iopjacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 742
I think the bitching is about only 5 ACC teams were picked for the NCCA Tournament. Payments to the conferences appears to be more based on number of teams selected and less on how the teams selected performed.
Bracketology 2024
- Thread starter slugboy
- Start date
I think the bitching is about only 5 ACC teams were picked for the NCCA Tournament. Payments to the conferences appears to be more based on number of teams selected and less on how the teams selected performed.
stinger78
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,960
As I understand, share’s increased all the way to the championship game. No shares for that, oddly. The moat are obviously awarded for the first two rounds when the most teams are playing.
- Messages
- 5,736
After the Sweet Sixteen the ACC will be tied with the B12 for the most units earned.
After that it would depend upon how many ACC teams make it to the Elite Eight.
Units are earned for every game played by the teams in a conference until the Final Four (none are given for Final Four games).
Each unit is worth the same amount.
These units are incredibly important to the auto-bid only leagues as it is a huge amount of their budget for their programs. If an auto-bid only program makes a run on the Tourney it helps the programs in its conference immesuarbly.
After that it would depend upon how many ACC teams make it to the Elite Eight.
Units are earned for every game played by the teams in a conference until the Final Four (none are given for Final Four games).
Each unit is worth the same amount.
These units are incredibly important to the auto-bid only leagues as it is a huge amount of their budget for their programs. If an auto-bid only program makes a run on the Tourney it helps the programs in its conference immesuarbly.
stinger78
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,960
They're also important for underfunded P5 programs.
MtnWasp
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 790
The way the system is structured explains the public relations/media blitz by the Uber-conferences (BIG & SEC) to enhance perception of conference strength in the preseason and early pre-conference season.
The NCAAT payouts are based on games played. The more teams from a particular conference in the field, the more games they play. Most of the money made is made in the first weekend where 100 games are played (whereas the second weekend only 24 games are played). So just getting teams in is the most efficient means to securing the most revenues. Actually being dominant is more problematic and not the most secure route to leave the tournament with the honeypot.
Since the NCAAT selection algorithm is based on strength of schedule, and there are initial inputs on team rankings before the games are played, the money conferences will go all in to invest to enhance strength of schedule standing for conference members before the season begins. This is critical in the gaming of the system. Only conferences with preseason premier power rankings will have a chance to dominate the NCAAT field in a system where parity actually exists.
stinger78
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,960
Thank you. This is dead on correct, IMPO.
ESPNjacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,498
This isn't a thing. Overspending P5 programs are a thing.
stinger78
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,960
Silly me.
MtnWasp
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 790
I don't know what the actual formula is used for NCAAT selection, but I bet it would be possible to determine the number of games that it would take to negate any influence (bias) of pre-season power rankings. I bet it would take more than the ten pre-conference games that are played for teams to find their natural position in the power ratings based on wins and losses. Once teams get into conference play, their strong pre-season power ratings will guarantee and enhanced strength of schedule which perpetuates the bias.
What that means is that conferences like the SEC and BIG that dominate the preseason rankings (how are they determined?) are guaranteed by mathematical certainty built into the algorithm that they will be advantaged in terms of the number of NCAAT at large bids!
Bottom line: the pre-season power ratings, which are determined by non-objective means, are input into a quantitative model to select which teams play in the money earning games at the end of the season. The number of pre-season games is inadequate to overcome the initial biases so that advantages are rendered to members of conferences with the most teams highly rated in the pre-season power ratings.
That is what the data that Singer provided of NCAAT conference performance over the last five years.
What that means is that conferences like the SEC and BIG that dominate the preseason rankings (how are they determined?) are guaranteed by mathematical certainty built into the algorithm that they will be advantaged in terms of the number of NCAAT at large bids!
Bottom line: the pre-season power ratings, which are determined by non-objective means, are input into a quantitative model to select which teams play in the money earning games at the end of the season. The number of pre-season games is inadequate to overcome the initial biases so that advantages are rendered to members of conferences with the most teams highly rated in the pre-season power ratings.
