Bracketology

[stever20]

I find myself thinking at this point about how great the split has been for Big East schools. If the C7 had stayed in the AAC (granted, it would still have the BE brand behind it) we would currently be in a 6 bid, 18 BB school league. I wonder what the national narrative would be at that point. That's certainly not power conference territory.

It's an interesting thought. this year Nova, PC, SH, Cincy, UConn, Tulsa would have all been close to locks right now I think. Temple would have been extremely interesting. And Houston/Marquette would be close as well.... Probably would have squeezed at least 7 bids, if not 8.

1 thing as well- ECU would have been FB only at that point. so no basketball with them so only a 17 team league.

Thing is this year, instead of playing DePaul/St John's 2x, would have seen those 1 ea. Not that much difference between them and USF,UCF, and Tulane.

And I do think Georgetown wouldn't have gone into the funk that we've been in quite frankly. And Marquette may have been different as well quite frankly.....

[XUFan09]

Today's ESPN bubble watch has 4 Big East locks and 1 with work to do (Butler).

Though one could knock Butler's overall non-conference SOS, they still played some tough matchups and picked up a couple really good wins (a road win versus Cincinnati and a neutral court win versus Purdue) and a solid win (neutral court win versus Temple).

In one of the best conferences, they put together a 10-8 record while generally avoiding bad losses, unless you want to count a road game versus a borderline top 100 Marquette squad that everyone knows has a lottery pick (and since the Committee makes adjustments for venue, that will really be considered the equivalent of a loss to a borderline top 50 team on a neutral court). They picked up a couple more good wins in conference, and their poor record against the top 25 just means that they are not getting a good seed. Regardless, they are a lock for the tournament, because the worst that can happen now is they lose to another tournament team in Providence.

While I agree that Butler is a lock, it's pretty dumb to say a loss @ Marquette would be viewed as the equivalent of a loss to a borderline top 50 team neutral. Marquette is only 19-12 despite having only the #98 schedule in the country. 12 of their 19 wins were against teams #186 or worse in the RPI. They might not view it as a terrible loss, but it's no borderline top 50 loss either.....

False. The Committee actually has an equivalency table based on venue. For example, playing a borderline top 25 team at home is the equivalent of playing a team not even in the top 50 on a neutral court. There's a huge discrepancy due to venue, and the discrepancy can actually explain a lot of the more surprising selections and seedings for the tournament. If you are wondering why a team made the cut or got seeded higher than expected, there's a good chance they had a number of road wins versus teams in the RPI 50-100. If you are wondering why a team didn't make it or was seeded lower than expected, there's a good chance that a number of their better wins were at home.

Whether the big discrepancy in ratings based on venue is fair is another question altogether, but it definitely exists.

If you want other evidence, just look at Kenpom. He started employing a very similar method with Tier A and Tier B opponents. Tier A opponents correspond to top 50 opponents to on a neutral court. If you look at #100 Oklahoma State, they are considered a Tier A opponent when playing on their home court. They are one spot in front of #101 Marquette.

[Westbrook#36]

I was replying to everyones post and not just yours....

This years conference is much better than it was last year...
last years conference RPI- .5248 80-49 against .4807 SOS .5547 KP rating
this years conference RPI- .5363 89-48 against .5014 SOS .6805 KP rating

you say that includes SMU. Yes. But games against SMU do count. The committee isn't going to do like folks here want and totally dismiss the SMU wins that EVERY contender in the conference got.

Also, in Ken Pom- Last year the conference had 5 teams 220 or worse(with 6 top 100 teams). This year it's 4 teams 193 or worse(with 7 top 100 teams).

Also- you look at Cincy, UConn, and Tulsa, all 3 of those have top 50 Ken Pom ratings. If it's UConn/Tulsa in the finals- all 3 will likely make the tourney.

Then don't just quote me if you're replying to more than one post.

Now back to my original point, every AAC team on this years bubble has a resume similar or slightly worse than either of SMU's or Temple's of the last 2 years. They both got snubbed, if I were a AAC fan I'd be more than a little nervous of getting 3 teams in.

