11/12 recap

Get used to the slower pace of the blog updates, at least for the first couple months.

@Kentucky 73, Vermont 69 - if nothing else, it helps cement Vermont's status on the 13 line assuming they eventually get through the A-East
@Washington St 86, Texas Southern 84 (OT) - everyone's favorite SWAC team showing well
@Arkansas 101, Bucknell 73 - along the same veins of mid-major stars, Bucknell hasn't shown as well through two games so far

lol of the day:  Le Tourneau 99, @Northwestern St 84

...not much else on this day.  Plenty of name teams played, they all had service holds at home over relative cupcakes.

11/11 recap

Notre Dame 72, @DePaul 58 - only notable in that it goes down as a true road win

terrible non D-1 loss of the day:  Ouachita Baptist 81, @Little Rock 79

...there's not a lot going on here today.  Most teams played yesterday, so you're not going to find any results of impact.  FGCU beats Illinois St at home...that's what, the 2nd most impactful score of the day?  Pass.

11/10 recap

Thus begins the daily recaps on the blog.  A quick reminder to what we do with these:

1) We don't bother mentioning cupcake wins, unless they're notable for some reason.  Duke beating East Bumfuck St isn't notable enough for me to waste the time during typing these things.
2) We pay much more attention to bubble teams and try to feature wins that will matter in March.
3) Remember home wins are diminished and road wins are gold.
4) When the time is appropriate, we'll pay attention to all conference races.
5) During these first couple months, these recaps are all about identifying which teams matter and which don't.

So with that, notable Day 1 results.

Catastrophic loss of the day:  Niagara 77, @St Bonaventure 75 - that's going to look pretty terrible for a probable bubble team in March

lolwat score of the day:  Indiana St 90, @Indiana 69 - wat

Impact results:
UCLA 63, Georgia Tech 60 - neutral site wins have some value
Georgia Southern 85, @Wake Forest 83 - could be catastrohpic, but Wake will have chances to recover
Texas A&M 88, West Virginia 65 - both are likely tourney teams, so eventually this result will be minimized by other key results, but still.  Big positive sign for the SEC on day 1
@Missouri 74, Iowa St 59 - again, SEC just winning these games is a big deal


Interesting results:
Delaware 76, @Richmond 63 - another building block for the Colonial's conference RPI, which has been really good in previous years
@North Carolina 86, Northern Iowa 69 - perhaps interesting to those who assume UNI is at their strength of previous years; they're not
@Navy 71, Pittsburgh 62 - not quite as bad as you'd think since this was a true road game for Pitt
Lamar 74, @Tulsa 67 - on the one hand, Lamar is the rare competent Southland team and Tulsa is bad.  On the other hand...it's the Southland, for cripes' sake
@Alabama 72, Memphis 70
UC Riverside 74, California 66
@Monmouth 79, Bucknell 78 - Bucknell is supposed to be an elite mid-major this year...this is a very harmful loss for at-large chances, which might've existed coming into the year

11/10 S-CURVE

Maybe I'll do a bracket, but this S-Curve should suffice.  Some tweaks made from the offseason bracket.

Quick conference-by-conference thoughts.

ACC - I have them with 8 teams....seems about right.  I don't see potential to max out to double-digit teams this year, but the conference has a high floor.  Plenty of quality win chances to go around.
B1G - I see a beefy middle of the conference, I expect the top 7-8 teams to be solid in the non-con and build up good resumes.  This leads to plenty of quality win chances for bubble teams in March.
Big 12 - The round-robin schedule hurts this conference just a little bit, as I see the bottom few teams dragging down the league.  They should get their usual number of bids.
SEC - The big story to me last year was the work this conference did OOC.  Much better SoS numbers across the board, and now the talent on the teams are starting to catch up.  Not sure if a 3rd team behind UK and UF can rise very high in the S-Curve, but this might be the year they get back to 5 or 6 teams in the NCAAs.
Pac-12 - Ew.
Big East - They've got some problems establishing a second big-time program behind Nova....it's slowly catching up to them in seeding.
AAC - Very curious to see their seeds in March.  They've been disrespected in previous years, now we'll see how much Wichita changes the math.  I've seeded them conservatively for now, because I'm not completely sold the AAC hate will go away yet.


The 1 line:  Duke, Kansas, Arizona, Villanova
The 2 line:  Michigan St, Kentucky, North Carolina, Florida
The 3 line:  Notre Dame, West Virginia, USC, Wichita St
The 4 line:  Xavier, Purdue, Gonzaga, Cincinnati
The 5 line:  Northwestern, Minnesota, Miami, Louisville
The 6 line:  Baylor, Seton Hall, UCLA, St Mary's
The 7 line:  Texas, Virginia Tech, Wisconsin, Rhode Island
The 8 line:  Oregon, Alabama, TCU, Providence
The 9 line:  Florida St, Missouri, Oklahoma, St Bonaventure
The 10 line:  Creighton, Nevada, Michigan, Stanford
The 11 line:  Texas A&M, Maryland, Arkansas, Central Florida, Butler, Virginia
The 12 line:  Northern Iowa, Oakland, Texas-Arlington, Charleston
The 13 line:  Middle Tennessee, Bucknell, Vermont, Western Michigan
The 14 line:  Iona, Harvard, New Mexico St, Murray St
The 15 line:  FGCU, South Dakota St, Long Beach St, Furman
The 16 line:  UNC-Asheville, Idaho, St Francis(PA), Stephen F Austin, Norfolk St, Texas Southern

