Jump to content

Nebraska on the Selection Committee Board


hhctony

Recommended Posts

Here is the source

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/mens-basketball-selections-101-selections

Selection Criteria
The Rating Percentage Index (RPI) is one of many factors used by NCAA sports committees when evaluating team selection, seeding and bracketing.

The basic RPI consists of a team’s Division I winning percentage (25 percent weight), its opponents’ winning percentage (50 percent weight) and its opponents opponents’ winning percentage (25 percent weight). The RPI is one of many factors the committees use for selecting and seeding teams.

Other criteria the committee considers in the selections process are:
 

  • An extensive season-long evaluation of teams through watching games, conference monitoring calls and regional advisory committee rankings;
  • Complete box scores and results;
  • Head-to-head results and results versus common opponents;
  • Imbalanced conference schedules and results;
  • Overall and non-conference strength of schedule;
  • The quality of wins and losses;
  • Road record;
  • Player and coach availability; and
  • Various computer metrics.

Each of the 10 committee members uses these various resources to form his or her own opinion, resulting in the committee’s consensus position on selection and seeding.

Team Sheets
The committee often refers to "team sheets" when comparing team performance. The team sheets contain in-depth team information about strength of schedule, performance against top-50 teams and home/road records.

Starting with the 2017-18 season, the team sheets took on a new look. They now not only include each team’s RPI, but also include a team’s ranking in five other metrics: the ESPN strength of record and BPI rankings, as well as the KPI, KenPom and Sagarin rankings. In addition, a team’s schedule and results are now broken down in four quadrants that place greater emphasis on games played on neutral courts and in true road environments. The quadrant breakdown is as follows:
 

  • Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  • Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  • Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  • Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus.

Download team sheets

Seeding
The committee creates a seed list 1 through 68 -- which is used to assess competitive balance of the top teams across the four regions of this national championship. Additionally, the seed list reflects the sequential order with which teams will be placed in the bracket.

Automatic Qualifiers: A total of 32 conferences will place an automatic qualifier in the NCAA tournament field. These qualifiers are determined by conference tournaments.

At-Large: With the tournament field of 68, there are 36 at-large spots after the AQs. The committee selects the 36 best teams to fill the at-large berths. There is no limit on the number of at-large teams the committee may select from one conference.

 

Yes, I posted this to make on HuskersOnline as well to prove a point to NewAD... One thing that sticks out like a sore thumb is no where does it say quadrants are based solely on RPI.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HuskerFever said:

Here's Lunardi's new bubble watch as of March 7:

 

Last Four Byes
Kansas State
Saint Mary's
Providence
Baylor


Last Four In
Texas
USC
UCLA
Alabama


First Four Out
Syracuse
Louisville
Marquette
Oklahoma State


Next Four Out
Notre Dame
Penn State
Boise State
Nebraska

I'm starting to think Joey would have Deleware State in ahead of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has been posted...from the same guy who has us safely in (if someone knows how to embed this and make it easier to see, please do so!)

 

Bruce's quote about winning games you should is something that doesn't get talked about enough when we are discussed by so-called experts.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jason2486 said:

Sorry if this has been posted...from the same guy who has us safely in (if someone knows how to embed this and make it easier to see, please do so!)

 

Bruce's quote about winning games you should is something that doesn't get talked about enough when we are discussed by so-called experts.

 

 

 

You needed to remove the ?s=20 part of the url to make it embed I guess.

 

Here's the thing about the Haslam dude though.  I read on his twitter this morning that he makes bracket predictions based on his own personal set of beliefs and calculations, which can make him quite a bit different than the other bracketologists, then right before the selection show begins, when the final bracket predictions are due, he changes everything up so that his brackets are pretty much in line with everyone else's so he can get a legit score on his predictions.

 

I wouldn't put too much stock in him having Nebraska in his brackets right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

You needed to remove the ?s=20 part of the url to make it embed I guess.

