Author Topic: 2015 Bracketology  (Read 18977 times)

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
2015 Bracketology
« on: February 18, 2015, 07:17:38 pm »
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2015, 09:07:30 pm »
Can't argue with your findings, but I have real issues with the rankings.  Hobart at #3, Boston ahead of Plattsburgh, and Trinity ahead of Oswego all surprised me.  Given what the committee did to Trinity last year, do you think they have any confidence in their position (or the process)?

Offline PeterLangella

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2015, 09:53:56 pm »
Norwich needs a new league. Four DII games that don't count in the primary criteria, plus two games each against the bottom half of their league is killing their SOS.

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2015, 08:55:19 am »
Can't argue with your findings, but I have real issues with the rankings.  Hobart at #3, Boston ahead of Plattsburgh, and Trinity ahead of Oswego all surprised me.  Given what the committee did to Trinity last year, do you think they have any confidence in their position (or the process)?

It looks like Trinity (.557) and Hobart (.547) are the beneficiaries of enormous SOS, which is a trend we've seen many times before.  Trinity's is third-highest in the nation while Hobart's is eighth-highest, and they are fairly easily the highest two SOS among East Region teams that could be ranked.  Obviously the committee is giving some major play there -- especially in the case of Hobart. Amherst likely is to an extent as well as its .538 (I think) SOS outpaces that of the teams behind it.

Trinity landing at 1E makes sense if you break down the numbers:

              Trinity          Oswego
WIN       .886              .881
SOS        .557              .511
RNK        .667 (2-1)     1.000 (2-0)
COP       1.000 (4-0)    .833 (2-0-1)
H2H         -                  -
L25        .833 (5-1)      1.000 (6-0)



« Last Edit: February 19, 2015, 09:02:13 am by Matthew Webb »
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2015, 03:08:02 pm »
I guess the biggest change to next week's Bracketology is that Plattsburgh will be awarded the Pool A from SUNYAC (while it wasn't even part of Bracketology last week), and Oswego now becomes a Pool C candidate.  I don't think Oswego's loss drops them below Hobart, so I'm predicting a field seeded this way:

1E. Trinity               1W. Adrian
2E. Oswego            2W. UW Stevens Point
3E. Hobart              3W. St. Thomas
4E. Amherst
5E. Norwich
6E. Plattsburgh
7E. Nichols
8E. Plymouth State

First Round

Nichols @ Plattsburgh
Plymouth State @ Norwich
St. Thomas @ UW Stevens Point

Quarterfinals

Nichols/Plattsburgh @ Trinity
Plymouth State/Norwich @ Oswego
Amherst @ Hobart
St. Thomas/Stevens Point @ Adrian

That's my uneducated guess before the rankings even come out! 

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2015, 03:55:05 pm »
Looks about right to me. Wego dropping to Pool C for now likely clears things up nicely as far as determining the field as the UMB-SNC comparison is rendered moot.  Wego in, UMB out. But...the big one will be how to set the bracket.  The UWSP-Oswego comparison took a turn in favor of UWSP last weekend. I took a crude look at it on Sunday and think Point might now claim the higher overall seed, but we'll see what tomorrow's exact numbers are before going all wild...
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2015, 04:56:50 pm »
Looks about right to me. Wego dropping to Pool C for now likely clears things up nicely as far as determining the field as the UMB-SNC comparison is rendered moot.  Wego in, UMB out. But...the big one will be how to set the bracket.  The UWSP-Oswego comparison took a turn in favor of UWSP last weekend. I took a crude look at it on Sunday and think Point might now claim the higher overall seed, but we'll see what tomorrow's exact numbers are before going all wild...

With the current 8/3 split, what would the difference be if UWSP & Oswego  flipped?  The QF would still look the same to avoid travel, wouldn't it? 

Unless you meant that Adrian / UWSP flipped....   In that case, would they be willing to fly St. Thomas to Adrian for a first round game?  Or is the comparison close enough they'd leave it as is?

