Author Topic: Pool C  (Read 100994 times)

Offline SilversSports

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +4/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #435 on: February 13, 2012, 08:10:04 pm »
Never mind the bracket I was looking at was a link higher on the page from last year!
-Rob Silvers
Former WRFW Broadcaster and Sports Director 2007-2012

Offline SilversSports

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +4/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #436 on: February 13, 2012, 09:16:30 pm »
Anyone by chance have a calculation for UWRF and Carthage's OWP/OOWP?
-Rob Silvers
Former WRFW Broadcaster and Sports Director 2007-2012

Offline bballfan13

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
  • Karma: +46/-18
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #437 on: February 14, 2012, 01:24:47 pm »
Anyone by chance have a calculation for UWRF and Carthage's OWP/OOWP?

This is the data from the first regional rankings.  There will be new data tomorrow afternoon.

http://web1.ncaa.org/champsel_new/exec/pdf/staticpdfrank?doWhat=publicrankings&sportCode=WBB&region=35&division=3

Offline 80sshorts

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: +6/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #438 on: February 24, 2012, 02:07:04 pm »
Now that Commonwealth Coast Conference #1 Seed University of New England has been bounced from the conf. tourney by #4 Endicott (slated to face #2 Salve Regina) in the CCC Championship, what are the chances of New England getting an at-Large bid to the tourney? (As of the Week 3 regional rankings they're as high as 2nd in the Northeast region).  And if they do get the at-large bid, who gets knocked off the bubble.  I realize it's still a bit early in the weekend to project since a billion conf. tournaments are happening simultaneously so geniuses, feel free to wait till later on in the weekend if you want to tackle this question. 

Offline WilsonHoops

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #439 on: February 24, 2012, 03:38:24 pm »
80sshorts, I just did the calculations based on D3Hoop's strength of schedule that looks like it includes last night's games and what I see is U of New England now sitting at 10th in the Northeast region and 49th overall.  Of course, I'm just a guy with an excel spreadsheet, and like you said, a lot of tournaments going on this weekend.  Looks like their strength of schedule hurts them:

Team   RegRec   RegW%   OWP   sos rank   OOWP   rnk pts
Amherst   23-0   1.000   0.607   16   0.581   0.598
Tufts   20-4   0.833   0.650   3   0.570   0.519
Babson   22-2   0.917   0.540   93   0.538   0.494
Rh Island   22-3   0.880   0.563   59   0.553   0.492
Bowdoin   18-5   0.783   0.617   12   0.572   0.471
Williams   17-6   0.739   0.658   2   0.580   0.467
Colby   19-6   0.760   0.627   8   0.572   0.462
SoMaine   19-5   0.792   0.597   24   0.556   0.462
Em'uel   20-5   0.800   0.549   77   0.521   0.431
UofN Eng   22-5   0.815   0.531   118   0.502   0.424

Offline 80sshorts

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Karma: +6/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #440 on: February 24, 2012, 06:59:27 pm »
Thanks for doing all the heavy lifting on that Wilson, I've been playing around on excel a lot lately too with scenarios and whatnot.  At least according to your research, that is a pretty vast drop in the regional rankings for UNE. 

WLCALUM83

  • Guest
Re: Pool C
« Reply #441 on: February 24, 2012, 10:01:22 pm »
Would like a comment on WLC's chances should the Warriors lose to Dominican in the NAthCon Final tomorrow

Offline Ralph Turner

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 27359
  • Karma: +1693/-376
  • Hall of Famer
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #442 on: February 24, 2012, 10:17:07 pm »
Pool C dodged a bullet as Louisiana College held off HSU, 59-53.
The Cowgirls missed about 3 shots in the last possession. 

Offline Ralph Turner

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 27359
  • Karma: +1693/-376
  • Hall of Famer
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #443 on: February 24, 2012, 11:01:45 pm »
Game 5: [W1] Concordia Texas (21-4) vs. [E2] Texas-Dallas (20-6), 2 p.m.


Game 6: [W2] McMurry (19-7) vs. [E1] Louisiana College (23-3), 4:30 p.m.

Top seeds held. UTD edged HPU [W3] 56-53


Offline WilsonHoops

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #444 on: February 25, 2012, 01:03:10 pm »
WLCALUM83, Again, my opinion doesn't mean squat but I think they would be #8, behind Chicago, UW-Stevens Point, Washington U, UW-Whitewater, Ill. Wesleyan, UW-River Falls, and UW-Eau Claire, and right in front of Carthage.  Of course they could be rated higher than teams in other regions.  Hopefully for all of rooting for teams on the bubble, a lot of top seeds get the automatic bids.

