It’s time once again for what we like to call Bracketology — college hockey style. It’s a weekly look at how the NCAA tournament might look if the season ended today.
More than that, it’s a look into the thought process behind selecting and seeding the NCAA tournament teams.
This is the fourth installment of Bracketology, and we’ll be bringing you a new one every week, until we make our final picks just before the field is announced.
Here are the facts:
• Sixteen teams are selected to participate in the national tournament.
• There are four regional sites (East – Worcester, Massachusetts, Northeast – [nl]Amherst, Massachusetts, Midwest – Grand Rapids, Mich., West – Minneapolis, Minn.)
• A host institution which is invited to the tournament plays in the regional for which it is the host, and cannot be moved.
• Seedings will not be switched, as opposed to years past. To avoid undesirable first-round matchups, including intraconference games (see below), teams will be moved among regionals, not reseeded.
Here are the NCAA’s guidelines on the matter, per a meeting of the Championship Committee:
In setting up the tournament, the committee begins with a list of priorities to ensure a successful tournament on all fronts including competitive equity, financial success and likelihood of playoff-type atmosphere at each regional site. For the model, the following is a basic set of priorities:
• The top four teams as ranked by the committee are the four No. 1 seeds and will be placed in the bracket so that if all four teams advance to the Men’s Frozen Four, the No. 1 seed will play the No. 4 seed and the No. 2 seed will play the No. 3 seed in the semifinals.
• Host institutions that qualify will be placed at home.
• No. 1 seeds are placed as close to home as possible in order of their ranking 1-4.
• Conference matchups in first round are avoided, unless five or more teams from one conference are selected, then the integrity of the bracket will be preserved.
• Once the six automatic qualifiers and 10 at-large teams are selected, the next step is to develop four groups from the committee’s ranking of 1-16. The top four teams are the No. 1 seeds. The next four are targeted as No. 2 seeds. The next four are No. 3 seeds and the last four are No. 4 seeds. These groupings will be referred to as “bands.”
Additionally, the NCAA recently clarified its selection criteria to include a bonus factor for “good” nonconference wins.
Given these facts, here is the top 16 of the current PairWise Rankings (PWR), and all conference leaders, based on winning percentage (Holy Cross, Michigan, Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State, Cornell, Boston College and Wisconsin) (through all games of Monday, January 31, 2005):
1 Boston College
2 Colorado College
3 Minnesota
4 Denver
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Harvard
8 Wisconsin
9t Massachusetts-Lowell
9t New Hampshire
11 North Dakota
12 Boston University
13 Colgate
14t Ohio State
14t Northern Michigan
16 Dartmouth
29 Bemidji State
— Alabama-Huntsville
— Holy Cross
Step One
From the committee’s report, choose the 16 teams in the tournament.
We break ties in the PWR by looking at individual comparisons among the tied teams, and add all of the conference leaders, based on winning percentage.
From there, we can start looking at the bubble in a more detailed fashion.
There are only two bubbles, one at 9 and one at 14.
Breaking ties in the PWR using head-to-head comparisons among the tied teams, the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:
1 Boston College
2 Colorado College
3 Minnesota
4 Denver
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Harvard
8 Wisconsin
9 New Hampshire
10 Massachusetts-Lowell
11 North Dakota
12 Boston University
13 Colgate
14 Ohio State
15 Bemidji State/Alabama-Huntsville
16 Holy Cross
All ties were broken by individual comparison wins.
So our main differences this week are that Ohio State has taken back its place in the tournament, dropping Dartmouth out, and that BC is now the overall number-one seed.
Step Two
Now it’s time to assign the seeds.
No. 1 Seeds — Boston College, Colorado College, Minnesota, Denver
No. 2 Seeds — Michigan, Cornell, Harvard, Wisconsin
No. 3 Seeds — New Hampshire, Massachusetts-Lowell, North Dakota, Boston University
No. 4 Seeds — Boston College, Ohio State, Alabama-Huntsville, Holy Cross
Step Three
Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals.Because of the fact that Minnesota is hosting a regional, the Gophers are placed first.
No. 3 Minnesota is placed in the West Regional in Minneapolis.
No. 1 Boston College is placed in the Northeast Regional in Amherst.
No. 2 Colorado College is placed in the Midwest Regional in Grand Rapids.
No. 4 Denver is placed in the East Regional in Worcester.
Step Four
Now we place the other 12 teams so as to avoid intra-conference matchups if possible.
Begin by filling in each bracket by banding groups. Remember that teams are not assigned to the regional closest to their campus sites by ranking order within the banding, except for host schools, which must be assigned to their home regionals.
If this is the case, as it was last year, then the committee should seed so that the quarterfinals are seeded such that the four regional championships are played by No. 1 v. No. 8, No. 2 v. No. 7, No. 3 v. No. 6 and No. 4 v. No. 5.
So therefore:
No. 2 Seeds
No. 5 Michigan is placed in No. 4 Denver’s Regional, the East.
No. 6 Cornell is placed in No. 3 Minnesota’s Regional, the West
No. 7 Harvard is placed in No. 2 Colorado College’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 8 Wisconsin is placed in No. 1 Boston College’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 3 Seeds
Our bracketing system has one Regional containing seeds 1, 8, 9, and 16, another with 2, 7, 10, 15, another with 3, 6, 11, 14 and another with 4, 5, 12 and 13.
Therefore:
No. 9 New Hampshire is placed in No. 8 Wisconsin’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 10 Massachusetts-Lowell is placed in No. 7 Harvard’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 11 North Dakota is placed in No. 6 Cornell’s Regional, the West.
