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

Bracketology 2-23-15
Goto page 1, 2  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
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/23/15 6:28 pm    ::: Bracketology 2-23-15 Reply Reply with quote

Charlie Creme's latest write up makes a big deal about the S curve being a high priority within the seedings.

espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12370370/how-geography-impacts-bracket


espn.go.com/ncw/bracketology


Quote:
Unfortunately, it doesn't follow the easy logic of laying out the bracket, in what used to be referred to as the S-curve fashion, for the best seed balance. As the final No. 1 seed in this week's bracket, Tennessee would generally be assigned its region last among the top seeds. That would put the Lady Vols in Spokane. Oregon State is seventh on the board. Also placing the Beavers in Spokane means the worst No. 1 seed and the third No. 2 seed would be in the same region. That isn't balanced.



Quote:
.... there doesn't appear to be a scenario where the Beavers can be in Spokane and still preserve the perfect S-curve bracketing principle.





Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact geography has always over-ruled balancing the 1 and 2 seeds placed in any region for a long time. Creme seems to always forget what has happened in prior years.

I can remember in 2008, UConn was the overall top seed and placed in the East region. There was a close call for the 4th one seed. I don't remember who actually got the 4th one seed but the other contender was Rutgers. As the overall 5th team on the S-curve they were still sent to UConn's region because it was the closest site to Rutgers' campus, giving the east the first and 5th seeds on the S-curve. The committee that year said they had no choice because they were ruled by their policy of sending teams to regionals based on the closest available site in order of their seeding. So much for the S-curve Charlie. So UConn and Rutgers were set to meet for a 3rd or 4th time. In that same year both LSU and Tenn, were also sited in the same region, and geographical imperative was the reason given for that pairing also. Now Charlie would have us believe that Oregon St must be sent away from the west in order to not disturb the S-curve. Since Spokane is the closest site to OSU, and the furthest of any other potential 2 seed, it would be impossible for the committee to send them anywhere else under the geographical mandate. The only way that could happen is because of the new ruling policy that no 2 conference teams seeded 1-4 can be placed in the same region. And that is impossible to speculate over until we see all the top 8 seeds. Go back over the last umpteen years Charlie and find one where Stanford didn't end up in the west.

Of course, the committee seems to always have a policy de jour to explain their sometimes bizarre decisions, and usually gives ESPN about 60 seconds to question it each year.

So Charlie, stop with this S-curve nonsense. It hasn't been a high priority in the process for a long time. And you should know that.


umbeta1455



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 1897
Location: Maine


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/24/15 5:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Maine vs. Duke in the first round would be fun. An upset would be amazing.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/24/15 6:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Live link: http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12370370/how-geography-impacts-bracket

The very first sentence of Creme's essay says: "Balancing the bracket to get the most geographically beneficial arrangement . . . is what the NCAA selection committee aims to do each season . . . .

To me, that means the SelCom has historically let geography trump the S curve. The rest of the article simply says the SelCom will have to let geography trump again if they want Oregon State in the Spokane regional. Is there anything else to it?

It makes sense to me to have geography, which is a real thing with real fans, trump an S curve, which is a voted-on, averaged-out and hence highly debatable artificial number.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/24/15 8:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Live link: http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12370370/how-geography-impacts-bracket

The very first sentence of Creme's essay says: "Balancing the bracket to get the most geographically beneficial arrangement . . . is what the NCAA selection committee aims to do each season . . . .

To me, that means the SelCom has historically let geography trump the S curve. The rest of the article simply says the SelCom will have to let geography trump again if they want Oregon State in the Spokane regional. Is there anything else to it?

It makes sense to me to have geography, which is a real thing with real fans, trump an S curve, which is a voted-on, averaged-out and hence highly debatable artificial number.


So then all of the talk about keeping higher seeds from having to play in front of the lower seed's crowd was a lie if they're going to protect Oregon St and let them play near to home to the disadvantage of whatever #1 seed gets shipped out there.

They should just be honest and say "we're going to assign teams based solely on whatever way we think will sell the most tickets whether high seeds get screwed or not."


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/24/15 9:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Live link: http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12370370/how-geography-impacts-bracket

The very first sentence of Creme's essay says: "Balancing the bracket to get the most geographically beneficial arrangement . . . is what the NCAA selection committee aims to do each season . . . .

To me, that means the SelCom has historically let geography trump the S curve. The rest of the article simply says the SelCom will have to let geography trump again if they want Oregon State in the Spokane regional. Is there anything else to it?

It makes sense to me to have geography, which is a real thing with real fans, trump an S curve, which is a voted-on, averaged-out and hence highly debatable artificial number.


So then all of the talk about keeping higher seeds from having to play in front of the lower seed's crowd was a lie if they're going to protect Oregon St and let them play near to home to the disadvantage of whatever #1 seed gets shipped out there.

