1. Ranks. These ranks are slighty different than the NCAA's ranks published at the NCAA.com website. This is due to a single raw data difference. On September 21, Hampton and USC Upstate played a game. It appeared to have finished as a 1-0 overtime win for USC Upstate, and the teams entered it that way in the NCAA's statistics system. Hampton, however, filed an appeal with the NCAA challenging a referee's call at the end of the game that resulted in the Hampton goal. The NCAA upheld the appeal, and the game was changed to a 0-0 tie.
This game result change has not yet found its way into the NCAA's statistics system. This accounts for all of the differences between my ranks and the NCAA's. Interestingly, although Hampton and USC Upstate playing to a tie rather than a loss/win seems inconsequential in terms of teams' ARPI ranks, this actually affected the relative rankings of two top 50 teams, switching them with each other. It thus gives a good example of how interrelated all the teams are in terms of ARPI ranks and how important it is for the NCAA to have exactly correct game results data.
The NCAA statistics staff are aware that the game result needs to change within their system, and I expect they'll get the change done this week. The way the system works, ordinarily the two teams involved need to make the change.
2. Seed and At Large Selection Candidate Groups. On the left of the table are color coded columns. These columns show which teams are possible seeds and at large selections for the NCAA Tournament based on what has happened over the last 12 years, as applied to this point in the season.
For example, if you look at the At Large Bubble column, you'll see no color for teams 1 through 10. This means that based on what's happened over the last 12 years, all of those teams already are locks for at large selections, if they aren't conference automatic qualifiers. You'll also see grey coding for teams 11 through 148. This means that all of these teams currently have the potential to get or not get at large selections, based what's happened over the last 12 years. They thus are the at large "bubble" group at this point in the season. Teams ranked 149 or poorer, based on history, already are out of the running.
As you can see, the "candidate" groups for seeds and at large selections are quite large. This is an indication that, at this stage of the season, teams' ARPI ranks remain quite fluid and aren't very reliable in terms of where teams are likely to finish up. As the season progresses, the ARPI ranks will become progressively more reliable and the candidate groups will get smaller.
3. Strengths of Schedule. The last column on the right shows how teams rank in terms of what their strengths of schedule have been, to date.
No comments:
Post a Comment