2021 NCAA Tournament

[kramerica.inc]

Weird bracket.

My initial reactions:

- UNC has a cakewalk to the Final Four
- If Cuse can get by Georgetown, they get to play the only other team in the field they know they can beat in the QF. Lucky them
- Why the Duke - High Point rematch? Feel like they could have switched Duke and Maryland's first round games
- Loyola got in because their win over Georgetown became more valuable than Army's over Syracuse

Army beat Loyola convincingly at Ridley a couple weeks ago and lost by one on Friday. I think Army should have been in over them. Terps got screwed over - 3 seed with ND in the second round? C'mon now.

Army's win was over a mos ago. And in Covid-time, that was about 6 mos ago.

[AreaLax]

Patrick Stevens tweet
Just finished a call with Towson AD Tim Leonard. He said the committee's discussions centered on three teams for the final two at-large berths: Loyola, Syracuse and Army.

Will have more later, since it's a busy night for calls and other work.

[nyjay]

Terps got screwed over - 3 seed with ND in the second round? C'mon now.

At Notre Dame.

If the selection committee had such a hard time understanding how good MD is because of the conference-only schedule, why did they let Rutgers in?

Completely inexplicable if you ask me.

[wgdsr]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

state your case for rutgers over delaware.
i'll listen.

[calourie]

Brackets look good to me. I like Cuse unseeded, Lehigh seeded and Rutgers getting in. No total patsies in the entire group. Loyola with their Covid uncertainty was a bit of a surprise.

[Wheels]

Patrick Stevens tweet
Just finished a call with Towson AD Tim Leonard. He said the committee's discussions centered on three teams for the final two at-large berths: Loyola, Syracuse and Army.

Will have more later, since it's a busy night for calls and other work.

WAT?

So RU wasn't really on the bubble?

[wgdsr]

Weird bracket.

My initial reactions:

- UNC has a cakewalk to the Final Four
- If Cuse can get by Georgetown, they get to play the only other team in the field they know they can beat in the QF. Lucky them
- Why the Duke - High Point rematch? Feel like they could have switched Duke and Maryland's first round games
- Loyola got in because their win over Georgetown became more valuable than Army's over Syracuse

Army beat Loyola convincingly at Ridley a couple weeks ago and lost by one on Friday. I think Army should have been in over them. Terps got screwed over - 3 seed with ND in the second round? C'mon now.

Army's win was over a mos ago. And in Covid-time, that was about 6 mos ago.

if you could post in the nc$$ selection criteria why that matters, that'd be great. thanks.

[wgdsr]

Patrick Stevens tweet
Just finished a call with Towson AD Tim Leonard. He said the committee's discussions centered on three teams for the final two at-large berths: Loyola, Syracuse and Army.

Will have more later, since it's a busy night for calls and other work.

WAT?

So RU wasn't really on the bubble?

nope. i said as much earlier. leonard signalled they were in in march. as the season was a week or 2 old.

[HopFan16]

They have said for months they were going to use the eye test and they used the eye test. Why is anyone surprised? It wasn't a normal year. They didn't use the normal criteria. They thought Rutgers was a better team, clearly. Even if you don't buy that, there still is some data to back that up:

https://lacrossereference.com/stats/elo-d1-men/
https://lacrossereference.com/stats/str ... rd-d1-men/

Rutgers has #9 ELO rating, above Loyola, Army, Delaware, and Syracuse. They also have the #9 strength of record, also above those same teams.

The ELO system is a method for comparing the relative strength of teams. The higher the ELO rating, the better the team. The difference in two teams’ ELO ratings can be used to estimate the likelihood of each team winning. ELO only uses the final score, the location of the game, and the date of the game, and it does factor in some season-to-season carryover. To reiterate, this is not a ranking based on past performance, but an attempt to sort teams based on “current” strength. Consider these ratings in beta for the time being.