They should just be honest and say "we're going to assign teams based solely on whatever way we think will sell the most tickets whether high seeds get screwed or not."


I personally have very little interest in seeding and bracketing. So I don't follow what the SelCom says, if they say anything. A few years ago I tried to help some forum interpret their Principles and Procedures (or whatever it's called) document, and I recall there were sufficient weasel words and escape clause paragraphs to allow the SelCom to basically do what it thinks best.

Having the guessed-at top four schools in four different brackets makes sense to me as a primary competition principle. Seedings deeper than that quickly become voodoo, in my opinion.

Setting up geographical brackets and seedings to maximize ticket sales sounds like a very good secondary principle to me. I only question whether any committee can accurately predict that. Tournaments are about money after all, and the best team should win its bracket no matter the geography or lower seedings.
calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5152
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/24/15 10:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The argument of who should be put in Spokane is quite premature. Oregon St is the number 1 team in the Pac 10 for now, but they haven't yet played either Cal or Stanford. If they run the table from here that would be 4 more quality wins and they will no longer be a weak second seed. If they lose twice this weekend (a possibility even though they have the home court) and again at the Pac 12 tournament they could fall to a 4 seed.

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 5:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Most of what Creme says is nonsense. He fills space for ESPN.



_________________
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
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 6:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It seemed to me that Creme was suggesting that the S curve has been the ruling factor in placing teams in the past. Nothing could be further from the truth. In addition, the committee has never mentioned ticket sales as a rationale for their placement of teams. The only reason I ever read for the use of geography as the prime rule was to keep travel expenses down to a minimum.

The new wrinkle is that teams from the same conference seeded 1-4 are to be placed in different regions. All this means is that if, for example No 1 and No 5 are both closest to say Greensboro and are both in the same conference then No 5 goes to the second closest regional site.

Now, since this applies to the top 16 teams, it could get very tricky. This year we could see a 4 seed or two get made 5 seeds to avoid this new requirement. As another poster said, the committee has enough loopholes built in to allow them a lot of wiggle room.

Since I am going to Albany with UConn, I would like to see some novelty in the 2-4 seeds. Teams that haven't played UConn lately such as Fla St, Oregon St or Tenn. I'll be disappointed if either Kentucky, or Duke is sent there.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 6:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

After rereading Creme's article is seems his concern is in having "balanced brackets". While that is certainly a worthy goal it is impossible to do it in a system in which 1-64 is determined by a mish mash of dubious rankings that are applied by a committee.

If this was an objective seeding system the strict adherence to an S curve would be more applicable. In a golf tournament for example, contestants all play a round of golf and the scores are ranked in a totally objective way. In the NCAA tournament, seedings are made subjectively. So any team's place on the S curve is fuzzy. One could reasonably say that a team likely belongs in a range of, say, 3 spots lower or higher. The committee cannot possibly "balance" any region except subjectively.

So why waste time trying? It's simple, it gives the committee an excuse for doing whatever they want.


FS02



Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 9699
Location: Husky (west coast) Country


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 6:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
The argument of who should be put in Spokane is quite premature. Oregon St is the number 1 team in the Pac 10 for now, but they haven't yet played either Cal or Stanford. If they run the table from here that would be 4 more quality wins and they will no longer be a weak second seed. If they lose twice this weekend (a possibility even though they have the home court) and again at the Pac 12 tournament they could fall to a 4 seed.

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


I would take the over on 300 OSU fans!



_________________
@dtmears2
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 7:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
The committee cannot possibly "balance" any region except subjectively.

So why waste time trying?


That's always been my view.

I don't know if the SelCom considers the ticket sale probability when putting teams in the different geographical places, but it just seems to me to be a sensible objective.

Many decades ago, the four regionals in the men's tournament were almost truly regional. Only western teams were in the West, for example. That minimized travel for teams and potential fans (= tickets), and seemed to work okay as far as I could tell from a TV fan perspective.
ajdawg7



Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 479



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/15 9:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FS02 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:
The argument of who should be put in Spokane is quite premature. Oregon St is the number 1 team in the Pac 10 for now, but they haven't yet played either Cal or Stanford. If they run the table from here that would be 4 more quality wins and they will no longer be a weak second seed. If they lose twice this weekend (a possibility even though they have the home court) and again at the Pac 12 tournament they could fall to a 4 seed.

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


I would take the over on 300 OSU fans!


I'd get in on that as well. OSU's fanbase has exploded and is nothing to sneeze at.



_________________
Seek opportunities to show you care. The smallest gestures often make the biggest difference.

John Wooden
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/26/15 2:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
linkster wrote:
The committee cannot possibly "balance" any region except subjectively.