Offline Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 7156
  • Karma: +541/-283
  • Broadcaster, Announcer, Analyst, and Fan!
    • View Profile
    • Hoopsville
Re: Pool C
« Reply #445 on: February 25, 2012, 04:31:08 pm »
Another bubble pops as Catholic defeats Juniata in the Landmark title game... Juniata is a Pool C lock.
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director, play-by-play and analyst for D3sports.com. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

Offline BruinFan

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
  • Karma: +8/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #446 on: February 25, 2012, 09:24:34 pm »
I want to give credit to Whitman College from the Northwest Conference. They have a deceiving won-loss record (16-10) and understandingly so will not appear on any lists of bubble teams being considered for the NCAA tournament.

I know I am ignoring criteria that the committee will use, so just pretend along with me.

Four of their losses were to NAIA schools. Only 1 of the six Division 3 losses is outside of conference.
The 5 losses in conference:
George Fox (twice),ranked #3 in the Top 25 and #1 in the West Region. Whitman is the only team to come within one point of beating George Fox this year.
Lewis and Clark (three times), ranked #7 in the Top 25 and #4 in the West Region. The losses were by 10, 2, and 5 points to the Pioneers.

Rarely do teams from either coast travel to the other side of the country. Whitman did so this year and lost at Williams by just 3 points (ranked #9 in NE Region). They then played Tufts (receiving votes in the Top 25, and ranked #4 in the NE Region) and beat them by 19 points. This was the second worst loss of the season for Tufts.

Occidental is ranked 6th in the West Region. Whitman has a better OWP, OOWP, and SOS than Occidental.
I believe that Whitman College could hold their own just fine against other Pool C teams that will be announced on Monday.

I'm off to watch the George Fox/Lewis and Clark game. Loser should be a lock for a Pool C bid.

Offline deiscanton

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2001
  • Karma: +89/-22
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #447 on: November 17, 2017, 12:25:07 am »
I am reviving this topic to talk about some new changes in the selection criteria for this season.  On Hoopsville, the national women's chair Bobbi Morgan was talking about some of iur, but she got the terminology mixed up a little bit, and since Dave "d-mac" McHugh probably was a little too busy with getting Hoopsville up and running to study the bracketology for the d3 soccer tournament, I will let this slide.

1.) For all d3 sports, non- conference SOS is a new addition to the secondary criteria.  In the soccer data sheets, these SOS numbers were added in the first week regional rankings for women's soccer and the first 2 weeks's regional rankings for men's soccer.  The final non-conference SOS numbers were not published in the final data sheets for soccer, unfortunately.  For transparency, I would like the non-conference SOS numbers published in each regional ranking for basketball, but the non- conference SOS numbers are not primary criteria for selection.

2.). If a team is ranked in the week 3 regional rankings, in other words, the last regional rankings published before Selection Monday, results vs those RROs will count for selection purposes.  In addition, any result vs teams that become RROs on the week 4 regional rankings will also count for selection purposes.  Therefore, in the case of the Calvin women's basketball team, if that scenario had been applied last season, Calvin would be 2-5 vs RROs, as opposed to only being 1-5.  Calvin had a RRO in the week 3 rankings that dropped out in week 4.  The win over Hope gave that 1 win back.  Now, Calvin gets to count both of those 2 wins as wins for selection purposes.

Note: Calvin's win over Kean last season did not count as a win over a RRO since Kean dropped out of the final Atlantic Region rankings.  This season, if that same situation were to happen, Calvin's win over Kean would still count as a win over a RRO since Kean was still regionally ranked in the week 3 regional rankings.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2017, 09:40:46 am by deiscanton »

Offline Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 7156
  • Karma: +541/-283
  • Broadcaster, Announcer, Analyst, and Fan!
    • View Profile
    • Hoopsville
Re: Pool C
« Reply #448 on: November 17, 2017, 12:48:05 pm »
I am reviving this topic to talk about some new changes in the selection criteria for this season.  On Hoopsville, the national women's chair Bobbi Morgan was talking about some of iur, but she got the terminology mixed up a little bit, and since Dave "d-mac" McHugh probably was a little too busy with getting Hoopsville up and running to study the bracketology for the d3 soccer tournament, I will let this slide.

