Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

    Originally posted by Birdwatcher View Post
    Ummm....you need to go to ncaa.com and study the metrics used. I actually supplied the links earlier.
    Oh, I forgot we live in an era where everyone gets a trophy. If you play a garbage schedule or a lousy league, you should not be in the conversation.

    Comment


    • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

      Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
      Oh, I forgot we live in an era where everyone gets a trophy. If you play a garbage schedule or a lousy league, you should not be in the conversation.
      Sorry, that is the way it is in every NCAA sport....There is an AQ from every conference that has the correct number of qualifying teams. Look at D1 hoops...a few years back UVM beat Syracuse in the first round of the Tourney...so yes every athlete deserves to gets a chance...but they still need to win the big one to earn the trophy. And yes most times better teams stay home because of the AQ.


      "FEAR THE BIRD!"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
        Oh, I forgot we live in an era where everyone gets a trophy. If you play a garbage schedule or a lousy league, you should not be in the conversation.
        You're right, Norwich and St. Norbert definitely shouldn't be ranked.
        Oswego'08, '10

        From the shores of Lake Ontario to the island of Hilton Head...


        2011-2012 SUNYAC Pick 'Em Champion!
        2011-2012 D3FHL Overall Points Champs!

        Comment


        • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

          Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
          Oh, I forgot we live in an era where everyone gets a trophy. If you play a garbage schedule or a lousy league, you should not be in the conversation.
          hahahahahahahaha, thanks for the comical relief this morning bub. Curious if you've seen Norwich play since you are slandering them a ton on this board. Thank the Lord Almighty you have zero say in rankings or all our heads would be whirling this morning.

          Comment


          • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

            Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
            FWIW

            Hobart
            Adrian
            Williams
            Babson
            Plattsburg
            Trinity
            Colby
            Amherst
            Hamilton
            Oswego
            Stevens Point
            Utica

            Little early in the day to be drinking, no?
            I'm Kent...Detlefsen?

            I was there for 27/92.

            Comment


            • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

              Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
              FWIW

              Hobart
              Adrian
              Williams
              Babson
              Plattsburg
              Trinity
              Colby
              Amherst
              Hamilton
              Oswego
              Stevens Point
              Utica
              Even if they spelled PlattsburgH right, still no credibility with that list. So Norwich and St. Norbert don't belong in the top 12. Neither does Geneseo. Williams 3rd, Babson 4th. LOL. Did you just take your favorite programs and throw darts at a board?

              Comment


              • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                Originally posted by PSUChamps2001 View Post
                Here is a table for NCAA East Ranking vs KRACH East Ranking.....











                # TEAM EAST KRACH #
                1 NORWICH 1
                2 ENDICOTT 4
                3 OSWEGO 2
                4 HOBART 5
                5 BABSON 11
                6 WILLIAMS 7
                7 HAMILTON 3
                8 UTICA 8
                9 GENESEO 6
                10 AMHERST 12
                Appreciate your work.

                Three of the 1st-round byes in both metrics are identical -and a bye is a big deal- and both agree on 6 of the top 8 teams.

                The NCAA's ranking is fairly reasonable, IMO, but I think that Hamilton ought to be higher and that Babson shouldn't be in the top 8.

                Next couple of weeks should be fun.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by sticksnstones View Post
                  Even if they spelled PlattsburgH right, still no credibility with that list. So Norwich and St. Norbert don't belong in the top 12. Neither does Geneseo. Williams 3rd, Babson 4th. LOL. Did you just take your favorite programs and throw darts at a board?
                  It's all good. Need cupcakes in the NCAA tourney as well.
                  BTW, love the spell checkers. Beauties🙃

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                    One thing I find encouraging this year is that - barring upset AQ's- we have a shot to get the 8 statistically-best Eastern teams in. I don't think I've ever seen that before.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Ronnieb View Post
                      Leave it to the NCAA to concoct garbage, not even close to sensible 🙂🙂
                      By "Not even close to sensible", do you mean "It doesn't help my team so I think it's wrong?"

                      Looks like it to me. Translation is a handy, handy tool. Also in your rankings the team at the bottom has beaten the team at the top twice....

