|
Post by maximus16 on Feb 9, 2011 0:12:19 GMT -6
I know everybody wants the seeding for the pools to turn out right but I think the bigger issue is how we set up the elimination round on day 2. In the world cup, the bracket is always set so that the winner of any given pool plays on the opposite side of the bracket of the 2nd place team of that pool. This ensures that even if the two best teams must meet in pool play, they will get the chance to meet again in the finals. We also need to ensure that blowout victories are not incentivized as they were last year. The only way to do this is to base seeding on pool rank and not on total points scored. If you win all your games 1-0 you played really boring dodgeball but a win's a win and you earn the top spot in your pool. Expanding this idea for 16 teams would look something like this.
Quarter 1 A1 vs B4 and C2 vs D3
Quarter 2 A4 vs B1 and C3 vs D2
Quarter 3 (opposite half of the bracket) A2 vs B3 and C1 vs D4
Quarter 4 A3 vs B2 and C4 vs D1
In the event of 3 teams going 2-1 in their pool the winner should be decided on head to head play in the regular season. With regard only to contest wins and not point differential. If the tie can't be broken that way...we go to our version of the BCS tiebreaker. (It's 2008 for Texas, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma). And the closest thing we have to the BCS is counting regular season wins. If they all have the same amount of wins... I don't know. Discuss that one at the captain's meeting.
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Feb 9, 2011 1:24:33 GMT -6
I have the actual bracket drawn up for the second day of nationals, right now I have it with 20 teams playing like this. Going off of seeding, for an easy-to-understand bracket, I'm going to make the higher rank seed advance: Hour 1: 16 vs 20, 13 vs 17, 14 vs 18, 15 vs 19 Hour 2: 1 vs 16, 4 vs 13, 3 vs 14, 2 vs 15 Hour 3: 5 vs 12, 8 vs 9, 7 vs 10, 6 vs 11 Hour 4: 1 vs 5, 4 vs 8, 3 vs 7, 2 vs 6 Hour 5: 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3 Hour 6: 1 vs 2
Basically, this works out so each of the bottom 8 teams get a close-matched game on Sunday. If you are one of the top 4 seeds you are rewarded with an hour of rest between your first and second game. That's the best I can do with 4 courts and 20 teams.
If it is only 16 teams, all we do is just take out the first hour of play.
Would everyone be opposed to us switching up the groups on Saturday that way in the off chance that WKU, UK, and UofL are all put in one group or more than 2 Michigan teams in the same group. It would suck for CMU, MSU, and SVSU to all drive down to play each other when they play each other all season.
I have a rough outline of what I think the groups for Saturday could be if it is all 20 teams: Group A: WKU, BGSU, Depaul, MSU, Kansas Group B: CMU, UK, Kent, Nebraska, EMU Group C: WIU, SVSU, NSU, Miami, Moody Group D: OSU, UWP, GVSU, Louisville, Towson
Basically what I did to create these groups were to place all the KY teams in one group, them rate them on skill. I did the same with Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio. Then the outlier teams (NSU, Nebraska, Towson, Kansas, UWP) were placed in different groups based on distance. Such as UWP and Nebraska were placed in the Illinois group because they are closer to them then anyone else. Towson was placed with Ohio because Maryland is relatively close to Ohio. NSU and Kansas were placed with the KY teams. With all of the geographical groups with 5 teams, I rated each team based on my experience with the teams and their game play this year.
I then took all of the number 1 teams and placed them in the different groups. Then I took the number 2 teams from the other groups and mixed them up, and so on and so forth. So Michigan is the only state that will have two teams in one group because they have 5 teams. I had a lot of time in my video production class today, so I drew all this up.
Then once it comes to figuring out who is going to play who I used this organizational formula: 1 vs 2, 3, 4; 2 vs 1, 3, 5; 3 vs 1, 2, 4; 4 vs 1, 3, 5; 5 vs 2, 4, & number 5 from another group. This is a good deal because the number 1 seed will have a close game against a number 2, a fair game against 3, and a blowout against 4. The number 2s will have a close game against a number 1 & 3, and a blowout against a number 5. The number 3s will have a fair game against a number 1, and close games against numbers 2 & 4. The number 4s will have a blowout against a number one and close games against the 3 & 5. The number 5s will have a blowout against a number 2, close game against a number 4, and an evenly matched game against a number 5 from another group.
The only unfair advantage I see is the Michigan schools because while I have GVSU as a number 3 ranked team in their region, they are still really good in comparison to everyone else, they just have two teams (CMU and SVSU) that are a little bit ahead of them. Again, this is all just my opinion and my observations based on this years results.
What does everyone else think? I hope this all makes sense haha you should see my notebook, it's all kinds of crazy drawings and such. I guess for future reference, this is where Murphy's regional idea would come in handy.
