Selection Committee to place more emphasis on road and neutral games.

[The_Answer1313]

From KSR

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/bask...put-more-emphasis-on-road-neutral-site-games/

Obviously this is a good thing as it corrects a huge issue. Beating a top 10 team at home is different than beating a top 10 team on the road or even at a neutral site. For so many years the committee i don't think handled the road/home thing properly.

The only problem I see.........they are still using RPI to group the teams.

Instead of this they could just use a ranking system or an average of ranking systems that properly account for home/away.

But I guess we are making progress here.

 

[UKUGA]

This means UK will start getting jobbed more at home.

 

[nickhorvathsuxazz]

This means UK will start getting jobbed more at home.

uh-huh...no doubt

 

[nickhorvathsuxazz]

From KSR

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/bask...put-more-emphasis-on-road-neutral-site-games/

Obviously this is a good thing as it corrects a huge issue. Beating a top 10 team at home is different than beating a top 10 team on the road or even at a neutral site. For so many years the committee i don't think handled the road/home thing properly.

The only problem I see.........they are still using RPI to group the teams.

Instead of this they could just use a ranking system or an average of ranking systems that properly account for home/away.

But I guess we are making progress here.

Smoke and mirrors...they'll continue to utilize the good ol' boy favoritism method to ensure their ACC chosen ones get favorable routes to the final 4 while UK gets hosed beyond the pale...I'm disinterested in reading anything those fukstix propose/publish

 

[Smashcat]

Smoke and mirrors...they'll continue to utilize the good ol' boy favoritism method to ensure their ACC chosen ones get favorable routes to the final 4 while UK gets hosed beyond the pale...I'm disinterested in reading anything those fukstix propose/publish

Tend to agree. They've said plenty of times in the past they will use ranking systems other than the RPI yet never do it.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Tend to agree. They've said plenty of times in the past they will use ranking systems other than the RPI yet never do it.

I think the thing is RPI is their baby. They don't want to give that up for an outside ranking system.

The best thing would be a combination of ranking systems.

 

[Untouchables22]

They don't need to give any "extra" credit for neutral games. I hate that Duke doesn't get punished for refusing to play any true road games during the non-conference that the ACC doesn't
force on them. A road win should get A LOT more credit. Winning on the road is the hardest thing to do in team sports. Neutral site games prepare you for the tournament but they are substantially easier then going on the road. REALLY reward the bold teams that win in another persons building.

 

[hotelblue]

it's not the selection process that sucks. if you're on the bubble you're susceptible (not saying they don't mess that up regularly too but it usually doesn't affect us). my issue is with seeding. it's all for ratings and isn't ever fair.

 

[The_Answer1313]

They don't need to give any "extra" credit for neutral games. I hate that Duke doesn't get punished for refusing to play any true road games during the non-conference that the ACC doesn't
force on them. A road win should get A LOT more credit. Winning on the road is the hardest thing to do in team sports. Neutral site games prepare you for the tournament but they are substantially easier then going on the road. REALLY reward the bold teams that win in another persons building.

Road is going to be weighted the most, then neutral and then home. So I'm ok with that. It's not like they are weighing neutral and road the exact same. They are just weighing neutral more than home.

It's the way it should be.

 

[The_Answer1313]

it's not the selection process that sucks. if you're on the bubble you're susceptible (not saying they don't mess that up regularly too but it usually doesn't affect us). my issue is with seeding. it's all for ratings and isn't ever fair.

This process will be used for both selection and seeding.

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

I agree with the above. I think there should be a HUGE weight given to wins on the road. Encourage more big boys to take their teams into hostile environments. That will truly test their mettle.

 

[docholiday51]

They don't need to give any "extra" credit for neutral games. I hate that Duke doesn't get punished for refusing to play any true road games during the non-conference that the ACC doesn't
force on them. A road win should get A LOT more credit. Winning on the road is the hardest thing to do in team sports. Neutral site games prepare you for the tournament but they are substantially easier then going on the road. REALLY reward the bold teams that win in another persons building.

Their(Duke) tourney wins out west were all the committee needed to see,they waited for that would go before deciding what metric to use this season. Duke is a lock for a #1 seed if they can just play .500 ball from here on.

 

[hotelblue]

This process will be used for both selection and seeding.

what evidence suggests they hold to that more than matching for tv ratings, which they've already admitted (2011) they do?

 

[irishcat1965]

The NCAA talks a good game. It means nothing.

 

[Col. Angus]

I will forever and always say the committee should use all 4 of the RPI, BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom rankings and draw up a composite for all teams and use that new ranking to create a snake bracket so that the overall #1 genuinely had the worst #2, or #8 overall, in their bracket, #4 has #5 (top 2 seed), etc and so forth.

That's as close to true objectivity the committee is ever gonna get when putting together the brackets and people really wouldn't be able to truly bitch about other teams in their bracket.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I will forever and always say the committee should use all 4 of the RPI, BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom rankings and draw up a composite for all teams and use that new ranking to create a snake bracket so that the overall #1 genuinely had the worst #2, or #8 overall, in their bracket, #4 has #5 (top 2 seed), etc and so forth.

