ESPN bracketology

[agibson]

So, where did we end up one the all-time RPI list?  Somebody (a3uge?) had a nice table, but I wasn't trivially able to find it...

[Kyle321n]

So, where did we end up one the all-time RPI list?  Somebody (a3uge?) had a nice table, but I wasn't trivially able to find it...

Considering we have opponents of opponents still playing (and probably will until Selection Sunday) we'll have to wait to find out what the final number is.

[vu72]

So, where did we end up one the all-time RPI list?  Somebody (a3uge?) had a nice table, but I wasn't trivially able to find it...

Considering we have opponents of opponents still playing (and probably will until Selection Sunday) we'll have to wait to find out what the final number is.

[/b]
[/b]

So, for example, Miami won last night and Green Bay beat them earlier in the year.  Do wins like that help our RPI?

[Kyle321n]

So, where did we end up one the all-time RPI list?  Somebody (a3uge?) had a nice table, but I wasn't trivially able to find it...

Considering we have opponents of opponents still playing (and probably will until Selection Sunday) we'll have to wait to find out what the final number is.

So, for example, Miami won last night and Green Bay beat them earlier in the year.  Do wins like that help our RPI?

Yes. Our opponent's strength of schedule makes up 25% of our RPI. So every win that our opponent's opponent gets helps us. Not as much as wins our opponents get (50% is made up of our Opponents Record) or our wins.  Even if Green Bay had lost to Miami, that Miami win would help us. It helps us more that Green Bay beat Miami, but that's besides the point.

[talksalot]

Calling it now. Rematch between Michigan St and Valpo in the Elite Eight!

'14... I agree to a point... as a preservationist... I think the rematch with Arizona in the E8...50-15 at the half...90-51 at the end... Not going to happen this year...


I do see Lunardo [spelling correct for pronunciation purposes] has 5 Indiana teams in ...and IU gets the PIG.

[agibson]

So, where did we end up one the all-time RPI list?  Somebody (a3uge?) had a nice table, but I wasn't trivially able to find it...

Considering we have opponents of opponents still playing (and probably will until Selection Sunday) we'll have to wait to find out what the final number is.

Well, sure.  But, I bet we're within a couple of places of the final.  Actually, I take that back.  I bet our RPI itself (about 0.5717) won't change very much.  But, our rank might.  A fair number of the teams around us are still big conference teams with tournaments still going on.  So, who knows, maybe #53 can still change by a few places.  Still, are we close?

[LaPorteAveApostle]

Are we looking for "regular season" RPI or "end of year" RPI?  Shouldn't it be the latter for comparisons between years to be valid?

So it could change by several spots based on what happens in the tournament.

And hopefully it goes up a lot.

[talksalot]

wonder what North Carolina's 10 point win over Louisville in the ACC tournament will do to the bracket...? 

[agibson]

Are we looking for "regular season" RPI or "end of year" RPI?  Shouldn't it be the latter for comparisons between years to be valid?

So it could change by several spots based on what happens in the tournament.

And hopefully it goes up a lot.

We have better data on pre-NCAA RPI, right?

Of course, both could be interesting, especially in the event of wins.

[a3uge]

I have end of season data from the NCAA archives saved somewhere I'll try f find it. I think RPI used to not factor in home/away games until 2002 or something. Maybe bbstate.com has it

[agibson]

Here's the thread.

http://www.valpofanzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=2106.msg55593#msg55593

[agibson]

Jerry Palm puts the 2013 pre-NCAA RPI at 60.  So, whether we end at 53, or something nearby, it seems like we will beat that one.

[justducky]

wonder what North Carolina's 10 point win over Louisville in the ACC tournament will do to the bracket...?

Watched some of that game and some of Providence- Saint John. I had paid no special attention to any of them before but a quick glance at all suggests that none could dominate us like Michigan St did 2 years back. No I am not going to stick my neck out any further than that until I know a bit more than I presently do.

[agibson]

Today Lunardi's got us a 12 against a rising Georgetown.

Thinking in general about bracketing.  There's been a lot of talk in the last few years that geography matters a great deal.  And, that it can maybe even move teams up or down a seed.