 

Here's the thing about the Haslam dude though.  I read on his twitter this morning that he makes bracket predictions based on his own personal set of beliefs and calculations, which can make him quite a bit different than the other bracketologists, then right before the selection show begins, when the final bracket predictions are due, he changes everything up so that his brackets are pretty much in line with everyone else's so he can get a legit score on his predictions.

 

I wouldn't put too much stock in him having Nebraska in his brackets right now.

 

I feel like most of us could pretty easily come up with 60-64 teams that will get in (same with these bracket gurus).  It's the last 4-8 that can be hard to nail down.  Some years it's easier than others.  IMO this year seems tougher than most. For one, there's the new quadrant system that we haven't really seen in action. Are big wins valued more than bad losses? By how much? We haven't seen a full bracket made up with the quadrant system in effect so we don't have a lot of data to go from when predicting the final field.

 

Another thing that seems tougher this year is all the 17-19 win teams with .500 or below .500 conf records and similar metrics.  It seems like there are more in contention for a bid this year than years past. How are you going to choose between the Baylors, OUs, OSUs, and Texas' of the world.  I'm fairly confident all 4 won't get in. Someone gets cut.  And if not there won't be room for all those SEC and ACC teams. That's not even counting a bid stealer or 2.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is it will be hard for any of these guys not on the committee (or without some inside info) to get 65/66/67/68 teams right this year. 

 

Im still holding out hope we will be one of the WTF teams that all the experts rant about on Sunday. I think that's where this guy (Haslam) is coming from. He's trying to be contrarian and go against the group think and one up guys like Lunardi and Palm.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if he has us in his bracket on Sunday.

Edited by tjp21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, big red22 said:

Here is the source

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/mens-basketball-selections-101-selections

Selection Criteria
The Rating Percentage Index (RPI) is one of many factors used by NCAA sports committees when evaluating team selection, seeding and bracketing.

The basic RPI consists of a team’s Division I winning percentage (25 percent weight), its opponents’ winning percentage (50 percent weight) and its opponents opponents’ winning percentage (25 percent weight). The RPI is one of many factors the committees use for selecting and seeding teams.

Other criteria the committee considers in the selections process are:
 

  • An extensive season-long evaluation of teams through watching games, conference monitoring calls and regional advisory committee rankings;
  • Complete box scores and results;
  • Head-to-head results and results versus common opponents;
  • Imbalanced conference schedules and results;
  • Overall and non-conference strength of schedule;
  • The quality of wins and losses;
  • Road record;
  • Player and coach availability; and
  • Various computer metrics.

Each of the 10 committee members uses these various resources to form his or her own opinion, resulting in the committee’s consensus position on selection and seeding.

Team Sheets
The committee often refers to "team sheets" when comparing team performance. The team sheets contain in-depth team information about strength of schedule, performance against top-50 teams and home/road records.

Starting with the 2017-18 season, the team sheets took on a new look. They now not only include each team’s RPI, but also include a team’s ranking in five other metrics: the ESPN strength of record and BPI rankings, as well as the KPI, KenPom and Sagarin rankings. In addition, a team’s schedule and results are now broken down in four quadrants that place greater emphasis on games played on neutral courts and in true road environments. The quadrant breakdown is as follows:
 

  • Quadrant 1: Home 1-30; Neutral 1-50; Away 1-75
  • Quadrant 2: Home 31-75; Neutral 51-100; Away 76-135
  • Quadrant 3: Home 76-160; Neutral 101-200; Away 136-240
  • Quadrant 4: Home 161-plus; Neutral 201-plus; Away 241-plus.

Download team sheets

Seeding
The committee creates a seed list 1 through 68 -- which is used to assess competitive balance of the top teams across the four regions of this national championship. Additionally, the seed list reflects the sequential order with which teams will be placed in the bracket.

Automatic Qualifiers: A total of 32 conferences will place an automatic qualifier in the NCAA tournament field. These qualifiers are determined by conference tournaments.

