big bump on the matrix

[CusefanATL]

The Bracket Project's Bracket Matrix - 2018

2nd team out this AM

 

[Trueblue25]

time for Battle to channel his inner g mac

 

[Chris02M]

still cant see how alabama is so safety in, they have 14 losses

 

[jncuse]

Yesterday was a crazy day. There are 20 old brackets that are skewing the results on the currently posted matrix. At this time of year they should do a better job discarding them.

I would suggest reading my thread on this topic that I just posted, as I made the adjustment.

We are still 2nd team out, but in a cluster with 4 others for the last 2 spots.

 

[20Plus]

Yesterday was a crazy day. There are 20 old brackets that are skewing the results on the currently posted matrix. At this time of year they should do a better job discarding them.

I would suggest reading my thread on this topic that I just posted, as I made the adjustment.

We are still 2nd team out, but in a cluster with 4 others for the last 2 spots.

5 teams for 2 spots

 

[Madbiker]

still cant see how Alabama is so safety in, they have 14 losses

The inconsistency is sickening. Alabama has 4 top 25 wins so many have them in despite 14 losses and some bad ones. Last year we had 3 top 10 wins yet all the gurus had us out because all they wanted to focus on was a bad loss. IMO a lot of who they favor is dependent on conference and whether they personally like the coach (which of course works against us).

 

[pearl31]

The inconsistency is sickening. Alabama has 4 top 25 wins so many have them in despite 14 losses and some bad ones. Last year we had 3 top 10 wins yet all the gurus had us out because all they wanted to focus on was a bad loss. IMO a lot of who they favor is dependent on conference and whether they personally like the coach (which of course works against us).

well let's at least wait to see what the committee actually thinks this year

 

[Tom W.]

The inconsistency is sickening. Alabama has 4 top 25 wins so many have them in despite 14 losses and some bad ones. Last year we had 3 top 10 wins yet all the gurus had us out because all they wanted to focus on was a bad loss. IMO a lot of who they favor is dependent on conference and whether they personally like the coach (which of course works against us).

I thought the same thing until I made this spread sheet and noticed they had 11 top 100 wins with a SOS of 9.---

 

[Chris02M]

I thought the same thing until I made this spread sheet and noticed they had 11 top 100 wins with a SOS of 9.---

they also lost there last 5 games of the regular season. They only have 2 true road game wins also

 

[sdcuseguy]

I look at teams in Green like Providence and, in its totality, I see very little difference. We had a tougher schedule and have a better average...Q2 hurt us a little bit but they had a bad loss to a Q4. This really is splitting hairs with most of these teams listed and we definitely compare well to Baylor. Thanks for doing this Tom. I personally don't see any teams we don't have an argument against in the light green. If they lose one in the conference and we win 1, I think things can flip. They SHOULD take into account performance at end of season but no longer do.

 

[20Plus]

The inconsistency is sickening. Alabama has 4 top 25 wins so many have them in despite 14 losses and some bad ones. Last year we had 3 top 10 wins yet all the gurus had us out because all they wanted to focus on was a bad loss. IMO a lot of who they favor is dependent on conference and whether they personally like the coach (which of course works against us).

Non conf SOS

Su has an even better though

 

[sdcuseguy]

Can anyone explain to me why Arizona St. is so far above us? Same conference record in a weaker conference, similar average, weaker schedule overall, quadrants W-L almost identical. The Q1 same amount of wins vs. fewer opportunities plays into it but other than that I see almost no difference.

 

[OrangeYaGladi]

Can anyone explain to me why Arizona St. is so far above us? Same conference record in a weaker conference, similar average, weaker schedule overall, quadrants W-L almost identical. The Q1 same amount of wins vs. fewer opportunities plays into it but other than that I see almost no difference.

won by 10 @ kansas, beat Xavier on neutral by 16

 

[PoppyHart]

SOS and NCSOS is such a horsesheet metric.

OK State is 281st & played:
1. Texas A&M (N)
2. @ Arkansas
3. Florida State (N)
4. Wichita State
5. Tulsa

and 8 tomato cans.

Alabama is 34th & played:
1. Rhode Island
2. @ Arizona
3. Texas
4. Oklahoma
5. BYU
6. UCF

and 7 tomato cans.

Syracuse is 18th & played:

1. Kansas (N)
2. Maryland
3. St. Bonaventure
4. Buffalo
5. Toledo

& 8 tomato cans.

These are all the sub-100 RPI games. Tourney locks are in bold, tourney likelys are in italics. 18 vs. 34 vs. 281 doesn't add up in my book.

 

[Madbiker]

I thought the same thing until I made this spread sheet and noticed they had 11 top 100 wins with a SOS of 9.---

I know they have an overall good SOS and some good wins. But they also have bad losses. Especially to Minnesota (RPI #177), Miss (127).

 

[Tom W.]

SOS and NCSOS is such a horsesheet metric.

OK State is 281st & played:
1. Texas A&M (N)
2. @ Arkansas
3. Florida State (N)
4. Wichita State
5. Tulsa

and 8 tomato cans.

Alabama is 34th & played:
1. Rhode Island
2. @ Arizona
3. Texas
4. Oklahoma
5. BYU
6. UCF

and 7 tomato cans.

