So according to GauchoDan, the cutoff for an at-large is currently 43. So I thought I'd take a look at the 20 teams on either side of 43. Right now, UT-Rio Grande is the last team in but they have no wins over top 50 teams (and have only played two) and their next game is against a team with a bad record. In other words, there will be movement. Keep in mind that of those, all but two (Portland and Dartmouth) of them could (but likely won't) still win an automatic bid while one team (Pitt) can't qualify for the NCAA Tournament because they're under .500. Here is each team from 34-53 which their rank, record and strength of schedule rating. 34. Illinois-Chicago --- 11-5-1, 61 0-1-1 vs. Top 50 (L @ 20. Charlotte; T @ 29. Wright State) Next game: Thursday, TBA, Horizon semifinals 35. Coastal Carolina --- 9-5-0, 50 2-3-0 vs. Top 50 (L 12 Maryland; W 16. Georgetown; L 21. UCLA; W @ 31. UNC Wilmington; L 38. Portland) Next game: Wednesday, vs. 203. Howard, Sun Belt quarterfinals 36. Michigan --- 11-4-2, 121 1-3-1 vs. Top 50 (L 2. Indiana; L 6. Notre Dame; W. 12 Maryland; T @ 33. Michigan State ; L. @ 45. Wisconsin) Next game: Friday, vs. 45. Wisconsin, Big Ten semifinals 37. UC Davis --- 11-4-4, 96 0-2-3 (L 11. Saint Mary’s; L 17. UC Irvine; T @ 17. UC Irvine; T @ 27. Oregon State; T @ 30. Creighton) Next game: Saturday, @ 78. UC Riverside, Big West final 38. Portland --- 11-2-3, 158 4-1-0 vs. Top 50 (W 18. Syracuse; W. 25 Washington; W 27. Oregon State; L @ 32. Pacific; W @ 35. Coastal Carolina) Next game: Saturday, 11. St. Mary’s, regular season finale 39. East Tennessee State --- 9-6-1, 39 0-4-0 vs. Top 50 (L @ 1. Wake Forest; L @ 3. North Carolina; L @ 7. Kentucky; L. 19 High Point) Next game: Friday, 130. Furman, Southern Conference semifinals 40. Akron --- 7-6-2, 20 3-5-0 vs. Top 50 (L 14. West Virginia; L 18. Syracuse; L @ 25. Washington; L 28. NC State; W 30. Creighton; W @ 33. Michigan State; W 42. Pittsburgh; L @ 49. Seattle) Next game: Tuesday, 57. SIU-Edwardsville, Mid-American Conference quarterfinals 41. James Madison --- 11-4-2, 119 0-3-1 vs. Top 50 (L @ 17. UC Irvine; L 22. Air Force; T @ 28. NC State; L vs. 31. UNC Wilmington) Next game: Friday, 105. William & Mary, Colonial Athletic semifinals 42. Pittsburgh --- 8-10-1, 17 2-8-1 vs. Top 50 (L @ 3. North Carolina; L 5. Virginia; W @ 5. Virginia; L 6. Notre Dame; L @ 8. Louisville; L @ 9. Virginia Tech; L @ 10. Duke; T @ 10. Duke; L @ 14 West Virginia; W 28. NC State; L @ 40. Akron) Next game: Season over (no games remaining; record under .500) 43. UT-Rio Grande Valley --- 13-5-0, 129 0-2-0 vs. Top 50 (L. @ 22. Air Force; L @ 49. Seattle) Next game: Wednesday, vs. 141. UNLV, Western Athletic quarterfinals -------- 44. Old Dominion --- 10-4-2, 93 1-1-1 vs. Top 50 (T 3. North Carolina; L @ 7. Kentucky; W 20. Charlotte) Next game: Wednesday, vs. 143. New Mexico, Conference USA quarterfinals 45. Wisconsin --- 10-5-2, 114 3-1-0 vs. Top 50 (L 2. Indiana; W @ 12. Maryland; W @ 33. Michigan State; W 36. Michigan) Next game: Friday, vs. 36. Michigan, Big Ten semifinals 46. Dartmouth --- 6-5-5, 16 0-3-2 vs. Top 50 (L @ 2. Indiana; L vs. 6 Notre Dame; L @ 24. Connecticut; T 26. New Hampshire; T @ 47. Princeton) Next game: Saturday, 77 Brown, regular season finale 47. Princeton --- 10-4-2, 102 0-1-1 vs. Top 50 (T 46. Dartmouth; L 50. Loyola) Next game: Saturday, @ 88. Yale, regular season finale 48. Fairfield --- 11-4-2, 115 1-1-0 vs. Top 50 (L @ 26. New Hampshire; W @ 31. UNC Wilmington) Next game: Friday, 147. Rider, Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference semifinals 49. Seattle --- 13-6-0, 146 3-1-0 vs. Top 50 (L @ 22. Air Force; W “@” 25. Washington; W 40. Akron; W 43 UT-Rio Grande