Huge news today from the NCAA on selecting and seeding teams for the Big Dance!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2018/08/22/ncaa-tournament-new-metric-tournament-selection-process/1062465002/

Here's more...

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-08-22/division-i-mens-basketball-committee-adopts-new-ranking

Interesting. We'll see as it plays out if it's a model to try to bring back power conference control or something to allow more mid majors to compete. My guess is that it's the former.

That's what worries me, does this help Power Cons or Mid Majors.

Haven't seen too many analysis of it yet.

PurpleOut said:

---

I'm not a fan of the 10-point margin cap. I get it, but think it should be at least 15.

---

My thoughts exactly on that portion of it. Doing so will greatly exaggerate the value of a 10 point win over a weak opponent vs. the value of a 25 point win over a very good opponent. 15 would have made more sense. But they obviously forgot to ask our opinions on the matter.

Cbb podcast talking about the change. They seem mostly positive about it.
Eye on College Basketball podcast
https://player.fm/series/cbs-sports-eye-on-college-basketball-podcast/the-rpi-is-officially-dead-long-live-the-new-and-improved-ncaa-tournament-822

I don't think it will hurt teams like SFA at all really, but I'm not sure if it will help us very much either. Obviously, some of the selection/seeding criteria is changing, but I think SFA will still see the same seeding we were getting before... Maybe a 1-spot jump if anything. Just my .02.

For midmajors, consistency has always been the key. We can't win by 10 at home over Alabama and say it's better than a 2 point loss to Corpus on the road. Big wins can be offset by poor losses. We need to win the games we should and compete in the ones we're not favored in. This is the only thing that's going to help SFA's chances of better selection.

SfaFan15 said:

---

I don't think it will hurt teams like SFA at all really, but I'm not sure if it will help us very much either. Obviously, some of the selection/seeding criteria is changing, but I think SFA will still see the same seeding we were getting before... Maybe a 1-spot jump if anything. Just my .02.

---

I think, much like RPI, there will be a small benefit to gaming the system, which I'm hoping SFA can do on our own soon through strategic scheduling.

A spot or two in the seeding translates to an increased likelihood in wins in the tourney.

But as Nacluth points out, consistency is key for SFA.

nacluth said:

---

For midmajors, consistency has always been the key. We can't win by 10 at home over Alabama and say it's better than a 2 point loss to Corpus on the road. Big wins can be offset by poor losses. We need to win the games we should and compete in the ones we're not favored in. This is the only thing that's going to help SFA's chances of better selection.

---

Exactly this. A couple of headscratchers is fine. 5 or 6 and then we start to get ourselves into trouble.

Interesting. I suppose.

Yeah interesting. Still the top value is the team index - which is essentially a judgment call over which teams the committee believes is better. Just saying they will still think P6 schools are better than mid majors on a one to one basis. It still is a rigged system.

They will then point to the other four calculable lower results to help justify their number one biased result. Honestly seems like the same system just with a different name. Consistency is still the key for us. ACC teams can bicker over there net efficiency; for us, we have to win and keep winning.

Just win. Let the rest play out how it plays out.