That's as close to true objectivity the committee is ever gonna get when putting together the brackets and people really wouldn't be able to truly bitch about other teams in their bracket.

This will never happen. Least not by design.
Geography matters more than balance of groups.

If the #1 overall seed natural region is East and the 5th overall seed natural region is East, both are going East. They try their best to NOT put the best 1s and 2s together but geography generally trumps everything.

But honestly, people talk about this but does anything REALLY know who the number 1,2,3 etc etc teams should have been last season? So I'm not sure the 1 vs 8, 4 vs 5, 3 vs 6 and 2 vs 8 thing really matters a whole lot if you can get a room full of people and not come to a consensus on who truly should be in those positions to begin with.

It's impossible. Teams at the top are so close you could make a case for ANY ordering of teams.

 

[The_Answer1313]

what evidence suggests they hold to that more than matching for tv ratings, which they've already admitted (2011) they do?

I highly doubt they've admitted to this but if you got something I'd love to see it lol.

Even if they did this (which is debatable), I highly doubt they admit to it.

 

[JonathanW]

From KSR

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/bask...put-more-emphasis-on-road-neutral-site-games/

Obviously this is a good thing as it corrects a huge issue. Beating a top 10 team at home is different than beating a top 10 team on the road or even at a neutral site. For so many years the committee i don't think handled the road/home thing properly.

The only problem I see.........they are still using RPI to group the teams.

Instead of this they could just use a ranking system or an average of ranking systems that properly account for home/away.

But I guess we are making progress here.

I have (wrote a SAS program for) a ranking system that uses Bayesian statistics principles to properly rank teams using home/away/neutral/semi-neutral, as well as margin of victory, and how recent the game was. I'm sure there are many others. On average, across all teams, the home team has approximately a 62% chance of winning. This comes from looking at only within conference games, since those are equally likely to be on the home court of the favorite as the underdog.

 

[Untouchables22]

I will forever and always say the committee should use all 4 of the RPI, BPI, Sagarin, and KenPom rankings and draw up a composite for all teams and use that new ranking to create a snake bracket so that the overall #1 genuinely had the worst #2, or #8 overall, in their bracket, #4 has #5 (top 2 seed), etc and so forth.

That's as close to true objectivity the committee is ever gonna get when putting together the brackets and people really wouldn't be able to truly bitch about other teams in their bracket.

The NCAA doesn't get any money from the college football playoff. So they try and wrangle as much $$$$ from the tournament as possible. They want to sell as many tickets as possible. (Don't believe the BS they put out about wanting families to see their kids play so geographic preference is important.) Your suggestion is very pragmatic and a good proposal but anything that loses the NCAA money is a no-go.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I have (wrote a SAS program for) a ranking system that uses Bayesian statistics principles to properly rank teams using home/away/neutral/semi-neutral, as well as margin of victory, and how recent the game was. I'm sure there are many others. On average, across all teams, the home team has approximately a 62% chance of winning. This comes from looking at only within conference games, since those are equally likely to be on the home court of the favorite as the underdog.

That actually falls in line with what I'm thinking. Home court is usually 3 points. That usually equates to winning about 60% of the time.

FWIW interestingly, home court advantage has declined quite a bit in recent years.

Usually the advantage in home court is mostly explained by refs calling fouls. I guess with increased TV exposure and better technology, maybe some of that advantage is slowly going away.

 

[Untouchables22]

That actually falls in line with what I'm thinking. Home court is usually 3 points. That usually equates to winning about 60% of the time.

FWIW interestingly, home court advantage has declined quite a bit in recent years.

Usually the advantage in home court is mostly explained by refs calling fouls. I guess with increased TV exposure and better technology, maybe some of that advantage is slowly going away.

Except at Allen Field house where the Golden State warriors would lose as the away team. Durant would have two fouls getting off the bus.

 

[hotelblue]

I highly doubt they've admitted to this but if you got something I'd love to see it lol.

Even if they did this (which is debatable), I highly doubt they admit to it.

i'm sure you would. as if that my point isn't obvious anyway. it's all for ratings. they did from an interview with espn in 2011. i'm sure others here remember. it was a black man ncaa official interviewed by andy katz.

 

[The_Answer1313]

i'm sure you would. as if that my point isn't obvious anyway. it's all for ratings. they did from an interview with espn in 2011. i'm sure others here remember. it was a black man ncaa official interviewed by andy katz.

The tournament sells itself.

No one has ever sat there saying "oh I think i'll watch the tournament it has good storylines this year". People are watching regardless. Plus when it comes to UK, they could make a story out of anything. Heck even when we played Harvard in 2010 they made a story line lol.

 

[hotelblue]

The tournament sells itself.

No one has ever sat there saying "oh I think i'll watch the tournament it has good storylines this year". People are watching regardless. Plus when it comes to UK, they could make a story out of anything. Heck even when we played Harvard in 2010 they made a story line lol.

the selection process in this regard i'm sure is as old as the tournament itself and therefore just as important to its product. i'd argue that intrigue is what the brackets are all about.