Offline PeterLangella

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2015, 05:47:05 pm »
I think Matt might be saying that the committee could try to ensure a home QF for both Adrian and Point, which means that Hobart would likely go to Adrian for a QF with all of the 1st round games happening in the east.

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2015, 12:19:17 am »
What I mean is that, as was the case last week, the manner in which the bracket gets set up ultimately hinges on whether Oswego or Stevens Point is more deserving to host (and/or go straight to) a quarterfinal. One can work through more details of each bracket setup, but that becomes the one significant difference between the two options. Last week we suspected Oswego would be a higher overall seed than Point and thus put Point in the opening rounder. I'm not so sure that will be the case this week -- but we'll see what the official numbers bring.

If that makes sense.
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2015, 12:31:16 am »
To larify, the two options last week were:

1. Point v UST in opening rounder, winner at Adrian. Trinity, Hobart, Oswego all go straight to QF and all host. Amherst also straight through to qf at Hobart. This gives 1w, 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e byes to qf, with all but 4e hosting.
2. UST at Point and hobart at Adrian in direct qf. This gives 1w, 2w, 3w, 1e, 3e byes to qf but puts Oswego (2e) in a first rounder as all three first rounders would be in East so only Trinity gets a bye.

While Oswego would still host a qf in the second option and we think it's a tad more equitable in terms of getting as many top regional seeds as possible directly into qf, the whole thing came down to whether Oswego or Point (undeservingly in either case) gets stuck with a first rounder. As we believed Oswego would have been a higher overall seed last week we stuck Point in the first round.

Neither option is ideal but it was the Oswego v Point overall seed that made the difference. If that makes sense...trying to type this on my phone... :)
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2015, 07:59:47 am »
I guess I don't understand why Oswego has to play a first round game instead of Hobart in your scenario.  I think you do more to damage bracket integrity when E2 plays in the first round and E3 gets a bye than setting up E2 v. W1 in the QF and make Hobart play in that first round.

At any rate, I think the bracket you proposed actually made the most sense.  I'll have to read your explanation if that changes in week two.

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2015, 10:49:13 am »
I guess I don't understand why Oswego has to play a first round game instead of Hobart in your scenario.  I think you do more to damage bracket integrity when E2 plays in the first round and E3 gets a bye than setting up E2 v. W1 in the QF and make Hobart play in that first round.

There was a reason for it...which I don't recall at the moment, of course. Ah well, will all be moot in a few hours anyway :)
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2015, 11:47:06 am »
I guess I don't understand why Oswego has to play a first round game instead of Hobart in your scenario.  I think you do more to damage bracket integrity when E2 plays in the first round and E3 gets a bye than setting up E2 v. W1 in the QF and make Hobart play in that first round.

There was a reason for it...which I don't recall at the moment, of course. Ah well, will all be moot in a few hours anyway :)

Yeah, but the discussion is fun! ;D

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2015, 12:35:56 pm »
Yeah, but the discussion is fun! ;D

No doubt. Funny thing is, as enjoyable and educational as it is to do this every week...very, very little of it matters until selection Sunday as reality invariably ends up deviating wildly from Bracketology #3.

However, we're at the point now where it's reasonably safe to start writing some teams off and locking others in. For example, I'd call Trinity a lock.

People will waste their time rambling about last year but fact is Trinity's numbers are in a much different spot this time around -- and I'm sure no one will take the time to figure that out. Can only lose once more and it won't make any difference (in terms of being in tourney) if they do or not...

...except to some other Pool C hopefuls, of course :)
« Last Edit: February 24, 2015, 12:40:46 pm by Matthew Webb »
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2015 Bracketology
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2015, 04:07:12 pm »
Ok, I was surprised to see Oswego drop behind Amherst, but looking at the numbers, it was closer than I thought.  I'll bet Norwich fans are not going to be happy seeing Mass-Boston jump them.

Can't wait for Bracketology, Take II!