Next 4 in:
Michigan
Stanford
Texas A&M
Maryland

Last 4 in:
Arkansas
Central Florida
Butler
Virginia

Last 4 out:
SMU
San Diego St
VCU
Vanderbilt

Next 4 out:
UConn
Iowa
Boise St
Wake Forest

Break it down!
ACC 8
B1G 7
Big 12 6
Big East 6
SEC 6
Pac-12 5
AAC 3
A-10 2
WCC 2

Offseason S-CURVE

While teams get bids, not conferences....when doing a preseason S-Curve you can't do it that way.  Otherwise if you add up all the probabilities, Power 6 teams dominate everything.  So do pay attention to the conference breakdown, it'll help describe what I think of each conference coming into the season.  Don't get too literal over placements of individual teams in the middle of the bracket.

The 1 line:  Duke, Kansas, Arizona, Kentucky
The 2 line:  Villanova, North Carolina, Michigan St, Florida
The 3 line:  Wichita St, Notre Dame, West Virginia, USC
The 4 line:  Xavier, Purdue, Gonzaga, Cincinnati
The 5 line:  Miami, UCLA, Minnesota, Louisville
The 6 line:  Seton Hall, Northwestern, Texas, Virginia Tech
The 7 line:  Wisconsin, Oregon, St Mary's, Rhode Island
The 8 line:  Providence, Florida St, Alabama, Baylor
The 9 line:  Missouri, TCU, Virginia, Nevada
The 10 line:  St Bonaventure, Creighton, Stanford, Arkansas
The 11 line:  Oklahoma, Butler, UCF, Iowa, Michigan, VCU
The 12 line:  Northern Iowa, Towson, Middle Tennessee, Oakland
The 13 line:  Texas-Arlington, Western Michigan, Vermont, Iona
The 14 line:  New Mexico St, Belmont, Harvard, Bucknell
The 15 line:  FGCU, South Dakota St, Long Beach St, Furman
The 16 line:  Mount St Mary's, UNC-Asheville, Weber St, Stephen F Austin, Norfolk St, Texas Southern

Next 4 in:
Stanford
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Butler

Last 4 in:
UCF
Iowa
Michigan
VCU

Last 4 out:
Texas A&M
Boise St
Georgia Tech
UConn

Next 4 out:
SMU
Maryland
Arizona St
Vanderbilt

Break it down!
ACC 8
B1G 7
Big 12 6
Big East 6
Pac-12 5
SEC 5
AAC 3
A-10 3
WCC 2

Offseason BRACKET

SOUTH
@Charlotte
1) Duke vs. 16) UNC-Asheville/Norfolk St
8) Alabama vs. 9) TCU
@Wichita
4) Xavier vs. 13) Western Michigan
5) Miami vs. 12) Northern Iowa
@San Diego
3) USC vs. 14) New Mexico St
6) Virginia Tech vs. 11) UCF/Michigan
@Nashville
2) Florida vs. 15) FGCU
7) Oregon vs. 10) Creighton

EAST
@Nashville
1) Kentucky vs. 16) Mount St Mary's
8) Providence vs. 9) Virginia
@Boise
4) Cincinnati vs. 13) Iona
5) UCLA vs. 12) Oakland
@Detroit
3) Notre Dame vs. 14) Belmont
6) Northwestern vs. 11) Oklahoma
@Pittsburgh
2) Villanova vs. 15) Long Beach St
7) Rhode Island vs. 10) Stanford

WEST
@San Diego
1) Arizona vs. 16) Weber St
8) Baylor vs. 9) Nevada
@Boise
4) Gonzaga vs. 13) Vermont
5) Minnesota vs. 12) Middle Tennessee
@Pittsburgh
3) West Virginia vs. 14) Harvard
6) Seton Hall vs. 11) Iowa/VCU
@Detroit
2) Michigan St vs. 15) South Dakota St
7) St Mary's vs. 10) St Bonaventure

MIDWEST
@Wichita
1) Kansas vs. 16) Stephen F Austin/Texas Southern
8) Florida St vs. 9) Missouri
@Dallas
4) Purdue vs. 13) Texas-Arlington
5) Louisville vs. 12) Towson
@Dallas
3) Wichita St vs. 14) Bucknell
6) Texas vs. 11) Butler
@Charlotte
2) North Carolina vs. 15) Furman
7) Wisconsin vs. 10) Arkansas

New selection guidelines. Break it down!

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-men-s-basketball-committee-redefines-quality-win

A change in the nitty-gritty sheet. In the past, the sheet divides games into 4 categories: games against the RPI Top 50, 100, 200, and 201+.