No. 12 Boston University is placed in No. 5 Michigan’s Regional, the East, as the host.
No. 4 Seeds
One more time, taking No. 16 v. No. 1, No. 15 v. No. 2, etc.
No. 16 Holy Cross is sent to Boston College’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 15 Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State is sent to Colorado College’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 14 Ohio State is sent to Minnesota’s Regional, the West.
No. 13 Colgate is sent to Denver’s Regional, the East.
The brackets as we have set them up:
West Regional:
Ohio State vs. Minnesota
North Dakota vs. Cornell
Midwest Regional:
Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State vs. Colorado College
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Harvard
East Regional:
Colgate vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Michigan
Northeast Regional:
Holy Cross vs. Boston College
New Hampshire vs. Wisconsin
Our first concern is avoiding intra-conference matchups. We have none. Our tournament is set.
Bracketing the Frozen Four, if all four number-one seeds advance, then the top overall seed plays the No. 4 overall, and No. 2 plays No. 3. Therefore, the winners of the Midwest and West Regionals face each other in one semifinal (Colorado College and Minnesota’s brackets), while the winners of the East and Northeast Regionals (Denver and Boston College’s brackets) play the other semifinal.
Now, at the beginning we could have sent Boston College to Worcester, but that would have involved putting a 1 seed with a 12 seed in the same bracket, since Boston University has to go to Worcester. If we put BC in Amherst, we have perfect bracket integrity.
But…
Bonus Time
We know there is a bonus component to the criteria, the NCAA’s tweak to the system which rewards “good” nonconference wins.
Without official word on the size of the bonuses, we take these numbers: .003 for a good road win, .002 for a good neutral win and .001 for a good home win.
Now remember, non-conference wins against conference opponents do not count toward the bonus. Therefore when Alaska-Anchorage defeated Minnesota in the Nye Frontier Classic, for instance, that didn’t count as a bonus win.
Our seedings are now:
1 Boston College
2 Colorado College
3 Minnesota
4 Denver
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Harvard
8 Wisconsin
9 New Hampshire
10 North Dakota
11 Massachusetts-Lowell
12 Boston University
13 Colgate
14 Ohio State
15 Bemidji State/Alabama-Huntsville
16 Holy Cross
There is one difference — North Dakota and Massachusetts-Lowell switch seedings.
So, our new brackets, using bracket-filling like above, have a few changes.
West Regional:
Ohio State vs. Minnesota
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Cornell
Midwest Regional:
Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State vs. Colorado College
North Dakota vs. Harvard
East Regional:
Colgate vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Michigan
Northeast Regional:
Holy Cross vs. Boston College
New Hampshire vs. Wisconsin
Once again there are no intraconference matchups and there is perfect bracket integrity.
What if we took these numbers: .005 for a good road win, .003 for a good neutral win and .001 for a good home win?
Does anything change? Slightly, as New Hampshire moves down two spots and North Dakota and Massachusetts-Lowell move up one each.
So our brackets are:
West Regional:
Ohio State vs. Minnesota
New Hampshire vs. Cornell
Midwest Regional:
Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State vs. Colorado College
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Harvard
East Regional:
Colgate vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Michigan
Northeast Regional:
Holy Cross vs. Boston College
North Dakota vs. Wisconsin
We have to worry about one intraconference matchup, that of North Dakota/Wisconsin. We switch North Dakota with Massachusetts-Lowell. That solves it.
So our new brackets are:
West Regional:
Ohio State vs. Minnesota
New Hampshire vs. Cornell
Midwest Regional:
Alabama-Huntsville/Bemidji State vs. Colorado College
North Dakota vs. Harvard
East Regional:
Colgate vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Michigan
Northeast Regional:
Holy Cross vs. Boston College
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Wisconsin
That’s it for this week, but let’s take a look at Bracketology a little more closely right now.
We see now where the brackets wind up after Saturday’s games. Where were they after Friday?
Here are the seedings after Friday’s games with a 3-2-1 bonus:
1 Boston College
2 Colorado College
3 Minnesota
4 Denver
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Massachusetts-Lowell
8 Boston University
9 Colgate
10 Harvard
11 Wisconsin
12 North Dakota
13 Northern Michigan
14 New Hampshire
15 UAH/Bemidji
16 Holy Cross
Compare this with the “after” on Friday. Here are the differences:
• UML went from No. 7 to No. 11
• BU went from No. 8 to No. 12
• Colgate went from No. 9 to No. 13
• Harvard went from No. 10 to No. 7
• Wisconsin went from No. 11 to No. 8
• North Dakota went from No. 12 to No. 10
• Northern Michigan went from No. 13 to out of the tournament
• New Hampshire went from No. 14 to No. 9
• Ohio State came into the tournament
What happened?
Let’s look at UML for a moment. The River Hawks lost to UNH on Saturday. That changed the individual comparison between these two teams. On Saturday morning, UML had the comparison won, 2-2, with the tie broken based on RPI. After UNH defeated UML, UNH’s RPI rose, UML’s fell, and the head-to-head evened out. As a result, UNH wins the comparison, 4-1.
Looking at Saturday’s results, we can see what happened. NMU lost to Michigan and that hurt the Wildcats, as did Colgate’s loss to Clarkson on Saturday. Ohio State’s win over Western Michigan, which is a team under consideration, helped the Buckeyes.
The PairWise is so volatile each and every weekend that’s it’s almost impossible to predict what will happen day by day. That’s the moral of the story.
We’ll go a little more in-depth next week and see if we can start to predict what might happen under certain results.