Our strength-of-record ratings attempt to provide an apples to apples comparison for the relative “impressiveness” of a team’s record. 7-1 vs an easy slate may not be more impressive than 4-4 against a top-tier schedule. SOR provides an easy numeric comparison to compare records. The core concept can best be described as “how many wins would a generic top-10 team have against the same schedule?”

Not perfect metrics but in a season like this one where it's hard to compare teams, they can be helpful.

[wgdsr]

They have said for months they were going to use the eye test and they used the eye test. Why is anyone surprised? It wasn't a normal year. They didn't use the normal criteria. They thought Rutgers was a better team, clearly. Even if you don't buy that, there still is some data to back that up:

https://lacrossereference.com/stats/elo-d1-men/
https://lacrossereference.com/stats/str ... rd-d1-men/

Rutgers has #9 ELO rating, above Loyola, Army, Delaware, and Syracuse. They also have the #9 strength of record, also above those same teams.

The ELO system is a method for comparing the relative strength of teams. The higher the ELO rating, the better the team. The difference in two teams’ ELO ratings can be used to estimate the likelihood of each team winning. ELO only uses the final score, the location of the game, and the date of the game, and it does factor in some season-to-season carryover. To reiterate, this is not a ranking based on past performance, but an attempt to sort teams based on “current” strength. Consider these ratings in beta for the time being.

Our strength-of-record ratings attempt to provide an apples to apples comparison for the relative “impressiveness” of a team’s record. 7-1 vs an easy slate may not be more impressive than 4-4 against a top-tier schedule. SOR provides an easy numeric comparison to compare records. The core concept can best be described as “how many wins would a generic top-10 team have against the same schedule?”

Not perfect metrics but in a season like this one where it's hard to compare teams, they can be helpful.

lol. i like laxreference. he seems like a nice guy. as he solicited early... not a lax guy. we're really stretching now. the b1g was gifted a spot in march. it is what it is.

[HopFan16]

They have said for months they were going to use the eye test and they used the eye test. Why is anyone surprised? It wasn't a normal year. They didn't use the normal criteria. They thought Rutgers was a better team, clearly. Even if you don't buy that, there still is some data to back that up:

https://lacrossereference.com/stats/elo-d1-men/
https://lacrossereference.com/stats/str ... rd-d1-men/

Rutgers has #9 ELO rating, above Loyola, Army, Delaware, and Syracuse. They also have the #9 strength of record, also above those same teams.

The ELO system is a method for comparing the relative strength of teams. The higher the ELO rating, the better the team. The difference in two teams’ ELO ratings can be used to estimate the likelihood of each team winning. ELO only uses the final score, the location of the game, and the date of the game, and it does factor in some season-to-season carryover. To reiterate, this is not a ranking based on past performance, but an attempt to sort teams based on “current” strength. Consider these ratings in beta for the time being.

Our strength-of-record ratings attempt to provide an apples to apples comparison for the relative “impressiveness” of a team’s record. 7-1 vs an easy slate may not be more impressive than 4-4 against a top-tier schedule. SOR provides an easy numeric comparison to compare records. The core concept can best be described as “how many wins would a generic top-10 team have against the same schedule?”

Not perfect metrics but in a season like this one where it's hard to compare teams, they can be helpful.

lol. i like laxreference. he seems like a nice guy. as he solicited early... not a lax guy. we're really stretching now. the b1g was gifted a spot in march. it is what it is.

"not a lax guy" is not a compelling argument

[FlyEaglesFly]

Tough draw for Georgetown

[pcowlax]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

state your case for rutgers over delaware.
i'll listen.

That’s an easy one. A lifetime of watching NCAA sports decisions. I did t say anything about which team I thought was better or more deserving. I just said I can’t imagine how anyone thought Delaware was getting in. There was no way they were getting in. They certainly weren’t the last one out either. It was very clear who the 3-4 teams being considered for 2-3 spots were.

