ADVERTISEMENT

2/17 BACATOLOGY: NCAA TOURNAMENT ANALYSIS

Georgia Tech and Syracuse kept their longshot hopes alive with wins today. Cuse was down big to Notre Dame before rallying. I think both have jumped of weak sauces from the A10 like Richmond and St Louis

UConn falls to Nova, not a damaging loss but a missed opportunity and will remain on the last 4 in grouping.

Michigan State's win over Indiana puts them back onto the bubble but likely need 3 more wins. Indiana meanwhile going to need a couple to feel safe

Minnesota utterly destroyed at home to Illinois and their profile is hurting. Will need to win at Penn State and beat Rutgers. Wins vs Northwestern and at Nebby will not move the needle. Could wind up in the last 4 line or worse soon
 
I can’t believe Syracuse won that game. Saw the score earlier when they were down like 18 and assumed they were packing it in for the season.

Lots of bubble trouble elsewhere though.

And of course, Colgate notching another win over one of the same 3 opponents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shields
Seton Hall is not nine seed, two wins versus horrible DePaul team. Also lost to a poor Rhode Island team.
 
Last edited:
Gotta think the pirates r 11 now . Lot of bubble losses today helped them though
 
Apparently they had beaten us 102-54 earlier in the same season. A much more competitive game.
 
In the ACC, Duke and UNC are on the upswing. Duke via beating UVA tonight has chances to get back into the bubble with games vs Louisville and UNC coming up. They're playing better strangely since the lottery kid opted out.
 
Curious how seeding changes. Missouri, Tennesse, Texas Tech and UVA should all drop?
FSU, LSU, Bama and Oklahoma moving up.
SEC looking very good.
Would not want to play Texas or WVU early. Kansas improving.
Just when I think VCU is good they have a bad loss to George Mason at home.
Not sure anybody could have beat Illinois yesterday.
I am stunned at the losses of SHU and St.Johns after looking so good earlier this week. Still don't know what to make of UConn.
I would love to be in a bracket with Nova. They don't scare me.
Bad losses for Ole Miss and Stanford.
GT and UNC looking up.
BYU now firmly in.
 
That's what I thought too. Think Mathis could frustrate him too. Not sure they could stop Myles either. First time in awhile that I think they are vulnerable and over-rated.

Johnnies looked so good against Xavier.
 
it was a wild day. It will likely take a full scrub to try and accurately decipher everything.

here is my best guess right now after last nights results and there will be major shifts in the 8-11 seeding range

Davidson now is the AQ from the Atlantic 10. VCU the previous AQ remains as an at large. St Bonaventure drops out of the field

North Carolina moves in the field with their win over Louisville. UConn moves out

I am declaring Purdue a LOCK after their win at Nebraska, making Rutgers the next school ready to be projected as a lock....#1 on the list of schools competing for the 22 available at large bids.


LAST 4 IN: DRAKE, COLORADO STATE, XAVIER, SETON HALL
FIRST 4 OUT: STANFORD, CONNECTICUT, SAINT BONAVENTURE, DUKE
NEXT 4 OUT: GEORGIA TECH, SYRACUSE, MICHIGAN STATE, UTAH STATE
 
UConn plays Seton Hall soon. Game may be for a bid given the current status of the bubble.
 
the loss drops Rutgers down to an 8 seed along with Maryland


full scrub tomorrow but no one can take away the good on the RU resume, this was not a bad loss for the resume.

Indiana would add another quad 2 win...beat them and we are very close
 
I said as well as many others that I felt we needed 2 wins in our last 4 games. Now we will have extra pressure against Indiana. I don't think we are a lock by any means. We didn't look good at all today.
 
Put ourselves in a position that we will have to win at least one road game.
 
not much today.....

Xavier beats Butler to remain on the good side of the bubble but they likely need 3 of next 4 (3 on road) plus one has to be Creighton

LAST 4 IN: DRAKE, COLORADO STATE, XAVIER, SETON HALL
FIRST 4 OUT: STANFORD, CONNECTICUT, DUKE, GEORGIA TECH
NEXT 4 OUT: SYRACUSE, MICHIGAN STATE, UTAH STATE, MISSISSIPPI
 
new updating hopefully by Tuesday evening

from Jerry Palm about what the selection committee is looking for

We have reached that point in the college basketball season when NCAA Tournament résumés are hotly debated. Whether it is a battle for seeding or, more importantly, for an at-large bid to the Big Dance, the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Committee (commonly referred to as the "selection committee") uses several data points to judge each team to build the bracket by deciding which teams earn the 37 at-large bids (one more than usual) and where each of the 68 teams in the tournament will be seeded when the bracket is announced on Selection Sunday.