                      Anyway, regarding the actual rankings, the application of the stated process has been so much better these past few years. Committees have gotten it as right as they're going to get it within the framework they are expected to function in. A few things surprised me a bit on first ranking release, but it is those standout items that teach you even more about the process and how it works. The value the committees are placing on SOS here is pretty well documented when you look at the data for Endicott and Babson, and Middlebury on the Women's side.
                      Last edited by vcxc3200; 02-15-2017, 04:56 PM.
                      Our bite is worse than our bark....
                      Top guys, out.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                        Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
                        One thing I find encouraging this year is that - barring upset AQ's- we have a shot to get the 8 statistically-best Eastern teams in. I don't think I've ever seen that before.
                        The extra 12th spot doesn't hurt.
                        The "Miracle" was winning the Gold Medal Game against the Finns. I'm biased, I was there.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                          Originally posted by NUProf View Post
                          That's the bizarre part of the RNK metric. It applies to the current rankings.
                          Prof, I think you are splitting verbal hairs here. XYZ is correct, it is not being applied yet.

                          While the manual says "Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference postseason contests are included;" That applies to the "Primary Selection Criteria".

                          Perhaps it should read "as established by prior rankings, when addressing all rankings before actual selection". OR SOMETHING

                          Otherwise the equation to determine the first set of rankings actually IS circular.
                          Last edited by peddler; 02-15-2017, 05:53 PM.
                          The "Miracle" was winning the Gold Medal Game against the Finns. I'm biased, I was there.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by peddler View Post
                            Prof, I think you are splitting verbal hairs here. XYZ is correct, it is not being applied yet.

                            While the manual says "Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference postseason contests are included;" That applies to the "Primary Selection Criteria".

                            Perhaps it should read "as established by prior rankings, when addressing all rankings before actual selection". OR SOMETHING

                            Otherwise the equation to determine the first set of rankings actually IS circular.
                            Why avoid making it circular now, when you're going to make it circular in the end? This just means that the pre-selection rankings are not as accurate a depiction of the process as they're meant to be...
                            Plattsburgh CARDINALS
                            SUNYAC Champ x24: 78, 79, 82, 83, 85, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 97, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 04, 08, 09, 11, 12, 15, 17, 23
                            ECACW Champ x11: 81, 82, 87, 92, 06, 07, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
                            NEWHL Champ x5: 18, 19, 20, 22, 23
                            NCAA DIII Champ x10-ish: 87, 92, 01, 07, 08, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19
                            NCAA DIII Runner-up x4-ish: 86, 90, 06, 08
                            NCAA DII Runner-up x2: 81, 82

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                              Originally posted by CARDS_rule_the_Burgh View Post
                              Why avoid making it circular now, when you're going to make it circular in the end? This just means that the pre-selection rankings are not as accurate a depiction of the process as they're meant to be...
                              That is the part that struck me as odd. I had assumed (I know, bad idea, because of what is make U and ME), that the same criteria would be used to generate the preliminary rankings as would be used for determining the final rankings. If they go back to prior rankings, wouldn't they then use the super-secret first (or are they the zeroth) rankings from last week.
                              2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
                              2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
                              2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
                              2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

                                Originally posted by CARDS_rule_the_Burgh View Post
                                Why avoid making it circular now, when you're going to make it circular in the end? This just means that the pre-selection rankings are not as accurate a depiction of the process as they're meant to be...
                                That, for this first (public) round of rankings would be correct. These rankings (assuming I understand the process) WILL be used to create RNK for next Tuesday's 2/14 round, etc, until the final "selection".

                                In XYZ's Feb 14 "opus" on another website he describes this initial process by saying "Strength-of-schedule (SOS) appears to be pulling some significant weight in the East rankings, at least in some instances. As RNK was not considered by the committees in the generation of this set of rankings".

                                As Prof points out, why not use the (non-publicized) rankings from Feb. 7th? I have no idea since the manual does not explain further. I welcome anyone who might shed some light on the issue.
                                The "Miracle" was winning the Gold Medal Game against the Finns. I'm biased, I was there.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X