At-Large: With the tournament field of 68, there are 36 at-large spots after the AQs. The committee selects the 36 best teams to fill the at-large berths. There is no limit on the number of at-large teams the committee may select from one conference.

 

Yes, I posted this to make on HuskersOnline as well to prove a point to NewAD... One thing that sticks out like a sore thumb is no where does it say quadrants are based solely on RPI.

 

I don't see "pay attention to Joe Lunardi" anywhere on there.

 

Odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, tjp21 said:

 

I feel like most of us could pretty easily come up with 60-64 teams that will get in (same with these bracket gurus).  It's the last 4-8 that can be hard to nail down.  Some years it's easier than others.  IMO this year seems tougher than most. For one, there's the new quadrant system that we haven't really seen in action. Are big wins valued more than bad losses? By how much? We haven't seen a full bracket made up with the quadrant system in effect so we don't have a lot of data to go from when predicting the final field.

 

Another thing that seems tougher this year is all the 17-19 win teams with .500 or below .500 conf records and similar metrics.  It seems like there are more in contention for a bid this year than years past. How are you going to choose between the Baylors, OUs, OSUs, and Texas' of the world.  I'm fairly confident all 4 won't get in. Someone gets cut.  And if not there won't be room for all those SEC and ACC teams. That's not even counting a bid stealer or 2.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is it will be hard for any of these guys not on the committee (or without some inside info) to get 65/66/67/68 teams right this year. 

 

Im still holding out hope we will be one of the WTF teams that all the experts rant about on Sunday. I think that's where this guy (Haslam) is coming from. He's trying to be contrarian and go against the group think and one up guys like Lunardi and Palm.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if he has us in his bracket on Sunday.

 

Oh, yeah. Erik Haslam will have Nebraska in his bracket. He's going to love all the attention when he's right. B)B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Team Rankings has us up to an 84% chance today to make the tournament.  I know this hasn't been the most reliable predictor in the past but I do like the continued upward movement.  This is easily my favorite bracketology site, for obvious reasons. :D

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/team/nebraska-cornhuskers/bracketology

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is interesting.  This guy is basically the Director of Media Relations for the NCAA Tournament.  If I'm reading correctly what he is saying below, Nebraska is among 33 teams competing for the last 8 spots in the tournament.  Put on your lucky socks and underwear and don't take them off until Sunday night!

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nebrasketball1979 said:

This is interesting.  This guy is basically the Director of Media Relations for the NCAA Tournament.  If I'm reading correctly what he is saying below, Nebraska is among 33 teams competing for the last 8 spots in the tournament.  Put on your lucky socks and underwear and don't take them off until Sunday night!

 

image.png

 

This is correct.  However, I would assume that, of the 28 teams, there is still going to be an auto-bid in those from the ACC, A-10, Big 12, Big East, SEC, and possibly the Pac 12 as well.  So that would free up possibly 6 bids.  So we would compete with 33 teams for the final 14 spots in the tourney.  It is one of the main reasons why, despite the help we are getting from Boston College and St. Johns with their wins, we need a top seed to win their conference tourneys as much as we need the other bubble teams to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Nebrasketball1979 said:

This is interesting.  This guy is basically the Director of Media Relations for the NCAA Tournament.  If I'm reading correctly what he is saying below, Nebraska is among 33 teams competing for the last 8 spots in the tournament.  Put on your lucky socks and underwear and don't take them off until Sunday night!

 

image.png

Maybe we are one of the 28 teams!! ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, brfrad said:

Maybe we are one of the 28 teams!! ?

 

You know it isn't totally out of the question that we are locked in. Our body of work is essentially complete (with the exception of BC continuing to win). In most years the #4 team in the Big 10 with our record would be locked in right now.  If we met their eye test and our overall resume is good enough to get in we may already be considered in.  Just a matter of seeding (last 4 vs bye etc).  We can always hope!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...