The big change is the change in cutoff for each of the 4 categories. The first tier is now Top 30 home games, Top 50 neutral site games, and Top 75 road games. And so forth.  We'll do a full breakdown below.

This is a significant on the following levels:
1) They're clearly listening to everyone else. Everyone knows road games are tougher. Now, instead of relying on the committee to view the sheet and make adjustments in their mind, the adjustments will be made on the sheet itself.
2) This shows the emphasis they were putting into these tiers in the first place....which is something most people have underestimated over the years.
3) This is the first step towards getting rid of the RPI as a whole and/or coming up with a better ranking system to analyze teams.  This is a positive step towards recognizing a single number cannot be representative of the value of beating a team.  More information is always needed.

There's still a problem with the arbitrary way they've chosen the cutoffs. There's nothing special about 30, 50, or 75, or any other numbers. Still, this is better than the alternative.

Now, let's look at the actual hard numbers they're using.

Tier 1:
home games against RPI Top 30
neutral games against RPI Top 50
road games against RPI Top 75
- Changes in the tier:  subtracting home games against 31-50 and adding road games against 51-75.

I like the selection of Top 30 for home games.  With very few exceptions, every team in the top 30 is a tournament team.  So every game there represents at least some kind of value.

However, by losing 31-50, something interesting happens.  Some teams in the past, like Kansas or Duke, in order to build a strong SoS, schedule prospective conference champions from mid-major conferences.  Many of these teams wind up in the tail end of the RPI Top 50, causing the SoS of the giant to be inflated higher than it should be, and causing their W-L vs. the Top 50 to be inflated as well.  Using last year as an example, home games against UNC-Wilmington, Middle Tennessee, and Illinois St lose value.  Now with this change, home games against mid-major conference champions lose value.  Will opportunities dry up?  And how does this impact mid-major at-large bid chances, when one precious signature win chance (home game at conference leader) comes off the board?

On the flip side, with road games against 51-75 now entering this year....there are actually more mid-majors in this range.  Now the giants can play the occasional road game and add a quality win that might not have been viewed that way in the past.  Using last year as an example, road games against New Mexico St, ETSU, Charleston, and Winthrop now represent signature wins.  So you could actually see more giants playing true road games instead of home games against these types of schools.  Maybe not more than 1 in a given year, but spread across a few dozen teams, the impact could be large.

Tier 2:
home games against RPI 31-75
neutral games against RPI 51-100
road games against RPI 76-135
- Changes in the tier:  subtracting home games against 76-100 and adding road games against 101-135.

One impact of swelling to 351 D1 teams is that you have more teams with winning records occupying RPI 101-150.  Now some of these road games represent solid wins in this structure.  This is an improvement.  If you look, this range has a fairly balanced mix of middling majors and quality mid-majors.  I don't see an advantage gained for either faction here.  The major teams will add a couple of road games to the quality win ledger; the mid-major should also add a few such road games, but now will lose home games against RPI 76-100 in this category.

One conference that might get hurt specifically is the A-10.  They've been very proficient at having a few teams in the RPI 75-125 range traditionally, usually leading to solid W-L records against the Top 100 that get them higher seeds (and more bids).  With only Top 75 home wins now counting, they might get hurt a bit.

You'll also see much more attention paid to unbalanced scheduling.  Most conferences will have 4 teams, give or take a team, ranked in between RPI 75-125.  In most conferences with 14 teams, it's probably a given team would only play one of those four teams twice.  In those 5 total games....if 4 are road games, that's 4 Tier 2 games and 1 Tier 3 game.  If 4 are home games...that's 1 Tier 2 game and 4 Tier 3 games, and a big resume hit (in terms of chances at quality wins, and strength of schedule).  In the latter case, the team might be criticized for a soft SoS when it was simply the luck of the draw.

One big challenge for each conference is finding a strategy for unbalanced schedules.  And more importantly, making sure every team has a solid mix of road games and home games.  An imbalance of road/home games and good/bad opponents will cause a team to skew more than normal in the bubble discussion.

Tier 3:
home games against RPI 76-160
neutral games against RPI 101-200
road games against RPI 136-240
- Changes in the tier:  subtracting home games against 161-200 and adding road games against 201-240.

If a bubble team is a tournament team, they really should handle games against RPI 161-200.  No issue moving those wins down a level.

Usually a bubble team will have a loss or two or maybe even three in this category in the past.  Stuff happens.  But losses in Tier 4 are usually devastating.  Some of those Tier 4 road losses now move up a level, to this tier.  I like it.  I almost want to put every road game in this tier, but I do suppose you should leave some for Tier 4.  This will help a team like Monmouth cope with conference play dragging them down just a little bit.

Tier 4:
everything else

Losses to sub-240 teams, even on the road, are pretty unforgivable...maybe a team can still afford one.  The big thing is home losses to sub-160 teams now slip into this category.  Note that for power conferences, only the truly bad teams slip to sub-160, so I don't think the big boys will be hurt by this.  In fact, I think they're helped in that road conference losses in the top conference will almost never slip into this category.