Valley) Next game: Wednesday, 90. San Jose State, Western Athletic quarterfinals 50. Loyola --- 12-3-1, 171 1-1-0 vs. Top 50 (L @ 24. Connecticut; W @ 47. Princeton) Next game: Friday, TBA, Patriot League semifinals 51. Dayton --- 9-5-4, 52 1-2-0 vs. Top 50 (L 14. West Virginia; L @ 23. Rhode Island; W @ 39. East Tennessee State) Next game: Friday, vs. 114. George Mason, Atlantic 10 semifinals 52. Virginia Commonwealth --- 10-5-2, 104 1-3-0 vs. Top 50 (L @ 2. Indiana; L 40. Akron; L 42. Pittsburgh; W 44. Old Dominion) Next game: Friday, vs. 23. Rhode Island, Atlantic 10 semifinals 53. Providence --- 10-6-2, 101 0-3-1 vs. Top 50 (L 16. Georgetown; L 23. Rhode Island; T @ 30. Creighton; L. vs. 34. Illinois-Chicago) Next game: Wednesday, @ 16. Georgetown, Big East semifinals
I can't help wondering if Pitt should maybe try and schedule a couple of games for this week against some poor teams to get them to .500. With all the teams that have had games cancelled, there have to be a couple that aren't done playing and haven't played 18 regular season games and could give Pitt a go.
The winner of Michigan v Wisconsin is in, obviously (imo), but could the loser really be out of luck? Or will both get in?
Thanks for the rundown, Sandon. As far as I’m concerned, keep the cut line at 43. Put Wisconsin and Seattle in the tournament, in place of Pitt who’s out anyway and Rio Grande.
I'll defer to gauchodan on this one. I'm thinking the good records of both teams is 50% of the equation weight? If so, they may both benefit from the game.
Remember, the Selection Committee uses additional criteria beyond the RPI. The Projection and cut line should be viewed as approximations. I think Wisconsin is in better shape than Michigan with its two road wins (Maryland and Michigan State). Michigan's best road win is at Oakland (they have a draw at Michigan State). Wisconsin also won the regular-season head-to-head matchup.
So Providence got smoked by Georgetown 4-0 today, dropping their RPI down to 59. In all likelihood, there bubble just popped. Yesterday, Akron beat Southern Illinois 2-1, moving them two games over .500 and bumping them up to 33. They play 13. West Virginia tomorrow in the MAC semifinals and even if they lose, I think they're in good shape for an at-large bid.
Really? Not so sure. Much depends on what others do as well. I aim for it not to come to that. Buffalo Bob is making the roadie. Way too big a contest to miss, and Morgantown as not far away.
In the WAC quarterfinals, UT Rio Grande Valley beat UNLV to move up to 39. Old Dominion beat New Mexico in the CUSA Tournament and is now 42. In the Big South, 29. High Point was eliminated on PKs. High Point isn't a bubble team but the two Big South finalists have RPI in the 150s, meaning the number of at-large spots for teams in the 30s and low 40s just shrunk by one.
Seattle blew a three goal lead in the final 15 minutes of regulation in the WAC quarterfinals and fell to San Jose State on PKs. That drops them to 51 and likely ends their season. The cutline is currently 40 with Portland the last team in and 42. ODU the first team out. A lot can - and will! - happen in the next 4 days.
High Point got knocked off in the Big South semifinals. The Panthers are 11-4-2 with an RPI of 29 (at 12:34 pm PST, 11/8/18). High Point won at Duke (rpi 10), at ETSU (41) and at Davidson (66), tempered by a home draw with Campbell that ended up ending their Big South Tournament. High Point's bonus-penalty score is the 19th highest among the 57 eligible teams in the RPI top 60. I think they are in, but they are not a lock. If they are in, the Big South will be a two-bid conference...which means a bubble team somewhere else will be snubbed.
