One bracketology question I've been asked repeatedly is why am I adamant about pointing out conference spots as locks rather than teams. So I thought it might be easier to write a quick explainer.
The short answer is that it's easier this season to understand selecting the NCAA Tournament field in terms of conference spots. This year's selections feature two levels of subjective. Teams are being ranked against one another inside their own conference. Conferences are being ranked against one another for bids. Put those together and conference spots become more important, the first level of subjectivity before deciding which team fields the spot.
The longer answer, well...
1) Unprecedented Selection
In a normal year, math, not people, decide the 16 teams. Using math allows for an easier committee decision, as only the locations need to be agreed upon. In a normal year, teams become important to track as locks since teams know mathematically which results put them ahead of other teams.
This is no normal year. Math does not work across the nation when few play true non-conference games. There needs to be a human element to decide the 10 NCAA Tournament at-large bids.
And that leads to #2...
2) Political Process
For the first time in a generation, a political process exists. No one is quite sure how teams will be decided, which means coaches and programs are using postgame press conferences to stump for their teams. David Carle of Denver (using examples to discredit Omaha), Mike Gabinet of Omaha (using examples to discredit Denver), and Jeff Jackson of Notre Dame (using examples to discredit both Denver and Omaha in an effort to get a fourth Big Ten team over a fourth NCHC team).
Even Guy Gadowsky took his "you miss 100% of the shots you miss" Wayne Gretzky opportunity by saying Penn State, with 6 regulation wins, is deserving of an NCAA Tournament spot after turning the ship around from an 0-5 start.
I will not miss subjective decisions. I will miss every coach on the bubble making their case to be in the NCAA Tournament like it's an episode of "Survivor." The last few spots will be political decisions that will leave others furious and on the outside looking in, so why not take your shot?
Still, the battle between programs to get in will be more against one another in the conference than against others.
3) Not all conferences are the same
It's easier to rank between teams in the same conference given the number of games against common opponents. The math works inside conferences. With few exceptions, the Big Ten played a round-robin schedule where each team played all six other conference teams twice at home and twice on the road, plus four home games against Arizona State. This one is easy, remembering to add the games against ASU aside.
On the other hand, some conferences played unbalanced schedules, or teams played whoever was available. While the math exists to compare between the two, each conference comparison is unique. What works towards one does not towards another - and the selection committee can take different criteria to compare between each - which is another reason why teams are first arguing to be ahead of their conference mates.
4) External Factors
Sorry if I repeated this too much, but it bears repeating. No one, besides the committee itself, knows what the committee will be doing. Criteria exist yet remain vague enough to justify any decision. (See: This explanation why Minnesota was left out of the NCAA Women's Hockey Tournament despite the consensus saying otherwise.) External factors exist.
Whether it's a bracket that features subjective integrity, or matters more on regional location and creating an even East/West split, the human element creates a chaotic opportunity when comparing teams who did not play one another and played vastly different schedules.
And that has nothing on the fact that the 2021 NCAA Tournament takes place during a pandemic. No game or team is guaranteed. Going by conference spots makes it easier to replace if necessary.
All in all...
I understand that no roadmap exists for this season. It's easiest to acknowledge that and take a measured approach to the chaos college hockey will be living in Sunday, building a foundation of what should happen with an open concept of what can and could happen. That is why I find it easier to rank the 16 teams by conference spots, rather than teams.
So that said, are there teams who are locks? Yes. some teams can be considered true locks because it's difficult to see them dropping below being considered the X-best team in a conference when the conference at worst should receive X bids.
For example, let's use Minnesota State. The Mavericks can be considered a lock because it's difficult to see a scenario where Minnesota State is not considered the best WCHA team. Even in the unbelievable chance that the Mavericks are the second-best WCHA team, it comes in a time when the conference gets at least two bids.
Teams besides Minnesota State who fit this admittedly subjective definition include Minnesota, Wisconsin, Boston College, UMass, North Dakota, and St. Cloud State.
A few more like Michigan, UMD, and Quinnipiac are likely locks, however, sit at a point where if the committee decides to take a conference spot or two away each would be on the outside. It's difficult to see all three (and especially the first two) miss the NCAA Tournament, but it's a strange year.
Related:
2021 NCAA Men's Hockey Tournament Bracket Version 2.5
2021 NCAA Men's Hockey Tournament Bracket Version 2.0
2021 NCAA Men's Hockey Tournament Bracket Version 1.0
Bracketology 101: Five More Selection Questions + NCAA Tournament Locks & Bubble Teams
Bracketology 101: How Many Teams From Each Conference Make The Men's NCAA Hockey Tournament?
--
No comments:
Post a Comment