Bracket reactions
Mar
2008
I’ve been sitting here in a state of semi-consciousness for some time now, trying to decide how I’m supposed to feel about the brackets. Other than generally feeling tired.
Why is it, do we suppose, that the women’s bracket is capable of interspersing a Texas pod with a pod centered on Pennsylvania with a west coast pod and a pod centered on Ohio?
Should I be outraged that the same team is victimized by an incorrect release of the men’s bracket two years in a row? Is it important to note that last year they changed the brackets to keep conference teams from playing each other and this year they changed them to force conference teams to play each other?
Are we sure now that everyone is hosting who is supposed to?
Do we think the NCAA knows what the Thursday men’s first-round games are supposed to be about? Those are supposed to be 8/9 games and 7/10 games leading to No. 1 and No. 2 seeds, remember. I know Clarkson and John Jay do not fit that mold at all and I don’t think Capital and Bethany are seeded that close together.
The good news is that soon we start playing. Two teams will hoist Walnut and Bronze. We’re looking at the most wide-open men’s tournament since 2001, if not earlier.
So let’s have some fun. Eventually. Or we can gripe for a while if you like.
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:58 pm
PC said: “Should I be outraged that the same team is victimized by an incorrect release of the men’s bracket two years in a row? Is it important to note that last year they changed the brackets to keep conference teams from playing each other and this year they changed them to force conference teams to play each other?”
The NCAA has a 52-page handbook consisting of excruciating minutiae, delineating exactly how the selection committee works and the criteria it uses to determine the participating teams. They set up and trumpet fancy-schmancy media to announce the brackets. Then they screw it up anyway. There’s a word for that: incompetence.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:04 pm
OB:
This is part of that handbook. You should familiarize yourself with it. It’s not like it’s not written in black and white. I bolded one so you can’t miss it.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Pat:
Thanks for that, but I know all about those rules. In fact I posted that excerpt on the SCIAC board earlier this morning as a way of explaining why the Oxy-Pomona pairing is justified. That’s not what I was talking about. The NCAA’s incompetence is not getting the announcement correct the first time, same as last year.
OB
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:39 pm
I agree with Bob about his assessment. I don’t even want this to fall on the backs on the coaches who are charged with the responsibility of pulling this off. IMHO, this is a lack of competent infrastructure and administrative support.
The Oxy issue is just bad because of the deviation from principle.
I logged on to weigh in on Pool B. The women handled it well. Chapman played a worthy schedule and earned theirs. It was Concordia-WI’s to lose out of the NATHC and they did. The Landmark Conference conference scooped up the bid that CUW dropped. There were no other Pool B’s in sight.
However, I believe that the men’s committee did not use the judgment that they needed to use within the guidelines that they were given. Maryville is solid. Aurora did what they needed to do this year. The NATHC “moves” that Pool B bid to a Pool A bid next year (and a fraction of a Pool C bid should come with a 12-team league in the move.) The remaining Pool B bids were left there for the coasts. I have a real hard time thinking that there isn’t some statistical overlap/confidence intervals in the OWP and OOWP’s between the second place team in the Landmark and a real independent 3000 miles away. Moravian was 18-7 in region. (.680). They lost their last two games to Scranton. Scranton “won” the conference and that “unofficial” bid.
Chapman is 13-5 (.722) The sad thing for Chapman is that LaSierra had to repeat Year #2 of their provisional status, which means that those three victories that were scheduled when the games were contracted did not count. (16-5, .762)
This is my personal opinion, but there are implications about the way that Pool B is treated. There is an access ratio that determines the number of Pool B bids. Practically speaking, all 12 NATHC men (and 13 women’s teams) move to Pool A in 2009. The Landmark takes its 8 teams to Pool A in 2010. A bid essentially goes to Pool A with each conference.
I would like to think that this was a case of East Coast bias and familiarity with those two Landmark schools. I have major disagreements with the practical application of the last Pool B bid by two teams that are almost “7 degrees of Kevin Bacon away” from each other. In the secondary criteria, Plattsburgh edges Chapman over Christmas. Chapman played a creditable independent schedule. Moravian choked at the end of the season. Chapman should have had that Pool B bid.
As for what to do with the third Southern California bid, bring Whitworth to play the lower-seeded SCIAC team. Let the highest seeded California school that filed the paperwork host. Plug Chapman into the bracket where they fit with respect to seeding.
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:29 pm
OxyBob - just for the record. I was told by Gary Grace, Men’s Basketball Championships Committee Chair, that the production side of things got the Oxy/Pom/Whitworth bracket incorrect. They moved things around apparently by accident after they (NCAA Production) got the bracket.