As for the conference talk, say what you want and use whatever metric you care to, doesn't change the fact that AAC is struggling to live up to the big expectations homers were painting 3 years ago. You know like ... the AAC will be a 4-5 bid league at least every year, he AAC will be better than the BE easily, the AAC will be consider a power conference instead of the P5 it will be the P6, yada, yada, yada.

[stever20]

do you have anything to prove this equivalency table exists? at all.

What you are saying then would mean-
losing to a borderline top 25 team at home is viewed worse than to a 105 team on the road.

I'm sorry, but no.

I know Ken Pom tried to put this out, but that's the only place I've ever seen that.

[stever20]

I was replying to everyones post and not just yours....

This years conference is much better than it was last year...
last years conference RPI- .5248 80-49 against .4807 SOS .5547 KP rating
this years conference RPI- .5363 89-48 against .5014 SOS .6805 KP rating

you say that includes SMU. Yes. But games against SMU do count. The committee isn't going to do like folks here want and totally dismiss the SMU wins that EVERY contender in the conference got.

Also, in Ken Pom- Last year the conference had 5 teams 220 or worse(with 6 top 100 teams). This year it's 4 teams 193 or worse(with 7 top 100 teams).

Also- you look at Cincy, UConn, and Tulsa, all 3 of those have top 50 Ken Pom ratings. If it's UConn/Tulsa in the finals- all 3 will likely make the tourney.

Then don't just quote me if you're replying to more than one post.

Now back to my original point, every AAC team on this years bubble has a resume similar or slightly worse than either of SMU's or Temple's of the last 2 years. They both got snubbed, if I were a AAC fan I'd be more than a little nervous of getting 3 teams in.

As for the conference talk, say what you want and use whatever metric you care to, doesn't change the fact that AAC is struggling to live up to the big expectations homers were painting 3 years ago. You know like ... the AAC will be a 4-5 bid league at least every year, he AAC will be better than the BE easily, the AAC will be consider a power conference instead of the P5 it will be the P6, yada, yada, yada.

I really disagree with you.....
SMU 2014- 23-9 record. 128 SOS, 302 OOC SOS, 4-6 vs RPI top 100, 3 sub 100 losses. 1-5 road/neutral vs top 100 53 RPI 32 KP 179 avg win 81 avg loss
Temple 2015- 23-10 record. 56 SOS, 46 OOC SOS. 7-8 vs RPI top 100, 2 sub 100 losses. 3-6 road/neutral vs top 100 34 RPI 56 KP 177 avg win 46 avg loss

Cincy 2016- 22-9 record. 72 sos, 142 OOC sos 7-8 vs RPI top 100, 1 sub 100 loss. 3-5 road/neutral vs top 100 39 RPI 32 KP 175 avg win 51 avg loss
Tulsa 2016- 20-10 record. 52 SOS, 109 OOC SOS. 8-8 vs RPI top 100, 2 sub 100 loss. 2-6 road/neutral vs top 100 48 RPI 46 KP 161 avg win 67 avg loss
Temple 2016- 20-10 record. 70 SOS, 106 OOC SOS 7-8 vs RPI top 100. 1 sub 100 loss. 3-5 road/neutral vs top 100 55 RPI 86 KP 171 avg win 60 avg loss
UConn 2016- 21-10 record. 53 SOS, 114 OOC SOS. 6-10 vs RPI top 100. 0 sub 100 loss. 3-7 road/neutral vs top 100 59 RPI 31 KP 170 avg win 45 avg loss

Cincy has a far better resume for sure than SMU in 2014. 56 better SOS, 160 better OOC SOS, 3 more top 100 wins, 2 fewer sub 100 losses, better road neutral.. I'd say of the 6, they're by far the best....
I think Tulsa this year better than either SMU/Temple last 2 years. better sos, more top 100 win(s), much stronger average win.
Temple I think you throw out from this year.
UConn really interesting one. If they make the final for sure I think they're in

[Westbrook#36]

Not going to argue with you stever. The AAC bubble teams this year have very similar resume's to those snubbed teams. Overall record wise, conference record wise, and rpi wise. Agree to disagree, which is most often the case with you and everyone else on this board in regards to the AAC.