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on Feb 9, 2011 1:57:09 GMT -6
there is so much number crunching bracket information that i just can't comprehend right now. I appreciate anyone that creates this bracket visualization in typetext form, because I can't understand without drawing it out. Which I will try tomorrow.
One thing I gathered and someone else and I always stand by, "More dodgeball over less dodgeball." I'll be so glad if we can fit 20 teams into Nationals this year. That's the spirit behind dodgeball and behind the National's legacy.
|
|
|
Post by hiller 87 on Feb 9, 2011 11:35:49 GMT -6
felix i like your groups the way they turn out, but doesn't that make the whole points set up we decided on at nationals worthless? and thereby making the regular season near worthless? i do like the way that the groups came out however (each group is pretty fair i'd say), although i'd say its a pretty big assumption that all 20 teams will be able to show up.
|
|
|
Post by maximus16 on Feb 9, 2011 12:03:17 GMT -6
i guess the biggest question i have for you felix is how are you determining those second day seeds? is it based strictly on pool performance or does the regular season play a role? i also like the way those groups look, but presetting the groups does diminish the significance of the regular season.
and i'd like to point out that the nice thing about my model is that it splits up the four pool winners and the four teams from each pool into separate quadrants of a bracket. winning your pool guarantees you wont face another pool winner til the semifinals and no team will have to face a team from their own pool til the semifinals. i wish i knew how to put this into a bracket format to make it look prettier.
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Feb 9, 2011 13:21:35 GMT -6
I have been facebooking all the presidents/captains of each team and the only one's I haven't heard a response from yet are SVSU (it's safe to assume they're in), Northwestern State of Louisiana (from how they've been talking they're in), and Louisville (it's only an hour and a half away for them so surely to God they'll come). Everyone else has told me they will be there 100%, even Kansas State and Towson University. My grouping does diminish the usefulness of the regular season and our point system, but only slightly, I used a lot of our point system to determine who was number 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in their respective group. The only one I really didn't follow it on was the Michigan group, only because GVSU has only played two games and have been the National Champs for the past 5 years or whatever, so (no offense to MSU or EMU) I put them at number three even though they haven't won a game this year. As for the second day seedings, I like your idea, we just have to adjust it for 20 teams. But that is a simple fix, take a look at my bracket www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=16939032&l=0d5c0ba399&id=510100022I drew it up since my previous post is hard to understand haha. I think we should go with your idea for seedings on the second day, we should definitely use the first day to determine the seeding and if there is a tie we go to the regular season point system to determine who gets the higher seed. Let's say that WIU and CMU both go 3-0 on the first day, since we can't determine from that who will be number 1, we will go to the point system for the regular season and CMU would get the number 1 since they are 7-0. I think this will work out great too, that way we don't have another 17-0 situation like last year because we were trying to determine seeds off of point differential. Making it more fun for everyone is my goal.
|
|
|
Post by fishercmu23 on Feb 9, 2011 13:30:02 GMT -6
I like the way this is set up right now Felix. The brackets seem more fair then they have in the past and I think that is the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by hiller 87 on Feb 9, 2011 14:03:52 GMT -6
ok this is just my own personal bracket assumptions with the team with the most points claiming each position in each pool: www.bracketmaker.com/tmenu.cfm?tid=387429&tclass=Sunday%20TournamentI did my best to make sure that every team didn't play a team from their Saturday pool on Sunday. Also like I said, I chose the team from each pool that had the most points to "win" the pool, and so on and so forth. So I'm not saying Saginaw Valley is the fifth best team even though they're definitely top 3, etc. etc. And I tried my best to make sure that everyone played a team in the first/second round that they hadn't played at all this year (and I think i was successful, not sure though.) Hope this helps a little bit Felix.
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Feb 9, 2011 14:09:50 GMT -6
Thanks Sam, that looks great! Much easier to read than my awful handwriting too haha. I think that'll definitely work, we can use that website on Saturday night at the captain's meeting to make up the bracket for Sunday. Great job!
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Feb 9, 2011 17:45:00 GMT -6
I have just gotten the final confirmation, every team in the league will be at this year's National Tournament. 20 teams. 400 players. 10000 pounds of fun!
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Feb 9, 2011 19:56:33 GMT -6
IT'S OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by woojumbo on Feb 10, 2011 12:06:44 GMT -6
IT'S OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEEEESSSSS DBZ
|
|
|
Post by calannin on Feb 11, 2011 12:18:40 GMT -6
I used to get interested in this stuff, but it always ends up one huge cluster f**k haha. WE NEED THE BCS COMPUTERS! (turns on Bat Signal). Excited though, either way
|
|