So why waste time trying?


That's always been my view.

I don't know if the SelCom considers the ticket sale probability when putting teams in the different geographical places, but it just seems to me to be a sensible objective.

Many decades ago, the four regionals in the men's tournament were almost truly regional. Only western teams were in the West, for example. That minimized travel for teams and potential fans (= tickets), and seemed to work okay as far as I could tell from a TV fan perspective.


I remember the days of regionals that were actually regionals. UCLA would have to beat Long beach State and the Lobos of N Mexico to advance to the FF. That was the opposite extreme. I'm all in favor of simply applying the strict S curve method of siting teams. Place the 1 seeds by the geographical method and then let the chips fall where they may. If the stands are 3/4 empty then maybe the powers that be will finally do something to improve the quality of play enough to attract fans of basketball instead of appealing to tribalism.


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5152
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/26/15 6:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I hope ajdawg7 and fs02 are right. The posts made me look into Oregon St attendance. The Beavers have essentially doubled their attendance from last season to 4000 per game. Tonight's game vs. Stanford and Saturday's game vs Cal should both draw well.

As the number 1 seed and the second closest team to Seattle the team should have a large presence at the Pac 12 championships. If 1000 OSU fans come to the Key Arena I'll gladly revise my estimate upward for the regionals.

One last point. Two years ago when Cal and Stanford were both in Spokane (along with LSU and Georgia), the locals showed up in force and made for decent attendance (6000 per game).


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/26/15 6:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:

One last point. Two years ago when Cal and Stanford were both in Spokane (along with LSU and Georgia), the locals showed up in force and made for decent attendance (6000 per game).


I'd just point out that two years ago Gonzaga was in the Spokane Region. They didn't make it to that second weekend and lost to Iowa St in the first round, but they had probably already bought a lot of tickets with the hope that their team would be there. That probably contributed to the attendance numbers.

It's interesting that Gonzaga was also in a pod that played the opening round in Spokane. First two rounds at the McCarthey Athletic Center. Second weekend would have been at the Spokane Veterans Memorial Arena.


ajdawg7



Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 479



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 11:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
I hope ajdawg7 and fs02 are right. The posts made me look into Oregon St attendance. The Beavers have essentially doubled their attendance from last season to 4000 per game. Tonight's game vs. Stanford and Saturday's game vs Cal should both draw well.

As the number 1 seed and the second closest team to Seattle the team should have a large presence at the Pac 12 championships. If 1000 OSU fans come to the Key Arena I'll gladly revise my estimate upward for the regionals.

One last point. Two years ago when Cal and Stanford were both in Spokane (along with LSU and Georgia), the locals showed up in force and made for decent attendance (6000 per game).


It's still much easier for someone from Cal and Stanford to get to Seattle than from Corvallis. It's a 2 hour and change flight rather than a 4+ hour drive.



_________________
Seek opportunities to show you care. The smallest gestures often make the biggest difference.

John Wooden
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 11:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This assumes flying. Why do you assume Cal and Stanford fans are all wealthy? Or even LIKE flying, for that matter?



_________________
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
Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 11:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
This assumes flying. Why do you assume Cal and Stanford fans are all wealthy? Or even LIKE flying, for that matter?

It's a 12 hour drive (800 miles) from the Bay area to Seattle. Nonstop flights are $267 round trip. Unless you've got a vanload of poor students, it makes sense to fly.


ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2811
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 12:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 12:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ucbart wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.

Oregon State probably has little chance at a 1-seed, as they lost last night by 11 to Stanford in Corvallis. Now it looks like Maryland or Tennessee. Or maybe Florida State or Louisville if they win the ACC tournament (assuming that they beat Notre Dame along the way). Oregon is presently 13th in RPI with the 50th toughest schedule. Seems as if a 2-seed is their seeding ceiling, They face Cal in Corvallis to finish the regular season and then have the PAC12 tournament.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 1:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
ucbart wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.

Oregon State probably has little chance at a 1-seed, as they lost last night by 11 to Stanford in Corvallis. Now it looks like Maryland or Tennessee. Or maybe Florida State or Louisville if they win the ACC tournament (assuming that they beat Notre Dame along the way). Oregon is presently 13th in RPI with the 50th toughest schedule. Seems as if a 2-seed is their seeding ceiling, They face Cal in Corvallis to finish the regular season and then have the PAC12 tournament.


Crème says last night's loss dropped OreSt from a 2 to a 3. His top four in each region are now:

Greensboro: South Carolina, Florida State, Iowa, Stanford

Albany: UConn, Louisville, Arizona State, Mississippi State

Oklahoma City: Notre Dame, Baylor, North Carolina, California

Spokane: Tennessee, Maryland, Oregon State, Duke


FollowtheCardinalRule



Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 1:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Fighting Artichoke wrote:
ucbart wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.