[XUFan09]

do you have anything to prove this equivalency table exists? at all.

What you are saying then would mean-
losing to a borderline top 25 team at home is viewed worse than to a 105 team on the road.

I'm sorry, but no.

I know Ken Pom tried to put this out, but that's the only place I've ever seen that.

How would I come up with something that specific without having seen something of the kind? Even Kenpom doesn't have an actual equivalency table, though he might have his formula somewhere. More importantly, why would I make up something like that? It serves no benefit to me, as it was just an afterthought to a more general post. By the way, demanding me to produce a non-public document is like demanding a poster to reveal his source on a rumor. It's foolish.

In the end, think about this logically. The Selection Committee has been emphasizing road record and road wins in recent years. Since they are doing that, it stands to reason that they would have some means of valuing these wins (and devaluing home wins). I gave the Kenpom example to show how easy it is to do and to show how big the jumps are in another commonly used rating system.

If you're stuck on it being unfair or unreasonable that a road win versus the #105 team is viewed (slightly, within margin of error) better than a home win versus the #25 team, once again that's another question altogether. I agree that the absolute value of a team should be taken into account more (though I'm sure there's data showing how similar the records are for the #25 team on the road and the #105 team at home). There's a good chance that the absolute value is accounted for, though, just not at this level. The Selection Committee does employ a strong subjective component to their selection and seeding that probably takes that into account, along with whether specific teams are disproportionately strong at home or disproportionately weak on the road or vice versa. For example, Providence hasn't been the strongest homecourt team, so a road win against them might count for a bit less in the eyes of the Committee

[stever20]

Agree to disagree, stever. The AAC bubble teams this year have very similar resume's to those snubbed teams. Overall record wise, conference record wise, and rpi wise. Again agree to disagree, which is most often the case with you and everyone else on this board in regards to the AAC.

Agree to disagree, stever. The AAC bubble teams this year have very similar resume's to those snubbed teams. Overall record wise, conference record wise, and rpi wise. Again agree to disagree, which is most often the case with you and everyone else on this board in regards to the AAC.

SMU and Cincy are close ONLY on record. EVERY OTHER METRIC is Cincy and not even close....
SOS- 72-128
OOC SOS 142-302
vs top 100 7-8 vs 4-6
sub 100 losses 1 vs 3
road/neutral vs top 100 3-5 vs 1-5
RPI 39 vs 53

Things are more than just records and RPI.

[stever20]

back to real bracketology:
USA Today:
Nova 1 E
Seton Hall 6 E
Xavier 2 S
PC 8 S
Butler 9 MW

[Westbrook#36]

Agree to disagree, stever. The AAC bubble teams this year have very similar resume's to those snubbed teams. Overall record wise, conference record wise, and rpi wise. Again agree to disagree, which is most often the case with you and everyone else on this board in regards to the AAC.

Agree to disagree, stever. The AAC bubble teams this year have very similar resume's to those snubbed teams. Overall record wise, conference record wise, and rpi wise. Again agree to disagree, which is most often the case with you and everyone else on this board in regards to the AAC.

SMU and Cincy are close ONLY on record. EVERY OTHER METRIC is Cincy and not even close....
SOS- 72-128
OOC SOS 142-302
vs top 100 7-8 vs 4-6
sub 100 losses 1 vs 3
road/neutral vs top 100 3-5 vs 1-5
RPI 39 vs 53

Things are more than just records and RPI.

Keep telling yourself that stever. Look the AAC could easily get 3 teams in, it's also fair to say they easily could not. Especially with how the committee's history with the AAC is concerned, keep telling yourself that past committee history isn't relevant stever.

Again I'm done, we will see on Sunday how the committee views the AAC, if I were you I'd be more than a little nervous.