1.) For all d3 sports, non- conference SOS is a new addition to the secondary criteria.  In the soccer data sheets, these SOS numbers were added in the first week regional rankings for women's soccer and the first 2 weeks's regional rankings for men's soccer.  The final non-conference SOS numbers were not published in the final data sheets for soccer, unfortunately.  For transparency, I would like the non-conference SOS numbers published in each regional ranking for basketball, but the non- conference SOS numbers are not primary criteria for selection.

2.). If a team is ranked in the week 3 regional rankings, in other words, the last regional rankings published before Selection Monday, results vs those RROs will count for selection purposes.  In addition, any result vs teams that become RROs on the week 4 regional rankings will also count for selection purposes.  Therefore, in the case of the Calvin women's basketball team, if that scenario had been applied last season, Calvin would be 2-5 vs RROs, as opposed to only being 1-5.  Calvin had a RRO in the week 3 rankings that dropped out in week 4.  The win over Hope gave that 1 win back.  Now, Calvin gets to count both of those 2 wins as wins for selection purposes.

Note: Calvin's win over Kean last season did not count as a win over a RRO since Kean dropped out of the final Atlantic Region rankings.  This season, if that same situation were to happen, Calvin's win over Kean would still count as a win over a RRO since Kean was still regionally ranked in the week 3 regional rankings.

Yes... I have not been able to get up to speed on all the minute details as of yet... mainly because sometimes the info is very forthcoming and other times it just appears out of nowhere usually in the middle of a random conversation. LOL

Thanks for sharing. I will also admit that sometimes I don't dive too far into some of these things in the beginning of the season when I used to in the past. I discovered that no one is really paying attention now. Thus why we now traditionally have a follow-up segment with each national committee chair in late January and that's when we dive more into these things.

That doesn't mean they should be shared... so thank you for doing it.

BTW - I do need to check to see what will and will not be utilized for each committee. Remember, the SOS calculation by the men is not the same as the women. These committees have a base to work from and then can add other "add-ons" if they like. You show it a bit in your first example. I need to make sure I know which of the "add-ons" are being used by which committee.

The first example has been talked about a lot especially on the men's basketball side.

As for your second example, I need to get clarification. It is a bit more complicated with how the vRRO is used at the very end.

This is how it worked, at least, last year for both committees that I am aware:

- The RACs for the final regional rankings take a look at the vRRO from the previous two rankings (in this case Weeks 2 and 3) when they vote.
- Since basketball RACs vote before all the outcomes are known, they vote on several different scenarios depending on results (if necessary).
- The national committee then gets those rankings and adjusts them as they see fit.
- The vRRO data is then run AGAIN with these temporary final rankings and the national committee makes any other adjustments necessary.

We have known, again at least for last year, that the final two weeks of the regional rankings will be used to help shape the final regional rankings/selection rankings of the season. I thought Calvin's win over Kean did count (though, I have to start going back to some very old notes) and thus why Calvin got into the tournament.

I will say, I was told by the liaisons last year that the final two weeks count in the final RACs and that Week 3's vRRO is absolutely part of the data. If it wasn't, then there was a mistake on someone's part at the NCAA when tabulating that data. I do not remember that being a conversation starter last season.
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director, play-by-play and analyst for D3sports.com. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

Offline deiscanton

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2001
  • Karma: +89/-22
    • View Profile
Re: Pool C
« Reply #449 on: November 23, 2017, 07:08:05 am »
Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to point out that the pre-championship manual for the NCAA Division III Women's Basketball Tournament was digitally released by the NCAA last week.  The men's version is yet to be released.

The new manual confirms the following that I previously discussed:

In the primary criteria, results vs ranked DIII teams for purposes of selection are now defined as results vs ranked DIII teams as established by the final ranking and the ranking immediately preceding the final ranking.  As Dave McHugh was trying to tell me in his last post, this new definition is a clarification of the old definition which had it as rankings established at the time of selection.

In the secondary criteria, non-conference strength of schedule is a new addition to the criteria.

The first ranking of the regional rankings will be released on Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2018; with the ranking immediately preceding the final ranking to be released on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2018.  The final ranking is to be released on Selection Monday, Feb. 26, 2018, after the bracket is revealed.

There is a field of 64 for this season's tournament with 43 teams automatically qualifying, 1 Pool B selection, and 20 teams to be selected via Pool C.

I expect that Hoopsville will talk more about this in January, so until then, have a great Thanksgiving and enjoy the rest of the holiday season.


« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 08:51:29 am by deiscanton »