Oregon State probably has little chance at a 1-seed, as they lost last night by 11 to Stanford in Corvallis. Now it looks like Maryland or Tennessee. Or maybe Florida State or Louisville if they win the ACC tournament (assuming that they beat Notre Dame along the way). Oregon is presently 13th in RPI with the 50th toughest schedule. Seems as if a 2-seed is their seeding ceiling, They face Cal in Corvallis to finish the regular season and then have the PAC12 tournament.


Crème says last night's loss dropped OreSt from a 2 to a 3. His top four in each region are now:

Greensboro: South Carolina, Florida State, Iowa, Stanford

Albany: UConn, Louisville, Arizona State, Mississippi State

Oklahoma City: Notre Dame, Baylor, North Carolina, California

Spokane: Tennessee, Maryland, Oregon State, Duke


Really? Louisville a 2 over Oregon State? I'm not sure I buy that one.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 2:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FollowtheCardinalRule wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
Fighting Artichoke wrote:
ucbart wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.

Oregon State probably has little chance at a 1-seed, as they lost last night by 11 to Stanford in Corvallis. Now it looks like Maryland or Tennessee. Or maybe Florida State or Louisville if they win the ACC tournament (assuming that they beat Notre Dame along the way). Oregon is presently 13th in RPI with the 50th toughest schedule. Seems as if a 2-seed is their seeding ceiling, They face Cal in Corvallis to finish the regular season and then have the PAC12 tournament.


Crème says last night's loss dropped OreSt from a 2 to a 3. His top four in each region are now:

Greensboro: South Carolina, Florida State, Iowa, Stanford

Albany: UConn, Louisville, Arizona State, Mississippi State

Oklahoma City: Notre Dame, Baylor, North Carolina, California

Spokane: Tennessee, Maryland, Oregon State, Duke


Really? Louisville a 2 over Oregon State? I'm not sure I buy that one.


His comment:

"Oregon State's loss to Stanford wasn't nearly as stunning, but it cost the Beavers their No. 2-seed status. Louisville's overall profile looks slightly better now that Oregon State has a third loss."

Remember, he's trying to predict what the committee will do. Louisville has a stronger RPI profile. RPI of 6, SOS of 18, 7-4 vs RPI top 50. Ore St has a RPI of 13, SOS of 50, 4-3 against RPI top 50. They have one more loss, but their losses (to RPI 1, 10 , 12 and 18 ) are to higher ranked teams than Ore St's losses (to 2, 20 and 28 ).

The conference tournaments might change it, but I'm not sure that even if Ore St wins the PAC tournament while Louisville loses to FSU or ND in the ACC tournament that it would change this. (and if it loses to ND, it likely means that it beat FSU which would further strengthen its resume) If it wins the ACC, it's not even close.


ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2811
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/27/15 2:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
ucbart wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:

Oregon St is still a 7 hour drive from Spokane so I don't believe they will bring more than 300 fans. From an attendance perspective the NCAA would probably want Washington to win the Pac 12 tournament and somehow get to Spokane, or for either Gonzaga or Washington St to pull two upsets if they make the tournament.


If that's truly the case, then Creme's rationale is nonsense. His explanation is to increase the ticket sales in Spokane. If that's not going to happen anyhow, then there is no reason for any geographical priority and they ought to get sent to Oklahoma City or Albany or wherever competition principles dictate they belong.

I would find it just as outrageous if, for example, Baylor were to get sent to Greensboro as a 1 seed while Duke was assigned to the same region as a 2 or 3 seed. Might be good for ticket sales, but it would be completely unfair to the higher seed.


Does Oregon State now have a chance to be a #1 seed? Conference tournaments are going to be very important to the last #1 seed as I think 3 of the #1's are all locked up.

Oregon State probably has little chance at a 1-seed, as they lost last night by 11 to Stanford in Corvallis. Now it looks like Maryland or Tennessee. Or maybe Florida State or Louisville if they win the ACC tournament (assuming that they beat Notre Dame along the way). Oregon is presently 13th in RPI with the 50th toughest schedule. Seems as if a 2-seed is their seeding ceiling, They face Cal in Corvallis to finish the regular season and then have the PAC12 tournament.


My B. I hadn't seen that they lost at that time. If Oregon State had won out their schedule and won the Pac-12 tourney, I would have thought they would have a shot at a #1 seed, but not now. The interesting thing will be Baylor/Tennessee for the final #1. If Tennessee only loses to South Carolina and Baylor wins the Big 12 regular season and tournament title, who gets the #1 seed? Then, does the committee put them in the same bracket? I think it needs to go in seeded order, the #1 overall seed gets the #8 overall seed in their regional and go from there, regardless of location.


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 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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