Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Playoff Criteria?

Collapse

Support The Site!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Playoff Criteria?

    I stated in another thread that I would like to see what the Committee's rankings would be had travel costs and flights not been a concern.

    It stands to reason that Tarleton is currently having to play the number 5 or 6 team instead of the number 7 team, whereas Pueblo and Mines is getting better odds with the seeds the teams placed vs them.

    Was Tarleron denied the 1 seed simply because the NCAA wanted to eliminate a flight?

    Also look how things seem to have worked out in SR3, I dont imagine this was the way the new criteria was expected to be implimented.....
    I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

  • #2
    Originally posted by Boohaha View Post
    I stated in another thread that I would like to see what the Committee's rankings would be had travel costs and flights not been a concern.

    It stands to reason that Tarleton is currently having to play the number 5 team instead of the number 7 team, whereas Pueblo and Mines is getting better odds with the seeds the teams placed vs them.

    Was Tarleron denied the 1 seed simply because the NCAA wanted to eliminate a flight?

    Also look how things seem to have worked out in SR3, I dont imagine this was the way the new criteria was expected to be implimented.....
    I don’t see many surprises. Mankato and Tarleton were a coin flip for much of the year, and the NCAA admitted they would change up the seeds to reduce air flight first and rematches second.

    Had Mankato finished #2 then they likely play a rematch against a conference mate.

    But with Tarleton at 2 there is one less air travel game if the Lions slot in against them. There are no lower seeds, so the traditional 5-7 no longer applies.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by We-Are-Lions View Post

      I don’t see many surprises. Mankato and Tarleton were a coin flip for much of the year, and the NCAA admitted they would change up the seeds to reduce air flight first and rematches second.

      Had Mankato finished #2 then they likely play a rematch against a conference mate.

      But with Tarleton at 2 there is one less air travel game if the Lions slot in against them. There are no lower seeds, so the traditional 5-7 no longer applies.
      If this is going to be the case the they need to either eliminate the 7th team or expand to 8, with the seedings being subjective, and then travel considerations being brought it it's an unfair advantage giving one team home field AND a week off simply because the ncaa want to save a few bucks.

      Either that orthor the number 1 seed they need to use non subjective criteria, with clear tie breakers, travel costs should not be a consideration.
      I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

      Comment


      • #4
        Every year one of two teams will not be happy no matter what the committee does, our team got left out a year they went 10-1 or 9-2 can't remember but teams around the country got in at 6-4 and 6-5. NCAA should drop the regions and take the top 28 (with the top 4 getting byes), give the top 14 home field and scoot the bottom 14 to the closest geographic 14.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Boohaha View Post
          I stated in another thread that I would like to see what the Committee's rankings would be had travel costs and flights not been a concern.

          It stands to reason that Tarleton is currently having to play the number 5 or 6 team instead of the number 7 team, whereas Pueblo and Mines is getting better odds with the seeds the teams placed vs them.

          Was Tarleron denied the 1 seed simply because the NCAA wanted to eliminate a flight?

          Also look how things seem to have worked out in SR3, I dont imagine this was the way the new criteria was expected to be implimented.....
          How many times do I need to say this.... you guys only played 9 D2 games!! The committee looks hard onto it! It cost you guys the 1 seed and it really screwed Virginia St. over. They only had one loss to a undefeated Bowie St. by 10 but only played 9 D2 games, that cost them dearly. Tarletons SOS also took a big hit the final two weeks.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Twincitiesmav View Post

            How many times do I need to say this.... you guys only played 9 D2 games!! The committee looks hard onto it! It cost you guys the 1 seed and it really screwed Virginia St. over. They only had one loss to a undefeated Bowie St. by 10 but only played 9 D2 games, that cost them dearly. Tarletons SOS also took a big hit the final two weeks.
            Where in ANY of the CRITERIA does it say number of games played is a consideration? NOWHERE, period, the fact that it is use points to the problem...

            I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Boohaha View Post

              Where in ANY of the CRITERIA does it say number of games played is a consideration? NOWHERE, period, the fact that it is use points to the problem...
              I don’t if it is officially or not but there’s been evidence thar they consider in region record as a factor to seeding.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Boohaha View Post

                If this is going to be the case the they need to either eliminate the 7th team or expand to 8, with the seedings being subjective, and then travel considerations being brought it it's an unfair advantage giving one team home field AND a week off simply because the ncaa want to save a few bucks.

