New NCAA Criteria

by **unipanther99** » July 14th, 2017, 9:37 am

Interesting stuff. My initial read makes me think this is a good thing for us.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/med ... uality-win

**Sponsor**

by **mule** » July 14th, 2017, 9:50 am

Agreed. It will certainly come into play with teams like Syracuse that spend November and December playing at home without venturing on the road.

by **BEARZ77** » July 14th, 2017, 10:51 am

Yes, I've been touting this for years. I think they need to go further but it's in the right direction. Too much credit is given to home conference wins in the power conferences vs road wins for mid majors in the non-con.

by **Cdizzle** » July 14th, 2017, 11:59 am

The team sheet thing is a step in the right direction. I'm a big fan of the more advanced metrics, personally. But I'm still not sold that using additional analytics is a good thing for the selection committee. Cynical me says it just gives them more data sets to cherry-pick from to make sure Syracuse gets in.

by **LanceShock** » July 14th, 2017, 12:19 pm

I ran through the numbers for how WSU and Illinois State would look on those numbers for last year. I also looked at Syracuse for an example of a school that might be hurt

Previous stats
Team, 1st col, 2nd col, 3rd col, 4th col
WSU, 2-3, 1-1, 12-0, 14-0
IlSU, 1-2, 1-2, 14-1, 10-1
Syracuse, 6-8, 2-1, 4-4, 6-1

New stats
Team, 1st col, 2nd col, 3rd col, 4th col
WSU, 2-2, 1-2, 12-0, 14-0
IlSU, 0-3, 1-2, 12-1, 13-0
Syracuse, 4-9, 4-1, 2-4, 8-0

It makes things a little better against a school that schedules like Syracuse, but if the committee is just going to look at column 1 wins, it won't help much.

by **TheAsianSensation** » July 14th, 2017, 12:40 pm

Better. Not good enough, but better. The ranking system they're using is still flawed, although they're using it smarter. I kind of hate the arbitrary nature of Top 50, Top 75, Top 100, etc etc......but at least there's more division instead of just 50-100-200.

The one thing this WILL do is help elite mid-majors get more home games against better teams. There's now a bit more value to playing on the road at 16-17 Illinois St, for example.

by **BEARZ77** » July 14th, 2017, 12:51 pm

The problem is as long as home wins against top 100 teams gets a disproportionate rating influence, power conferences will have a great advantage because they get those type of games 5-8 times automatically in their conference schedules and it's almost impossible for a mid major to schedule those in the non-con.
Then they get another 2-3 of those at a neutral site in their conference tourney. I think road wins, especially top 150 road wins should be a major deciding metric.

by **unipanther99** » July 14th, 2017, 1:52 pm

Here's another write up on it, and they make a good point. This should help mid-major programs in the seeding process, not just selection. We all know how horribly underseeded some of our teams have been over the years.

It sounds like the RPI is on the way out, but not until the following year. They're going to try their new formula behind the scenes this year and make sure it does what they hope it will do before pushing it live.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basket ... t-process/

by **BEARZ77** » July 14th, 2017, 2:48 pm

They haven't been using the RPI all that much as you annually see several teams with worse RPI get in because of over valuing a few top 50-100 wins vs the overall schedule value[RPI].

by **Svoboda** » July 18th, 2017, 11:07 am

Until I see mid-majors start hosting high-majors with any sort of regularity, I'm not holding my breath. As most of you have said though, it's a good start.