That is what the data that Singer provided of NCAAT conference performance over the last five years.
Last edited:
57jacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 942
What a bunch of crap. Trying to use an algorithm to accurately rate teams is impossible. They just need to IGNORE algorithms, sit in their respective rooms and WATCH games. It's not rocket science ( which I do know something about). The selection commitee needs to be a permanent season long team to accurately evaluate the teams.
They moved in this direction in the first place because people complained about the eye test. Which was likely influenced by the "what we see on the front of the jersey" test. Unless you don't let your emotions get involved and have the ability to remain objective. Foreign territory for some.
gtbeak
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 285
The ACC has had 9 different schools make the Sweet 16 in the past 5 tournaments. The next closest conference as far as that kind of depth is the Big 12 with 7, followed by the Big East and SEC who both have 6. Additionally the ACC has had 4 different schools with multiple Sweet 16 appearances over that time, which also is tops of any conference. If the ACC is propped up by a small subset of schools then that is true and then some for all other conferences.
- Messages
- 9,905
- Location
- Williamsburg Virginia
Isn't the selection and seeding largely correlated with RPI? I know the public line is what I copied below. What I'm asking is despite the words, doesn't the actual selection and seeding largely follow RPI? It does in baseball.
ESPNjacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,498
Amen.
The propensity for ACC fans to denigrate its own conference is extremely strange. The Pac 12 was probably in second place for self-hating fans but their anger was directed at the conference leadership and officials, rather than claiming they had bad teams.
- Messages
- 10,800
I think baseball is fairer than a lot of other sports
Fantastic. Let the top 8 of the ACC in with the AQ's every year due to past successes. Certainly don't evaluate teams for the tournament based on what is done during the actual season in which the tournament is being played. I DGAF. The way the sport runs now I won't be watching in a few years anyways.
Pitt and Wake still suck.
Last edited:
ESPNjacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,498
I don't follow college baseball but the NCAAMBT does not use RPI, which is good because RPI is not a good tool.
Here is the same link I posted earlier
gtbeak
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 285
Nuke, basketball has mostly (perhaps completely) stopped using RPI in favor of NET. An equivalent would be if baseball started using Warren Nolan's or Massey's computer system that considers more than just wins or losses.
MtnWasp
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 790
Another thought about the seedings:
Based on the NCAAT payout system, 75% of the payout is determined in the first weekend. For instance, a conference that got 8 teams in and they lost all 8 first round games would still get as much as a conference that had two school in that played each other in the championship game (each scenario the conference played 8 games that count). So, if you are a conference administrator, what is your strategy to get your conference the most money?
Two keys:
1. Get as many at large bids as possible.
2. Don't lose the first game.
Do those two things and you are golden. To achieve those things requires the same strategy based on the selection algorithm. Get your conference to be rated highly in the pre-season. This not only is a competitive advantage to get more teams in, BUT it also gives your teams the better seed, which means that you will be facing a weaker opponent in that key first game. Get a weaker oppoenent in game one means that it is more likely to get a second game. Since the payout is for games played, you want the weaker opponents.
So, the pre-season rankings are a double whammy, More teams = more games. Weaker opponents = more games. More games = more money.
Based on the NCAAT payout system, 75% of the payout is determined in the first weekend. For instance, a conference that got 8 teams in and they lost all 8 first round games would still get as much as a conference that had two school in that played each other in the championship game (each scenario the conference played 8 games that count). So, if you are a conference administrator, what is your strategy to get your conference the most money?
Two keys:
1. Get as many at large bids as possible.
2. Don't lose the first game.
Do those two things and you are golden. To achieve those things requires the same strategy based on the selection algorithm. Get your conference to be rated highly in the pre-season. This not only is a competitive advantage to get more teams in, BUT it also gives your teams the better seed, which means that you will be facing a weaker opponent in that key first game. Get a weaker oppoenent in game one means that it is more likely to get a second game. Since the payout is for games played, you want the weaker opponents.
So, the pre-season rankings are a double whammy, More teams = more games. Weaker opponents = more games. More games = more money.