                Either that orthor the number 1 seed they need to use non subjective criteria, with clear tie breakers, travel costs should not be a consideration.
                Please explain why Mankato shouldn't have been the #1 seed. As said, it was a coin flip all season and both teams took care of business the entire way. Someone had to be the #2 seed.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Twincitiesmav View Post

                  I don’t if it is officially or not but there’s been evidence thar they consider in region record as a factor to seeding.
                  Again both undefeated....
                  I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Turbonium View Post

                    Please explain why Mankato shouldn't have been the #1 seed. As said, it was a coin flip all season and both teams took care of business the entire way. Someone had to be the #2 seed.
                    What other reasons within the criteria should the be ranked over Tarleton, why is tarleton ranked over mines?
                    I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Boohaha View Post

                      Again both undefeated....
                      Minnesota st in region record 11-0
                      Tarleton St in region record 9-0

                      Which is more? 11 or 9?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Twincitiesmav View Post

                        Minnesota st in region record 11-0
                        Tarleton St in region record 9-0

                        Which is more? 11 or 9?
                        win% is in criteria, not number of games.... 1.0 is 1.0 whether its 11, 10, or 9....
                        I have fat thumbs sorry for typos!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Boohaha View Post

                          What other reasons within the criteria should the be ranked over Tarleton, why is tarleton ranked over mines?
                          I think those are questions for you as you yet again have problems with how teams are seeded. We can add you complaining about playoff seedings to the taxes and death saying. :)

                          I have not looked at anything for Mines as they weren't being discussed at all until now. They have a solid win over CSU-P but their OOC opponent unfortunately had a pretty down year and went 1-9 (Azusa).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Boohaha View Post
                            I stated in another thread that I would like to see what the Committee's rankings would be had travel costs and flights not been a concern.

                            It stands to reason that Tarleton is currently having to play the number 5 or 6 team instead of the number 7 team, whereas Pueblo and Mines is getting better odds with the seeds the teams placed vs them.

                            Was Tarleron denied the 1 seed simply because the NCAA wanted to eliminate a flight?

                            Also look how things seem to have worked out in SR3, I dont imagine this was the way the new criteria was expected to be implimented.....
                            This is all very easy. There is no conspiracy.

                            This is how things looked after week 10.
                            x
                            Team Region D2 SOS Road .500
                            Tarleton State 7-0 8-0 .537 4-0 4-0
                            Minnesota State 10-0 10-0 .534 5-0 6-0




                            x
                            Both teams were undefeated. MSU led in all the secondary categories. Tarleton State led in SOS. SOS was the deciding factor.

                            This is how things looked after week 11.
                            x
                            Team Region D2 SOS Road .500
                            Minnesota State 11-0 11-0 .509 6-0 6-0
                            Tarleton State 8-0 9-0 .508 5-0 4-0




                            x
                            Both teams were undefeated. MSU led in all the secondary categories. MSU now leads in SOS. SOS was the deciding factor.

                            You asked, "Was Tarleron denied the 1 seed simply because the NCAA wanted to eliminate a flight?"

                            Looking at the numbers, it shows that was not true. But I decided to look at the seedings and try to compare them with Tarleton #1 versus MSU #1.

                            MSU #1 - First Round

                            1. Minnesota State

                            2. Tarleton
                            7. Commerce

                            3. Mines
                            4. Sioux Falls

                            4. Pueblo
                            5. Augustana

                            (2 Flights)

                            MSU #2 - Second Round

                            1. Minnesota State
                            4. Pueblo

                            2. Tarleton
                            3. Mines

                            (2 Flights)

                            Tarleton #1 - First Round

                            1. Tarleton

                            2. Minnesota State
                            7. Sioux Falls

                            3. Mines
                            6. Commerce

                            4. Pueblo
                            5. Augustana

                            (2 Flights)

                            Tarleton #1 - Second Round

                            1. Tarleton
                            4. Pueblo

                            2. Minnesota State
                            3. Mines

                            (2 Flights)

                            The number of flights does not change in the two scenarios in which the #1 team was switched. The real way to save on flights was to move Tarleton or Minnesota State to 1/4 and Mines and Pueblo to 2/3. So unless I am missing something, I see no way to show that there was nefarious activity in the 1-4 seedings.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Boohaha View Post

                              What other reasons within the criteria should the be ranked over Tarleton, why is tarleton ranked over mines?
                              As I said in the previous post...
                              x
                              School Region D2 SOS Road .500 Region Non-Con
                              Minnesota State 11-0 11-0 .509 6-0 6-0 0-0
                              Tarleton State 8-0 9-0 .508 5-0 4-0 0-0
                              Mines 11-0 11-0 .492 6-0 5-0 1-0





                              x
                              It appears to be as simple as that.

                              Comment

                              Ad3

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X