RPI for 2008

Actually though... hey UPSF... would we be #1 if we would have beaten UCLA? I assume help in our Element 1 and the bonus point would put us over the top, but judging by where Notre Dame is as an undefeated team, maybe that isn't the case?

FSU and UNC still need to play each other in their tournament, unless they lose earlier. One will lose.

The NCAA released the official RPI just now:

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/weeklyrpi/2008WSOrpi1.html

We check in at #5.

Just poking through the RPI a bit... anyone else find it strange that 1-16-2 Xavier is ahead of 80 teams, several with 6-8 wins?

I know strength of schedule is the primary factor, but...

By the way, kudos to UPSF. Nearly perfect in the Top 25, and from my quick count it looks like in the Top 50 almost all were correct and the most one was off was by two positions.

I know it's been said, but what a great resource UPSF's spreadsheets are!!!

That is impressive indeed! Now, if we can just put a curse on UCLA and North Carolina.

UPSF

The margin between UP and FSU is small. If UP beats San Diego is there a way for UP to get back to #4 in the RPI? What is FSU up to before the end of the regular season?

Martin Jol wrote:UPSF

The margin between UP and FSU is small. If UP beats San Diego is there a way for UP to get back to #4 in the RPI? What is FSU up to before the end of the regular season?

FSU has the ACC tournament, and probably a face-off with North Carolina. One of those teams has a loss in their future. (or both)

Even if we get to #4, it seems like we could lose out on a #1 seed. Surely undefeated, untied Notre Dame is going to get a #1 seeding regardless of the RPI. That means we'd have to jump over two teams to get there. Unless UCLA loses in Oregon or Stanford loses at Cal (or both UNC and FSU lose in the ACC tournament), I'm afraid that the Pilots had better prepare for Thanksgiving on the road again.

Yeah we will be lucky not to get shipped off to a high altitude location again. That kind of weariness lasts for weeks and could be what attributed to the Pilots running out of gas in the OT against UCLA.

Note: Written before last couple of posts after Geez.

Geezaldinho wrote:
FSU has the ACC tournament, and probably a face-off with North Carolina. One of those teams has a loss in their future. (or both)

Since at least one of these teams are definitely going to lose this week, (no ties in a conference tournament, I presume?), if we take care of our business and defeat San Diego, aren't we pretty much guaranteed a number one seed?

Or is there some other hair-brained reason they can deny us the seed?

I believe (am I right???) that overtime losses count as ties, so it's possible that UNC and FSU could end up with an additional tie each but no losses. Also, the Pac 10 has no tournament, so UCLA and Stanford could win out and ND will almost surely win their conference tournament against the same nobodies that they have beaten up on for the last month.

SoreKnees wrote:Even if we get to #4, it seems like we could lose out on a #1 seed. Surely undefeated, untied Notre Dame is going to get a #1 seeding regardless of the RPI. That means we'd have to jump over two teams to get there. Unless UCLA loses in Oregon or Stanford loses at Cal (or both UNC and FSU lose in the ACC tournament), I'm afraid that the Pilots had better prepare for Thanksgiving on the road again.

There isn't any linkage that I see between us and ND that would justify their leaping over us. They need to show some virtue against us or our opponents that would justify ignoring the RPI. I don't see one.

FANatic wrote:Note: Written before last couple of posts after Geez.

Geezaldinho wrote:
FSU has the ACC tournament, and probably a face-off with North Carolina. One of those teams has a loss in their future. (or both)

Since at least one of these teams are definitely going to lose this week, (no ties in a conference tournament, I presume?), if we take care of our business and defeat San Diego, aren't we pretty much guaranteed a number one seed?

Or is there some other hair-brained reason they can deny us the seed?

If UNC looses, it might not lower their RPI enough to fall below us.

SoreKnees wrote:I believe (am I right???) that overtime losses count as ties, so it's possible that UNC and FSU could end up with an additional tie each but no losses. Also, the Pac 10 has no tournament, so UCLA and Stanford could win out and ND will almost surely win their conference tournament against the same nobodies that they have beaten up on for the last month.

Sore Knees... a penalty kick shootout loss counts as a tie. A regular loss in OT is just that... a loss.

UP can definitely still get a top seed.... sometimes the Selection Committee makes some strange decisions when it comes to the seeding. Wasn't Stanford a big surprise as a one seed last season? They definitely weren't Top Four in the RPI.

Sorry, my bad, I meant shootout losses, such as the one we inflicted on Penn State in the semis in 2005...

SoreKnees wrote:I believe (am I right???) that overtime losses count as ties, so it's possible that UNC and FSU could end up with an additional tie each but no losses. Also, the Pac 10 has no tournament, so UCLA and Stanford could win out and ND will almost surely win their conference tournament against the same nobodies that they have beaten up on for the last month.

Hockey on the brain?
You get a point for losing in OT or a shootout there. No more ties in hockey.

Did UP get a #1 seed regardless of RPI the year that we were unbeaten, because we were not at home that year? Or do I recall that they amended the rules since then?

I think we were at home in 2005 and played Notre Dame in the quarters at Merlo, so we must have been a #1 unless the #1 lost to someone else before the quarterfinals. The other championship year (2002) we were a #2 and beat Stanford (#1) on kicks from the mark in Palo Alto in the quarters. Am I remembering correctly?

Martin Jol wrote:Did UP get a #1 seed regardless of RPI the year that we were unbeaten, because we were not at home that year? Or do I recall that they amended the rules since then?

