SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-05-16 10:37 PM - Post#203559
In response to Chip Bayers
There was some weird ILDN stuff going on with Yale/Columbia. The feed was fuzzy and freezing on my laptop, so I tried to log in on my tablet and the schedule said "audio only," the icon for "watch now" having disappeared mysteriously. I just had to keep reloading the tab on my laptop and it never ran smoothly all the way to the end.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
03-06-16 10:29 PM - Post#203642
In response to SRP
Anyone know if Harvard (14-16) is eligible for the CIT?
If so, wonder whether school/team would accept offer.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-06-16 11:00 PM - Post#203645
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
No. But the CBI and Vegas tourneys would accept such a team. If Harvard were to get a bid, there'd be a decision to make - this team is really banged up... Maybe too banged up to continue.
|
dperry
Postdoc
Posts: 2214
Loc: Houston, TX
Reg: 11-24-04
|
03-07-16 12:15 AM - Post#203653
In response to Stuart Suss
Really brillant.  Fortunately, they've recovered their senses and put the Penn-Princeton women's game on ESPN3.
Just another reminder to the tournament proponents: these are the people you're counting on to make it successful. 
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!" |
|
20Penn14
Senior
Posts: 364
Reg: 02-26-12
|
03-07-16 11:36 AM - Post#203670
In response to dperry
For everyone who is curious, Charlie Creme (ESPNs WBBALL Bracketologist) currently has Princeton getting an at large and an 11 seed and Penn getting a 13 seed with the autobid
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
Rising Tide
03-07-16 12:47 PM - Post#203677
In response to mrjames
Thanks Mike.
Yes, I noticed Egi joined McCarthy as recent concussion sufferers. Also, it appears that after the first Cornell game - and even after his return - Zena seemed more 'grounded.' Assumed there must be a lingering injury. I also understand Agunwa had the flu last week - which drew concern because of the current cases of Mumps.
CIT might have been worth it. I don't see CBI or Vegas, unless Vegas is a stop on the way to November's opener in China vs. Stanford!
Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 03-07-16 12:47 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Tiger69
Postdoc
Posts: 2814
Reg: 11-23-04
|
03-07-16 01:01 PM - Post#203679
In response to mrjames
Didn't play very banged up Friday night 
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
03-07-16 01:16 PM - Post#203680
In response to Tiger69
That game was very much a chess match. I noted that Princeton (correctly) applied full court pressure virtually all game. McCarthy - coming off missed weekend due to concussion - didn't start, but thankfully was able to spot Corbin Miller. To deal with the press, Amaker had Patrick Steeves bring the ball up court against Cook/Caruso. With about five minutes late in the game, Mitch Henderson slipped another guard (Rayner) into the game and he immediately pressed Steves, change in strategy had some success.
|
dperry
Postdoc
Posts: 2214
Loc: Houston, TX
Reg: 11-24-04
|
 Bizarre
03-07-16 06:37 PM - Post#203705
In response to 20Penn14
For everyone who is curious, Charlie Creme (ESPNs WBBALL Bracketologist) currently has Princeton getting an at large and an 11 seed and Penn getting a 13 seed with the autobid
OK, I respect this guy's record, and I accept that he probably has a pretty good insight into what the committee is thinking.
That being said, if the committee is really thinking it, it makes. Absolutely. No. Sense:
1.) To begin with, if they really think Princeton is two seeds better, why aren't they the autobid? After all, all the computer rankings I can find are predicting the Tigers to win by 10 to 13 points. The only reason I can see for this is if you think that Penn matches up phenomenally well with them, and given recent history there's no overwhelming evidence to back that up.
2.) OK, I assume that the women's committee uses similar criteria to the ones mentioned here. (If this is not the case, please correct me.) Let's go through the criteria.
1.) Quality wins: Princeton has one win against the top 50 (Duquesne); Penn has two (Princeton, Colo. St.) Against teams predicted by Creme to be in the tournament or among the first eight out, Princeton is 1-3; Penn is 4-2.
2.) Record against better teams. Against top 25 in RPI: Pr 1-1, Pa 0-0. Against top 50 in RPI: Pr 1-3, Pa 2-1. Top 100? Pr 4-4, Pa 6-2.
3.) Bad losses: to teams below 100, Pr 0, Pa 2 (St. Joe's, Cr). Neither lost to anyone below 200.
4.) SOS: Pa 124, Pr 137. Since they have exactly the same conference schedule, by definition Penn also has a better NCSOS.
5.) Record not at home: Pr 10-4, Pa 10-3
6.) Injuries and roster: Ok, Pr has a deeper roster; I doubt Brzozowski potentially being hurt has much effect on the deliberations here.
OK, so if you want to give Princeton credit for playing a couple of top-20 teams and beating one of them, and you take demerits off Penn for losing to a couple of so-so teams, it's not unreasonable to say that Princeton's had a better year up to this point. But two seeds better, after Penn hypothetically has beaten them twice? I just don't get it. If the committee really is thinking this way, I can only conclude that they're still thinking about last year, either how well Princeton did, or how badly they jobbed them, I don't know which.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!" |
|
whitakk
Masters Student
Posts: 523
Age: 32
Reg: 11-11-14
|
03-07-16 08:42 PM - Post#203711
In response to dperry
I would guess Penn is currently the 'autobid' based on its H2H win. (Other projectors use RPI as tiebreaker, but Princeton is now ahead there.) These brackets are almost always 'as of today', so they aren't factoring in a potential Penn win at Jadwin.