But, I wonder, how does it affect the S curve?  In our draw against Michigan State, I don't remember us being seeded low relative to our announced S curve position.  Do they retroactively change the S curve, if geography has an affect  on bracketing/seeding?

[Kyle321n]

I think we were considered to be the highest rated 13, we were moved to Detroit due to location and I think they moved us below 2 other 13s, but this is 2013 we're talking about and I don't remember the beers I drank last night.

[covufan]

I don't remember the beers I drank last night.

Whenever my wife asks me "How many beers did you have?", my response is always "One...at a time!"

[agibson]

I think we were considered to be the highest rated 13, we were moved to Detroit due to location and I think they moved us below 2 other 13s, but this is 2013 we're talking about and I don't remember the beers I drank last night.

#45 Boise State vs. #49 La Salle for one 13, NM State #52, SD State #53, Montana #54 for the other 13's.

Davidson #55, Valpo #56 as the best of the 14's.  (Then Northwestern State #57, Harvard #58.)

At the time it sure felt like we should have been above Montana (who proceeded to lose by 47 to Syracuse).

But, either geography doesn't seem to have been a factor in our 14 seed, or they covered it by changing the "overall rank" scores.

[a3uge]

I think we were considered to be the highest rated 13, we were moved to Detroit due to location and I think they moved us below 2 other 13s, but this is 2013 we're talking about and I don't remember the beers I drank last night.

They don't snake seeds - they reserve the right to move teams up or down 1 seed, so they moved up Montana and moved down either Valpo or SD State whom also got a terrible draw against eventual runner-up Michigan. The one thing that was disappointing (besides stupid Montana seed) was the lack of respect for the Horizon - the conferences historically strong reputation didn't really do us any favors.

The committee does rank each team 1-68, so I feel if they have the top 13 seed, they'll try to avoid dropping them down to a 14, but you never know. Montana wasn't even close to a 13, but they moved them up anyways.

[agibson]

Trolling around a little bit for reports from the Mock Selection exercises, trying to find comments on the role of geography.

Here's one take
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2387936-behind-the-scenes-how-the-ncaa-tournament-selection-committee-really-works

Geography is the supreme ruler during bracketing. Senior Web Developer Colin Chappell has designed a program (that I would pay good money for) that notes exactly how many miles a team would need to travel to reach the various options for regional and sub-regional locations. In addition to miles, there is a lot of discussion about how many time zones a team would need to travel. The top 16 teams are placed by region and then by sub-region.

Where in previous years there was an "S-curve," in which (if possible) the top No. 2 seed was matched up against the bottom No. 1 seed, teams are now kept as close to home as possible while still remaining on their true seed line. So even if Wisconsin is the top No. 2 seed, get ready to see the Badgers in the Midwest Region opposite Kentucky. Cleveland would be the preferred regional location for each.

[agibson]

They don't snake seeds - they reserve the right to move teams up or down 1 seed, so they moved up Montana and moved down either Valpo or SD State whom also got a terrible draw against eventual runner-up Michigan. The one thing that was disappointing (besides stupid Montana seed) was the lack of respect for the Horizon - the conferences historically strong reputation didn't really do us any favors.

The committee does rank each team 1-68, so I feel if they have the top 13 seed, they'll try to avoid dropping them down to a 14, but you never know. Montana wasn't even close to a 13, but they moved them up anyways.

Yeah, sorry, my use of the phrase "S Curve" was an anachronism.  Still, I assume that the procedure is still to do the overall ranking before bracketing.

And, it would seem a little perverse (but who knows) to edit the overall ranking to support, ex post facto, the final bracketing.

Do we have a copy of the actual "rules" given to the committee?

[a3uge]

They don't snake seeds - they reserve the right to move teams up or down 1 seed, so they moved up Montana and moved down either Valpo or SD State whom also got a terrible draw against eventual runner-up Michigan. The one thing that was disappointing (besides stupid Montana seed) was the lack of respect for the Horizon - the conferences historically strong reputation didn't really do us any favors.

The committee does rank each team 1-68, so I feel if they have the top 13 seed, they'll try to avoid dropping them down to a 14, but you never know. Montana wasn't even close to a 13, but they moved them up anyways.