Nope, In 2005 we were a #1 seed and were sent packing to Lincoln, Nebraska. We played Iowa State in the first game, then played Nebraska in the second.

The only two games we played at home were Arizona and Notre Dame. Lacking a NW partner team, we will be sent packing again, apparently. I thought they implemented a rule that #1 seeds would stay home when they implemented the non-conference rule, but people who should know say that's not so.

Code:


11/11/2005       Iowa State - NCAA 1st Round   Lincoln, Neb.   W 5-0   
11/13/2005       Nebraska - NCAA 2nd Round   Lincoln, Neb.   W 3-2   
11/18-20/2005       Arizona - NCAA 3rd Round   Merlo Field   W 4-0   
11/25-27/2005       Notre Dame - NCAA Quarterfinals   Merlo Field   W 3-1   
12/2-4/2005       Penn State - NCAA College Cup Semifinals   College Station, Texas   T 0-0 Pilots advance 4-3 on PK's   
12/4/2005       UCLA - NCAA Championship Game   College Station, Texas   W 4-0   

Geezaldinho wrote: Lacking a NW partner team, we will be sent packing again, apparently.

PLEASE tell me this is one of those silly april fool's jokes that is not being told on april 1st...

Fact of the matter is that if UW gets a seed, we're almost 100% going to be hitting the road unless Portland State somehow pulls a miracle.

I think the hope of WSU making it are very slim.

First, shootouts count as ties. A tie counts as half a win and half a loss. So, having teams we're competing with have ties is better than having them win. Losses are even better.

Second, the three primary criteria for seeds are RPI, head to head results, and results against common opponents. How a Women's Soccer Committee member weights those three criteria is up to the member.

Given those criteria, Portland and Florida State are very close in the RPI as of today. Portland beat Florida; and Florida beat Florida State. On that basis, I think that Portland moves ahead of Florida State; or Florida State drops below Portland. (The distinction between one team moving ahead and the other team dropping down may be important.)

But, Notre Dame beat North Carolina, so it has a head to head result with North Carolina to balance against the RPI. If the head to head result is more important, Notre Dame moves up ahead of North Carolina. Or does it? Maybe North Carolina drops down below Notre Dame. See what my parenthetical meant? And Florida State tied North Carolina. So did Stanford. So, maybe Portland moves ahead of them all on the strength of the Florida game. Or, they all drop down below Portland.

Fun, isn't it?

My take: let's not worry about it too much. Let's focus on the Pilots beating San Diego. And on Oregon's doing well in So Cal, Washington beating the Arizonas, and Kennesaw State, Northern Arizona, Colgate, San Diego State, and Penn State winning as many games as possible. (Rutgers' regular season is over.) Plus, let's root for Santa Clara against Gonzaga (might put them in a ranking position for us to get bonus points for our win over them) and for Loyola Marymount to win over St Mary's (might move them up enough to give us top tier bonus points for our win over them). All those things could help us.

Finally, Stonehouse, according to the NCAA, Stanford had a #4 RPI rank last year; and Portland was #5. The problem is, the NCAA was wrong. Stanford's being ranked ahead of Portland was the result of an NCAA screwup, treating a Denver shootout win as a win rather than as a tie. Treating the shootout as a win rather than as a tie resulted in the NCAA giving Denver a higher winning percentage than it actually had under the rules. Since Stanford played Denver, that improved Stanford's strength of schedule. It was that false improvement that put Stanford in the #4 position rather than the Pilots. If the Pilots had been in the #4 position, I don't think they would have gotten a #1 seed. Instead, I think USC would have been moved ahead of the Pilots due to their head to head win over the Pilots. But, I think Stanford would have remained below the Pilots in the seeding. In that scenario, USC would have been the fourth #1 seed and Portland would have been the first #2 seed. The way I think the NCAA assembles the bracket, I think that means Portland would have played USC in the quarter-finals rather than UCLA. So, we would have played USC in Los Angeles rather than UCLA, right? But, do you remember last year? USC played West Virginia in the quarters. USC was the higher seed, so it was entitled to have the game at USC. But, their field did not meet the NCAA's minimum acceptable size requirements and USC was not able to use the LA Coliseum that weekend, so USC traveled to Morgantown, West Virginia to play West Virginia there, coming away with a 1-0 decision. That means USC would have come here to play against us at Merlo. Would we have won? Very, very possibly. So, the NCAA screwup may not only have kept us from hosting a quarter-final game, it may have changed the outcome of the NCAA tournament. Fun to speculate, isn't it?

Stonehouse wrote:Fact of the matter is that if UW gets a seed, we're almost 100% going to be hitting the road unless Portland State somehow pulls a miracle.

I think the hope of WSU making it are very slim.

If WSU comes away from the two Arizona games with a win and a tie, I think they'll probably make it into the tournament. And, Oregon is on the rise. If they get one tie out of their So Cal trip, I'm guessing they'll be in, and maybe even if they don't. Their strength of schedule is going to get a huge boost from the two So Cal games. I'm not giving up on either team yet.

UPSF,

Something important that you are missing... The So. Cal schools come to rainy Eugene, not the other way around... could be important to have the home field and home weather advantage.

With all due respect I don't think the rain is much as a disadvantage/advantage as is the quality of the field. The memory of a soggy Drake Field causing the Pilots alot of fatigue is indelible in my mind. Merlo is rainy but it drains so well it is not really a factor. Now if you are saying the Eugene Field doesn't drain well I would say that it would be a hindrance to any team that depends on precision passing.