D1 Men NCAA Tournament

[CU77]

*sigh* It's clear that no one here ever took a statistics class.

The mathematical problem of how to rank "items" (teams) when all you have to go on are "paired comparisons" (who beat who) was solved 100 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley–Terry_model

You assign each team a rating. If team A with rating RA plays team B with rating RB, the probability that A wins is assumed to be RA/(RA+RB). Now choose the ratings to maximize the total probability that all games played came out as they actually did.

This simply and automatically takes into account strength of schedule, and how you did against that schedule.

Here are the results of that ranking system (excluding games against Hamptun, which mostly played DII and DIII teams):

1. PSU
2. UVa
3. Penn
4. Yale
5. Duke
6. Maryland
7. Loyola
8. Towson
9. Syracuse
10. Cornell
11. Army
12. High Point
13. Notre Dame
14. Johns Hopkins
15. Georgetown
16. Ohio State
17. Denver
18. UNC
19. Umass
20. Richmond

[Hawkeye]

You assign each team a rating. If team A with rating RA plays team B with rating RB, the probability that A wins is set to RA/(RA+RB). Now choose the ratings to maximize the total probability that all games played came out as they actually did.

I have taken a statistics class (I even remember some of it), but I have also seen The Social Network!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzZRr4KV59I

[PizzaSnake]

"*sigh* It's clear that no one here ever took a statistics class."

[ICGrad]

Here are the results of that ranking system (excluding games against Hamptun, which mostly played DII and DIII teams):

10. Cornell
...
14. Johns Hopkins

Wait...how on earth could Hopkins be ranked 4 lower than Cornell. They had two more losses. Quality losses!

No way in hell the committee would ever use this fraudulent garbage.

[It aint over yet]

ACC over rep once again. ACC will be lucky to have two teams play in quarterfinals We can count on the committee yr in yr out putting ACC teams in along with the likes of Hopkins! Look at 20017 when Rutgers & Army left out

[DMac]

ACC over rep once again. ACC will be lucky to have two teams play in quarterfinals We can count on the committee yr in yr out putting ACC teams in along with the likes of Hopkins! Look at 20017 when Rutgers & Army left out

It is over, the committee has spoken.
What would your list of those invited to the dance look like?

[It aint over yet]

"It is over, the committee has spoken.
What would your list of those invited to the dance look like?"

Notre dame be left out with 6 losses with Cornell beat them in! Nd beating Md in a facility such as theirs should not count much as it has. The Irish do not deserve a home count to boot!!
Big ten and thee Ivy league are better conferences then the ACC yet ACC gets not only 4 teams but a 2 and 3 seeds! UPenn should be 2 seed

[admin]

youthathletics, had to delete your post. We apologize. Funny scene from a funny show but... We have kids perusing these forums.

[Pensky Material]

"It is over, the committee has spoken.
What would your list of those invited to the dance look like?"

Notre dame be left out with 6 losses with Cornell beat them in! Nd beating Md in a facility such as theirs should not count much as it has. The Irish do not deserve a home count to boot!!
Big ten and thee Ivy league are better conferences then the ACC yet ACC gets not only 4 teams but a 2 and 3 seeds! UPenn should be 2 seed

I wouldn't really argue if you wanted to make a case for Cornell over ND or Hopkins. However what's your basis that the B10 and Ivy are better than the ACC?
Penn got blown out by Duke. Princeton and Brown lost to UVA. Cornell got blown out by Cuse.
The ACC/Big 10 match-ups were a little more even if I recall correctly.
Again if you want to argue Duke should be a 4 seed I wouldn't object, but they do have the most top 20 wins and they beat Penn in the H2H .
I do think it was stupid to have a potential Penn/Yale match up in the quarterfinals versus Championship weekend.

[It aint over yet]

The committee claims to use certain formula but tell that to the Cadets on Army”s 2017 team that beat Syracuse and Notre Dame but didn’t get selected along with Rutgers who beat Johns Hopkins 2x yet didn’t get selected ! I think the eye test has to count for something! It’s ridiculous to have a quarterfinal match up of Yale and UPenn The committee obviously has a hard job but there’s definitely room for improvement. I was on a team that got left out one year and that sting lasts a lifetime

[DMac]

Big ten and thee Ivy league are better conferences then the ACC

This, of course, is a matter of opinion, certainly not unanimously agreed upon.
Seems to me as if the level of competition, pretty much across the board, has
gotten incredibly stiff and these confrences are pretty darn competitive with one
another. Any given year any one of them can be the "better conference" but good
luck maintaining that, there are a ton of good teams evrywhere out there.