Syracuse is 18th & played:

1. Kansas (N)
2. Maryland
3. St. Bonaventure
4. Buffalo
5. Toledo

& 8 tomato cans.

These are all the sub-100 RPI games. Tourney locks are in bold, tourney likelys are in italics. 18 vs. 34 vs. 281 doesn't add up in my book.

Well, I think it is just another metric. All metrics have their flaws, which is why I like to make the spreadsheet. Gives you more information. Any one metric can be deceiving in some way.

But you have a point. And I think Boeheim and some others have smartened up in the way they have been scheduling since Cuse was snubbed in 2007. The key is just to avoid the really bad teams (sub300 teams). Play a few big schools, and then a whole bunch of teams in the 150-250 range. Avoid 250+. Can really help skew NCSOS numbers in the right direction.

 

[jncuse]

Can anyone explain to me why Arizona St. is so far above us? Same conference record in a weaker conference, similar average, weaker schedule overall, quadrants W-L almost identical. The Q1 same amount of wins vs. fewer opportunities plays into it but other than that I see almost no difference.

While they look at Q1 wins, they do dig even deeper at separate the real quality ones.

 

[jncuse]

SOS and NCSOS is such a horsesheet metric.

OK State is 281st & played:
1. Texas A&M (N)
2. @ Arkansas
3. Florida State (N)
4. Wichita State
5. Tulsa

and 8 tomato cans.

Alabama is 34th & played:
1. Rhode Island
2. @ Arizona
3. Texas
4. Oklahoma
5. BYU
6. UCF

and 7 tomato cans.

Syracuse is 18th & played:

1. Kansas (N)
2. Maryland
3. St. Bonaventure
4. Buffalo
5. Toledo

& 8 tomato cans.

These are all the sub-100 RPI games. Tourney locks are in bold, tourney likelys are in italics. 18 vs. 34 vs. 281 doesn't add up in my book.

I know the stuff matters to the committee, so it is a positive to us but as you say it's all BS. Play Q3/and higher end Q4 schools and you are fine. But what do those wins prove.

I don't know if the numbers will work out exactly, but I suspect if you play

#125, #100, #150
or
#1, #300, #300

The one that plays no challening games (TOP) is deemed to have a harder schedule.

 

[jncuse]

Well, I think it is just another metric. All metrics have their flaws, which is why I like to make the spreadsheet. Gives you more information. Any one metric can be deceiving in some way.

But you have a point. And I think Boeheim and some others have smartened up in the way they have been scheduling since Cuse was snubbed in 2007. The key is just to avoid the really bad teams (sub300 teams). Play a few big schools, and then a whole bunch of teams in the 150-250 range. Avoid 250+. Can really help skew NCSOS numbers in the right direction.

The RPI is garbage, and its spews out mostly garbage sub data (quality win metrics are impacted, SOS is flawed, conference multiplier effect). The RPI is all flaws and nothing good. But at the end I realize that is how they make their decision and that is how we have to analyze what they will do.

And for that reason you summary is great. Nice work.

 

[cuseattle]

jn and Tom W are better than espn or cbs sports. Good board here.

 

[TexanMark]

The RPI is garbage, and its spews out mostly garbage sub data (quality win metrics are impacted, SOS is flawed, conference multiplier effect). The RPI is all flaws and nothing good. But at the end I realize that is how they make their decision and that is how we have to analyze what they will do.

And for that reason you summary is great. Nice work.

Wasn't it like 10 years ago the committee was pushing RPI and a bunch of MVC conference teams gamed their OOC schedules and got about 5-6 teams in?

 

[shandeezy7]

The RPI is garbage, and its spews out mostly garbage sub data (quality win metrics are impacted, SOS is flawed, conference multiplier effect). The RPI is all flaws and nothing good. But at the end I realize that is how they make their decision and that is how we have to analyze what they will do.

And for that reason you summary is great. Nice work.

Didn't the committee say they were going to de-emphasize the RPI and that's how we ended up with this quadrant system...which is based on RPI, correct?

 

[kirbivore]

Wasn't it like 10 years ago the committee was pushing RPI and a bunch of MVC conference teams gamed their OOC schedules and got about 5-6 teams in?

The Mountain West did that also.

 

[Knicks411]

The inconsistency is sickening. Alabama has 4 top 25 wins so many have them in despite 14 losses and some bad ones. Last year we had 3 top 10 wins yet all the gurus had us out because all they wanted to focus on was a bad loss. IMO a lot of who they favor is dependent on conference and whether they personally like the coach (which of course works against us).

Not that you can compare teams from one year to another, but we didn't have 3 top 10 wins, did we?

Assuming you're going by RPI, Bama has Rhode Island (16), Auburn (8), Tenneesee (10), and Texas A&M (24), all at home. They also have Oklahoma (37) at home, and @ Florida (39)

I'm gonna use ESPN for last year's RPI, I think it's close enough. We had Duke (6), Florida State (13), and Virginia (22). Virginia may have been ranked higher when we played them , but A) committee doesn't care about rankings, and B) really doesn't care about your ranking in the middle of the season.

Hell, Bama has more top 10 tens this year than we did.

 

[djorange1989]

sorry if already posted but our friend Lunardi updated his bracket. Somehow, even though we beat Clemson since his last update, we are now in the next 4 out. Louisville, Marquette, Ok State and ND are his first 4 out.