The NCAA compiles all the relevant numbers and presents it on the "team sheets," which are distributed to members of the selection committee. The numbers the committee uses to evaluate each team is one of the biggest factors in what is otherwise still a subjective process.

Bracketology
For the 2020-21 season, the formula for the still new NET Ranking system was changed. There are two components, the "Team Value Index," which is results oriented and "Adjusted NET Efficiency," which is basically margin of victory measured in points per possession instead of points per game. Both components include strength of schedule and game location factors as well.

Below is a picture of Baylor's team sheet from last week:

A look at what Baylor's official 'team sheet' from last week looked like. NCAA
The layout of the team sheets cleaned up a little for this season, but the data on them has not changed from 2019-20. The NCAA also has a slightly different version of the "team sheets" available to the public.


Paid content by The New York Times
Facts. $1 a week.
Benefit from expert reporting on the subjects that matter to you. Subscribe today.

The data that matters
While no one criterion is necessarily THE most important on the team sheets, it is possible to group the criteria by relative importance, so I will attempt to do that here. In short, the committee is looking for teams that have performed well, especially away from home since the tournament is not played on home floors. No attempt is made to rank the importance of the criteria within a group.

Most important
  • Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
  • Records by quadrant, away and neutral
  • Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
  • Overall SOS
  • Overall road and neutral records
  • Non-Division I losses
Some value
  • Average NET win and loss
  • Overall record
  • Non-Conference record, road record
Not nothing, but not very important
  • NET and other computer rankings
  • Overall home records, non-conference and by quadrant
  • Game scoring margins
Not criteria
  • Conference records and standings
  • AP Top 25, Coaches Poll
  • Tournament history
The "Not Nothing, but not very important" category could also be named "If this is all you have, you have nothing." The data in those categories should be validated by the information in the more important categories. If they are not validated, then they are outliers. Nothing in this category is decisive. For example, a team's individual NET ranking is not nearly as important as those of its opponents. The NET is designed to define the quadrants, not to choose or seed teams. It's not a tiebreaker or anything like that. Teams are not compared by NET or other computer rankings.

One factor not listed because there is no way to measure it is the "Eye Test." That term gets thrown around a lot because it is part of the subjective nature of the selection process. The committee members watch a lot of games. They will form some opinions based on that. However, if that criterion were to be listed somewhere, it would be under "Not Nothing." If a team really is good, it will show up in the important categories somewhere. If all you have is the "Eye Test," then you have nothing.


COVID impact on committee's thinking
For the 2020-21 season, and hopefully never again, the committee will have to make some considerations for schedules that have been impacted by COVID-19. Many games have been canceled because of COVID issues. This season, there were only 43% of the typical number of nonconference games played than in a normal season. That impacts the reliability of the computer rankings because their effectiveness is based on the interconnectivity between teams in different conferences.

For example, Patriot League teams played a total of eight nonconference games, four each by Navy and Army. That's it. Colgate has been in the top 20 of the NET most of the season but didn't play any nonconference games. The most important factor in trying to judge Colgate this season, or whichever team emerges from what will surely be a one-bid league, will be the "eye test." There will be no reliable, measurable way to judge the quality of their opponents.

It's not just the Patriot League. As of this writing, 48 teams have played two or fewer nonconference games against D-I opposition, including Atlantic 10 contender St. Bonaventure.


Comparing teams that have played a widely disparate number of games will be a challenge as well.

Hopefully this helps you frame your arguments for your team when you start debating its selection or seeding.


 
  • Like
Reactions: fluoxetine
It scares me that the NET SOS is so completely broken. It has us at 43 when our actual strength of schedule should be like #3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUChoppin
Why and how the heck is strength of schedule so different? Ken Pom has us at 3rd toughest? USA Today has us at 3 too.
 
Because they try to reinvent the wheel instead of just using the established stuff that already exists.
 
ADVERTISEMENT