[Cooter]

I think the Hopkins - case clearly illustrates that the selection committee or its criteria overemphasizes Strength of Schedule.
Hopkins also illustrates the problems with the RPI, where SOS is again counted in a bit too much.
Of course, with the NCAA selection, SOS only counts the top 10 RPI games, and this lead to Hopkins having the top SOS, but against that group of 10 teams, Hopkins was 3-7 or .300 pct.; even further their wins were towards the weaker end of that 10.

[Hawkeye]

Hopkins was 3-7 or .300 pct.; even further their wins were towards the weaker end of that 10.

Poor Maryland! It looked like such a good win the first time.

[ICGrad]

along with Rutgers who beat Johns Hopkins 2x

C'mon now...you know that's not really fair. Hopkins had one more loss than Rutgers, invalidating Rutgers hth sweep against them.

[Drcthru]

You assign each team a rating. If team A with rating RA plays team B with rating RB, the probability that A wins is set to RA/(RA+RB). Now choose the ratings to maximize the total probability that all games played came out as they actually did.

I have taken a statistics class (I even remember some of it), but I have also seen The Social Network!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzZRr4KV59I

+1

[wgdsr]

The committee claims to use certain formula but tell that to the Cadets on Army”s 2017 team that beat Syracuse and Notre Dame but didn’t get selected along with Rutgers who beat Johns Hopkins 2x yet didn’t get selected ! I think the eye test has to count for something! It’s ridiculous to have a quarterfinal match up of Yale and UPenn The committee obviously has a hard job but there’s definitely room for improvement. I was on a team that got left out one year and that sting lasts a lifetime

really? we're doing rutgers, again!?!?
shouldn't we get a break this year?

[Drcthru]

Interesting bracket breakdown from LaxFactor.
https://youtu.be/sm3yLJRyX0Y

[3rdPersonPlural]

*sigh* It's clear that no one here ever took a statistics class.

The mathematical problem of how to rank "items" (teams) when all you have to go on are "paired comparisons" (who beat who) was solved 100 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley–Terry_model

You assign each team a rating. If team A with rating RA plays team B with rating RB, the probability that A wins is assumed to be RA/(RA+RB). Now choose the ratings to maximize the total probability that all games played came out as they actually did.

This simply and automatically takes into account strength of schedule, and how you did against that schedule.

Here are the results of that ranking system (excluding games against Hamptun, which mostly played DII and DIII teams):

1. PSU
2. UVa
3. Penn
4. Yale
5. Duke
6. Maryland
7. Loyola
8. Towson
9. Syracuse
10. Cornell
11. Army
12. High Point
13. Notre Dame
14. Johns Hopkins
15. Georgetown
16. Ohio State
17. Denver
18. UNC
19. Umass
20. Richmond

I took statistics. I understand it, but in a sport it isn't the best way to pick a national champion.

I posted WWAAYY back a few pages ago that I'm satisfied with ANY system that includes everyone with a legit claim to a national championship after the regular season. I could see that 1 through 5 on your list have a legit argument to the throne. Right now. Based on the full season performance. I notice that there aren't any brackets in the Bracketology comp that have anyone out of that set (except, of course, Hopkins) winning the tournament.

That's fair.

I also agree that teams that have gotten hot lately should have a shot at the crown. There's Hop and G'Town and Richmond. A shot, but no one expects them to win it all. But they can upset a pretender, yes?

I understand that conferences need to be encouraged for the good of the sport, so even UMBC should get a place in the tournament for the good of the future of the game, but NOT because anyone thinks that they are a finalist for the crown or that their resume even suggests that they deserve the title. Love the retrievers, I do, but no one here has ever made the argument that they deserve a chance to play PSU for all the marbles because they have the resume to have earned it.

The issue here is "Who should have been included but wasn't' Cornell is not on anyone's list for the champion of the regular season, so they fall out of the 'legit contenders' silo. They have run hot and cold all year, and they ended with a loss, so the 'they're peaking now, in May, and they can GO. ALL. THE. WAY!! is not a viable argument. And they didn't win a conference title, so the conference winner argument also fails. All that's left is Lies, DAMNED lies, and statistics. But the clear light of days says that fair Cornell is NOT the best team in the nation this year.

[a fan]

They have run hot and cold all year, and they ended with a loss....

So did Hopkins, Syracuse, Duke, Penn, and Maryland.

[QuakerSouth]

Hmmm.