Upsets in conference tournaments has moved the cut line dramatically -- it's sitting at 35/36 heading into the final day of the season. Some possible bids stolen: AMERICAN: (38) SMU knocked off (13) UCF in penalty kicks to win the auto bid. UConn (25) looks safe. IVY: Princeton (61) wins the title, and 3rd-place Dartmouth (41) could be on the outside looking in. WAC: Air Force (26) lost two games in a row to Grand Canyon (62), which now plays San José State (76) for the auto bid. BIG WEST: UC Riverside (83), once 0-7-1, took the auto bid. UC Irvine (23) is a lock and UC Davis (40) is on the bubble. BIG SOUTH: Presbyterian (153) hosts Campbell (155) for the auto bid, while High Point (27) is probably in.
To this point, UCLA is in an interesting position with their current RPI of 31. One quality road win vs MD, but very early in the season. And bad losses to both San Francisco and SDSU on their home pitch. Throw in the fact that the Bruins were 1-4 in their last five games heading into the post season. Personally, even as a Bruin fan I don’t believe they deserve an invite irrespective of their RPI. Thoughts?
UCLA will get in. They went 4-4 against the RPI Top 50. Which is better than those other teams around them.
Looking at the Tournament Projection: Made it from below the cut line Portland (36) UNCW (41) Missed from above the cut line Wright State (35) Creighton (31)
Yah, I would have included Wright State and Creighton for Portland, and UNCW. Guess this is why I'm not on the committee.
They've done it again. Don't know how they manage it. The two teams 2nd seeded IU will play are UConn (rpi = 24) or URI (20). Meanwhile, 15th seeded Denver plays either Air Force (26) or Central Ark (67) and 3rd seeded UK plays either Portland (36) or UCLA (30). 1st seed Wake plays either New Hampshire (18) or Colgate (45). So, if the play-ins w/ better RPIs win: #1 vs #18, #2 vs #20, #3 vs #30, and #15 vs #26! Shouldn't the 15th seeded team ideally play the #18 team (i.e., the one Wake has to play) in the second round??? I just don't understand how they seed these things.
If the National Tournament is structured to start off of "regions," then it will be extremely tough to match them up based on RPI as well. It makes sense that Wake would play against NH/Colgate instead of Denver playing NH/Colgate. Just like it makes sense that Denver gets the Air Force possibility. Only a few games are matched up outside of regional setup, if I'm not mistaken -- SMU v. Oregon State (winner to Saint Mary's), Air Force v. Central Arkansas (winner to Denver), Lipsomb v. Washington (winner to UCF). Yes, the Portland v. UCLA game goes to Kentucky, but at least the Portland v. UCLA game makes somewhat sense for "regional." Seems to me the rest are all in closer proximity for the 1st/2nd round games (Pacific v. UC Riverside to Duke, forgot it).
Combined RPI of first round games, with their seeded team: URI-UConn: 44 (#2 Indiana) Colgate-UNH: 63 (#1 Wake Forest) JMU-HPU: 65 (#5 UNC) UIC-Mich St: 65 (#4 Louisville) UCLA-Port: 66 (#3 Kentucky) SMU-Ore St: 66 (#8 St. Mary's) Gr Cr-UCI: 76 (#9 Stanford) Pri-Mich: 87 (#7 Notre Dame) CArk-AF: 93 (#15 Denver) LIUB-WVU: 106 (#13 Georgetown) GaSt-Char: 111 (#12 Virginia Tech) UCR-Pac: 116 (#6 Duke) Lip-UW: 126 (#14 UCF) Rider-Akr: 135 (#16 Syracuse) Furman-UNCW: 136 (#10 Virginia) Admittedly, the bottom ones are somewhat skewed by virtue of having to have one very low RPI team, but this entire table seems like it should be backwards. UNCW is hosting a game at #41, while eleven of the twelve teams in the top 6 above are higher (Colgate is #45). And the Committee can't even justify some of these on geography: UNC-W and Furman are both closer to Wake than UVA, and the latter two are both closer to UVA than Wake.
And if you just take the presumptive winners' rpi of the play-in round based on hosting (which eliminates the "regional" argument) and compare with the seed of hosting team, you get this: The orange line is the theoretical matchup between seed (x-axis) and play-in team RPI (y-axis). Blue circles are the real data. I'd be a little bitter if I were New Hampshire (1,18) or Rhode Island (2,20). The high outlier there at 41 is UNCW. Wonder who they knew?
My working theory is that the Committee don't like the Northeast and decided to take it out on those teams. Pretty much all of the Northeast teams got screwed in terms of hard draws; even Syracuse as a seeded team got drawn with a team with a higher RPI (admittedly, that they already beat).