maybe 1-3 teams....Plus those two losses were without 2 players which with Power conf. teams they give them a benefit of the doubt, for us probably not but its an angle to play....Either or we need to worry about ourselves taking care of business on what we control....We win every game rest of the season and tournament we don't have to worry about it, if we lose 1 or 2 games along the way we will be sweating regardless what Ohio, Missouri St, Austin Peay, etc does....Remember RPI is just one metric used, no telling what they actually use in that room...I am sure it varies depending on what conference you are from and the politics of the day...

MT doesn't have any bad losses yet. Emphasis on yet.

But as you indicate it is very easy for a team to take a night off on a game they should win easily that looks bad at selection time. We lost three games to Auburn, USC and Miami by an average of a little over three points. We lost the USC and Miami games in the waning seconds. Either of those two we could have won - the ball just didn't bounce our way late. Had we gotten either of those we would be in much better shape.

Here is what I believe based on the direction and trend that the NCAA is moving towards. If we could be 30-4 with an RPI in the low 30s and not get an NCAA bid (which is exactly what would have happened last year) there is very little chance either one of us are getting an at large this year. Either MT or wkcc will have to win out and lose the championship game of the tournament. That's about the only scenario I can see either of us getting an at large.

I agree with you, unless we get lucky and they throw MT a bone for our wins the last 2 years.
01-31-2018 10:43 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
69topper Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 4
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
I've always thought they should go to 128 teams being invited. It would only be one more game and after one game you are down to 64 teams and back on schedule. Think of all the revenue that would be generated from just one more game plus you would for sure have all the team's in that truly deserve to be in the tournament. No team could truly ***** about being left out. The teams that are on the bubble couldn't complain too much if they are the first team out if they are that low. I'm sure some would but nothing's perfect unless everyone is invited. The main things is that no team would finish at 27-3 and be left out while some p5 team gets in at 18-13.
The NIT and other sideshow tournaments would go by the wayside but I guarantee that every college kid would rather play in the ncaa tournament than the nit. I've been proposing this for 40yrs. Seems like a no brainer to me. Thoughts on this anyone?
01-31-2018 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
69topper Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 4
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 11:43 AM)69topper Wrote:  I've always thought they should go to 128 teams being invited. It would only be one more game and after one game you are down to 64 teams and back on schedule. Think of all the revenue that would be generated from just one more game plus you would for sure have all the team's in that truly deserve to be in the tournament. No team could truly ***** about being left out. The teams that are on the bubble couldn't complain too much if they are the first team out if they are that low. I'm sure some would but nothing's perfect unless everyone is invited. The main things is that no team would finish at 27-3 and be left out while some p5 team gets in at 18-13.
The NIT and other sideshow tournaments would go by the wayside but I guarantee that every college kid would rather play in the ncaa tournament than the nit. I've been proposing this for 40yrs. Seems like a no brainer to me. Thoughts on this anyone?

Also you should only seed 32 teams and have a blind draw for the other teams. We all know that after 32 seeds it's not easy to truly seed teams properly. By then the team's are too evenly matched to have good seeding. NCAA start showing bias by then.I just think the tournament needs to be a level playing field and not be tilted heavily to the big conferences.
Another thing is that smaller teams could get a good draw and advance further into the tournament and make more money for them and their conference instead of all the larger conferences taking home all the money.
01-31-2018 11:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ThreeifbyLightning Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,616
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 223
I Root For: Jenna Webb
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Selection Committee Metrics
(01-31-2018 11:43 AM)69topper Wrote:  I've always thought they should go to 128 teams being invited. It would only be one more game and after one game you are down to 64 teams and back on schedule. Think of all the revenue that would be generated from just one more game plus you would for sure have all the team's in that truly deserve to be in the tournament. No team could truly ***** about being left out. The teams that are on the bubble couldn't complain too much if they are the first team out if they are that low. I'm sure some would but nothing's perfect unless everyone is invited. The main things is that no team would finish at 27-3 and be left out while some p5 team gets in at 18-13.
The NIT and other sideshow tournaments would go by the wayside but I guarantee that every college kid would rather play in the ncaa tournament than the nit. I've been proposing this for 40yrs. Seems like a no brainer to me. Thoughts on this anyone?

Somebody will always find a way to *****. Merica.

I believe 80 is the right number rather than 128. Give the top 8 seeds a bye -- seeds #1 and #2 in each bracket and carry the tournament from there as usual.

Following on 69's thoughts above, only seeding the top 32 presents some problems. Eight and nine seeds are virtually interchangeable. If you are an eight seed and 32nd seed overall but then draw what would be a 16 seed while the #1 seed gets what would otherwise be a nine seed in the first round then you have some consternation. Seed is therefore necessary. The problem is the fact that too much subjectivity is intertwined into both seeding and the selection process. The only way around this is to sign all teams an indiscriminate number randomly generated that then can be matched without bias to their record, results, and other metrics. Removing team names would create at least a little bit of objectivity. "Eye test" should not be a selective factor as it invites way too much bias and subjectivity.
(This post was last modified: 01-31-2018 02:06 PM by ThreeifbyLightning.)
01-31-2018 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.