[10stone5]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

They’re a tremendous team, in a conference that is consistently overlooked by the NCAA,

if the NCAA was applying an “eye test” then they blew that criteria in assessing the Blue Hens.

Its more likely, they barely watched this team,
and merely applied the weak, oh, they lost to Hofstra argument - not realizing that Hofstra is a good team as well as being one of a very few teams that understand Delaware’s tendencies very well. Hofstra happened to exploit those tendencies in the CAA semifinals, playing one of their best games in a while.

If the NCAA really wanted a deserving team that would perform well in the NCAAs, a team deserving of a bid, then Delaware should have been one of their choices for at large.

[Wheels]

They have said for months they were going to use the eye test and they used the eye test.

But the paradox is so striking. To say you can't tell how good Maryland is because of who they played (and how they largely blow torched the B1G) but then say RU is in because of the eye test is such a contradiction. The way they evaluated Maryland should mean that RU is out and Army is in.

[pcowlax]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

They’re a tremendous team, in a conference that is consistently overlooked by the NCAA,

if the NCAA was applying an “eye test” then they blew that criteria in assessing the Blue Hens.

Its more likely, they barely watched this team,
and merely applied the weak, oh, they lost to Hofstra argument - not realizing that Hofstra is a good team as well as being one of a very few teams that understand Delaware’s tendencies very well. Hofstra happened to exploit those tendencies in the CAA semifinals, playing one of their best games in a while.

If the NCAA really wanted a deserving team that would perform well in the NCAAs, a team deserving of a bid, then Delaware should have been one of their choices for at large.

Again, not ripping Delaware. Your entire post is proving my point. There was no way Delaware was getting in and anyone who thought they had a chance has not paid attention to college sports the last 30 years. Army was first out, almost certainly Nova after them, then maybe the Hens. It is easy to predict that consistently overlook conferences will be, you know, overlooked.

[wgdsr]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

state your case for rutgers over delaware.
i'll listen.

That’s an easy one. A lifetime of watching NCAA sports decisions. I did t say anything about which team I thought was better or more deserving. I just said I can’t imagine how anyone thought Delaware was getting in. There was no way they were getting in. They certainly weren’t the last one out either. It was very clear who the 3-4 teams being considered for 2-3 spots were.

very clear when? by what measurement? you actually just gave none. would love to hear why rutgers and not delaware

[Matnum PI]

D1 MEN: National Championships
These are the Best Upcoming Games (below).
https://fanlax.com/2021/05/09/d1-men-na ... pionships/

[pcowlax]

I’m not sure why anyone thought Delaware was getting in.

They’re a tremendous team, in a conference that is consistently overlooked by the NCAA,

if the NCAA was applying an “eye test” then they blew that criteria in assessing the Blue Hens.

Its more likely, they barely watched this team,
and merely applied the weak, oh, they lost to Hofstra argument - not realizing that Hofstra is a good team as well as being one of a very few teams that understand Delaware’s tendencies very well. Hofstra happened to exploit those tendencies in the CAA semifinals, playing one of their best games in a while.

If the NCAA really wanted a deserving team that would perform well in the NCAAs, a team deserving of a bid, then Delaware should have been one of their choices for at large.

Again, not ripping Delaware. Your entire post is proving my point. There was no way Delaware was getting in and anyone who thought they had a chance has not paid attention to college sports the last 30 years. Army was first out, almost certainly Nova after them, then maybe the Hens. It is easy to predict that consistently overlook conferences will be, you know, overlooked.

[wgdsr]

They have said for months they were going to use the eye test and they used the eye test.

But the paradox is so striking. To say you can't tell how good Maryland is because of who they played (and how they largely blow torched the B1G) but then say RU is in because of the eye test is such a contradiction. The way they evaluated Maryland should mean that RU is out and Army is in.

it's insanity. maryland gets the hose. rutgers the chalice.

i've said, careful what you wish for.