Yeah, sorry, my use of the phrase "S Curve" was an anachronism.  Still, I assume that the procedure is still to do the overall ranking before bracketing.

And, it would seem a little perverse (but who knows) to edit the overall ranking to support, ex post facto, the final bracketing.

Do we have a copy of the actual "rules" given to the committee?

http://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection

I responded before reading your response, but yeah, in an ideal world they would avoid moving the top 13 seed to a 14, but the committee tends to make no sense.

[agibson]

http://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection

I responded before reading your response, but yeah, in an ideal world they would avoid moving the top 13 seed to a 14, but the committee tends to make no sense.

This document makes it pretty clear that the Seed List is created first, and not changed during bracketing.  Really suggesting that we weren't bumped down to 14 because of geography.  They just really thought we were worse than Davidson and Montana.

Seed moves (up or down one line, or even exceptionally two) must happen all the time (did they say up to eleven one year?).  So, the evidence should be there in past brackets...

[classof2014]

I really don't think we'll be a 14. The 2013 team I wasn't surprised at the 14 seed, I thought it was low but not unfair. The unfair part about it was that we had to play Michigan State in Auburn Hills, so it was basically a home game for the Spartans.

We're either a 12 or 13. An 11 or 14 isn't out of the realm of possibility but I would be quite surprised if that was the case.

[a3uge]

http://www.ncaa.com/content/di-principles-and-procedures-selection

I responded before reading your response, but yeah, in an ideal world they would avoid moving the top 13 seed to a 14, but the committee tends to make no sense.

This document makes it pretty clear that the Seed List is created first, and not changed during bracketing.  Really suggesting that we weren't bumped down to 14 because of geography.  They just really thought we were worse than Davidson and Montana.

Seed moves (up or down one line, or even exceptionally two) must happen all the time (did they say up to eleven one year?).  So, the evidence should be there in past brackets...

"Importantly, various principles may preclude a
team from being placed in its "true" seed position
in the bracket."

"A team may be moved up or down one (or in
extraordinary circumstances) two lines from
its true seed line (e.g., from the 13 seed line to
the 12 seed line; or from a 12 seed line to a 13
seed line) when it is placed in the bracket if
necessary to meet the principles."

[agibson]

Seed moves (up or down one line, or even exceptionally two) must happen all the time (did they say up to eleven one year?).  So, the evidence should be there in past brackets...

So, with that in mind, looking at the 2013 bracket.

Starting from the top, I don't see any discrepancies until the 9 seed.  Which would be 33 to 36 on the Seed List, normally.  But, Villanova got bumped up from #38 overall.

Correspondingly, the 10 seed would normally be 37 to 40, but Colorado played as a 10 from the #36 spot.

Then the 11 gets a little crazy.  Would normally be 41 to 44 or 45.  Minnesota (41) was an 11, and Belmont (44).  Bucknell (48, normally a 12) was the third 11.  California (42) got bumped down to the 12.  So did Oregon (43).  Saint Mary's (46) and MTSU (50) somehow played for the last 11.  MTSU, at 50, would normally have been at a 13.

The 12 seed would normally be 46 or so to 49 or so.  It wound up as Akron (51), Mississippi (47), California (42, as mentioned), Oregon (43, as mentioned).

The 13 seed would normally be 50 or so to 54 or so. SD State (53). Montana (54). NM State (52).  And Boise State (45) and La Salle (49) played for a spot.

The 14 seed would then be 55 to 58.  Which it was, including us.

So, according to the NCAA's seed list, there was plenty of shifting around in the bottom half of the bracket in 2013 - according to their rules about rematches, conferences, and perhaps geography.

But, apparently, none of it moved us off our originally designated 14 seed.

*shrug*

So, yeah, our playing in Auburn Hills might have been a bit of cruel fortune.  Perhaps a result of other geography considerations in the bracket.  Or, a cruel attempt by the NCAA to do us a favor and have us play close to home.

But, it seems like they gave us a 14 seed entirely on purpose.

And yeah, this year, I hope we can stay out of the 14.  It seems like everything would have to break wrong in the other conference tourneys, and in the head-to-head comparisons.  But, a fair bit would still have to break _right_ to get us to the 12.  Bracketmatrix aside.