Mr. Grace made a point of calling me as soon as he could to fix that mistake. So, let’s not blame the committee for that… and Mr. Grace did answer our question about the Oxy/Pomona match-up… which I hope to have available for everyone to listen too soon!
Last year, the committee completely screwed up… this time it wasn’t thier fault for the mistake.
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Ralph - your comment about Plattsburgh edging Chapman doesn’t make much sense. That game doesn’t count when it comes to the committees, since it isn’t a regional game. So it isn’t worth using it as a comparison.
And as for Pool B aspect ratio… I believe it is 1:6.5 like everything else. So, when the NATHC and Landmark leave, Pool B will lose the amount of bids, maybe as far down as one!
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Lawrence doesn’t get a home game, they were 22-2! and one loss came in double OT!.. what more does a team have to do?
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Lu_vike- the Hope College womens team went undefeated and ranked #1 and don’t get to host a first round game, so as for your question, who knows?
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Dave- Ralph says “In the secondary criteria, Plattsburgh edges Chapman over Christmas” he was referring to the other set of criteria that the committee uses.
Chapman finished their season much stronger than Moravian, and with a better regional winning percentage. Chapman is a stronger team with a better trend line winning 12 of their last 13, the loss coming to NAIA Vanguard. Of those 13 there were 6 regional games, which they all won.
March 4th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Dave McHugh said: “I was told by Gary Grace, Men’s Basketball Championships Committee Chair, that the production side of things got the Oxy/Pom/Whitworth bracket incorrect. They moved things around apparently by accident after they (NCAA Production) got the bracket.”
Good job there passing the buck, Mr. Grace.
March 4th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Dave, thank you for the response. Yes, I was referring to the Plattsburgh- Chapman game as a secondary criterion in two schools that are on opposite coasts. I have a hard time correlating the OWP and OOWP arising from the Mid-Atlantic/Atlantic Region and the West Region in our first season using the metric.
(Specifically concerning the last 20% of the season crtierion, I have not heard of that approved use in D3basketball.)
To clarify the access ratio for Pool B, the NCAA totals the number of a schools in Pool A conferences and divides it by 38 (men)/39 (women). That becomes the access ratio that allocates the number of Pool B bids that will be awarded. The ratio for the men is 1:9.29. 38 Pool B teams divided by 9.29 = 4.09 bids which is truncated to 4 bids. The 12 NATHC teams leave in 2008-09, and I think that they are replaced by 8 NECC teams. I think that we gain 4 new UMAC teams coming off provisional status. We might still have 38 Pool B teams, but 39 Pool A conferences in 2008-09.
Since we should get 1 bid for every 6.5 sponsoring institutions, we should get another bid. Mr Grace did not answer Pat Coleman’s question concerning that issue…our going to 60 bids and the women to 64, either this year or in 2009-10.
In my opinion, I felt badly for Chapman, a pure independent on the other side of the country. Moravian lost to Scranton and demonstrated that it was not the better Pool b team which is going thru the two years of provisional status of the Landmark Conference. I thought that was sufficeint to give Chapman the benefit of the doubt for the 3rd Pool B bid.
I agree with you that we may only have one Pool B bid in 2012. That explains some of the urgency that we see in the GSAC-USA South quakings.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:19 am
I was going to come on here and complain about UW-Platteville getting left out. But then I saw Cal Lutheran was 21-5 and got hosed. Ouch!
For a few years, I think the deck’s been stacked against WIAC 3rd/4th and even 2nd place teams getting at-large bids. I can only assume people in the rest of the country got sick of Platteville and Stevens Point winning so much. I was a bit surprised both Whitewater and Point got bids.
The Pioneers have most everyone back and they’ll be locked and loaded for next year!
Another comment on this site mentioned St. Lawrence was 22-2 and it appears they have to travel to Wheaton, which must have been the last team picked. Why in the world does the committee do this? Is St. Lawrence’s gym hosting a circus this weekend?
March 4th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Just a quick note of clarification.
Lawrence (of Wisconsin) was 22-2 and has to travel to Wheaton (Ill.). St. Lawrence (of NY) didn’t make the tournament after losing in the Liberty League semifinals.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:51 am
To reclarift Gordon’s post
Lawrence has to travel to UW-Whitewater to play Wheaton. They don’t have to play a home team unless they and UW-Whitewater both win their first games and face off in the second round. Then the # 15 ranked team in the country will have to play the # 2 ranked team on thier own floor. Ouch.