Princeton is 40 spots ahead of Penn in the computer rankings, which probably explains the seed difference (either using them directly or looking at similar inputs like margin of victory).
|
dperry
Postdoc
Posts: 2214
Loc: Houston, TX
Reg: 11-24-04
|
03-07-16 09:05 PM - Post#203715
In response to whitakk
But allegedly this is a prediction of what the committee will do, and allegedly the committee doesn't use computer rankings other than the RPI (not to mention that the computer rankings don't make a lot more sense comparing these teams either), and it is still difficult to explain how Princeton ends up two seeds ahead even if you don't take tomorrow into account.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!" |
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-07-16 09:28 PM - Post#203717
In response to dperry
Given my experience with bracketologists, I think they're seeding in the moment (which, yes, makes no sense) rather than projecting outcomes. So, Penn gets the current tiebreak due to H2H to be the autobid, and Princeton has to fight for an at-large. I don't believe this is meant to make a prediction on what will happen tomorrow night (which, again, makes no sense at this point when there aren't a lot of permutations to consider).
|
whitakk
Masters Student
Posts: 523
Age: 32
Reg: 11-11-14
|
03-07-16 11:35 PM - Post#203724
In response to dperry
The men's committee has been vocal about incorporating advanced metrics, even if they're not the "official" rating system. I'd imagine the women's committee does so less (especially given last year!), but factors like scoring margin probably matter on the margin.
And this is only one person's guess at what the committee thinks, so who knows.
|
Tiger69
Postdoc
Posts: 2814
Reg: 11-23-04
|
Re: Bizarre
03-07-16 11:40 PM - Post#203727
In response to dperry
Too much analysis.
IMHO, both teams got screwed in the seedings. But, given how badly Princeton was seeded last year when they went to the tournament undefeated and with several quality wins, this should be no surprise.
The women should, once again, be in the nightcap tomorrow. 
|
JDP
Masters Student
Posts: 576
Reg: 11-23-04
|
03-07-16 11:49 PM - Post#203729
In response to whitakk
What should one root for that will help the Ivies get 2 bids … other than benevolence from the committee?
There is very little actually – most of the important games have happened – regardless of what happens in Tuesday’s game, both team RPI (Princeton 32, Penn 36) are likely to only move +/- 3. And most of the teams in the 20-50 RPI zip code are done
The question is are the Ivy RPIs high enough RPIs to take a second spot away from a top six conference?
Of the projected two bid conferences, only the Big East is still left … root for St. John’s (RPI 51) over Creighton (RPI 121).
Conference USA has yet to start – it would be nice that UTEP (RPI 30) and Western Kentucky (RPI 37) lose early on their tournament.
Should not matter, but better that Ball State (RPI 57) or South Dakota (RPI 60) lose early.
Root for RPIs 51 and lower to win their conference (eliminates any 2 bid worries from another conference) – rest does not really matter – for the 1 bid conferences not sure any of this matter other than seedings, and the Ivies are already likely to be seeded ahead of most all these teams.
RPI Team Conference
16 BYU West Coast
25 Green Bay Horizon
31 UTEP Conference USA
35 James Madison Colonial
40 Arkansas St. Sun Belt
42 Ohio Mid-American
44 Colorado St. Mountain West
49 Albany (NY) America East
51 St. John's (NY) Big East
59 UC Riverside Big West
60 South Dakota St. Summit League
66 Army West Point Patriot
68 FGCU Atlantic Sun
76 Abilene Christian Southland
81 Quinnipiac Metro Atlantic
91 Missouri St. Missouri Valley
94 North Dakota Big Sky
107 New Mexico St. Western Athletic
128 Liberty Big South
155 Southern U. Southwestern
197 Sacred Heart Northeast
207 Hampton Mid-Eastern
|
TigerFan
PhD Student
Posts: 1888
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Rising Tide
03-07-16 11:53 PM - Post#203731
In response to mrjames
People will start to talk soon.
Mike was right that the chatter would come to support the idea of a "2 Bid Ivy" for the men's NCAA. Even after Princeton's loss to Harvard, SB Nation has this to say, after the "First Four Out" and "Next Four Out":
"Also considered (in order): Princeton, Virginia Tech, Georgia, Creighton, Georgia Tech, BYU, Alabama, LSU, Clemson."
http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/20 16/3/...
Of course at this point, I'd be happy with a solid thrashing of Penn State and a top 4 seed in the NIT.
Go Tigers!
Edited by TigerFan on 03-07-16 11:55 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12533
Reg: 12-07-04
|
Rising Tide
03-09-16 05:34 PM - Post#203984
In response to Stuart Suss
Mike James reported on his podcast that the Ivy League office kept the games off ESPN3 to force fans to purchase the games from the Ivy League Digital Network.
Sounds about right from a group as short-sighted and out-of-touch-with-reality as they are. I'd love to know how much that money grab brought in. I guarantee it was under $1k...I hope it was worth it. Instead I was forced to silently curse Columbia through the horrible espn gamefeed.
I very much enjoyed canceling their crappy service earlier today.
|
1LotteryPick1969
Postdoc
Posts: 2274
Age: 73
Loc: Sandy, Utah
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: ising Tide
03-09-16 08:23 PM - Post#204003
In response to Quakers03
Likewise!!!
|