 

[The_Answer1313]

the selection process in this regard i'm sure is as old as the tournament itself and therefore just as important to its product. i'd argue that intrigue is what the brackets are all about.

Oh it's definitely important. I just think with all they have to do tho (selecting teams, seeding, placing teams in regions), there's probably not so much time to be like we want Team X to fact Team Y because that would get good ratings.

Besides you could take the entire seed list that they publish and understand why teams went to the locations they went to. This is all based on geography these days.

But people will create things. Instead of saying we got placed with WVU all these times because the two teams are close geographically, they would say something else made them pit the two teams together.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Nice to see them using quadrants that overlap, so beating the 30th team isn't too far ahead of beating the 31st team.

But not sure how I feel about the SC favoring Neutral and home games the year Kentucky opts out of the PK80, with a coach who generally doesn't favor tournaments to begin with. Seems awfully convenient. And I don't think KSR is too correct saying this is so good for us. Taking the conference play out of this (every conference has road games), Kentucky has 3 neutral games and 1 away game.

FWIW Duke has 4 neutral and 1 away. They gained 2 extra Neutral games in the PK80.
UNC has 5 Neutral and 2 away
Kansas has 3 neutral and 2 away.

You can say "Tin foil hat", but I didn't even have to look up the above 3 schedules to know the rule changes would favor them the most.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Because of the lack of tournaments, I would guess Kentucky is on the lower end of Away/Neutral games among the power conferences.

 

[Skyguyb27]

Well IU is officially screwed then.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Because of the lack of tournaments, I would guess Kentucky is on the lower end of Away/Neutral games among the power conferences.

Probably. So other teams might have more opportunities for those big wins than UK does. We'll have to make the most out of our games vs Texas AM, WVU and UF

 

[Apoxie]

Good call not going to PK80. Thank you so much. I’m sure recruits don’t want to play for teams that play in that kind of spotlight. Better to play Popcorn st.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I mean it's not fool proof. Kentucky, being so young, might fare better by sticking close to home. At the end of the day it's still a ton of other factors, especially W/L column. Kentucky would get rattled anywhere that isn't home, just the nature of Cal's young teams. So we probably save some losses..

I just don't love how, yet again, the goal posts have moved. And I've yet to be pleasantly surprised by the SC thinking "Wow, they actually did something that will benefit Kentucky".

 

[The_Answer1313]

lol going to away games and losing doesn't help either.

UK will have their chances.

 

[OldEvilleCat]

Good call not going to PK80. Thank you so much. I’m sure recruits don’t want to play for teams that play in that kind of spotlight. Better to play Popcorn st.

Yeah....Cal's recruiting has really sucked lately. He'll be lucky to get a 3 star guy after this....

 

[Fox2monk]

We could lose to Florida at Home and T A and M but win every road game, be ranked #6 in the polls and win the SEC tourney. We will get a five seed with a one of Duke, Two of Florida, Three of Nova, Four of Carolina, five of Notre Dame and it would be in a Carolina region. They will then say while we should have been a two seed that we used a new metric based on age to seed teams.

 

[Apoxie]

Yeah....Cal's recruiting has really sucked lately. He'll be lucky to get a 3 star guy after this....

It hasn’t dropped off?

 

[The_Answer1313]

We consistently have the #1 or #2 recruiting class since Cal has gotten here.

So no, it hasn't dropped off.

 

[Saven]

Uh-huh, sure they will. It's still based on what will give them the best TV ratings. They are just saying that to look like they actually do something.

 

[ZenCatFan73]

Kentucky is judged on whatever region Duke plays in, and to a slightly lesser degree, UL, KU, UNC. They then make sure that he have the strongest of each of the other seeds in our bracket. We've been the #1 overall seed before (recently), and had the toughest region. It's blatant. Nowadays, I only watch UK basketball and skip any other college game. The NCAA is a disgrace.

 

[OldEvilleCat]

It hasn’t dropped off?

No...those your ilk are idiots.

"We need team players, guys that know how to fill their role....shoot, rebound, pass. You know what I'm talking about"!
"Our recruiting sucks, all the 5 star guys go to Duke! We're left with non-athletic guys that can't do anything but shoot (& miss), rebound, & pass"
^^
Same guy

Were you not around for the end of the Tubby era?

*if you're just trolling me....kudos to you. You got me.

 

[Apoxie]

No...those your ilk are idiots.

"We need team players, guys that know how to fill their role....shoot, rebound, pass. You know what I'm talking about"!
"Our recruiting sucks, all the 5 star guys go to Duke! We're left with non-athletic guys that can't do anything but shoot (& miss), rebound, & pass"
^^
Same guy

Were you not around for the end of the Tubby era?

*if you're just trolling me....kudos to you. You got me.

We missed out on Bamba and Bagley. I don’t think anyone would argue that the class we brought in was strong compared to ones Cal had in years past. I do remember Tubby winning just as many titles.